Khloe - Colindale, very friendly but older than I expected

[Real John Doe]

WTF happened to this thread?
The review was good, she looks smoking hot, understandable if reality is different to expectations, but going off those pictures and the review, I'd still be happy I went

[Dereks]

There should be a mandatory picture of the SP from at least this year. Three year old pictures mean squat.

[Sinz]

There should be a mandatory picture of the SP from at least this year. Three year old pictures mean squat.

Sure, Prime Minister we will vote for that.

[Dicky]

Sure, Prime Minister we will vote for that.

 

She's put up a face pic on UKE presumably as a response. Not sure if the pic is recent.

[James999]

I don’t see a reason even a small one to tell u how old I’m

So your a lot older than your profile age and ashamed to say your real age then, from the comments on this thread it sounds like you're in your 40's 

[unus669]

She's put up a face pic on UKE presumably as a response. Not sure if the pic is recent.

Pic loaded on UKE yesterday, seem like from her previous albums. She obviously is ashamed of her real age, hence the no comment. Doubt if she did reveal her real age, it would deter punters, as they seem happy with the service she provides. BTW she’s not my cup of tea.

[dryanse8]

I've seen Khloe a few times and she has always proved to be very satisfying company. Quite a few other punters seem to think the same. OP your expectations may not have been fully met but very few SP are exactly as described. Some are better, some are worse. One thing that Khloe does deliver on is service. Provides what she offers and does it very well. As has been said before, for the general debate, if the SP looks good, is friendly and provides a good service and leaves you feeling happy, who cares how old they are/aren't?

[stewpid]

I've seen Khloe a few times and she has always proved to be very satisfying company. Quite a few other punters seem to think the same. OP your expectations may not have been fully met but very few SP are exactly as described. Some are better, some are worse. One thing that Khloe does deliver on is service. Provides what she offers and does it very well. As has been said before, for the general debate, if the SP looks good, is friendly and provides a good service and leaves you feeling happy, who cares how old they are/aren't?

+1

People are acting as if a WG not displaying her accurate age is a new thing. 

[vw]

I've seen Khloe a few times and she has always proved to be very satisfying company. Quite a few other punters seem to think the same. OP your expectations may not have been fully met but very few SP are exactly as described. Some are better, some are worse. One thing that Khloe does deliver on is service. Provides what she offers and does it very well. As has been said before, for the general debate, if the SP looks good, is friendly and provides a good service and leaves you feeling happy, who cares how old they are/aren't?

OP cared, others do care about false advertising and out of date photos, are you expecting an extra kiss for this heroic post.   

+1

People are acting as if a WG not displaying her accurate age is a new thing. 

You never mentioned that on your review.

Or is this a general approval of deception?

[dryanse8]

Not at all VW and the OP does raise a valid point to a degree but it seems a shame to bang on about one minor point in the face of so many good ones.

[unus669]

Not at all VW and the OP does raise a valid point to a degree but it seems a shame to bang on about one minor point in the face of so many good ones.

Wasn't minor to OP and won't be minor to many who intend seeing her. Obviously minor to you, unfortunately you don't represent the many.

[vw]

Not at all VW and the OP does raise a valid point to a degree but it seems a shame to bang on about one minor point in the face of so many good ones.

Well it might be minor for the punters her that have clearly fallen for her, for others not so minor.

Maybe stop sniffing brasso and accept he wasnt happy with that.

[brolin_76]

I've seen Khloe a few times and she has always proved to be very satisfying company. Quite a few other punters seem to think the same. OP your expectations may not have been fully met but very few SP are exactly as described. Some are better, some are worse. One thing that Khloe does deliver on is service. Provides what she offers and does it very well. As has been said before, for the general debate, if the SP looks good, is friendly and provides a good service and leaves you feeling happy, who cares how old they are/aren't?

well said.    I once gave her neutral but later visits all were Positive last time we did filming.  My best guess she is 32 now and smoking hot no doubt.


I understand they dont put their real age. one example this one External Link/Members Only

one my very bad mistake to book her. She says 27yrs old. but looks like 50 years old granma. Lessons learned now I simply walk away if I don't find attractive face.

[HighlyMotivated]

Michelle just jumping in and dominating Khloe’s thread. Wouldn’t have that if I was you Khloe

[dubhcarr]

not sure why this thread was hijacked at some point by MI.....still shit attitude.......my understanding is the OP was disappointed with Khloes age ...his preference....I thought she was 30's three years ago when I punted her ....good service....just not for me to make a reg.....no bother with that.....but not sure why MI jumps to the rescue...dont think Chloe asked for white knighting?....maybe Im wrong and I am surprised that MI gets away with lots on this forum when she has track and other girls have been banned for less it seems.....

