| Type |
Site |
Feedback / Review |
Date |
Reply
951
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Comment
from lk2fireone:
So what are the details of the free offer?
You get free access to what sites, for how long?
And after the free access, which I assume ends in a short while, your free membership, which can be cancelled, I assume, then turns into a paid membership at what price?
There are sites in the Met Art network I would like to visit, if the free membership is for a week or more.
But 1-day memberships are too short for me. I'm not that efficient that I can explore a site in 1 day very well.
I'm currently a member of several sites in the Met Art network, and there's not enough hours in a day to do them justice.
|
07-21-13 12:35pm
|
Reply
952
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Comment
from rearadmiral:
Damn! To make matters worse, I see they have pics of Sasha on the preview pages both before and after her implants. That sort of highlights the issue. At least they aren't cartoonishly big, but she looked almost perfect before them and didn't need new breasts.
|
07-21-13 08:11am
|
Reply
953
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from Ergo Proxy:
(Denner's Reply)
I really doubt it will change their pricing scheme if I join or not. Just like I wonn't save the planet if I turn my lights out overnight.
|
04-22-12 11:45pm
|
Reply
954
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#1
from lk2fireone:
(Denner's Reply)
Sorry about that. The Metart server must have a program which captures the location of your computer, and a program that then controls the prices you see.
The link I gave gives me a price of $24.99, but I am in the U.S.
|
04-18-12 11:52am
|
Reply
955
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#15
from exotics4me:
(Denner's Reply)
I meant to reply to this, but had been on a mini-vacation. One thing I should have added, not for sure if this made any difference, I had a year membership to Met-Art last year. It ran out about 3 months ago, so I don't know if the offer was maybe offered to just those who had joined it long-term or not.
|
11-15-10 01:15pm
|
Reply
956
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#13
from PinkPanther:
(Denner's Reply)
Here's my take on this. These sites do a lot of different offers. They figure out where the offer is going to be made and to who. They figure out how many people are likely to take the offer and all these things affect their bottom line.
Perhaps the problem with the 2-for-1 deal is that they didn't figure it would get too many hits and that if it was being publicized here, it would get more than they had counted on and be a problem for them, rather than a help of getting new Nubiles customers as their customers. I dunno.
Both Met Art and Nubiles are among my favorite sites. I want them both to do well. If publicizing this offer more broadly than they intended was something they considered to be a problem for them, then I'm glad they took the action they took and that TBP/PU was professional enough to respond promptly to their request.
It's no insult to TBP/PU members and nobody here should take it as one. That's my view.
|
10-29-10 07:48pm
|
Reply
957
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#10
from Khan:
(Denner's Reply)
c'mon Denner, you know that's not the case. We don't try to keep you (or any other user here) from criticizing any site when you feel it's justified. I simply meant you shouldn't attach any negative tone (from the Met-Art webmaster) based on what I posted here.
|
10-29-10 09:17am
|
Reply
958
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#7
from Khan:
(Denner's Reply)
Denner, I would caution that you not make a huge deal out of them asking us to remove the link. They're weren't at all rude or harsh, they simply didn't want their "special deal" with Nubiles advertised elsewhere.
|
10-29-10 07:52am
|
Reply
959
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#4
from Khan:
(Denner's Reply)
Yes, "our site" means TBP/PU
From the webmasters email I gather it was a private deal between Met-Art and Nubiles and they didn't want it advertised elsewhere.
|
10-29-10 07:14am
|
Reply
960
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from lk2fireone:
(Denner's Reply)
Something is obviously very wrong. I gave MetArt the highest score I ever gave any site in my review. And all of my comments on the site were extremely positive.
But did MetArt ever send me a "Thank you" note?
Of course not, they seem to believe they deserve the kind words.
MetArt and I are coming to the end of our love affair. This one-way street has reached a dead end. :)
|
10-29-10 07:04am
|
Reply
961
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from Monahan:
(Denner's Reply)
Agree with Denner. I'm a video guy and quit Met-Art after about 3 months. The photo sets are good with a lot of full spreads and excellent angles. But I agree; no heat at all, no insertions and very little eroticism.
|
09-03-10 11:46pm
|
Reply
962
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from Capn:
(Denner's Reply)
Thanks for the additional info there, Denner.
Much appreciated.
I will have to give it a try soon, I think ;0)
Cap'n.
|
04-18-10 09:03am
|
Reply
963
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Review
from Capn:
I get the impression it is mostly outdoor full nude?
Is there much in the way of indoor striptease sets here, please?
Cap'n :0/
|
04-18-10 03:44am
|
Reply
964
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Comment
from Drooler:
Kudos to MetArt for being sympathetic to the cause, and to Denner for being doggedly persistent about it and bringing it home.
|
03-29-10 11:47am
|
Reply
965
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Comment
from Rick:
Just checked our link from an England proxy and it looks like our link converts correctly (14.69 Pounds), so maybe they corrected the regional pricing after Denner contacted them.
