the future of tgps and link lists (maybe)

[Tommy]

This morning when I woke up I had a sort of idea

(not that I am seriously considering it)

what if ALL the tgps and linklists charged the surfers a small price for access

like 5.00 a month

people like pk worldsex and the hun could be multi millionares overnight

maybe the submited gallerys they would be posting might be from other tgp owners premoting their tgp ??

maybe in 4 to 5 years this might be the way things go

if ya think about how the adult internet would change because of this, It would be very far reaching

before anyone panics, this is just a what if fantasy thread

[LowryBigwood]

I could see something like that happening if the link list and tgp owners had to check age, like paysites do. I'd think it could be a good thing for everyone and a lot less free porn. Just a newbies 1.5 cents. |bow|

[selena]

Anything that reduces the amount of totally free porn is a great idea, imho.

[Tommy]

well I dont think if it happened it would have anything to do with decreasing the amaount of free porn, I think it would be about money

right now the real money is made by the program owners and not by the people controling most of the traffic (customers) that senerio doesnt fly in any other buisness model

[Cleo]

It would only work if all the places did it together and I don't see everyone ever agreeing to this or anything else, but it would be nice.

[LowryBigwood]

Good point Tommy.

But if they are paying us for the porn, it's no longer free. :)

I don't have any doubt your bookmarkers would pay the monthly fee, but what about new traffic, with all the other available porn out there? How would the industry come together and sort of conform to this new idea? Of course the larger players such as yourself would have to venture out there first. :)

[Tommy]

It would only work if all the places did it together and I don't see everyone ever agreeing to this or anything else, but it would be nice.

3- 4 years ago everyone said the same thing about paid submits

[Verbal]

Yeah, I had also wondered why TGPs don't charge the surfers a small "surfing fee". The thing is though, everyone would have to agree to this model, and there is no shortage of TGPs that would stay open for free. But yeah, it would be interesting to do a test and see how it works.

[Verbal]

3- 4 years ago everyone said the same thing about paid submits

And it is ironic that webmasters now pay for the privilege of giving away porn for free.
Make the surfers pay for access too, dammit. :D

[selena]

Sorry, Tommy, I didn't post real clear, but in my mind, if they are paying to surf, it's not totally free anymore. Didn't word that right, I don't think.

[Ramster]

Interesting concept that has been thought of before.

Another cool option is the guy that has a TGP for his members. It's inside the members area or has a link to it from the members area.

Just thinking out loud. :)

[Porn Meister]

There've been lists before that try to get an email address out of a surfer after a few "free" visits. Once entered, the cookie was updated so it didnt block access anymore.
Not the same, but similar concept.
Also I've seen 1 paysite who sells submit spots where the galleries are listed inside a paysite members area. Again, not directly related, but I think goes to show the content value currently available for free.

Seems like a valid concept idea.. although I'm not sure where the line would be between "free" and "pay" site as far as regulations etc.

[LowryBigwood]

Selena, that's the way I was thinking as well. :) No longer free to surfers if they're paying webmasters for access to their directories.

It will be interesting to see what happens if this does get tested.

[swedguy]

For every place to goes "paid to view", there will be 10 "free to view" that will take its place. I think the old die hard followers might pay, but getting new surfers will be a hard task.

[ClickBuster]

Only one thing came to my mind after reading this thread and that listed content is not your content. After all it's just a tool for you to generate income. Maybe if you share your revenue... oooh even better - you will pay PPC or PPI to sponsors because you'll use their free content to promote their sites LOL. Which actually will turn things around wouldn't it - and here's how the idea of a paysite was born :) You can't have a free content listing and require som fee to be paid for it in order to view it, because in some time people will just start grabbing promo content from the sponsors and not even link to them - what will happen is people building *free* sites and galleries just for the $5 monthly... and in some moment the sponsor content will stop and here we come to what you were talking about - end of the free porn promoting - nobody will give it away free and everybody (including you guys) will in the same position as if time went back 5 years. In that case I'm for the $5 monthly fee, because I'm new to the biz and I would like to have an equal start with you all :)

Now, I don't want to be rude (but this post was so funny), but please stop dreaming Tommy. The story knows 100k of people that have denyed the future, so you may be also predicting it, but my logic just stops me from believing it.

[Tommy]

well the gallerys and sites listed at the tgp are still free

maybe think of it as a fee for assembling the list everyday and doing the updates

other industrys are plagued by lawsuits some good and some bad
but liablity lawsuits govern the way they do buisness

and I am sure its only a matter of time before it happens here

what if some kid gets caught jerking off to whatever tgp
and the parents feel the kid has become addicted to porn and the tgp has correpted the kids morals etc etc and the parents sue for millions of dollars

if one person won, overnight there would be thousands of lawsuits

what then ????????????

[Greenguy]

We tried that - it was called AVS :D

Seriously - there are already sites doing this with charging pennies for gallery links & whatnot.

If EVERYONE did it, then it'd work. Not you'll never get everyone in the entire world to do it.

[Brav]

I don't see it happening, it will be like TGP2, some will like it some won't. I think it would be nearly impossible to get everyone to do it.

I have seen some sites charging for access to their "huge archives" though.

[Tommy]

Avs Is a lot different and millions of people bought avs memberships
and it would still be a good thing if visa didnt have regulations against it

avs sort of pretended to be a safe guard against kids viewing porn but it was really a paysite with lots of different subsites

first of all they charged like 30 to 40 bucks or a trial with a 40 dollar recur
the list was free to see
and you had to put your password in at every site
most avs's dont add as many new sites as a tgp adds gallerys daily
avs's listed sites not gallerys
and most of those sites were a lot worse then the sites listed and free link sites


and when you think about it why would anyone buy an avs membership when they could just surf over to link o rama and find it for free.
But surfers bought millions of those passes and paid big money for em

[Pusher]

I agree with swedguy...there will always be people who will offer porn for free...in fact if some LLs and TGPs started charging a nominal fee, they would see it as an opportunity to increase their traffic!

[Tommy]

I am just saying anything is possable

Now lets take it a step further.
The trades you have with other tgps and linksites
could have revshare codes in the link urls

[ClickBuster]

Do you know what would I do if I had an LL like Link-o-rama for instance. I'd build my own VIP area where I'd push HQ sites for $1 monthly, just to distinct payable surfers from the other punks out there and build some better marketing knowing that you're not serving SEs, nor other LLs - you'll be building a site only for your VIP members - not so many restrictions that you should care about. The advantages of such VIP area are actually pretty much, you should think about it ;) I think this could be done with you current LL software by only adding a new category and restricting access with .htaccess and offer signup on an unsuccessfull login.

Since this is my *reply* I would appreciate if somebody let me know if he/she decides to do it any time soon :)

[Dr Bizzaro]

I think the big site's traffic would drop off and grow smaller and smaller by the day....while sites that remained free would flourish with new traffic.

[Robbo]

Yeah we`ll probably always compete with free porn eminating from one country or another. I could see something like that if our government said everything has to be behind age verification. But then that does bring up the matter of where new traffic comes from especially if we were still forced to compete with others who could still show whatever. As far as the US is concerned I think anything of that magnitude would be politically driven at this point.

[ClickBuster]

What I think will happen is that webmasters will try to increase the quality of their sites in order to get listed in the VIP area. I personally prefer to have surfers that have verified their age with CC and have 100 quality hits instead of 3k smoochers. Maybe this is not so good for LL traffic, but for TGP, mentioning the large numbers...

[swedguy]

hmmm, the more I think about it the better it looks :)

If they pay a nominal fee to get access = proved themself that they have a CC and want to use it. Same as AVS.
Since the traffic is already pre-approved, it's of higher quality.
Submitters will realise that you have higher quality traffic = higher quality submits. <--- good reason why people would sign up and retain. Of course there's more things you can provide that make them sign up and retain, but that's one thing.

[Tommy]

I think A thumb tgp with a strong search engine presence would be perfect

[Useless]

I'd love to see you big traffic handlers go to a paid model. I'd finally get some traffic to my TGP. :D I'd probably have to switch from a 10mbps pipe to a 100.

I say go for it! |thumb

[Tommy]

I would never take that big of a gamble with Tommys

I am working on anew tgp now and I am thinking about opening it free and then maybe 8 months later trying it

[bestdutchrates]

I like the idea but I also know that the biggest tgp owner out there wil never ever charge his visitors. And the rule is that the one who is the most succesfull, always has the true on his side.

just my cents

[Chop Smith]

I think TGFind.com had a 'surfing charge' a few years back. After viewed X number of the galleries listed, you would get a popup requiring you to register. I am thinking that it was 4.95 a month.

