Setting your price point

Status
Not open for further replies.

Flounder

Sleeps with the (rest of the) fishes
Re: Re: Re: one trick is not to cut prices but to give more time

Originally posted by slinkybender


And I can tell you that currently, I'm getting lots more than I used to of attorneys willing to do "high risk" work on contingency.
The "Hamster" Incident?:D
 
Damn slinky, hook me up with a lawyer who negotiates.

Everything is negotiable, even pussy.

If I hadn't worked in 2 weeks and had 2 cents to my name, believe me I would be selling my ass for 50 bucks. Anything to do what I have to do to take care of my family.

If you found a girl who charged 100 hr and she offered all the things you like in a session, would you not think there was something not right about her and avoid her?

For example Patty.....
 
I repeat, something's not right here.

Something is not jiving with the numbers in this thread or what people are saying, or I'm missing something.

Let's say a provider only sees 10 guys a week. At $300 each thats $3000/week. At 50 weeks per year (2 weeks off for vacation) that's $150,000. A very very nice income! That doesn't include tips which at maybe 10% is another $15,000.

Even charging only $250, you should make at least $125,000.

Even if we take the conservative 5 guys per week it's $75,000 (@ $300 without tips)

What gives here? Are they being mistaken about how many guys they see in a month? I always believed that it was a lucrative business if you were halfway decent at it. How can it not be based on the above.
 
No not at all. What I'm trying to imply is that if a girl is saying she does 10 guys a week at least, she should be up in that 6 figure area, and if she is complaining about money, then she isn't doing 10 guys per week, or she's not clean about how much she's really making. The numbers don't lie. Even if you charged only a $100, you could make $50,000 (10x100x50) without any tipping at all.

So if providers are up in the 6 figure area, what I'm trying to say is that there is a LOT of room for playing with the service charges.

I just can't see how the providers on this board are not making a lot of income unless they are really not seeing more then 2-3 clients a week.
 
Re: I repeat, something's not right here.

Originally posted by jp1064
Something is not jiving with the numbers in this thread or what people are saying, or I'm missing something.

Let's say a provider only sees 10 guys a week. At $300 each thats $3000/week. At 50 weeks per year (2 weeks off for vacation) that's $150,000. A very very nice income! That doesn't include tips which at maybe 10% is another $15,000.

Even charging only $250, you should make at least $125,000.

Even if we take the conservative 5 guys per week it's $75,000 (@ $300 without tips)

What gives here? Are they being mistaken about how many guys they see in a month? I always believed that it was a lucrative business if you were halfway decent at it. How can it not be based on the above.
If she is working for an agency you need to divide the above by at least 2. If she is independent you need to back out the direct expenses before you can calculate personel income.


dog
 
Re: Re: I repeat, something's not right here.

Originally posted by Bigdog


If she is working for an agency you need to divide the above by at least 2. If she is independent you need to back out the direct expenses before you can calculate personel income.


dog
You're right except that I'm only talking about independents and GROSS income here (the amount that one is worth) not net income (the amount that one has left after expenses). I just don't see how they don't make a lot of money after expenses with the gross I'm talking about. I know some of these providers and find it difficult to believe their expenses possibly approach the money they're taking in, if they are actually providing services to as many guys they say they are. And if they are, then they should be living life very well at that income level. And remember, there are no taxes coming off the top of that gross. A good provider with a lot of regulars per week should be pushing near $200,000 a year gross, no doubt in my mind.

Those working for agencies are losing that gross to the house.

I'm not complaining about the situation (I would love to make that kind of money also), I say more power to them. I love contributing to them and the hobby and will continue as long as I my income can maintain it.

Can any providers reveil real numbers here to try to prove my point? I understand if you can't.

I'll get out of this now before the providers get pissed off at me.
 
Re: Re: Re: I repeat, something's not right here.

Originally posted by jp1064


I know some of these providers and find it difficult to believe their expenses possibly approach the money they're taking in, if they are actually providing services to as many guys they say they are.

As I said earlier - expenses tend to rise to the level of income. There are many porn star escorts who charge a lot more than $300 per hour when escorting and also have income from videos and feature dancing but still don't have any money.
 
Besides Security and Wear and Tear....

Another reason girls would rather see X clients at 350 a pop rather than 2-3X clients at 200-250 a pop:

The providers will forego some income for the chance to "hit a Home Run"

There are many stories out there about providers who have met wealthy clients (more likely at the 350+/hour range) who have been very very generous with them- gifts, cash, tuition, rent on apartments. There are lonely older wealthy guys in NYC just looking to take care of the right girl, even if she's a Provider-see this week's NY magazine Stripper article for an example.

But none of the UG guys would do this, would they?
 

pswope

One out of three
Stanley

Per your last question,even by the extremely liberal patheticness standard employed by UG, if a member spent the kind of stones on a commercial sexworker that the dude did in the NY MAG article without getting 1 bust, he would be banned for life.
 
I sort of imagined the following conversation at my breakfast table this morning as I looked at that New York article.

WIFE: Did you see that piece about that guy who gave all that money to a stripper and never even had sex with her?

ME (uneasily): Yeah.

WIFE: You'd never do that, would you?

ME (honestly): No.
 
NY Mag

Find it hard to believe he never had sex with the girl.

He admitted lots of bad stuff- but maybe he could admit to embezzelment et al, but not to adultery?
 
Maybe he has difficulty in "pulling the trigger" and he is using her companionship to validate his desirability even though he doesn't have the means to follow through (guessing having not read the article)?

I always said that some people have way too much money....more money then sense....but I suppose if he can afford to toss money away like that and he is happy, then more power to him.
 

Slinky Bender

The All Powerful Moderator
Obviously he couldn't afford to "throw money away like that".


( Side note: don't be fooled by bon mots tossed around in that article about how he was a "good guy". He was always a scumbag who lost millions of taxpayer $$ and screwed lots of people. Plenty of folks are secretly very happy that he "got what was coming to him" ).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top