|jester| good one |yawn|
look for the lightning to be lifting the cup again this year :)


spaz

Wow this is some post!

I have to say, I support "responsible" tube sites.

Allowing user-uploaded & non-2257'd content is not responsible.

I run wanktube.com and let me make a few comments.....

-It has been up for many months and traffic growth has been ... well amazing. Surfers want community based content on demand sites. Youtube and myspace aren't huge without reason.

-We kill all videos that generate complaints even if we feel they are legit.

-I took on expensive legal advice before starting this site, and we are not breaking any laws.

-Ratios on wanktube have been better than any linklist traffic I have ever had, better than any tgp traffic I have ever had, and I even get better ratios that my ppc traffic.

In a perfect world i would love to see little free content. I would love to go back to the days where we could throw up 20 poor quality free pics and rake in the sales, but unfortunately guys we are in a different era. We either adapt or die.

Funny, some of these responses.

Anyway, I voted that I'm split on the issue. As a sponsor I obviously am not happy with the idea of buttloads of our video content being "shared" for free and on sites with heavy (and often unscrupulous) advertising or of having to compete with so much free porn, but we've had to resign ourselves to that being the reality and make sure that memberships provide content that surfers canNOT get for free (live cams, interaction, easy access to full archives, frequent updates, etc.).

I've no idea why Useless thinks that sponsors don't already find their content used CONSTANTLY on sites with competing advertisements. We do, and we often pay upwards of 50% in sales to affiliates for putting it there (in blogs, review sites, picposts . . . pretty much everywhere unless someone uses our hosted promos).

Unless I'm the only one who sees NOTHING here, your terms of use don't inspire a lot of confidence:
http://wanktube.com/terms.php

I haven't read this thread but here are some of my off-the-cuff thoughts on why I'm against this:

1) There will NEVER be an adult version of YouTube. Unless you're talking about your neighbor videotaping himself and his wife go at it and uploading it for the world to see, what we have going on right now is not and never will be an adult version of YouTube.

2) The only site that gains from the traffic is the video hosting site. Submitters send them traffic that will never come back and paysite owners lose sales by helping create a site no one has to pay for.

Good point -- there's a big difference between the homemade content users post on youtube and the stolen or promo content posted on pornotube, etc. That doesn't mean it won't catch on, though. I think the new site rude.com encourages non-pro users to do just that: broadcast their own cams and post their own porn videos. Those kinds of sites have done well in the past when they were picture oriented and as long as 2257 doesn't scare everyone away it could happen. It already happens a lot in fetish communities where the fetishists make and share their own porn (there's a doll-sex site and forum like that).

We are still in beta, but there shouldn't even be a terms page since we haven't passed them by our lawyer yet so thanks for pointing it out :)

What I would love to see is sponsors who aren't ok with the uploading of their promo content on tubes saying so clearly, just like they are starting to do for blogs. However from what I am seeing when I ask sponsors is that most are more than happy for me to use their promo content, and some who realise the quality of the traffic have even put video content packs together for me with no watermarks :)

The over-riding reality is that the internet is an entirely different marketplace than the bricks-and-mortar world. Some people have exploited those differences almost by accident (solo model site owner/operators) and a handful of others - such as the developers of YouTube and MySpace - have set out to profit from those differences.

The vast majority of us (and I am guilty as charged) depend on business models which fail to recognize these differences at all. That, if you like, is Web 1.0. The Emperor's Clothes are beginning to look decidely translucent, even for the minority who execute their chosen business models well, because supply and demand are closing and because Web 2.0 is moving in. Web 2.0 - in online porn terms - isn't only represented by adult versions of YouTube and MySpace, but also by torrent sites and sites such as "I Shot Myself" and "Suicide Girls".

The internet is about interactivity. Interactivity between individuals and also interactivity between customer and product. If I order books from Amazon, the site will in future suggest books I might enjoy. If I rate movies at Netflix, other movies I might like are displayed. Interactivity on adult sites is largely restricted to dating and webcams, but the success of both those areas should be telling us something.

Another consideration is that there are two fundamental marketing models in any kind of business: low-margin/high-volume and high-margin/low-volume. Ford vs Ferrari. These are not arbitrary choices dictated by producers/sellers (although some, such as champagne producers and diamond merchants, restrict their product to keep prices high). They are also a consequence of market reaction: while some people will buy PC's from independent stores and pay a higher price for the extra service and attention they perceive, most are willing to buy boxes as cheaply as possible.