[Dereks]

Sure, Prime Minister we will vote for that.

That's great. Power to the people

[Bassman]

She's put up a face pic on UKE presumably as a response. Not sure if the pic is recent.

I don’t think it is.

[Cunning Punt]

People are acting as if a WG not displaying her accurate age is a new thing. 

We all know they lie. The point is that in the opinion of a number of punters she is not only much older than stated, she looks significantly older and not so young and good looking than the photos.

What's more, at £120ph she isn't exactly cheap.

Thanks for the review, OP. Given the number of positives, I've always been intrigued by her but not got round to seeing her due to distance and the rate.

It's about time she was more honest, posted up-to-date pictures, was more realistic about her age and appeal, and reduced her rate back to £100.

[smiths]

I've seen Khloe a few times and she has always proved to be very satisfying company. Quite a few other punters seem to think the same. OP your expectations may not have been fully met but very few SP are exactly as described. Some are better, some are worse. One thing that Khloe does deliver on is service. Provides what she offers and does it very well. As has been said before, for the general debate, if the SP looks good, is friendly and provides a good service and leaves you feeling happy, who cares how old they are/aren't?

Some punters do care like the OP cared, his review, his preference to care about what he chooses and same with other punters. She has refused to answer how old she is, up to her but punters bothered by age can read that refusal and book her or not as they wish.

I also know some punters care which is why I gave a general idea of how old I thought she was in my review 3 years ago, early-30s ish then. She is now advertising herself as 28, that's years out in my view.

[dubhcarr]

I also know some punters care which is why I gave a general idea of how old I thought she was in my review 3 years ago, early-30s ish then. She is now advertising herself as 28, that's years out in my view.

yeh correct........its a deceit in my view where a prossie knows that she will lose a part of her potential new market if she is above 20's......Im convinced from my meet she is well into her mid/late 30's........so what......if the prossie doesnt like it when you call her out lying........she's lost the plot I think.........

[vw]

If the prossie doesnt like it when you call her out lying........she's lost the plot I think.........

seems the fan club don't like it being mentioned, whether she has their ear is unknown. 

[mrhappypants]

One thing I will add that no one has mentioned is Khloe's aggregate.  If I check my personal experience against individual reviewers there are always differences of style or opinion, but I would say with a pretty substantial database the aggregate does not lie.  70 positives, 4 neutrals, only 1 negative is a hell of a record.  Personally I reckon Khloe can afford to be a little blaise about personal perceptions of her age sitting on a review record like that.

[Cunning Punt]

seems the fan club don't like it being mentioned, whether she has their ear is unknown.

For a period of time a couple of years ago, it seemed that rarely a day went past when we didn't have a glowing positive review about Khloe - she was the forum darling. Inundating this forum with similar glowing reviews in quick succession can be counterproductive to punters - and so it proved.

Predictably, she got harder to book. It's pretty clear then that her fans, out of fluffiness but also their own selfishness, suggested that she raised her prices but still charged them the former rate. Which is what happened. She went up to £110 then shortly later £120 but her former clients (admittedly all, not just the fluffy ones) were still charged £100.

So they have her ear and I suspect the other way round as well.

[mrhappypants]

For a period of time a couple of years ago, it seemed that rarely a day went past when we didn't have a glowing positive review about Khloe - she was the forum darling. Inundating this forum with similar glowing reviews in quick succession can be counterproductive to punters - and so it proved.

Predictably, she got harder to book. It's pretty clear then that her fans, out of fluffiness but also their own selfishness, suggested that she raised her prices but still charged them the former rate. Which is what happened. She went up to £110 then shortly later £120 but her former clients (admittedly all, not just the fluffy ones) were still charged £100.

So they have her ear and I suspect the other way round as well.

Thanks mate, you might have just saved me 20 quid (Khloe???).

[Cunning Punt]

One thing I will add that no one has mentioned is Khloe's aggregate.  If I check my personal experience against individual reviewers there are always differences of style or opinion, but I would say with a pretty substantial database the aggregate does not lie.  70 positives, 4 neutrals, only 1 negative is a hell of a record.  Personally I reckon Khloe can afford to be a little blaise about personal perceptions of her age sitting on a review record like that.

No-one's really questioning her service and many folk aren't that fussed about age,
However, as we've seen with a couple of recent reviews and other comments, being faced with a WG who looks quite a bit older and not so good looking is an issue for some punters - and that's their prerogative and understandable given the misleading photos, particularly when they're paying £120.
She can afford to be blasé but not sure that's necessarily right.