I just visited TGFind.com. They still have a to register but it redirected back to the index.

[Tommy]

ya know years ago I use to redirect some of my se traffic to a page asking the surfers to buy an AVS membership I dont remeber exactly but I think it did a good 40 sales a day

http://www.tommys-bookmarks.com/index1.html

[Useless]

I like the idea but I also know that the biggest tgp owner out there wil never ever charge his visitors. And the rule is that the one who is the most succesfull, always has the true on his side.

just my cents

And that is the truth. The almighty Hun, who has made himself rich by providing the cleanest and most honest page, would have to add more servers to handle the influx from those unwilling to pay to see our indentical advertising. To quote Ross Perot (referring to NAFTA), 'there would be a huge sucking sound' made by the movement of surfers to other reliably free venues.

[stuveltje]

i never thought it would be a problem to pay some $ to submit to linksites or tgp, i know tommy you started a post about charging 3 years ago or so on the ans board i didnt found it a bad idea that time and i still think its a good idea, and my thoughts are if all are doing it, alot of "one day" webmasters will be away from the bizz, the webmasters are not forched to pay for submitting, they still can choose to submit to other linksites who dont ask money....so it isnt forching the submitters, i know people would complain if realy all linksites would do it, because lately its a trend that newbies start bizz with a linksite instead of free sites or other things, but then the choise is still to the submitter, they dont have to pay if they dont want to, i think not on the getting rich part, i think at that part that a seriouse submitter will pay to have they sites listen, i think many cheaters will disapear, just my point of view.....(oke back checking if the trojan is gone from my puter, i hate puters:)!)

[eman]

what if ALL the tgps and linklists charged the surfers a small price for access

like 5.00 a month

people like pk worldsex and the hun could be multi millionares overnight



75% of linklists/tgps would disappear because surfers would suss out the winners and losers.

In time some of the remaining 25% would drop the charge and gain market share by reverting to the "free" model.

This in turn would encourage others to follow the "free" model and things would eventually end up where they are now.

[chilihost]

My opinion, if thehun started charging $1 or 5 access fee per month, thehun would have almost zero traffic within a month as surfers would just go to another free place.

it would only work if all tgp owners did it at the exact same time...and if you can get agreement to that then I will personally start a free site that same day so I can get all that traffic!!!!!

cheers,
Luke

[GeorgeTH]

I actually think that as it stands now, with the quality of general submissions, paid spots partly taken up directly by sponsors (not gallery posters anymore), there is a tiny chance that it might work out with some specific rules:
· no sponsor content, none at all!
· no trade script, no other missleading links
= and above average experience for the surfer!

I turn this would probably attract some decent submissions, too, since the surfer has shown he/she is willing to pay.

But I agree with GG: we have tried it with AVS (which was good as long as it lasted), and after that I had actually tried briefly a micro-pay-system on my site for people to get to complete sets, but that failed badly...

Still - I would give it another go, particularly considering all the new micro billing options evolving, like SMS billing. Once they become more practical and worldwide accepted there could be a real chance, even if 1,000s of sites will continue giving away free porn.

[RawAlex]

Tommy, in a perfect world, it would work. If all the people listing free porn starting charging for it, well, we would make more money (if for no other reason, that we would stop paying for so much bandwidth!).

However, nature abhors a vacuum. If the top 10 links site and the top 10 TGPs start charging, the surfers just all go somewhere else. New free links and free TGPs would pop up, and your surfer base would pretty much disappear overnight.

The traffic you did send out would probably be better, as you would have filtered off all the freeloaders.

Of course, you could just turn tommy's into a low price membership site and get it over with. Nothing stopping you from charging for access to listings, I guess. I am not entirely sure how many people would be willing to give you free galleries so that you can make money, but that is another issue.

It's like TGP2 - a nice idea, but not as successful because the original TGPs and TGP galleries didn't go away. Instead, there are movie gallery posts, and they are WAY hotter than TGP2.

Alex

[Opti]

I am just saying anything is possable

Now lets take it a step further.
The trades you have with other tgps and linksites
could have revshare codes in the link urls

I think this might make it possible... and incorporate a central public counter service too... that sells adpsots on behalf of each site like adbrite.com

Been working on a system like this for my personal network of sites.

[whitey]

Right before the visa regulations impacted avs's, we had a softcore, fetish tgp site that we began charging for access to the non blind site that included hardcore galleries.

We made a ton of cash in three months before the visa/avs shit hit the fan. The avs we were using for access kicked us off. We tried to get another avs interested, but it was not easy.

Once one had a billing model, the possibilities of marketing this concept are endless Tommy.

We are right there with you. The problem, im my mind, is the billing model. We have proven that the concept works already.

[security_man]

the key to it is to either have everyone do it at the same time, but like everyone has said that just wont happen (unless copa goes through and thats why i kinda hope it does <ducks the flying objects comming his way from other webmsaters for the blasphemy> LOL).

the other way to do it is to give the surfers something more than what they can get anywhere else for free.. not much more but something... kinda like AVS did but for some reason we have all poo pooed avs now too.

i wonder why it seems great ideas are usually the same ideas that already exist as bad ideas because they werent mouthed by big names in the industry?

[Sean416]

I think the only real way this would happen is if the US implies some kind of law like all surfers have to enter a CC number in order to view any graphic images. Then you could charge a surfer a $5 lifetime membership to your TGP, link list or whatever. But if that were the case, I think it would have to be all FHG's and FHS's because the domains hosting the free content would have to be controlled. Otherwise you couldn't tell who is the TGP and who is the gallery submitter.

Did anybody else notice tommy's thought pattern? He just started charging for submits and now all the sudden he is thinking about charging surfers too... he's getting greedy! Musta made some nice money from the submits fee. LOL j/k tommy.

[Greenguy]

You know what I love - and this doesn't apply to Tommy (LOL)

The geniuses that run CJ's & blink link TGP's that think that they should be able to charge surfers for clean gallery links after fucking them over for the last 5 years :D

[Greenguy]

I think the only real way this would happen is if the US implies some kind of law....You're in Canada - you of all people should know that the US does not make Internet Laws, no matter what our silly gov't thinks :D

[security_man]

You know what I love - and this doesn't apply to Tommy (LOL)

The geniuses that run CJ's & blink link TGP's that think that they should be able to charge surfers for clean gallery links after fucking them over for the last 5 years :D
|pokefun| yeah, but wouldnt you if you could? |bananna|

[Linkster]

Tommy - if you remember - I was one of the few that agreed with you back in the day when we were discussing paid submits a few years ago :)
I happen to agree with you on this as well - for a few reasons.
First - from a biz model as you mentioned, we have been screwing ourselves for years to make money for sponsors - and they in turn have taken it further with the addition of free hosted galleries and loads of free content for submits, leading to the "easy path" for a bunch of new WMs and killing off a few big content companies in their path.
Second - and I think that there is a low buzz already developing about this - the organizational side of this biz has always been lacking - people have developed into small groups, but never a large "association" that worked towards the benefit of the people that do the real work in the biz (traffic generators)
Third - A lot of self regulation done early on our side would lead to less future attempts at regulation from the outside, and some people still look at the internet as a wild wild west - it still "seems" that way, but with everything from lawsuits to international treaties in the works already to regulate the internet, this will change - and we better be ready.
Last - there are some technical issues that will have to be handled ranging from issues with SE's caching and image hotlinking (copywrite issues) to handling WMs in countries that tend not to care about self regulation but I truly believe that can all be worked out to everyones benefit.
I say we should definitely not let this one drop for a few years like we did with the paid submits :)

[mrMagoo]

A federal court dismissed obscenity charges against extreme associates, here is the article http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Articles&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=214089

One of the reasons cited for dropping the charges was that extreme associates has their content behind a member's area that can only be accessed with a credit card.

So charging with a credit card gives you some protection.

[Tommy]

you guys keep talking about the hun

when extreame paychecks opens 5 new paysites the huns traffic doesnt go up

I am not gonna change over Tommys and even if everyone else did it I would be the last man holding the fort Kicking and screaming BUT I am very tempted In fact I am gonna
try it on a new tgp and go around premoting my new paid tgp like its a sponsor

now lets say this tgp makes truckloads of money
think about it, look at nasty dollars they were the first that got in to reality content
and now they are one of the biggest sponsors around

do you wanna be one of the johnny come Latelys


Remember worldsex got sold for like a million dollars what if worldsex could have charged the surfers a small price and made 2 million in the first 4 months
dont you think he would have done it ??????