Online porn, by the very nature of the internet, should be a high-volume/low-margin business. There is a reluctance to accept that, because so many people still influential in the business, have enjoyed unrealistically high margins and obviously do not want to let them go. They are dwindling anyway, the snag is that the customer isn't seeing much benefit because increasing cost-of-sales and static/declining volumes are getting in the way.

Affiliates are paid too much. Never mind newbie webmasters, most of whom begin with no relevant skills whatsoever. We have hundreds of "experienced" webmasters who have no more real skills or business knowledge than the day they started. Sure they learn how to improve their chances of getting a free-site listed in a links list or they buy a script and find out how to avoid the worst pitfalls of traffic trading. But mostly all they bring to the table is labor and labor is a cheap commodity. In a mature market the average affiliate would be damn lucky to make even $20 an hour.

Agree or disagree, what does this have to do with free porn?

In the 90's there were millions of people coming onto the internet, most of whom didn't even have easy, embarassment-free access to anything raunchier than H*stler. For a while at least, there wasn't a lot of free porn available except to the denizens of news groups, and most of what there was, was crap. Surely paysites and AVS programs offered more? They rarely did, but the hope produced a goldrush.

Over the past 10 years we have done an excellent job of educating people that 9 times out of 10, sites will take their money and barely attempt to deliver what was promised, let alone anything substantially better than can be had for free. At the same time, the amount of free content has rocketed and the sites delivering it have become far easier to locate and use. If all you want to do is see pics of naked women or watch a movie of people f*cking, why pay for it is a very valid question.

But we cannot put the lid back on free porn even if we want to. The problem anyway is not free porn per se, but the ridiculous idea that once people have checked to see what all the fuss is about, more than a relatively tiny percentage of the total will be willing to pay $30, $40 and even $50 a month to see more of the same. People will not pay for a Ferrari and be satisfied if they are delivered a Ford.

That message has been delivered loud and clear in every market out there, yet somehow we still ignore it. Essentially we deliver what is cheap and easy for us to deliver and offer it at the prices we want to charge, not the prices that a mature market will bear. We are still, to an extent getting away with it, solely because it might be another 5 years before supply and demand are fully equalized. The fact remains that we are not adding value.

IMO, within 5 years almost all non-interactive porn will be given away and only used to attract traffic. We will see the cost of hiring still photographers and licensing DVD's as no different than other industries view their marketing costs. We shall focus almost entirely on selling interactivity, with just a few specialist sites and those which genuinely deliver ease-of-use and top-quality content, able to charge for anything else.

That interactivity will include live video, but we shall move away from bored models charged at high rates per hour, sitting idle for hours at a time, to something which Mr. Average can afford on a regular basis and we will present it imaginatively enough for him to want to do so. Solo models are also here to stay: not the kind of sites for which someone shot a couple of years' updates in a weekend, but the ones with real interaction between models and visitors. Nor is there any reason that principle needs to be restricted to solo models...

Above all, we will be seeing Web 2.0 sites (btw I hate the term and a lot of it is marketing hype, but it is convenient shorthand) which let surfers interact with each other as well as the content. Adult dating sites will blur into adult community sites, some with a broad appeal and others much more specific. We shall effectively make content sharing legal, because instead of kidding ourselves we can shut it out, we will make it easy for members to share the content we are no longer trying to monetize. That will become just another aspect of interactivity.

The lines will also blur between affiliate sites and sponsor sites because with both heading towards the community model and both giving a lot away, outwardly they will look very similar. That is also what will effectively raise the entry bar for new webmasters. It never can cost more than the price of a PC and an internet connection to want to be an adult webmaster, but the knowledge and investment needed to build sites with the potential to earn serious money in future, will increase dramatically.

At the risk of getting even further off topic, I think we shall see other changes in the sponsor-affiliate relationship. Payments will more often become related to volume but also there will be more discrimination. The shotgun approach to attracting affiliates is increasingly expensive and less productive and even though many affiliates earn little or nothing for the majority of sponsors, their existence makes life more difficult for productive affiliates. So just as in other industries, we are going to see the top names becoming much more selective about their affiliates, both to reduce recruitment costs and to encourage those who can generate volume to join them on the promise of less competition. New webmasters will have to settle for new or otherwise struggling programs. More of the money now being spent on newbie recruitment, shows, etc., is going to go instead on affiliate development and practical support, because sponsors need to start taking control of their businesses, instead of merely hoping that a high profile will produce results.