Kudos to Met Art for hooking up our users with a great price!
|
03-29-10 11:21am
|
Reply
966
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#3
from adrenalinrush:
(Denner's Reply)
I've just joined MET (1 month only and it will be my last one forever!) because of this discussion.
Ok, naked girls might be a reason to join the site BUT after all MET does not stand the standards of today!
Compared to other sites the images are always mid or just low resolution, you can kick 3/5 of there archive because the images often over-sharpened, blurry or just plain boring.
In the galleries the browsing experience sucks. It's like the Ugh-factor is hitting me like a stone. Who the hell is still using the popup feature from the Stone Age? I don't want to use my browser's back button over and over again anymore.
MET finally has 3-5 top photographers that kept my head up but that's it :/
And something I nearly forgot, I never felt to be welcome in the memberzone. It's plain black and dreary and has additional promotion of other sites and that's something I can't accept as a paying customer!
|
12-13-09 12:00pm
|
Reply
967
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#2
from propaGhandi:
(Denner's Reply)
Yes, 'A shitload of naked girls' is a bit heavy there ...
But MetArt is definately overrated in score at TBP and adrenalinrush is right - sets and videos are really boring here.
|
12-09-09 01:59pm
|
Reply
968
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#5
from Mr Fountain:
(Denner's Reply)
Yeah, I have a nude site rotation. I am a member of Met Art this month. But I may rejoin Femjoy or MPL Studios.next month Hmm... If I see her there; I'll let you know.
|
12-23-08 05:49pm
|
Reply
969
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Comment
from lk2fireone:
I've been looking at Ulya G since 2005 at met-art. Her face kind of reminds me of Catherine Zeta Jones (the actress married to Michael Douglas).
But the only sites I've seen her on are met-art and metmodels.
|
12-20-08 05:08pm
|
Reply
970
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Comment
from Mr Fountain:
I think she's also on Femjoy. But I haven't been a member on that site for a while; but I thought I remembered seeing her there.
|
12-20-08 08:17am
|
Reply
971
|
MetArt
(0)
|
Reply of
Denner's Comment
from Drooler:
There's one photoset of her at MetModels, called "Tahiti." She's called Ulya there, too. No vids there, though. That's all I could find.
|
12-20-08 04:13am
|
Reply
972
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#12
from asmith12:
(Denner's Reply)
> I think hondaman done some fine things here after all
For the first review - yes, but IMHO it's still too one-handed. Ok, it can easily be "honestly one-handed", but it's still way too one-handed IMHO.
> But, bro - we'll see in the future - guess there's never any 100%..
For me there are a few 100%s here on PU, starting (surprise) from myself :-), and ending with about 50 or so people (yourself included :-) ); come on, suspecting roseman or exotics4me of shilling would be WAY too far fetching.
|
11-14-08 12:34pm
|
Reply
973
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#9
from asmith12:
(Denner's Reply)
Well, bro, to put it bluntly - doesn't it look suspicious when somebody just STARTS his PU life with ridiculously high ratings? You're here longer than me, but even I myself have seen LOTS of different shills around here (coming, making 98 or so review for the site, seeing that rating doesn't count, then sometimes trying to make a few MUCH less detailed reviews to get points, and then usually giving up and disappearing). Granted, it doesn't look TOO suspicious for hondaman, but I'm still not 100% sure about him.
|
11-14-08 12:12pm
|
Reply
974
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#7
from hondaman:
(Denner's Reply)
Yeah thanks. I gave MET-ART that score because I feel that it does its target niche errotic art very well and to a large extent errotic art is manily a photographic medium. I guess I dont ding the viedos as much as some do because I feel at least when some say "they are not hard enough there is no sex toys or anything" I think well did you see anything like that in any of their previews?No. And MET-ART does not advertise that your going to see anything "hardcore". Also I feel that MET-ART is mainly a photographic site seeing that they have over 600,000 photos and something like 500 videos. But alas nothing can be truly perfect really but I feel that MET does the best at the errotic art niche as a whole. I think more review sites like the staff for this site should more clearly state that on most any errotic art site that you are going to see little or no "hardcore" style stuff. Or even better they should make a site that reviews only errotic art sites since it is not really porn like a site such as BANG BROS is. Well enough of my rambeling.
|
11-14-08 12:00pm
|
Reply
975
|
MetArt
(0)
|
REPLY TO
#6
from asmith12:
(Denner's Reply)
Sorry, I cannot agree that the very first review with the words "the best errotic art site on the net" and rating of 97 can possibly be a "fine" one.
|
11-14-08 11:52am
|
