penny or hannah diamonds

[diamondsofnewcastle]

Hi just a quick mention as this thread was pointed out to me.

Neither of the girls above offer bareback as we understand it (nor do any of the girls on our site).

It is simply a misunderstanding language wise as the girls took that to mean if they offered bareback oral - you will notice that in the list of services on AW that 'unprotected sex' is not ticked.

I have clarified this with them and asked them to take babreback off as people will make the assumptions that have been made here.

Hope that helps

Thanks

[FLYING BLUE]

For the record, I have seen Penny twice and Hannah just this week. Happy to say that I have not been offered 'bareback' by either lady............ Any offer of this 'service' would result in an instant exit from me and a report on this forum.

[Randy101]

For the record, I have seen Penny twice and Hannah just this week. Happy to say that I have not been offered 'bareback' by either lady............ Any offer of this 'service' would result in an instant exit from me and a report on this forum.

Which was your favourite Major, Penny or Hannah?

[James999]

take babreback off as people will make the assumptions that have been made here.

Fucking Hell, talk about Spin, Bareback is bareback it's not about "people making assumptions"  Talk about trying to shift the blame / detract from the point 

[AnthG]

The thing I do not like is. Diamonds had assured they will from now on always display the true age of the girls on their site from now on in, and they modified almost every girls age to reflect her true age.

They suggested there were one or two girls who refused to have the true age displayed and thus it was a case of either them leaving Diamonds or letting that age remain. But the rest will from now on be correct.

This was reassuring, pleasing and also kind of great PR in my eyes as it made you feel you can trust if I book such and such who is down as this age. It really is her age.

But these new girls Kirsten is down as 18 on Diamonds. But on AW she is down as 21.
And Donnatella is down as 20, but on AW is down as 23

They obviously have not asked Diamonds to put up the wrong ages if they are being so open about it on AW.

My take on it is. Why do it. Yes it may get you some short term business but in the long term everyone will mistrust the ages. I would rather book a genuine 23 year old than a someone states she is 20 but is really 23 as this gives me the impression she is dishonest and thus will give a poorer service.

Why is it are prostitutes, and agencies, so short sighted. Most other companies plan for years and years in advange. These plan for the here and now and don't care if the here and now affects the future.

Please if they ever see this, please keep your assurance and just display the right age.

[WestCountryLad]

They suggested there were one or two girls who refused to have the true age displayed and thus it was a case of either them leaving Diamonds or letting that age remain. But the rest will from now on be correct.

This was reassuring, pleasing and also kind of great PR in my eyes as it made you feel you can trust if I book such and such who is down as this age. It really is her age.

But these new girls Kirsten is down as 18 on Diamonds. But on AW she is down as 21.
And Donnatella is down as 20, but on AW is down as 23

They obviously have not asked Diamonds to put up the wrong ages if they are being so open about it on AW.

My take on it is. Why do it. Yes it may get you some short term business but in the long term everyone will mistrust the ages. I would rather book a genuine 23 year old than a someone states she is 20 but is really 23 as this gives me the impression she is dishonest and thus will give a poorer service.

Anth, ALL women lie about their age, prossie or civvy.  Some can get away with it, others can't.

I'd be more concerned about those who use old or photoshopped pics on their profiles.  An accurate picture tells me whether I find her sexy enough to want to book her, then the stated age is irrelevant.

Also I'd be concerned that this agency seem to state one thing on here but then don't follow through with it.

[AnthG]

Anth, ALL women lie about their age, prossie or civvy.  Some can get away with it, others can't.

I'd be more concerned about those who use old or photoshopped pics on their profiles. 

To be honest we are the customers. Photoshopped pics are annoying. But so is misleading/misrepresenting about ages, and also all other features to get a booking.

Here is what they said elsewhere

Apart from one or two w hich have specifically stated they do not want their ages changed then all of the ages will be accurate within the next 24 hours or at leasts within a very slight margin either way to allow discretion to be maintained.

