Turn over of AdultWork proiles

[bobbles1945]

Looking back at my records (I know- a bit sad and nerdy) I have since 2006 seen about 100 girls from AW but very few still have active profiles. From 2006 there is only Chelsea 2012 (External Link/Members Only) whose profile is still active.

 This got me wondering what the turnover rate of AW profiles is. Looking more closely at my records the half-life of profiles of the women I have seen seems to be less than two years-so how typical is this?

So I looked at the review sections of ukp and at London and the East of England (my bailiwick) and looked each year for reviews where an aw number was given and looked to see what proportion were still active. UKP only really started to have reviews in 2010 but really got going by 2013 so then I just looked at the first 50 reviews of the year to see what proportion of aw profiles were still active. This showed that only 44% of profiles from 2015 are still active and only 14% of those from 2013 , less than 9% in 2012. So the half-life is under a year, that each half the WGs on AW leave before they have been on the site for a year. And remember these are real profiles as the women have been visited by UKP contributors.

I wondered if this was because most of those girls who left were not getting that much custom or were not well rated. So I looked at those girls seen by some prolific and experienced punters (Pumps, Cueball, smiths, horizontal pleasures, threechiiliman) to see if the girls they saw (and so were presumably well rated) lasted longer. And indeed this does seem to be the case, an average of 81% last a year and 46% 2years.  Make of this what you will! 

But it does seem the life-time of an AW provider is rather short-but maybe this is just a southern phenomena-perhaps things are more stable up north?

[Home Alone]

Looking back at my records (I know- a bit sad and nerdy) I have since 2006 seen about 100 girls from AW but very few still have active profiles. From 2006 there is only Chelsea 2012 (External Link/Members Only) whose profile is still active.

 This got me wondering what the turnover rate of AW profiles is. Looking more closely at my records the half-life of profiles of the women I have seen seems to be less than two years-so how typical is this?

So I looked at the review sections of ukp and at London and the East of England (my bailiwick) and looked each year for reviews where an aw number was given and looked to see what proportion were still active. UKP only really started to have reviews in 2010 but really got going by 2013 so then I just looked at the first 50 reviews of the year to see what proportion of aw profiles were still active. This showed that only 44% of profiles from 2015 are still active and only 14% of those from 2013 , less than 9% in 2012. So the half-life is under a year, that each half the WGs on AW leave before they have been on the site for a year. And remember these are real profiles as the women have been visited by UKP contributors.

I wondered if this was because most of those girls who left were not getting that much custom or were not well rated. So I looked at those girls seen by some prolific and experienced punters (Pumps, Cueball, smiths, horizontal pleasures, threechiiliman) to see if the girls they saw (and so were presumably well rated) lasted longer. And indeed this does seem to be the case, an average of 81% last a year and 46% 2years.  Make of this what you will! 

But it does seem the life-time of an AW provider is rather short-but maybe this is just a southern phenomena-perhaps things are more stable up north?

And I thought I was a nerd!!   I must say I've never gone into that amount of detail. 

However, when looking for a new WG, what I occasionally do is to go back to one of my old favourites and see who other clients of hers have also seen - you know; a sort of "If you liked her, you might also like, . . "

And it's quite surprising how many of them - even oop here in t'North, bobbles - seem to have have packed the job in.  Mind you; they might just be "resting"!

[CoolTiger]

A quick search shows 3,942,964 profiles have been created between 14 October 2003 and today, 13 1/4 years.

These include AW members as well. Estimating the WGs to be 50% suggests 151,000 WG profiles created per year!!


External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

[bobbles1945]

Well the AW numbering system has always been a mystery to me-while the numbers do increase with time there is not a one to one correspondence between the AW number and girls.

 You can see this clearly by doing a search on  External Link/Members Only (how appropriate she is in Bristol!) now do the same search but subtract 1,2,3,4, etc from her number and redo the search. Mostly nothing come up. So AW numbers do not translate into number of girls.