Thanks mate, you might have just saved me 20 quid (Khloe???).

I got this from posts, not personal experience. Not sure if it still applies - perhaps PM the Don, who has been a regular, to check.

[dubhcarr]

One thing I will add that no one has mentioned is Khloe's aggregate.  If I check my personal experience against individual reviewers there are always differences of style or opinion, but I would say with a pretty substantial database the aggregate does not lie.  70 positives, 4 neutrals, only 1 negative is a hell of a record.  Personally I reckon Khloe can afford to be a little blaise about personal perceptions of her age sitting on a review record like that.

not really sure why you wrote this......... this site is surely about the reviewers perspective............other punters can write their review.......does her number of positives make her immune to the OP's view that she is older than he expected based on her stated age......which she is...does a certain arrogance creep in due to the perception of being a forum darling?......I appreciate the reviewer stating how the experience was for him and I appreciate no fluff facts.....

[mrhappypants]

not really sure why you wrote this......... this site is surely about the reviewers perspective............other punters can write their review.......does her number of positives make her immune to the OP's view that she is older than he expected based on her stated age......which she is...does a certain arrogance creep in due to the perception of being a forum darling?......I appreciate the reviewer stating how the experience was for him and I appreciate no fluff facts.....

I think it provides important context around individual opinion about how good an SP she is.

[vw]

I think it provides important context around individual opinion about how good an SP she is.

The thing is without updating the photos and age she will get more and more of these type reviews.

[unus669]

The thing is without updating the photos and age she will get more and more of these type reviews.

Very true. Some punters not UKP members probably felt the same, dare I say even walked however, we’ll probably never know. Reading between the lines, seems like her age is more visible than it used to be or/and visibly less acceptable 

[naz]

Not sure why this thread is  focused on age and pics, if someone tried to guess my age they would get it wrong by 15years or so.  Some of the pic on AW are photoshopped, some are taken with full make up. The person in the pic generally always look slightly different in real life. Some don't bother putting on some decent sexy lingere.When I've seen Khole she has always make effort to look good.

I think it might be time for me this see her again. Thanks to this thread. 

Attitude and service goes a long way to many making a decision to see her.

[vw]

Not sure why this thread is  focused on age and pics

Because that was the reviewers disappointment surprisingly, and that's why the thread focuses on that.   

[Cuntminion]

One thing I will add that no one has mentioned is Khloe's aggregate.  If I check my personal experience against individual reviewers there are always differences of style or opinion, but I would say with a pretty substantial database the aggregate does not lie.  70 positives, 4 neutrals, only 1 negative is a hell of a record.  Personally I reckon Khloe can afford to be a little blaise about personal perceptions of her age sitting on a review record like that.

High amount of positives don't outweigh anything

Whenever an sp has negatives or neutral that's what I read first before a few positives

It's the reasoning behind the neg and neutral I want to know every time as that is will what be most relevant to my experience and I have absolutely booked sp's with both neg and neutral as they didn't seem they would be relevant to my sensitivities

So no an impressive aggregate is nothing really

It's the content of the reviews not numbers

[lewishamguy]

Just my two cents here --- she has been reviewed here since 2014, some were by well established members and almost everyone gave the indication of her age. I personally once mentioned she was 28 but that's in 2015 --------

28 I would say.

from that perspective now she is definitely in her 30's perhaps 31-32 as mentioned by others. Btw now it's up to punters,newbies to decide whether they will trust or rely 70 positive reviews or the recent age saga and yes always there is a option to walk away if anyone don't fancy in her looks/appearance. I walked away from some punts before I was a member in UKP but since I've been a member here luckily I didn't have to walk away. I'm grateful to this forum and it's contributors. 

[naz]

Yes the reviewer also said what many have experienced too and said.

Her services were all good.
She was very friendly and enthusiastic DFK followed by OWO, and had a few position until the end.
Overall I was satisfied but in terms of looks, my expectation was higher than reality.
So this is neutral.

YMMV I think also stated in his review.   A well balanced reveiw I think. For most its a balance between looks, attitude and service. For the OP, looks and age  is very important, hence a neutral.  Don't get me wrong  it I important to me also but a balance  of all  3 qualities.