Then

Sorry not been able to reply earlier.

Out of 46 profiles:

35 are accurate to within a year (including 19 that are precise and 3 that are actually listed a year older than they actually are).

3 are within 3 years (at the girl's request for various reasons).

2 are more than 3 years but have specifically asked me not change their profiles for their own reasons.

There are 6 girls I have not yet spoken to for various reasons but when I texted each girl to say would be doing this I did promise I wouldn't amend their profiles until I had actually spoken to them. This includes Serina, hence her profile has not changed.

We have also added an auto-update facility to the admin section of our site and entered each girl's date of birth so that starting from whatever age their profiles currently state, the age will automatically increase at each birthday, removing the need for us to try to remember to do this manually.

In terms of the other issues discussed since my last post, we take a photocopy of photographic ID for each girl so it is not possible for girl's to be on our site that are younger than 18 years of age. Also, if a client contacted us to say they did not want to go ahead with an appointment because they felt misled by the information we had given them or listed on the site , then they would have no problems booking with us in future - they would certainly not be barred or listed as a timewaster.

Once I have spoken to the other 6 girls over the weekend then any appropriate changes will be made.

The other bolded part. Angelica has said she has recently had a birthday and is now 24 but it has not updated.

I am not saying this to get at Diamonds. I am saying it as I like using them so am trying to push them to strive to give me and others the best service I can get for my money.

[WestCountryLad]

To be honest we are the customers. Photoshopped pics are annoying. But so is misleading/misrepresenting about ages, and also all other features to get a booking.

Agreed, but I don't place as much emphasis on age as you obviously do.  I would rather they didn't lie about anything but I think using inaccurate pics is far worse than cutting years off their age.  If the pictures are recent & not touched up you can usually have a good guess at their age anyway.

[AnthG]

If the pictures are recent & not touched up you can usually have a good guess at their age anyway.

But that is the other issue. The pictures on Diamonds are very small, low resolution and the face is blurred. So it is a lottery with what you get.

I do not know why they do that. If I had some attractive girls on my site (which they do). I would not be afraid to show it and have large pictures on there. Fine the face blurring is for anonymity. But tiny, dark pictures with a metallic background is just off.

[FLYING BLUE]

Which was your favourite Major, Penny or Hannah?

Penny was my favourite & I would see her again 

[FLYING BLUE]

Penny was my favourite & I would see her again 

Oops, I posted that before I finished & then realised I could not edit it.....

Both girls appear to be a similar age ( I guess maybe 22-23) and similar body shape (very nice, slim, toned) and both have a similar manner of taking complete control of the punt from start to finish, both offered OWO & kissing - Overall, I preferred the service I received from Penny

[diamondsofnewcastle]

Fucking Hell, talk about Spin, Bareback is bareback it's not about "people making assumptions"  Talk about trying to shift the blame / detract from the point 

Hi,

Sorry I think I have been misunderstood - perhaps becuase my reply was slightly rushed.

Most, if not all punters will know that bareback refers to bareback sex. However oral without is also refered to as a bbbj. The girls that this query relates to do offer bbbj (at their own discretion) but do not offer bareback sex. Hence they apparently ticked the bareback option in the list of services but did not tick the unprotected sex option.

It might seem quite obvious to ourselves but neither of the girls speak fluent english as their first language so probably not as clear to them. Like I say though, I have clarified the meanings with them and they have removed that option accordingly. I can categorically confirm that bareback sex is not a service that any of the girls we represent will offer - if girls do offer this for any reason then we would remove them from the site with immediate effect as soon as it is brought to our attention.

My reply was in no way an attempt to shift the blame although I have no control over what girls do with their adultwork profile - nor was I trying to detract from the point - i simply addressed it and clarified the situation.

Hope this is more clear.

Thanks

[diamondsofnewcastle]

The thing I do not like is. Diamonds had assured they will from now on always display the true age of the girls on their site from now on in, and they modified almost every girls age to reflect her true age.