Sooner or later the Ambulance chasers will find this industry and living in holland isnt gonna help you, If you do buisness in the USA they can get your money


I am not spreading doom and gloom rumors
This is a vision maybe a prediction, Maybe a fantasy

[Chop Smith]

|thumb

Damn right, Tommy. Go for it Buddy!

[SirMoby]

As usual Tommy, your idea has a lot of merit. The first thing that popped into my mind was AVS. Remember the Visa regulations did NOT kill the AVS companies but only made them change their marketing and some folded at that time because they were already loosing money. AVS companies were loosing members because they had terrible sites in the network. Some AVS companies still exists and the sites, the content and the navigation makes for one of the worst porn surfing experiences that can be found on-line today. Just go surf Adult Check and see if you can get a boner.

A Mr. Mary Lou, a GG or a Tommy running something like that would push for quality sites and keep growing the member base.

If surfers come to your site they will buy. The Home Shopping Network should be proof enough that people will buy anything at any time for reasons that no one can possibly understand. They will buy your memberships.

If you had a strong network of porn sites that could only be had at Tommy’s money site then the surfers would not only buy they would also renew month after month.

I don’t see this as a replacement for free porn but I do see this as a new revenue stream. It will work if implemented correctly.

[SirMoby]

Linkster, wouldn't it be great if there was an organization that focused on growing and protecting the business? It's difficult but not impossible.

[Linkster]

I think its very possible especially if you give the perks due the traffic generators and ensure the sponsors realize that the traffic doesnt come cheap like they do in the mainstream world already.
Have you noticed the amount of sponsors that have sprung up in the last year because they realize that traffic is almost free from us?
There are many benefits for a WM that could be put in that organization, as long as the overall path is to the promotion of the biz long term and not just for one companies benefit like so many of the splinter organizations that exist out there today.

[Chop Smith]

I don't Tommy's fantasy was to change the entire biz model.
what if ALL the tgps and linklists charged the surfers a small price for access
I read it to mean that he visioned charging a small 'surfing fee'. Therefore, the content for his site would still come from submitters and free hosted stuff. If he was planning otherwise, he might as well turn the site into a 'pay site', providing his own content.

First - from a biz model as you mentioned, we have been screwing ourselves for years to make money for sponsors - and they in turn have taken it further with the addition of free hosted galleries and loads of free content for submits, leading to the "easy path" for a bunch of new WMs and killing off a few big content companies in their path.
Second - and I think that there is a low buzz already developing about this - the organizational side of this biz has always been lacking - people have developed into small groups, but never a large "association" that worked towards the benefit of the people that do the real work in the biz (traffic generators)
How do you figure that you been screwing yourself? In return for your traffic, sponsors and/or submitters provide you free content for you site. And if anyone got screwed with the advent of the "free hosted craze", it was the submitters. It was like a manufactor going to direct sales and cutting out the merchants.

I think its very possible especially if you give the perks due the traffic generators and ensure the sponsors realize that the traffic doesnt come cheap like they do in the mainstream world already.
Have you noticed the amount of sponsors that have sprung up in the last year because they realize that traffic is almost free from us?
There are many benefits for a WM that could be put in that organization, as long as the overall path is to the promotion of the biz long term and not just for one companies benefit like so many of the splinter organizations that exist out there today.
The sponsors are not getting a free ride, they are paying 50+% of their gross for your traffic either to you or your submitter.

The 'bottom line' is this is a three way street - sponsor = provider of goods/service, LL and TGP owners = provider of media, much like radio, tv, print and submitters=provider of adverting copy, a kin to ad agencies. We all need each other. |shake|

[Sean416]

You're in Canada - you of all people should know that the US does not make Internet Laws, no matter what our silly gov't thinks :D


bah... I wish that were true. But the way I see it is somewhere down the line we're all connected to the US laws in some way or another. If it isn't the webmaster living in US, it's the processing company, if it's not the processing company its the host, if its not the host, its something else. True you could have a company that used all non-US resources but as it stands right now, I say about 75% of online webmasters are connected to the US in some way or another. They would either have to really switch up how they do business, or comply to the rules.

My being in Canada just means I know all too well what this saying means "When the elephants dance, the mice get stomped" |pink

[whitey]

You know what I love - and this doesn't apply to Tommy (LOL)

The geniuses that run CJ's & blink link TGP's that think that they should be able to charge surfers for clean gallery links after fucking them over for the last 5 years :D

You are right on GG...When we did the experiement, there were several other tgps involved - most of them cj/tgp type sites.

Our site and one other had clean gallery links with a couple of semi blind links - "click here for more tgp galleries" or "visit our other tgp for more galleries" type of thing that many "clean" tgps use.

In general, the cleaner the site, the better the conversions. We primarily focused on the niche/hardcore nature of the protected galleries. We charged $10.00/month.

I agree with the sentiments expressed by several regarding the fact that competition will drive things to the lowest common denominator - free porn. But, by gaining trust of your surfers and providing them higher quality, high res galleries featuring hardcore porn in a non hassle environment, money can be made.

From a submitters standpoint, all I can say is that the hardcore galleries in the protected area converted at a rate I have not seen since we dropped the project.

It was only a three month project with about 5 or 6 tgps participating, but the results were encoraging.

[xxxjay]

How stoned were you when you came up with this idea? J/K

Though, a good linklist has enough content on it to where it is worth a subscription.

Making it member based would stop SE spiders in their tracks though.

[Kath]

Wow... definitely something to think about - I mean, just look at all the responses and tangent ideas posted already in this thread (plus the ones everyone is keeping secretly for themselves ATM - lol).

An idea that inspiring is definitely worth a try... would love to cover a story on an experiment like this and see what happens!

|thumb

[PayAsYouClick]

There is a way to introduce this type of idea gradually to surfers, without killing traffic.

We've developed a way of charging the surfer a few cents for each link he follows, rather than asking him to pay for your whole TGP by subscription.

Here's a demonstration TGP site that shows the kind of thing I'm talking about :

http://www.demotgp.com

The block of thumbs in the middle are all charged at 10c each. You can come down to 1c. Look at the url, and you'll see that the link is encrypted. But pay 10c (or whatever) and you're taken to the gallery.

If you tried to do this on your main TGP, of course the surfer would run a mile. But you could think about charging the surfer to follow links in your archive. Or make "specially recommended" links 5c each.

The surfer has to get a PayAsYouClick.com account to follow these links, and that's of course the barrier. But once the surfer sees that there is a now huge amount of content available from 1c to $2, they do sign up pretty well. There's some other examples on that page of how to charge him for content - do some clicking and you'll see what I mean.

Coming back to your TGP, you and your submitters know that the only people following those paid links (even at 1c) have proved they're able and willing to spend. So suddenly you've got fantastically qualified traffic going to those galleries. No sensible sponsor is going to begrudge you charging the surfer 1c per click for listing his gallery like that.

The real icing on the cake is that when you introduce surfers and they sign up for an account, you receive 50% commission (after processing) of everything he spends on ANY sites, EVER. So just exposing the surfer to this on your TGP is a new revenue stream, even if he doesn't fancy paying for links yet.

We've got more than 100 live sites using this now, so surfers are going to come across it more and more. If the TGPs get behind this, they have the power to make this a reality.

I'd be grateful for your feedback on this idea.

Regards

Danny

[Greenguy]

You know, this does bring up a question - can you legally charge for access to other peoples sites/galleries?

If I had a program that had hosted galleries & free sites & someone was charging people to look at them, I think I might have to call my lawyer.

[PayAsYouClick]

Of course, that would hold true whether you are charging for access to the whole TGP, or charging for the individual links.

I wouldn't suggest for a moment that you'd charge for individual links without making it part of your own submit terms, so that everyone was happy with it.

But remember that as a sponsor, the traffic coming to you from that kind of link would be from surfers who had been prefiltered. So the bandwidth bill goes down, and the conversions go up.

That sponsor could also charge for extra clips etc on that gallery page, knowing that the surfers that hit the gallery can make payments of up to $2 with one click. Effectively these would be preveiwing the subscription content - exactly what they're doing now for free, but able to charge say 20c per clip.

Remember also that what you are charging for is access to your "directory". The page you're linking to is freely available - you're not selling their content.

As a link list owner you can legally copyright your links. So if you can do that why couldn't you charge surfers to use them.

Danny

[caringneo]

You know, this does bring up a question - can you legally charge for access to other peoples sites/galleries?