I haven't looked at the poll, but I would guess that 80%+ are opposed to adult versions of YouTube. If you want to be making money 5-10 years from now, instead of opposing YouTube, you should be embracing it and whatever is going to be coming next. The Web 2.0 developments of the past few years are just the beginning...

check out my new system

I make my blog post like this
http://www.adailyfix.com/index.php/2...-the-foursome/

then instead of embedding a movie into the blog post, I started a tube site that I upload movie to, so you see an image like this
http://www.adailyfix.com/cm/nd-bn-643-01.jpg

you click it and get taken to my tube site
http://www.previewtheporn.com/view_v...5687be6106a3b8

so, basically I am getting my blog rolling, but also getting some traffic to the tube site....I am not allowing registration or any features to surfers, just view the video and that is it...and I am the only one that can upload videos

is this an approved way of doing things?

btw, the tube site is not completely done yet, i still gotta get it designed and themed and shit

I don't mean to diminish your post, but i agree with this.

I do a lot of mainstream work and I am paid a fraction of what I am paid in adult.

However the payouts to affiliates will only tone down once we manage to cut affiliates out of the business. This is a process which has already been started and the people who insert themselves between traffic sources and sponsors are becoming fewer and fewer.

I like to keep note of who wants to cut me out of their business. Then I make sure to give them their wish. I think more affiliates should consider doing this.

I have no doubt that is the direction many will take and among the first will doubtless be many of the very same people who were falling over themselves to raise affiliate payments just a few years ago. Unfortunately, they still haven't learned the right lessons and cutting out affiliates is going to prove as short-sighted as everything else so far.

jayeff - I read your book...twice. Aside from my feeling that you could have made the same post 5 years ago, what'd you vote for in the poll?

I didn't vote, for the same reason that although I couldn't have written that post 5 years ago, I could have predicted then that I would be writing it now.

Every developing industry goes through the same phases. Those phases vary in length from one industry to the next and the signs saying hey, this is where we are now, are also different. But the direction and destination is ultimately the same. Market forces are implacable. That reality is what makes possible the study of subjects such as economics and business management. It's why accountants and stock analysts are able to determine the health of individual businesses.

That may seem like an abstract consideration, but it isn't. It really doesn't matter where a train is when you get on it, nor which stations it will pass through en route. But to be wearing the right clothes when it reaches its destination, you need to know whether it is going to Florida or Alaska.

There are lots of ways to make money and those with a talent for spotting bandwagons early and knowing when to jump off, can do very nicely by constantly operating short-term, as it were. But the internet is already demonstrating that as always, the really serious money is earned by those who anticipate future bandwagons. No-one could have forecast specifically that there would be a YouTube or a MySpace, but the nature of the internet in particular and business/marketing in general, dictated that there had to be something like them.

Whether we welcome them or oppose them is irrelevant. They simply are.

Great question my friend but THEY would NOT exist if we didn't have the balls to be like Sinatra and do it our way. We did an it worked! Hell, Toyota sold more cars than GM last quarter because they refined their product. Fair competition is a good thing and though I c the point, to oppose anything on the web (save the obvious kid stuff which is as evil as brown corduroy) opposing any competition may inspire others to oppose US. And, Oh ya', keep in mind...we are really good @ what we do.

Whoever u r, I like your argument!

Some of the best paysites I have seen, with concepts that I know make them amazing sales either point blank refuse to take on affiliates, or only take them on after they have enjoyed a long period of exclusive promotion.

I didn't put my point very well before and it came off a little wrong. What I am suggesting is that the middle man is being cut out. Its the site owners with their traffic who are increasingly going straight to the sponsor, giving less traffic out to others for free, or asking submitters to start paying for a piece of the pie.

Anyhow I am straying off topic ... sorry :)

I think the threat is that most content you see on a paysite you can find free around the net anyway because 90% of it is plugged in.

Pick out any themed paysite and it will be exactly the same as any other only it will look different.

To compete with free porn offer something more unique that people can't get for free.

I have worked with three programs & had my own paysites and not one of them has a majority of their content plugged in. I review sites on the side and very few of the members areas I have reviewed in the past year have had a majority of their content plugged in. I am just wondering where you got the 90% from?
|huh

spaz

Ok but whats different about the content to any other paysite that i can't find on youtube or yourfilehost or any free source?

People theme their sites on whatever but basically they're the same predictable content.

It's a wonder we make any sales, huh Bob?

That's not what i'm saying, it's basically most, if not all people pumping porn are driven by their own greed, anything that's likely to be a threat is obviously not gonna get supported or liked.

But like anything thats under threat from competition, instead of moaning about it, work on ways of countering it by offering better and not the predictable paysite content thats plastered all over the place.