[5th Musketeer]

A quick search shows 3,942,964 profiles have been created between 14 October 2003 and today, 13 1/4 years.

These include AW members as well. Estimating the WGs to be 50% suggests 151,000 WG profiles created per year!!


External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

Interesting to note that Charlie118 has been on AW for 13+ years yet only has one UKP review.

[Home Alone]

Interesting to note that Charlie118 has been on AW for 13+ years yet only has one UKP review.

. . . and, according to her AW Profile page, she's still only 31 years old!!  

[Gordon Bennett]

A proportion of them start up with brand new profiles with new names and reference numbers. I've only been at it 2 years and seen about 12 ladies. Three of those ladies are now on brand new profiles. I dunno if my tiny sample is anything to go on but maybe 25% of the women who've supposedly disappeared have just closed and opened new accounts?

[CoolTiger]

A proportion of them start up with brand new profiles with new names and reference numbers. I've only been at it 2 years and seen about 12 ladies. Three of those ladies are now on brand new profiles. I dunno if my tiny sample is anything to go on but maybe 25% of the women who've supposedly disappeared have just closed and opened new accounts?

Also, don't forget the Romanian profiles that are reported and removed, as well as PG scams which are also reported and then removed.

[CoolTiger]

Well the AW numbering system has always been a mystery to me-while the numbers do increase with time there is not a one to one correspondence between the AW number and girls.

 You can see this clearly by doing a search on  External Link/Members Only (how appropriate she is in Bristol!) now do the same search but subtract 1,2,3,4, etc from her number and redo the search. Mostly nothing come up. So AW numbers do not translate into number of girls.

Good point.... but you may need to repeat this for a while to work out the next available working, live profile.

[CoolTiger]

Well the AW numbering system has always been a mystery to me-while the numbers do increase with time there is not a one to one correspondence between the AW number and girls.

 You can see this clearly by doing a search on  External Link/Members Only (how appropriate she is in Bristol!) now do the same search but subtract 1,2,3,4, etc from her number and redo the search. Mostly nothing come up. So AW numbers do not translate into number of girls.

Going up, the following come up...

External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

[5th Musketeer]

. . . and, according to her AW Profile page, she's still only 31 years old!!  

Too true - but she could have started at 18.

[bobbles1945]

Remember that the turnover of AW ads I found were for real WGs as they had been seen by members of UKP. There are a whole lot of fake or scamming profiles which no doubt have a short half-life.

What I find puzzling (or interesting) is that academic surveys (such as this one in Sociological Research Online at External Link/Members Only, which surveys Ugly Mug membership) when looking at the length of time spent sex working it varied between 1 year and 35 years, with the mean average sex work career being 6 years among this sample.

 Maybe Ugly Mug members are a particular subset of prostitutes-but a recent post on SAAFE (an escort forum) “ How long have you been working “http://www.saafe.info/main/index.php?topic=36499.0) escorts self reported a range from less than a year to over 33 years (of the 26 respondents most (12) fell in the 0-5 year bracket, 8 in the 5-10 year but three more than 20 years-the average was 5.5 years) pretty consistent with the UM member profiles..

How does one square this relative longevity with the short longevity of AW profiles?  Now it could be that escorts are always stating new profiles (as Gordon Bennett suggests) or that there are a lot of prozzies with AW profiles that are on the game for a very short time (visiting EE girls for instance) and that never come to the attention of researchers or know about SAAFE (I myself have pointed some WGs towards SAAFE as a source of useful info for them).

So if these “short timers” are dissimilar to the longer term WGs one hopes that they are properly in touch with STI clinics-if not punters beware.

[hogcatcher]

Charlie118 is on my hotlist External Link/Members Only

Is she European or British?

[CoolTiger]

Charlie118 is on my hotlist External Link/Members Only

Is she European or British?

Why are you posting your enquiry on the general thread?

You should have posted it in the London section.

[hogcatcher]

Why are you posting your enquiry on the general thread?

You should have posted it in the London section.

I have no idea. Im new here!
Also I saw shes spoken about before on this post. sorry!