If I had a program that had hosted galleries & free sites & someone was charging people to look at them, I think I might have to call my lawyer.

GG is right.
The submitter provides content, hosting, banwidth, and his time and work expecting traffic from linklist/TGP. Making money out of that for free is not a good idea.
Neo

[spookyx]

One of the problems I see is the Visa thing. They might not like the idea of all the freesites/galleries not being on "your" domain.


|waves|

[swedguy]

GG is right.
The submitter provides content, hosting, banwidth, and his time and work expecting traffic from linklist/TGP. Making money out of that for free is not a good idea.
Neo
For free?

There's a lot of work behind a LL. The charge would be for reviewing and providing links to the best porn out there and some other goodies. A submitter is never forced to submit to a LL/TGP. They can either submit to LL A and get 5000 mixed hits, or submit to LL B and get less traffic, but pre-approved. I know that I would take both ;)

But the legal issue is interesting. It's the submitter that hosts the content, and he's not charging anything. It's the LL webmaster that only has a link to the free site that is charging. Common sense says that it's all good, since the person that is using the content doesn't charge anything.

[PayAsYouClick]

GG is right.
The submitter provides content, hosting, banwidth, and his time and work expecting traffic from linklist/TGP. Making money out of that for free is not a good idea.
Neo


Absolutely. That's why it is such a good idea. The sponsor gets adult-filtered traffic that's ready to make payments with one click.

Nobody's suggesting the TGPs should make money at the sponsors' expense - whether you charge for the links individually or by getting the surfer to buy a subscription to the TGP. That would be an unsustainable business model, and I think we've had enough of those already!

PayAsYouClick can also be used to (for example) charge the surfer 20c (say) for 24 hours to reach your archive / premium links page, ie a short-duration subscription to a particular part of your TGP.

[Chop Smith]

You know, this does bring up a question - can you legally charge for access to other peoples sites/galleries?

If I had a program that had hosted galleries & free sites & someone was charging people to look at them, I think I might have to call my lawyer.

Think you are correct. Most contain a copyright notice. Of course you can contract for anything legal, so the terms and conditions for the LLs/TGPs would have to be rewritten to cover the legalities.

[Robbo]

Then of course as a submitter you`d have to wonder about the benefit of being listed at a ll or tgp as such. Would it be like the internet that once surfers pay for access they believe everything else is or should be free? Therefore not being very productive or finding another place to surf after thier needs are not exactly met. Like prepaying to be presented a sponsor. I know I would hate to pay to be advertised to.

[Chop Smith]

I know I would hate to pay to be advertised to.


But it might improve your shopping experience and be worth the small 'surfing' fee- guarantee no popups, blind links and BS like that. Sort of like paying a small fee to get rid of a high-powered used car salesman.

[PayAsYouClick]

Then of course as a submitter you`d have to wonder about the benefit of being listed at a ll or tgp as such. Would it be like the internet that once surfers pay for access they believe everything else is or should be free? Therefore not being very productive or finding another place to surf after thier needs are not exactly met. Like prepaying to be presented a sponsor. I know I would hate to pay to be advertised to.

I think its all about perceived value. If you tell the surfer that this site is so good he's going to have to pay you to even be told where it is, it sets an expectation in his mind that the site is something special, or that you've had to work hard on his behalf to find it for him - however you want to sell it.

When we launched everyone said surfers wouldn't pay a cent each to view pictures because they're free everywhere else. That was just plain wrong. We watch surfers all the time click 300 pictures in an evening at 5c each, then come back for more the next day.

The same COULD be true for links if they're marketed right, and you guys sure have got the traffic to make that pay if you get it right.

But I don't pretend to know for sure what the best way of doing that is. We're just providing the tools for you to do it whatever way you can make it work.

Danny

[SEO_Konsul]

This morning when I woke up I had a sort of idea

(not that I am seriously considering it)

what if ALL the tgps and linklists charged the surfers a small price for access

like 5.00 a month

people like pk worldsex and the hun could be multi millionares overnight

maybe the submited gallerys they would be posting might be from other tgp owners premoting their tgp ??

maybe in 4 to 5 years this might be the way things go

if ya think about how the adult internet would change because of this, It would be very far reaching

before anyone panics, this is just a what if fantasy thread

actuall I find this a very good idea, thugh I think how thinks are running atm it will not happen. everybody who runs a tgp or linklist must join this idea.

maybe it will have to be like your idea one day because of legal issues, maybe free access to adult related material will be prohibited...

just my thoughts I want to share with you all. time will show us

[SEO_Konsul]

You know, this does bring up a question - can you legally charge for access to other peoples sites/galleries?

If I had a program that had hosted galleries & free sites & someone was charging people to look at them, I think I might have to call my lawyer.

think this should be possible. remember, you offer a service and why should you not be allowed to charge a fee for it. actually I would love to get my freesites (if I had some) listed on your linklist thugh you charge a fee for you visitors ;)

[SEO_Konsul]

Making it member based would stop SE spiders in their tracks though.

there are possibilities to make such areas accessable, stuff I have already been doing in the past

[Robbo]

I really have no doubt you could make a few bucks on the idea. I think what everyone wonders is "how much?". But it sounds like a great plan should the law decide to really clamp down on unprotected content!

I think it could even work in the current climate given real value to surfers and promoted right. Hell what have`nt we sold yet?!

[amadman]

I have no doubt that this would work. Especially if you catered to a very specific niche.

[PayAsYouClick]

Whether you choose to charge surfers a subscription-style price to view a section of your links, or charge him for each link he follows, the real power lies in what you do with him then.

Let's say the idea moves ahead a few steps, and you have TGPs charging surfers to view their links with PayAsYouClick accounts.

An increasing number of surfers are persuaded to get an account, so those surfers are hitting sites able to make a payment of up to $2 with one click on a payment link. No big decision, no worries about anonymity or scams etc, just click on the thumb and that 2 minute clip is yours for a dollar.

The rest of the industry won't just ignore this, nor will they reach for their lawyers, they'll move to take advantage of it. So the sponsors will start to build galleries with a few free clips like now, but links to a load more of their content priced at 20c a clips etc. This is irresitable for surfers. Its like a Las Vegas slot machine - every extra payment is so tiny, there's no reason to stop. That's how we get surfers spending $20 in an evening, never mind a month. Of course if the surfer really likes what he's found, he'll stop paying per-click and buy a full subscription.

But this is the important bit. The way our system is set up, the TGP owner or submitter will earn around half of everything their traffic spends on those sponsor sites.

The sponsor's happy because he's getting pre-filtered traffic that ready to spend. And the TGP owner is happy because by driving the surfers to the best sites, he's going to make a hefty percentage of everything that surfer spends.

This isn't a dream for us, this is what we've got going right now. We've got webmasters of all shapes and sizes buliding sites with videos, niche pictures etc, and converting traffic better than they did on subscriptions. And now, we've got sponsors building pay-per-click versions of their sites, having already tested the idea and found that it converts new surfers without reducing signups.

What we haven't yet got is the mainstream TGPs and Link Lists. I hope that by offering this as a model, you'll see that we've got something worth looking at.

[Greenguy]

It'll only take one sponsor to call a lawyer to put an end to it. I really don;t see how you can charge for access to someone else's site.

This issue is an old one - remember back when AVS sites were very popular? A lot of sponsors would not let you use their free content on AVS sites because you were selling access to their material.

Same thing applies here.

[PayAsYouClick]

It'll only take one sponsor to call a lawyer to put an end to it. I really don;t see how you can charge for access to someone else's site.

This issue is an old one - remember back when AVS sites were very popular? A lot of sponsors would not let you use their free content on AVS sites because you were selling access to their material.

Same thing applies here.

In the case of the AVS's, they were charging for access to material they didn't own.

In this case, the sponsor's gallery remains freely available. You're charging the surfer for providing him with a link. You own the link. It's like selling a directory.

There's no legal issue, but of course you'd want to talk to the sponsors first and do it in a way that benefitted them, and would grow sustainably.

[GeorgeTH]

You know, this does bring up a question - can you legally charge for access to other peoples sites/galleries?

If I had a program that had hosted galleries & free sites & someone was charging people to look at them, I think I might have to call my lawyer.
First: I still doubt if surfers would be paying to view a sponsor gallery (coming back to my initial reply!), but they would for some rather exclusive content in nice large images/movies.