They suggested there were one or two girls who refused to have the true age displayed and thus it was a case of either them leaving Diamonds or letting that age remain. But the rest will from now on be correct.

This was reassuring, pleasing and also kind of great PR in my eyes as it made you feel you can trust if I book such and such who is down as this age. It really is her age.

But these new girls Kirsten is down as 18 on Diamonds. But on AW she is down as 21.
And Donnatella is down as 20, but on AW is down as 23

Hi again,

I can confirm that the ages on their profiles on our site are accurate, based on their official ID.

The AW group that they created (which I have no control over and was not even initially aware existed when they first set it up) has three profiles. One was originally set up for Megan and therefore has her accurate age - the other two were originally set up up for two other girls and they have simply dropped their pictures into the profiles without changing any of the details - ironically, given the content of this thread, making them look older than they actually are!

Over the years we have represented several girls who have decided to create an AW profile but have obviously used different names and sometimes different ages because they presumably do not necessarily want clients to realise it is the same girl as on Diamonds - otherwise clients will usually book through ourselves at the agency rate rather than book provately at a rate that is usally higher. Like I have said we have no control over what girls do with AW and personally I would prefer it if they weren't on their in order to avoid confusion and issues such as those raised in this thread - people tend to assume that it is the agency that is making a deliberate and malicious attempt to decieve which is genuinely not the case.

[diamondsofnewcastle]

The other bolded part. Angelica has said she has recently had a birthday and is now 24 but it has not updated.

I am not saying this to get at Diamonds. I am saying it as I like using them so am trying to push them to strive to give me and others the best service I can get for my money.

I'm honestly not sure what has happened there but I have changed Angelica's age manually this morning and have asked our web manager to look into why this has not changed over automatically.

[AnthG]

Most, if not all punters will know that bareback refers to bareback sex. However oral without is also refered to as a bbbj. The girls that this query relates to do offer bbbj (at their own discretion) but do not offer bareback sex. Hence they apparently ticked the bareback option in the list of services but did not tick the unprotected sex option.

Like I say sorry about this. I just seen the bareback mentioned in the profiles and freaked.

Like I have said we have no control over what girls do with AW and personally I would prefer it if they weren't on their in order to avoid confusion and issues such as those raised in this thread.

With regards to this. I would say there are some considerable benefits to the girl being on AW. I had never heard of Diamonds when booking my first escort. I had heard of Adultwork however via mentions of it via the Realpunting adultwebsite.

And booked Kyrsha (who changed to Leonie) via Adultwork as my very first punt. And she had said during the booking she also works for Diamonds and as I was new to all this and a little hesitant and nervous she recommended a few girls to see who I would probably like at Diamonds Amelie/Paige etc. (who have both retired now unfortunately)

So then just basically stuck with agencies as its so much more easier to book than going through AW in my opinion (I know others disagree on that). But never would have even heard of Diamonds without seeing this first girl via AW who also worked with the agency.

So anyway. It was suggested by someone above to also possibly list adverts for each girls via AW too. As this will also allow listing of possible services she may be willing to do which is not possible, or not on the Diamonds website. This will also be good as to be honest. It is a little bit difficult to ask for some obscurer services when booking with Diamonds with just the person you speak to on the phone during the booking. And thus having AW list them for each girl is much better way to do it. (in my humble opinion at least)

[diamondsofnewcastle]

But that is the other issue. The pictures on Diamonds are very small, low resolution and the face is blurred. So it is a lottery with what you get.

I do not know why they do that. If I had some attractive girls on my site (which they do). I would not be afraid to show it and have large pictures on there. Fine the face blurring is for anonymity. But tiny, dark pictures with a metallic background is just off.

I agree - we're not entirely happy with our images at the moment.

We have used several photgraphers since we started and struggled to find someone that we are both comfortable with and who creates images that we are 100% happy with.