[dubhcarr]

Just my two cents here --- she has been reviewed here since 2014, some were by well established members and almost everyone gave the indication of her age. I personally once mentioned she was 28 but that's in 2015 --------

from that perspective now she is definitely in her 30's perhaps 31-32 as mentioned by others. Btw now it's up to punters,newbies to decide whether they will trust or rely 70 positive reviews or the recent age saga and yes always there is a option to walk away if anyone don't fancy in her looks/appearance. I walked away from some punts before I was a member in UKP but since I've been a member here luckily I didn't have to walk away. I'm grateful to this forum and it's contributors. 

the number of positives were never in question ..its a fact....the OP's review is the discussion point and it does not help that punters blindly throw support to the SP and disrespect the punter. If punters are disrespected and decide not to review then we all lose....so put your infatuation to one side and contribute or not to the OP's point..you dont need to fly a flag cos most folk have stated that the prossie has good attitude and gives good service....

[Cuntminion]

the number of positives were never in question ..its a fact....the OP's review is the discussion point and it does not help that punters blindly throw support to the SP and disrespect the punter. If punters are disrespected and decide not to review then we all lose....so put your infatuation to one side and contribute or not to the OP's point..you dont need to fly a flag cos most folk have stated that the prossie has good attitude and gives good service....

It's pretty much just ad libbing to attempt to try and reinforce point

That's not a specific dig at Lewisham but in General whenever a review count is posted and I don't find that wrong or distasteful just pointless

Unless there is something consistent in specifics not just amount that ties a positive to another positive or a negative to a negative reviews then they don't really compliment nor discredit one another and just serve as their own individual account

Saying forget 4 and 1 but think of 70 doesn't wash and not a hypocrite so a counter argument of forget 70 but look at the 4 and 1 wouldn't wash either

And as for the op in this particular review being critical of advertised age that has also been touched in a fair few of the 70 positives , so that's consistency on that front right there and it's covered in positives, neutral and negative reviews

[LLPunting]

the number of positives were never in question ..its a fact....the OP's review is the discussion point and it does not help that punters blindly throw support to the SP and disrespect the punter. If punters are disrespected and decide not to review then we all lose....so put your infatuation to one side and contribute or not to the OP's point..you dont need to fly a flag cos most folk have stated that the prossie has good attitude and gives good service....

OP posted a NEUTRAL based on the plainly stated fact that he found her to be too old looking for his tastes.  IT'S VALID SO LET IT LIE.

All this bitching about deceit and outrage about a woman's age just shows that there are more old women and pre-pubescent boys posting on this forum than on not allowed or Facebook! 

I look forward to an equallly vociferous debate when I post a review of a girl I found looked legal but too young compared to her photos and stated age.

[Cuntminion]

OP posted a NEUTRAL based on the plainly stated fact that he found her to be too old looking for his tastes.  IT'S VALID SO LET IT LIE.

Erm have you quoted the wrong person dubbcarr comes across as someone who fully accepted OP's opinion.

The stoking came from SP who was happy to answer questions with a sprinkling of insults as long as the answers were favourable to herself

Then

Mindy who went off on an slow Friday tangent into Narnia

Then the multitudes of "look how many positives she has, it's impossible there is a difference of opinion"

Dubbcarr seems to accept op's review

[LLPunting]

Erm have you quoted the wrong person dubbcarr comes across as someone who fully accepted OP's opinion.

The stoking came from SP who was happy to answer questions with a sprinkling of insults as long as the answers were favourable to herself

Then

Mindy who went off on an slow Friday tangent into Narnia

Then the multitudes of "look how many positives she has, it's impossible there is a difference of opinion"

Dubbcarr seems to accept op's review

Sorry, wasn't contesting DC, I was supporting it.  (Naz's last couple of posts too.)  ((Not every quote is done for contention.)) 

[smiths]

Just my two cents here --- she has been reviewed here since 2014, some were by well established members and almost everyone gave the indication of her age. I personally once mentioned she was 28 but that's in 2015 --------

from that perspective now she is definitely in her 30's perhaps 31-32 as mentioned by others. Btw now it's up to punters,newbies to decide whether they will trust or rely 70 positive reviews or the recent age saga and yes always there is a option to walk away if anyone don't fancy in her looks/appearance. I walked away from some punts before I was a member in UKP but since I've been a member here luckily I didn't have to walk away. I'm grateful to this forum and it's contributors. 

Whereas I had her as early-30s ish 3 years ago. Of course punters interested can read the many reviews on her and make their own minds up. A good WG when I punted with her and her many reviews since mainly say the same.

[Cuntminion]

Sorry, wasn't contesting DC, I was supporting it.  (Naz's last couple of posts too.)  ((Not every quote is done for contention.)) 

Apologies it's just there's very little context in direct quotation sometimes, my bad