Don't forget: there are still a few old-fashioned webmasters left who are actually buying content to make into TGP/LL galleries! And who says that then the gallery should be still limited to 16 or 20 pictures, 4 or 6 movies... A submitter could make a little larger teaser particularly for this system - I certainly wouldn't mind the traffic as long as it is not double charged (meaning; me as a submitter and the surfer to see it - you can milk a cow only so long). Should probably be better quality traffic.

I would think from the legal point of view the TGP/LL is rather charging for their service, not the content as such... And otherwise the TGP/LL owner could maybe pay a percentage TO the submitter as a sub-license fee! Now that would be a lovely new concept: get finally paid for submitting! I always thought that would be only fair!!!
(It certainly wasn't such a minefield when I used a micro-payment with my own galleries - since the content was licensed to me.)

[Robbo]

Greenguy good point!

[dareutwo]

Just getting back into this biz, but here goes a knee jerk reaction -

1- Free porn won't go away, period, as of course this biz grew the internet.
2 - Sponsor(s) and their content has grown exponentially, a very very bad thing in my view.
3 - LL/TGP owners would like to get paid for the countless hours of reviews, costs of cheater script programming...

Tommy not knocking your idea, but just for a minute think of moving the left hand to right hand.
What IF??
LL/tgps required SPONSORS pay to get listed on your LL for promoting them?
Given a sliding scale fee (to be determined, PPC?), as some LL obviously can't produce hits like others.

Tommy - what would you charge BangBros to list a single link/gallery that will be seen by how many thousands, REGARDLESS of the other WM link codes??

If you're a sponsor, then you're a sponsor and you must be willing to forgo capital to promote your product. It's called Advertising Dollars.. quicken has a category for it.
If I link to a free site with your content or banners then I'm promoting YOUR product, not mine.
My product is MY Link List, my product is the ad views that I can deliver.

If Ford underwrites a series for Fox... do you think Ford would allow any other car company to advertise on this series??

Basically I'm saying that instead of surfers to pay, it might be time for Sponsors to Pay for results, like any other business model on the planet except, so far, the adult biz.

Would this be a pain in the ass for them? Hell yes. But I don't feel a damn thing for them I've been sending them free traffic for years.
If I send them 50khits through the galleries and my own traffic, that should be worth something.
(and in your case tommy, gg x ??)

Play this thought for a bit -

Hundreds/thousands of CCbill type, no investment sponsors go out of biz. (and chargebacks go away too)
Millions and millions of gallery pages no longer link to anything, oh well.
True big time sponsors would have to hire a full time - LL/tgp coordinator. (like a real biz would do)
Less Free content, less banned urls, easier workload for us.

You can't suck blood from a turnip, go for the deep pockects! (isn't that a lawyers creed or something)

Surfers, are surfers, and they always will be... don't charge them, ever.. (just keep your hook sharp)

Just my thoughts...

[dareutwo]

As a follow up -
Who ran through Millions and Millions in the past 18 months??
GG??
Tommy??
the Hun??
OR
Sponsors??
OR
Surfers????

[bret]

I think the big site's traffic would drop off and grow smaller and smaller by the day....while sites that remained free would flourish with new traffic.

But the quality of that traffic would be much better... When revenues drop enough, some of the bigger sites will try this.

[Linkster]

Dare - ya hit on a point thats been on my mind for a long time - and that is that the sponsors expect that their sites get advertised for free by us - by linking the submitters sites - we dont get jack for that service - and for that matter the submitter never gets really whats due them but thats another thread.
Im sure someone will bring up the argument that without the submitters, we wouldnt have sites to link to - we all know thats not true - between the sponsors giving away hosted free sites and galleries we have more than enough to load a well run TGP or LL - added of course to the pool of LL/TGP owners own free sites and galleries - hell - thats why most TGPs dont need submits from outside - they get enough to list everyday just from their trusted friends that run other TGPs.
The rampant explosion of sponsors lately has been due to the fact that they dont have to budget for advertising, other than to drag more WMs to their programs on boards like this - which is why theyve been able to cut way back on their staffing - the people that used to do the pushing of sites to the public for them arent needed right now.
Theyve about driven some of the best content companies out of the biz with their free giveaways - WMs dont need to buy content anymore for their own advertising.

I totally agree that the people with the traffic need to start getting back to the old model of advertising - some still do it with certain banner placements on som LLs and TGPs, but that is definitely becoming a minority. Its time for sponsors to meet the real world.

[Linkster]

One point I left out - Im still of the firm belief that the sponsors should be the ones paying for the submitters to be able to submit to places that now charge - why should a hard-working WM have to pay for the traffic thats going to the sponsor and hope that this weeks ratios might give them a sale - after scrubbing and other things that the sponsors might do

[Tommy]

One point I left out - Im still of the firm belief that the sponsors should be the ones paying for the submitters to be able to submit to places that now charge - why should a hard-working WM have to pay for the traffic thats going to the sponsor and hope that this weeks ratios might give them a sale - after scrubbing and other things that the sponsors might do


HMM I would love to get my submit pass in the ars rewards store

[Porn Meister]

I was going to ask Karen if I could buy a submit pass with points. Either way you get paid, and it's a chance to get your traffic to their sites as well. You should contact them.

[Chop Smith]

...and that is that the sponsors expect that their sites get advertised for free by us - by linking the submitters sites - we dont get jack for that service - and for that matter the submitter never gets really whats due them but thats another thread.

Linkster, this is not quite a true statement. As I stated above, the sponsors are paying for advertising - revenuse share or pay per signup. I agree that if you don't list hosted sites from the sponsor that you 'don't get jack'. Unless the sponsor is submitting directly to you, they are paying for advertising either to you for listing the hosted site or to the submitter for building and submitting to you.

And again as I stated above, I agree 'the submitter never gets really whats due them'

[GenXer]

people like pk worldsex and the hun could be multi millionares overnight




I am pretty sure the owners of pk, worldsex, AND the hun are already millionaires. Do you know how much they make in just ad revenue alone? Including affiliate payouts, the owners of those sites are already millionaires. I would bet money on that.

As far as charging surfers to access content that is not your own, truly and really is, copyright infringement and a number of other legal things. I mean...it's an interesting idea..but it's not a good one.

[Linkster]

As far as charging surfers to access content that is not your own, truly and really is, copyright infringement and a number of other legal things. I mean...it's an interesting idea..but it's not a good one.

I disagree on the legal side as I know of plenty of major portals for usenet posts that require you to pay for their listings - you are not requiring them to pay for the content - you are collecting money for your work of putting the links together - cataloging them.
If you want to talk about copyright infringement - I would suggest looking at the cached results that Google and Yahooo serve from their servers - plain copies of your work - thats a little closer to being true infringement but still wouldnt hold up in court

[Linkster]

Linkster, this is not quite a true statement. As I stated above, the sponsors are paying for advertising - revenuse share or pay per signup. I agree that if you don't list hosted sites from the sponsor that you 'don't get jack'. Unless the sponsor is submitting directly to you, they are paying for advertising either to you for listing the hosted site or to the submitter for building and submitting to you.

And again as I stated above, I agree 'the submitter never gets really whats due them'

I guess Im still out of the loop here - the revshare or pay per sale is paid to the submitter (sometimes) wheras I dont get anything for sending that traffic to the submitters site and eventually to the sponsor - leave the advertising that is done on the linklist or tgp out of the loop for a minute as that is an entirely different issue that we've kinda lumped together here (I did it too)
Dependant on the submitters selling ability, the sponsor is giving them something - not very much when you compare it to mainstream advertising even on the main side of the web.
The work of the linklist or tgp owner is totally free to both the sponsor - and currently the submitter in most places - I think the overall idea here is that we can charge the submitter (which in my mind has always been the last option) or charge the sponsor for clicks delivered to the submitter - then its up to the sponsor to really help the submitter improve his sale ratios like they used to :)

[GenXer]

Even Greenguy said it, it just doesn't seem legal. Just my opinion and a few others. You have a point though, Linkster.


I suppose the only person who would REALLY know the answer is a lawyer with specialization in this sort of area.

[Useless]

I guess Im still out of the loop here - the revshare or pay per sale is paid to the submitter (sometimes) wheras I dont get anything for sending that traffic to the submitters site and eventually to the sponsor...

But you get the traffic due to the content infested sites being built and submitted by free site builders. There is an important relationship here that everyone is missing. Submitters/builders can't make a dime without link list and TGP traffic. But the link lists and TGPs only have traffic due to years of good sites and galleries being built and submitted. Sure, you could go ahead and stop accepting submissions and list only FHGs and HFSs, but you know that that will kill your search engine traffic due to the lack of back linking and decrease bookmarkers because of the lack of quality.

