Quote:
Originally Posted by RyuLion
Good point Sir, my feedback was very limited..  |
To produce content that stands apart from the competition is very expensive. It requires a great location, great models, great action, great cameramen, directors, etc. This couldn't be done, by most, with affiliates taking 50% let alone 60% or $35 PPS.
Add the other costs of webmasters, programmers, admin, payment, promotion, affiliate support, etc and what's left to be spent on the product?
Hustler, Playboy, Private, Wicked, Penthouse, etc, back in the day could afford to spend that because of huge market share in a restricted market. Online no one could afford it because of the number of sites sharing the same pool of customers. So we had Solo Girl Giants paying $300 for a set and a video and Boy/Girl Giants paying $3,000 a scene. That has no comparison with what offline had to pay to get the great material that established brands like Hustler, Playboy, Private, Wicked, Penthouse, etc.
Pseudonymous made a point. "(they've had a decade to find a way to improve - it doesn't cost more to produce better). " And he's wrong, very wrong. It does cost more to produce great content. Just buying a better camera isn't enough because everyone can do that and sharpness of image doesn't make porn any better. It needs a professional lighting, sound, make-up, cameramen, directors, editors, etc to make a great product that fits the brand of people like Hustler.
Then he said.
"Having an inhouse production team vs freelancers is also very key to success due to having control over your product, as freelance producers are still a little stuck in their way and take little to no risk as they do not have the capital to absorb any loss, so they will just take the same routine b rated pornstars, hustler doesn't need to be that. Working with new top talent presents more risk (no shows, more difficult shoot, etc) - Plus a freelance producer will see the same rate no matter what so what extra effort do they need to put in?" Again wrong unless one is prepared to reward those inhouse people the same amount they can earn as freelancers. I would never have worked in-house for less money and that could be said for any other content producer. But he made a good point.
the capital to absorb any loss no content producers working for the exclusive market didn't have capital to absorb any loss. Because of the prices paid for content. Would that change if it were an in-house producer?
Ignore companies where the content producer is part of the ownership structure and then list the number of companies that produce great distinctive content. It's a short list.
No matter how much marketing is put into a site at the end of the day if the content isn't distinctive from what others offer. It will not convert any better. Especially when the main way of converting a surfer is to give them a 10-minute sample that are clips from the full-length scene.
Assuming giving away free content faster than your competitors warrants being called marketing. Unless you need free samples to sell ad space. Which is then marketing ad space.
Even amateur content that stands above the rest needs a better budget. The consumer is sick and tired of cookie cutter girl on a sofa or bed content.