The cost of a good punt on UKP

[Steely Dan]

There are many estimates of the cost of a punt.  But what does our data say?

We don't care about all the crap posted on AW - some of them are PG scams or just poor punts.  And agencies we know are about £200-£500. Hard to know how many get booked at £200 compared to £500. But we can say with accuracy what a good independent costs on average.

First we define a good independent as one with 3+ positive reviews on UKP.  Then look at the lists on the wiki that have prices. Then cut and paste them into Excel. Ten minutes later we have an answer. So this is London, SE, SW, Wales, EMids, WMids,and Scotland.  Other regions don't have lists or the prices are not in the table.

I posted the result on the Wiki External Link/Members Only.  Quite interesting.  The overall average of 576 good escorts is £126.  The cheapest is WMids at £111.  Surprising (to some) the most expensive is Wales at £138 (driven by very few value punts at £100 or less, rather than overall high prices).

London was good value at £126. The highest category was London Brits at £156, or £179 including the 9 porn stars with crazy rates.  The best value was also London: Hungarians average at £94.

[tantric talents]

Great job SD! Very interesting.
I am sure all members appreciate your hard work putting all that together.   

[Tricky Dickie]

Looks like a lot of work. I'm not sure your methodology supports your conclusions though.

You're making the assumption that the posts in the reviews section are representative of all punts. That may not be the case. It's a self-selecting set of data after all. For example, maybe the posters tend to regard a "good" service as one that's cheapest. That would skew the data. Even then for all we know it might only represent 10% of all available girls.

You also aren't considering services. In that case it's a bit like working out the average price of car in the UK. You can get a number but how then do you compare it to any single instance to work out if you're getting good or bad value?

Finally I don't think taking an average of this kind of thing is the best approach anyway. Your data will be skewed by outliers. Better might be to take the median price as being more representative.

[Steely Dan]

Looks like a lot of work. I'm not sure your methodology supports your conclusions though.

You're making the assumption that the posts in the reviews section are representative of all punts. That may not be the case. It's a self-selecting set of data after all. For example, maybe the posters tend to regard a "good" service as one that's cheapest. That would skew the data. Even then for all we know it might only represent 10% of all available girls.

You also aren't considering services. In that case it's a bit like working out the average price of car in the UK. You can get a number but how then do you compare it to any single instance to work out if you're getting good or bad value?

Finally I don't think taking an average of this kind of thing is the best approach anyway. Your data will be skewed by outliers. Better might be to take the median price as being more representative.

Thank you for you comments.  Helpful.  Will reflect on how to add to the Wiki.

I am just doing data analysis.  I have made few conclusions.  I shared my assumptions. I just explained why looking at all data on AW was silly, and looking at all reviews on UKP was less interesting.  Who cares what a bad punt costs? This IS the cost of a good punt on UKP.

Of course you may assume that 90% of good punts are not on UKP and have a totally different cost. Possible, but I cant think of a reason this is likely.  Escorts (mostly) don't know we are UKP posters. But I never meant this is the cost of a punt in the UK. Might be, who knows?

I did look at median and mode as well as average.  Was about the same other than London Brits - hence why I shared the data without the porn stars.  Same with the outliers - I checked - there are enough Hoors that the effect is very small.

I may do a weighted average by punts.  So MI cost is weighted more than an escort with 2 reviews.  Not sure that is fair too.  But it is data.  Data is neutral.

Have you other conclusions based on the data?  You say my conclusions are not valid.  They are not proven - but better some some of the shit the EU publishes. Do you think Wales is not more expensive than WMids?  Do you think London Hungarians are not a good low price punt?  What does you gut tell you is wrong?

[Llareggub]

Another possibility to improve the data is to remove the outliers. You set a percentage (lets say 5%) and remove the top 5% and bottom 5% data points. This stops a a couple of anomalous figures from skewing the data. Its a technique thats useful when the dataset is fairly small.

Interesting figures anyway.

[mcgee121]

Good interesting exercise but I think some problems lie in your assumptions.

"First we define a good independent as one with 3+ positive reviews on UKP. "  - A WG with 1 positive review from a level headed zen master like you with plenty of wisdom is more credible than a WG with 3 poorly written positive reviews (i.e. same day reviews from newbies, fluffiness and vague details).  Also, I know for a fact there are at least 2 SPs with about 12 positives who I don't consider a good punt.  Also, punters award positives for different reasons and positives are not all equal.  I give a firm positive if I would see the WG again, there are no awkward moments, I got what I wanted from the session, I feel the WG went out of her way to please me and I think back fondly in my mind of the session.  I would also award a low positive if there were a few little niggles I didn't like and an exceptional positive for near perfection.  But not everyone thinks like me, that's just my own classification.  I've read some positives that would certainly be neutrals for me.  So you are dealing with qualitative data and would need to scrutinize all the reviews for each WG and measure their usefulness based on your own definitions.  Furthermore, is a good punt just good fucking?  Some people care more about kissing etc.  So you would also need to consider this too.