[Chop Smith]

The loop is closing.

...the revshare or pay per sale is paid to the submitter
Exactally, either to the sumitter or you as the LL owner if you list the hosted sites. Regarless, of who the sponsors pays the revshare or PPS, it is part of the sponsors' advertising budget.

Dependant on the submitters selling ability, the sponsor is giving them something - not very much when you compare it to mainstream advertising even on the main side of the web.
Now don't tell me that in your brick and motar business that your adverising makes up 50+% of your total budget.

The work of the linklist or tgp owner is totally free to both the sponsor - and currently the submitter in most places
True, unless you are using the sponsors' HFS/Galleries and/or charging the submitter for listing. Tommy has stated that the 'submit charge' was successful.

I think the overall idea here is that we can charge the submitter (which in my mind has always been the last option) or charge the sponsor for clicks delivered to the submitter - then its up to the sponsor to really help the submitter improve his sale ratios like they used to :)
This tread started as being a discussion on charging the surfer. Just assume these things - LLs and TGPs charge a submit fee paid by the submitter; they charge the surfers to view the submits including HFS/Galleries and as stated the sponsor is paying thru revshare/PPS. Who is not getting compensated? You can not charge the sponsors for PPC and expect them to pay revshare/PPS to the submitter.

When I started my little program, I asked Dr B if he rather me pay his charge for submitting or would it be better on him to list the hosted galleries. He stated that let him list the hosted galleries - that way if we made in sales he would be happy and I would also. My point is that we were both gambling - me that he would list the hosted galleries and him as to where I could convert the traffic he sent me to sales.

Repeating myself from another post in this tread, this biz has three groups that need to be in sync - LL/TGP owners, submitters and sponsors. I think Tommy's orginal thought implies and I agree - the surfers are the one that is getting the free ride.

[Chop Smith]

But you get the traffic due to the content infested sites being built and submitted by free site builders. There is an important relationship here that everyone is missing. Submitters/builders can't make a dime without link list and TGP traffic. But the link lists and TGPs only have traffic due to years of good sites and galleries being built and submitted. Sure, you could go ahead and stop accepting submissions and list only FHGs and HFSs, but you know that that will kill your search engine traffic due to the lack of back linking and decrease bookmarkers because of the lack of quality.
You nailed it. Greed will kill all three groups.

[Tommy]

But you get the traffic due to the content infested sites being built and submitted by free site builders. There is an important relationship here that everyone is missing. Submitters/builders can't make a dime without link list and TGP traffic. But the link lists and TGPs only have traffic due to years of good sites and galleries being built and submitted. Sure, you could go ahead and stop accepting submissions and list only FHGs and HFSs, but you know that that will kill your search engine traffic due to the lack of back linking and decrease bookmarkers because of the lack of quality.

ya know I use to think that FHG killed your Se Chances but in the last 6 months I have found that not to be true

[RawAlex]

Tommy, I think that google and don't really care what you list, as long as you list a variety. Smarter programs are using real URLs on their galleries, while others are still using "dailygallery.cig?gallery=20585" which isn't such a good idea.

For a TGP, I think that premade sponsor galleries are a great thing, to a point. When everyone has the exact same things listed, it is pointless.

Alex

[KCat]

You know, this does bring up a question - can you legally charge for access to other peoples sites/galleries?

If I had a program that had hosted galleries & free sites & someone was charging people to look at them, I think I might have to call my lawyer.

This idea was brought up on GFY a few months ago & the guy got crucified for this very reason. A lot of exclusive content producers were not too happy with his idea to use their content in his own quasi-paysite.

Personally, I'd submit anywhere with pre-qualified traffic like that. |headbang|

[Verbal]

So is anyone gonna test this out? The pre-qualified traffic would definately be a marketers wet dream. :D

It'd also be smart to get the sponsors onboard instead of hoping they're OK with it. Come up with some additional incentives for them, like feature their different paysites everywhere inside for a week/month, etc. |pink

[Ann Omness]

Most of us with well-established links lists have nice Google-rankings. It would have to hurt to put your list behind security.

[Rocco]

there are 3 different models to do this (i admit, i was thinking to do this with some of my sites in the past):

1. you charge for access to your linklist: this should not be a problem at all as submitters must agree to your tos anyway. the content and everything is hosted on the "free" site as normal. What you will get is very high quality traffic from submissions and the ll/tgp owner probably will loose a lot of traffic.

2. you keep your site as usual, but use a gateway between the link and the free site/gallery. here you charge for gallery access. this should not be a problem if you use a textlink. but it probably can be a problem if you are using thumb previews. However, what you will get is that the linklist will not loose as much traffic as in (1.) and you could use clever marketing like tgfind who let you see 3 samples and then asked for email (in 2001) or payment (after 2001). this is probably the sort of thing most of you are thinking of as a good model.

3. (not a real option) you load the content from your site or in frames like some tgps/lls do. this is a problem anyway whether surfers pay for access or not.

yes, this is what i consider the avs model.

the access to the galleries/free sites could be managed by each ll/tgp individually or by a 3rd party system, which would be 4rth party processing then (eg the system was using ccbill).


CLICK HERE TO ADD YOUR LL TO OUR LINKLIST SYSTEM ;)


however, if established it would not have serious consequences for free porn.

[jigg]

This makes me think of an AVS.

The people who actually pay the fee are much more easier to upsell to because they've already pulled the card out and paid for porn

[Useless]

I have a silly question, as I often do. Have you thought out the recip link situation? Say Mr. Dingle enters a free site on the eternally free link-o-rama, on his scroll down the warning page he zooms in on the recip for a Scrote's Links, a non-free link list, and clicks-thru. Now he is confronted with something that is, for all intents and purposes, a paysite.

Wouldn't the recip for a link list which charges become considered a sponsor link out?

Also, shouldn't the link list then have to have an affiliate program to pay webmasters for bringing traffic to their sites?

What goes around, comes around.

[PayAsYouClick]

This idea is not so far fetched, with PayAsYouClick you can do it. And get paid for sending the referrals as an affiliate of PayAsYouClick.

Imagine starting off with a section that surfers have to pay to enter, you could eventually remove the free section. (Sort of wean them off the free stuff.) This indeed may be the way to make free porn less available.

- cheryl

[juggernaut]

well i not in tgp or LL. but i look at it like this. music was free for years on the internet. then people had to charge for it and still people always look for the free music. i think this would be a really hard sale. i mean if i wanted to sign up for something why not just sign up to a really good porn site that offers weekly updates. the only thing the i can see the tgp or the LL would offer is more varity and daily updates. could be a good selling point but i dont know. for me as a surfer i would feel very scared to pay for a tgp or LL. to many times i have gone to them to only find pop ups out the ying yang, and someone trying to install spyware on my box. i would be very pissed if anything other then a cookie got installed and i was paying for the service. just me. im not the pro just the surfer.

[Greenguy]

Is it the end of January again?

I can't wait to have my Super Bowl party :D

[bret]

Is it the end of January again?

I can't wait to have my Super Bowl party :D


LOL. no shit. why did this thread get resurected?

[Toby]

LOL. no shit. why did this thread get resurected?The username and web site of the resurectee gives a pretty good clue to the why, a topic to post to where it wouldn't look like blatant |spam|

[Tommy]

I think this would be a great project for someone to start with a NEW tgp

[PayAsYouClick]

juggernaut, I am suggesting clean galleries, no popups nothing secretly installed, not even blind links.

Bret, and Greenguy I thought the thread deserved a reawakening in the light that it is possible to turn TGP / MGP and other free sites into money making opportunities. And since PayAsYouClick is now starting to seek to advertise on boards it is always nice to know how friendly those boards are to new ideas.

Thanks,

- Cheryl

[Greenguy]

PayAsYouClick - we're not that friendly when threads like this are brought back to life as if you just found it, when in reality you were contributing to it back when it was popular 15 weeks ago & only brought it back to life to spam your program.

[swedguy]

I thought the thread deserved a reawakening in the light that it is possible to turn TGP / MGP and other free sites into money making opportunities.
So it really is possible to make money doing this? I had no idea.

[PayAsYouClick]

PayAsYouClick - we're not that friendly when threads like this are brought back to life as if you just found it, when in reality you were contributing to it back when it was popular 15 weeks ago & only brought it back to life to spam your program.

I appologize if I came across as spamming. I am new to the company, and in my search to find what to post and where to post I am discovering older threads that were missed by the company that I feel are relevant.

|bow|

with appologies

- cheryl

PS, I am serious about advertising. Please send me an email of your rates to:
cheryl@payasyouclick.com

[Greenguy]

cheryl - maybe you should read the entire thread before you post, as the username "PayAsYouClick" has posted to this thread numerous times, which means your company did not miss this thread.