Our current photgrapher is a great guy who is still learning his trade but we are happy working with him so that we can develop the relationship we have and work together with him to get it right.

The studio he uses is mostly set up with darker backgrounds so we are using this at the moment as it did work well with the colours of the site when we relaunched it. However we are in discussions to set up oour own studio with him so will aim to use lighter backgrounds and better lighting.

Several girls have had photoshoots in the last few days so we will be adding them shortly - Collette's are no on the site and Lexi's will be next to follow.

[diamondsofnewcastle]

With regards to this. I would say there are some considerable benefits to the girl being on AW. I had never heard of Diamonds when booking my first escort. I had heard of Adultwork however via mentions of it via the Realpunting adultwebsite.

And booked Kyrsha (who changed to Leonie) via Adultwork as my very first punt. And she had said during the booking she also works for Diamonds and as I was new to all this and a little hesitant and nervous she recommended a few girls to see who I would probably like at Diamonds Amelie/Paige etc. (who have both retired now unfortunately)

So then just basically stuck with agencies as its so much more easier to book than going through AW in my opinion (I know others disagree on that). But never would have even heard of Diamonds without seeing this first girl via AW who also worked with the agency.

So anyway. It was suggested by someone above to also possibly list adverts for each girls via AW too. As this will also allow listing of possible services she may be willing to do which is not possible, or not on the Diamonds website. This will also be good as to be honest. It is a little bit difficult to ask for some obscurer services when booking with Diamonds with just the person you speak to on the phone during the booking. And thus having AW list them for each girl is much better way to do it. (in my humble opinion at least)

Yeh i appreciate there are and would be some benefits to it.

We actually did have an AW group for Diamonds approx 18-24 months ago but to be honest (present company excepted of course lol) there are a significant number of timewasters on AW - in the same way that there are a significant number of fake profiles from girls, PG scammers etc etc.

I would say from AW at the time for every 100 calls/enquiries we received only 10 would book and out of those 10 we were lucky if 2 actually showed up.

So thats the main reason we decided against it.

[James999]

Isn't is about time you gavce Anth a free half hour session for all of his help and FREE advertising for you ?

[bobdavid]

@Diamonds: In the past, when I've been too busy with business meetings to call, or when I've had questions ahead of a booking, I've used your website to send you an email ... I've never, ever had a reply though. I've put that down to the fact that you guys seem to get enough business already ... any thoughts on that or plans to improve..?

[domino999]

Penny and Hannah have seemed to have disappeared

Me and a friend went to the gateshead flat a few weeks back and I ended up with Hannah and him with Penny.

I enjoyed her.. she's very sexy.. great body.. easy to get along with and all that! 8/10

She laughed at Diamonds promoting her as bisexual and as some reviews have mentioned penny and hannah doesn't work as a duo.

On discussion we agree that i got the better one in looks and recently my friend has been back to see Hannah.

No sure who he prefered tho...

[AnthG]

Penny and Hannah have seemed to have disappeared

Had asked Diamonds via PM on Sunday. They have went on holiday for a fortnight from Monday gone.

Well to be honest I only asked about Penny, but am guessing as they are related they both Hannah and Penny would have went away.

[john boy]

i ve kept in touch with hannah since she left the uk she has a normal job has just been engaged shes never been happier

[maxxblue]

Hi just a quick mention as this thread was pointed out to me.

Neither of the girls above offer bareback as we understand it (nor do any of the girls on our site).

It is simply a misunderstanding language wise as the girls took that to mean if they offered bareback oral - you will notice that in the list of services on AW that 'unprotected sex' is not ticked.

I have clarified this with them and asked them to take bareback off as people will make the assumptions that have been made here.

Hope that helps

Thanks

Who are you fucking kidding, Diamonds, you fucking half-wit scumbags? You are trying to milk punters for every penny you can. You don't care for your WG's, and you don't care for your punters - you just want as much cash as you possibly can.

Your response above shows you for what you are - greedy, illiterate, and thick.