As for average prices.  It might be better to find the average in different age ranges and based on their sexual tastes (a scale of vanilla to pornstar).  I like British WGs in their prime with a bit of maturity (20-23 is the ideal age for me) and that have an extensive like list.  In London, the average price I'm guessing for what I want is about £190.

[mediumjoe]

That's quite a spreadsheet you're talking yourself into Mr McGee .

[bigmanbigman]

100% price is rising.

[Steely Dan]

A WG with 1 positive review from a level headed zen master like you with plenty of wisdom is more credible than a WG with 3 poorly written positive reviews (i.e. same day reviews from newbies, fluffiness and vague details). 

Flattery is welcome, why not, YOLO. But anyway, in my view the large-ish numbers take care of this.  The numbers we have on the data base are quite adequate to make these limited conclusions. No worse than the election prediction guys certainly.  As said before, I welcome alternate views based on these data or your gut feel. What statement or conclusion do you think is wrong?

I like British WGs in their prime with a bit of maturity (20-23 is the ideal age for me) and that have an extensive like list.  In London, the average price I'm guessing for what I want is about £190.

Why guess?  What do the reviews tell you? Believing data projections as an absolute fact is wrong, but ignoring it totally is equally wrong.  UKP data is there for us all to read.  Perhaps Hungarian pussy is calling you....

[Steely Dan]

Another possibility to improve the data is to remove the outliers. You set a percentage (lets say 5%) and remove the top 5% and bottom 5% data points. This stops a a couple of anomalous figures from skewing the data. Its a technique thats useful when the dataset is fairly small.

I do this in my real life.  Tried it on this data, no change. You have the same data as me, what do you think?

Fuck, I expected a pity party for the poor sods paying over the odds in Cardiff, and resentment over the boys in Brum getting hot pussy for £111, not a discussion of data integrity!

Also, a big 'piss-off' to agencies.  For £125 we can have positive sex with escorts ANYWHERE.  We don't need you pimps!  Piss off Sergei and Kevin.

[NW_Guy]

Steely Dan,

Data can be interpreted any which way you like, to say what you like.  There are lies, damned lies and statistics...  However, this is a bloody good 'indicator' of current trends and the output of a lot of effort - Thank you for that.

NWG

[stampjones]

Interesting stuff. Cheers for taking the time to put it together and post

[Dogfather]

Thanks for this info SD.

Another unknown is the issue of looks. Vitally important for some but not so much for others.
Impossible to add into these stats?

[mrhappypants]

SD Thank you for a very interesting exercise.  I am surprised the median averages are not lower than the means.  There are not many girls charging less that £90 ph while the skies the limit at the top end, but this may reflect the nature of the sample - not many reviews £200+ on UKP.  I would expect a significant basement effect but the fact that your averages are higher than my intuitive sense of the market (that I punt pretty girls with a good list of services around £100 ph) may just reflect the value of UKP - the education that UKP provides makes it easier to spot "value".

[Tricky Dickie]

Thank you for you comments.  Helpful.  Will reflect on how to add to the Wiki.

I am just doing data analysis.  I have made few conclusions.  I shared my assumptions. I just explained why looking at all data on AW was silly, and looking at all reviews on UKP was less interesting.  Who cares what a bad punt costs? This IS the cost of a good punt on UKP.

Of course you may assume that 90% of good punts are not on UKP and have a totally different cost. Possible, but I cant think of a reason this is likely.  Escorts (mostly) don't know we are UKP posters. But I never meant this is the cost of a punt in the UK. Might be, who knows?

I did look at median and mode as well as average.  Was about the same other than London Brits - hence why I shared the data without the porn stars.  Same with the outliers - I checked - there are enough Hoors that the effect is very small.

I may do a weighted average by punts.  So MI cost is weighted more than an escort with 2 reviews.  Not sure that is fair too.  But it is data.  Data is neutral.

Have you other conclusions based on the data?  You say my conclusions are not valid.  They are not proven - but better some some of the shit the EU publishes. Do you think Wales is not more expensive than WMids?  Do you think London Hungarians are not a good low price punt?  What does you gut tell you is wrong?

Hi SD

I think I may have come across wrongly. My comments were intended constructively. However, as a major point, I didn't say that I think your conclusions are not valid. I have no idea if they are valid or not. I certainly have no better data to base my own conclusion on. My comment was that I'm not sure they are definitely valid.

If your data isn't being affected by outliers then that's great. I'm always a little wary of means without deviations though.

I haven't really thought this through but I'm wondering if there is an alternative presentation of the data that might also be useful. Could you bin your data into, say, £10 groups and then present each total as a percentage of the overall total? Might be interesting to know if there are multiple peaks. That in turn might represent different service levels. Or it might not. I'm just guessing.