[PayAsYouClick]

So it really is possible to make money doing this? I had no idea.

Yes, there are many ways you can make money with this concept.

1.) Just send referrals to the program. ( You will earn 50% of whatever they spend where ever they spend it in the system. -- As far as I know, no other billing company offers this kind of payout.)

2.) You can create a section on your TGP / MGP or Link List site and charge for the surfer to see it.

3.) You can use your own content to create a 2nd chance for those who do not take your full membership.

4.) You can use your own content to create sites that offer part of the content for a small fee and an upsell to the full month's version

No signup fees and nothing to lose but a few hours of time designing and setting it up.

If you would like more info please ask or email me.

Thanks for your interest.

- cheryl

[Tommy]

I think this is a great thread and I am glad someone woke it up

[Greenguy]

I hate you Tommy :D

[PayAsYouClick]

cheryl - maybe you should read the entire thread before you post, as the username "PayAsYouClick" has posted to this thread numerous times, which means your company did not miss this thread.


I am sorry, you are correct, I did not read the entire thread, I read the initial post and some of the first page.

I would like to be friends here.

[PayAsYouClick]

I think this is a great thread and I am glad someone woke it up


Thank you Tommy.

- Cheryl

[Tommy]

this is a good subject...
that pay as you click program could work out really nice for gallerys if a smart webmaster worked on it

think about posting a gallery of really sweet content
you put 15 pics on the free gallery/site
and then tell them there are 100 more pics to this set and they can download the rest of the pics in a zip file for 2 bucks or 10 cents a pic

[PayAsYouClick]

this is a good subject...
that pay as you click program could work out really nice for gallerys if a smart webmaster worked on it

think about posting a gallery of really sweet content
you put 15 pics on the free gallery/site
and then tell them there are 100 more pics to this set and they can download the rest of the pics in a zip file for 2 bucks or 10 cents a pic

Good point, but to be real honest, all a TGP / MGP sites need to do to earn some cash is to send traffic the site list to accrue referrals. Those that are referred by the webmaster are his/hers to keep - each referral will net 50% of the sale to the referral. There is no reason why every TGP does not have a link to send traffic to the site list at PayAsYouClick. It is just another money making opportunity.

- Cheryl

[CD Smith]

3- 4 years ago everyone said the same thing about paid submits
True, but getting webmasters to cough up some dough for the privilege of submitting and getting surfers to cough up even one dollar is two very different things.

I think most surfers would look for other sites that aren't charging a fee.

[Sinistress]

Okay...

I read through this thread (every post every page!) and I think that if done right, it could work. Key is, how does one go about doing it "right" as far as legality issues, as GG brought up. There was debate over whether the surfer would pay for the entire directory or pay per link clicked on... and who owned what.

I think that you could probably feasibly do it if you charged the surfer a small fee for access to the directory. This is not uncommon in mainstream webmastering by any means, if we think about say "people finders" the people can run searches etc for people / places etc, but they can't view ANYTHING until they pay a small fee, then they can view EVERYTHING. They have to pay for the directory... to try to charge someone per click on a link, it would have to depend on the link, and if the link really DID belong to the linklist. Is it the LL owners work? Is it the LL owners server that it is hosted on? Is it the LL owners domain, etc? Yeah there's a link TO it through the LL owners domain, but that doesn't make it "his/her" link or site or gallery by any means.

That's where I see the biggest legal discrepency in all of this... but I could be wrong <shrugs>

Xxx-SIN-xxX

[PayAsYouClick]

I am sure there are going to be differing opinions as to who owns what, is your surfer paying to see your collection of links, or is your surfer paying to see your recommendations? If using sponsor content or free hosted galleries then it is better to contact the sponsor for their opinion. I am sure once they understood that you are technically pre-screening traffic to be sent to them (sending cc holding surfers might make a difference.)

- Cheryl

[bret]

True, but getting webmasters to cough up some dough for the privilege of submitting and getting surfers to cough up even one dollar is two very different things.

I think most surfers would look for other sites that aren't charging a fee.


the same could be argued for paid submissions.. the submitters would go where it is free. some do, you can't throw up a bunch of crap and expect somone to pay for it. if you have a good established reputation and provide quality product, people will pay for it. would you pay to submit to john doe's fly-by-night submitter page? but you have no problem paying someone you know and trust in the industry, dr. bizzaro, shemp, et al.

the trust factor is huge with all the scammers out there, and they scams just keep increasing. if the surfer develops a relationship with your site, you earn their trust, and eventually maybe even their dollars.

[PayAsYouClick]

the same could be argued for paid submissions.. the submitters would go where it is free. some do, you can't throw up a bunch of crap and expect somone to pay for it. if you have a good established reputation and provide quality product, people will pay for it. would you pay to submit to john doe's fly-by-night submitter page? but you have no problem paying someone you know and trust in the industry, dr. bizzaro, shemp, et al.

the trust factor is huge with all the scammers out there, and they scams just keep increasing. if the surfer develops a relationship with your site, you earn their trust, and eventually maybe even their dollars.

I totally agree. Trust is as important to webmasters as it is with surfers. It takes time and lots of people to work together to gain respect and trust.

- cheryl

[Barron]

this is a good subject...
that pay as you click program could work out really nice for gallerys if a smart webmaster worked on it


Disclaimer: I am signing up for this for a project of mine. I like this concept.

However, the operative phrase is "smart webmaster".

I say this only as a heads up:
Cheryl is quite the sales person. She has the ability to put the right disclaimers in just the right spots in every post. This is not a bad thing or to say what Cheryl is posting is wrong. Just that, if your a webmaster, I'd read the fine print and understand completely what your doing before you start applying this concept in some of the ways that have been suggested.

I've read serveral posts on here and other boards about this concept. Considering the various ways that this concept can be applied, I think a trip to a copyright lawyer would be money well spent.


On another note,

In a perfect world, there are a couple of kinks in the scenario where the surfer pays to see links. If, and this is a big if, the link list or tgp requires payment from the webmaster to get listed AND the link list or tgp requires payment from the surfer, then I want to get paid also.

Imagine this, I pay for my hosting, I paid for the content, I spent my time developing/creating the listing and I get nothing? I think this is a wrinkle that woud need to be worked out.

Even if I didnt have to pay the listing, if someone is making money off my work, I want a piece of the action.

Getting free porn off the net is a very very good idea. Getting the surfer to pay, even for the right to see the links is a good idea. I think this should be the topic on every board for next two or three weeks so smarter people than me can come up with ways that everybody can make money off the idea of charging the surfer to see links.

(sending cc holding surfers might make a difference.) .... Cheryl

I like that phrase "might make", I think this reasoning was tried with AVS sites. Not as many people made money as was expected. Caveat: I know I know, lots of people made, and are making, really good money.

P.S. Cheryl, if you ever need a job, look me up, your really good :)


-

[PayAsYouClick]

Disclaimer: I am signing up for this for a project of mine. I like this concept.

However, the operative phrase is "smart webmaster".

I say this only as a heads up:
Cheryl is quite the sales person. She has the ability to put the right disclaimers in just the right spots in every post. This is not a bad thing or to say what Cheryl is posting is wrong. Just that, if your a webmaster, I'd read the fine print and understand completely what your doing before you start applying this concept in some of the ways that have been suggested.

I've read serveral posts on here and other boards about this concept. Considering the various ways that this concept can be applied, I think a trip to a copyright lawyer would be money well spent.


On another note,

In a perfect world, there are a couple of kinks in the scenario where the surfer pays to see links. If, and this is a big if, the link list or tgp requires payment from the webmaster to get listed AND the link list or tgp requires payment from the surfer, then I want to get paid also.

Imagine this, I pay for my hosting, I paid for the content, I spent my time developing/creating the listing and I get nothing? I think this is a wrinkle that woud need to be worked out.

Even if I didnt have to pay the listing, if someone is making money off my work, I want a piece of the action.

Getting free porn off the net is a very very good idea. Getting the surfer to pay, even for the right to see the links is a good idea. I think this should be the topic on every board for next two or three weeks so smarter people than me can come up with ways that everybody can make money off the idea of charging the surfer to see links.

(sending cc holding surfers might make a difference.) .... Cheryl

I like that phrase "might make", I think this reasoning was tried with AVS sites. Not as many people made money as was expected. Caveat: I know I know, lots of people made, and are making, really good money.

