I thought I'd do another post to analyse the reasons why.
In my early days of punting someone told me the number and quality of escorts in an area is linked to the relative affluence of that area - consequently the poorer cities fare the worst.
Now I don't know Birmingham, Newcastle or Glasgow, nor do I really know Liverpool, but at one time it was certainly a poor and declining city, also despite what the natives will tell you, Sheffield is a poorer city than either Leeds or Nottingham.
The south west of Sheffield was reckoned at one time to have more professionals and consequently be the richest area in the north of England. Now, while I accept it is a wealthy area and a nice place to live (Sheffield like many cities is socially divided geographically), I have never accepted it is any wealthier than Cheshire or South Manchester. It certainly doesn't attract a flood of decent escorts whereas Leeds, Nottingham and Manchester all have numerous agencies.
The other reason for the preponderance of parlours is the attitide of local councils. There are loads in Manchester and Sheffield, but few if any in Nottingham, and I don't think many in Leeds. I don't know anything about Newcastle.
It can't be coincidental however that the places with fewer parlours tend to have more escorts.
As I have said many of the alleged Sheffield escorts on AW actually work from parlours.
Going back to my orginal point I think that guy all those years ago was right. Wealth of an area equates in choice and quality of escorts.
Of course people in certain areas don't like to hear this.