I'm surprised most people didn't predict things like this now most people have broadband and the way online media has grown in everyway.

Ok 90% is a bit over exaggerated but the thing with youtube is it's unique and different to the paysite free content you find in packed in tgp/link sites.

Maybe paysite free content is a bad idea as there is so much of it about that people get bored.

I'm not trying to insult or upset people just giving a view.


Edit: Have a look at this site "sexdreams.2link.be" and tell me whats more of a threat, youtube or this.

Greed? Since when is a company's business model referred to as "greed"?

You think that the movie files on adult tube sites are really that much different from the free content, hosted galleries & whatnot that sponsors allow webmaster to use? It's the same material with a different delivery system.

Hell, if anything, it's longer versions posted by surfers that got the video from the members area or from some sharing service.

Well, if it isn't greed whats the problem?

If it's stolen content from paysites then it's theft and infringes copyright and youtube would be liable.

If it's submitted videos of home porn which is what i've seen mostly on there then again why should people pay to see them?

what your saying is ban people from submitting their own porn unless webmasters can exploit it and get rich.

I'd worry more on password trading/spoofing than what youtube type sites offer.

You really need to re-read all my comments on this - I understand why the adult tube sites exist & I'm not banning them (there were 3 posts promoting them in the last week that are still where they were posted)

What I am saying is that they are against my business model (Link Lists & TGP's) and that's why I do not want to support or encourage them.

I don't like adult tube sites at all - I don't care of the content is all submitted by the paysite owners, if it's all home made videos, if it's all stolen & no one has the rights to post it anyplace - not my concern.

It's also a completely different scenario with password traders or spyware or other malicious business models - if I threw up a poll asking if we should support password traders it's by 100% to 0% - and really has nothing to do with this thread.

Ok i see what you're saying, i only read the first few posts which were mainly about free porn.

The thing about youtube sites is they get good traffic, link lists send very little and from what i've seen elsewhere are mainly used to boost the dreaded PR's.

I can understand why link sites are against them but surely it just means you have to change with the times and compete to be better.

Link-o-rama tube?

I support them.. i think that anyone anywhere can find access to freeporn, and supporting things like this that makes porn 'ok' is a benefit to everyone involved in the industry

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&r...n&q=snizzshare - this thread comes up #3 on a google search. Does that mean Google is for or against?

Tough call.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...n&q=xxxjay+ass - is Google for or against you being an ass :D

I kid - I kid - but thanks for bumping the thread |thumb

Google ranks a lot of stuff high that I doubt very seriously they are "for".

Just a quick example: #2 result for "sex xxx" no quotes. (xxxpower.net)

I would have a hard time believing Google is all for that site. Just check out the title.

I disagree. There are certian SEO advantages you have being Web 2.0. Give me a couple months and you'll see.

i voted 50/50, but after reading your posts/replies, i think i'm against to that idea!

50/50 here, but that could change pretty fast.

I'm 50/50. I've uploaded a few small trailer clips on a few of our sites and not a whole lot of traffic, but a little bit. I do think flash video itself is going to become more and more in use because that where everything is going. A site like jay's that controls everything, in my opinion, is fine. What isn't is sites that would allow member area content uploaded.

the 'yes' or 'no' answer as to whether or not webmasters support Tube like sites is of little practical value. it seems like the relevancy of the question is how it is webmasters are going to respond to these types of sites. what new models are we going to come up with? although these sites are nettlesome, in a way they will challenge webmasters to improve upon the laurels that we rest on. in time, we are going to have to move away from indirect content resources like LL and TGPs, and if not away from these static modes, at least augment them.

because free clips that run over a minute are the very thing the user is looking for. long enough to spank. free streaming video is very desirable.

you can slice traffic up into quality traffic, and parse that into categories based on buying behavior, but the fact of the matter is, highly motivated buyers are outnumbered by the vast amount of users looking not to buy, but to spank. that means the tube sites are catering to a larger demo.
that's how they are worse. they get to the ends by jumping the usual means.
the real issue here is not about free content, but about the quantity of free content. a free ten minute clip is more detrimental to affiliate models than two gallery pages with five or six jpgs.

Good point, it's not just a black and white choice, it's way more detailed, so i voted YES/NO

I am not for them. I uploaded some trailers and got a little traffic from one site. I found some Zango links on another site I used. Then I stopped going to them. I think there is always going to be someone with longer clips on the Tube sites. Longer clips are not good at all. There needs to be a 30 second rule or something.