P.S. Cheryl, if you ever need a job, look me up, your really good :)


-

***blush***

Thanks very much!

However, I do believe in the system as I am a PayAsYouClick webmaster. I am very cautious in the way I promote any sponsor and I feel that should be every webmaster's concern. After all, we are responsible for what we do. I believe in the PayAsYouClick system because it makes sense - and I have made money. Gee, don't you wish you could send your traffic to a billing source and get credit for ANY sales that surfer makes?

I don't want anyone to think I am talking on sea shells when I post... I am very new as an employee to the program and do not know all of the ins and outs. From what I can see, and how it has worked for me... I am 100% happy with it. Don't take my word for it, do it for yourself!

- cheryl

[CD Smith]

the same could be argued for paid submissions.. the submitters would go where it is free.
No, not really. In some cases, yes, but where the site is really huge and it's traffic valuable (Like Shemp's, Doc Bizarro, Elephant list, and dozens of others) submitters are motivated to pay, at least the serious ones are. It also cuts down on cheaters because as we all know cheaters aren't usually into paying money for anything.

With smaller less busy TGP's, yes... having paid submissions probably isn't the way to go, thus some submitters would stick with submitting to them.

the trust factor is huge with all the scammers out there, and they scams just keep increasing. if the surfer develops a relationship with your site, you earn their trust, and eventually maybe even their dollars.
I don't really see the parallell between submitting webmasters paying a fee and charging the surfer a user fee though, other than the fact that both are fees. Other than that, I wouldn't be surprised if your traffic took a significant drop once the fee was put in place. It's no secret that MOST surfers simply do not want to pay for anything, much less porn. A common signup ratio in this biz is 1 signup in every 500 uniques. Some see 1:200, 1:300, some see as bad as 1:5000 or worse..... I doubt that would magically change just because it is a favorite TGP now charging.

Hey, I could be wrong, but at this point in the discussion I don't think I am.

[PayAsYouClick]

I don't really see the parallell between submitting webmasters paying a fee and charging the surfer a user fee though, other than the fact that both are fees. Other than that, I wouldn't be surprised if your traffic took a significant drop once the fee was put in place. It's no secret that MOST surfers simply do not want to pay for anything, much less porn. A common signup ratio in this biz is 1 signup in every 500 uniques. Some see 1:200, 1:300, some see as bad as 1:5000 or worse..... I doubt that would magically change just because it is a favorite TGP now charging.

Hey, I could be wrong, but at this point in the discussion I don't think I am.


The PayAsYouClick solution is NOT the same as a pay to get submitted solution though, I suppose the could exist in the same world. Since I had not thought of it I suppose webmasters could use the Payasyouclick model to offer linking opportunities to other webmasters. PayAsYouClick is a service to collect payments. I am sure, as the needs and desires arise from the community those needs and services will change at PayAsYouClick.

For now, there is no parallell and it is only a suggestion as to how to make money with the PayAsYouClick system. We are not promoting blind links, or any underhanded promises. They get what they click.... plain and simple. You get paid if they do. How simple can it get?

- cheryl

[HappySmut]

tommy your idea can defiantly work if you want to get around possible legal problems then have your paid submitters check a option to allow there galleries to also be listed at x tgp site for surfers to pay to get access to this way it covers you legally and will give that submitter the option to receive more traffic they will go for this anyway to be listed at another site to get even more traffic.

has for the actual site to do this on "I would do this" make a text listing of galleries with a traffic trade script to circle jerk the surfer but lets say 1 out of every 5 clicks the surfer is sent to a page explaining the option to pay x monthly fee so they dont get circle jerked and the paid version of the listing should have text and thumbnail version to keep your surfers paying that monthly fee. keep a extensive organized archive of multiple niches in text and thumbnail version of your "clean" listing and put in extra things to your site maybe giving away free dildos or free car oil whatever keeps them paying

surfers dont have to pay to see the latest galleries but they will have to pay if they dont want to be circle jerked and to be able to see the extensive archive and thumbnail version.

you might even just build your own galleries out of perchased content just for your 2$ surfers

and when it comes down legally "i dont think" there would be a problem since your are providing a service of organization to the surfer and traffic to the submitter and his sponsor.

if you told me your going to list my galleries behind a paid memberbased site id be very happy ;) conversion ratio would be alot better cuase those surfers got credit cards.

[Tommy]

Remember this is just a theory
I started this thread just to say what if......
its a good thread and has a few good and bad points which make it a good discussion

I dont think it would be smart to take submits

If I were gonna do this I would build my own gallerys
maybe gallerys with 50 to 60 pics with very little advertising
I would also use some hosted galleries

[Kinky]

Remember this is just a theory
I started this thread just to say what if......
its a good thread and has a few good and bad points which make it a good discussion

I dont think it would be smart to take submits

If I were gonna do this I would build my own gallerys
maybe gallerys with 50 to 60 pics with very little advertising
I would also use some hosted galleries
wouldn't that just make it a cheap pay site with upsells then?

[Lenny]

Remember this is just a theory
I started this thread just to say what if......
its a good thread and has a few good and bad points which make it a good discussion

I dont think it would be smart to take submits

If I were gonna do this I would build my own gallerys
maybe gallerys with 50 to 60 pics with very little advertising
I would also use some hosted galleries

Hi Tommy how are you?

I think it would have to be all your own galleries. Remember you need to pay $750 and have Visa approve your urls in order to accept Visa as payment.

The problem that AVS had was that they were basically "reselling" other people's content and sites, which is why the few that remain had to make so many changes to stay Visa compliant.

Just my 2 cents.

[HappySmut]

Remember this is just a theory
I started this thread just to say what if......
its a good thread and has a few good and bad points which make it a good discussion

I dont think it would be smart to take submits

If I were gonna do this I would build my own gallerys
maybe gallerys with 50 to 60 pics with very little advertising
I would also use some hosted galleries

well if you start to do this drop me a email if ya need more galleries id be happy to build galleries with specifications just for your site ;)

[Stever]

A large site like the Hun and others would be foolish to go to a pay model. Their high traffic IS their money flow. PERIOD.
Sure they throw sponsor stuff up to collect their 50% here and there but their real money is the banner ad spots. Some are affiliates for a % of sale, but many others are a flat monthly fee for the priveledge of being there, seen by 3.5 million per day.

In my nievity I inquired about banner spots on the Hun. I forget what the prices were, over $1000/month for good spots.?. They rotate dozens of adds and they were fully booked for the next 4 months. That's money!

And there are the sites that charge big $$ to be able to post your galleries to the top 10 spots. Essentialy the same as paying for advertising spots. That's what we are all doing here is advertising to the masses. We are not realy in the porn business. We are in the advertising business.

Free porn is a great business model for the high traffic tgp sites. Traffic comes to see it cause we all want to see sex. They need new stuff every day to maintain a reason for traffic to come, but can't possibly supply that much themselves. So us little guys keep submitting galleries to feed the demand and pray we entice a few of the masses to whip out a Credit Card cause they like our free stuff enough to see what it is like to get the full monty instead of single photos and short vid clips. For a site like the Hun to switch to a pay model, no matter how cheap, would be suicide.

Its all about the traffic!!!

Sure a small TGP with a decent amount of SE traffic could do O.K. (like cover hosting) with a pay model of some sort. Yes some people will buy anything. But that TGP would stay small and never realize the potential of a free TGP.

And the sponsors have to love the free porn model too. Those that complain about it don't have a clue how their biz even works. They end up with the best marketing team anyone could ever ask for. Hundreds, even thousands of us gallery builders are promoting for them to every corner of the traffic stream. Some of us suck at it and others are great at it. And the sponsor only has to pay for performance. Not to mention the large leak in this system where surfers who see the adds over and over finaly go to the site by typing in the main URL cause they cant remeber where to find the gallery they saw it on last night. Or those that purposely avoid affiliate links cause they don't like the thought of someone else making money off them. Or the faulty tracking systems that dont report every sale...........

Free=Money

[EDIT] I did not read all (or even most) the posts in this thread. So I am not sure how much of what I said has already been said in one way or the other. Just some of my thoughts. [EDIT/]

[SomeCreep]

This morning when I woke up I had a sort of idea

(not that I am seriously considering it)

what if ALL the tgps and linklists charged the surfers a small price for access

like 5.00 a month

people like pk worldsex and the hun could be multi millionares overnight

Turns out your vision of the future was semi-accurate. Except, that instead of TGPs charging surfers, they are charging webmasters to submit galleries.