Prossies who insit you book through AdultWork

[JV547845]

Maybe so, however it's amazing that the money grabbing cunts who are Awank don't charge you for this.

They're a huge juicy centralised target who operate in most jurisdictions of the world.  I'm not surprised they want to keep an arms length from the paying for sex part and make their money essentially by operating as a paid facebook for porn pics / cam time / ebay sexshop / contact info.

[JV547845]

No number no booking

You guys know working girls have to pay a £1 a day to show a number right?  I like to see a number too as it shows they've made a commitment but then many private gallery scams have numbers and even available today banners (£1/day too?).  I don't blame a lot of price competitive working girls for not leaving their number up 24/7.  Even higher class operators take their number down sometimes, they probably don't like being ripped off by AW either.  Of course they'll have to message me it anyway if they want a booking, and if they don't message me it fairly soon then yeah, no number no booking, not like they can't get a punting phone/sim too. 

[SeekingtheTruth]

Personally it makes no difference to me, only used it to make 1 booking and glad I spent that extra couple of mins sending an email and making a booking as she was cracking.

In regards to the posts about a change in the law, do you really think the police have the time or man power to retrospectively prosecute anyone? Most people will have used a punting email to go with their punting sim. And even on the slim chance they may try it, I'm sure I read somewhere that AW are not based in the UK so they can just refuse to provide the details.

[NIK]

They're a huge juicy centralised target who operate in most jurisdictions of the world.  I'm not surprised they want to keep an arms length from the paying for sex part and make their money essentially by operating as a paid facebook for porn pics / cam time / ebay sexshop / contact info.

The best description of AWank I've ever seen.

Just wasted another hour of my life trawling through a load of rubbish - fakes, poor photos, bait and switch, no phone, too far away, authenticity called into question, etcetera, and most annoying of all the fucking webcammers who have ticked the escort service, so appear in your search criteria when they obviously DO NOT ESCORT!   

I really envy you guys who use AW regularly and successfully, but I don't know how you do it. An hour on there makes me lose the will to live and makes me realise why I used agencies so often in the past.

[Festisio]

The best description of AWank I've ever seen.

Just wasted another hour of my life trawling through a load of rubbish - fakes, poor photos, bait and switch, no phone, too far away, authenticity called into question, etcetera, and most annoying of all the fucking webcammers who have ticked the escort service, so appear in your search criteria when they obviously DO NOT ESCORT!   

I really envy you guys who use AW regularly and successfully, but I don't know how you do it. An hour on there makes me lose the will to live and makes me realise why I used agencies so often in the past.

If you don't already, sort the search results by Feedback (escort) and that way you can bypass all the shite.

[Wowgeek]

I am a little surprised Nik that you are finding results that can be filtered out. Distance, telephone etc. can all be controlled for, as can the enjoys list, but I'm sure you must know that?

I usually go for 'logged in within last week ' to filter out non logged pimp profiles and anyone likely to be on break.

The only thing I would add, as I have posted elsewhere, is that the enjoys list is AND not OR, so if you tick CIM and CIM (discretion) for example, you will only find profiles where they both exist, you won't find profiles where they show only one or the other.

[berksboy]

You guys know working girls have to pay a £1 a day to show a number right?  I like to see a number too as it shows they've made a commitment but then many private gallery scams have numbers and even available today banners (£1/day too?).  I don't blame a lot of price competitive working girls for not leaving their number up 24/7.  Even higher class operators take their number down sometimes, they probably don't like being ripped off by AW either.  Of course they'll have to message me it anyway if they want a booking, and if they don't message me it fairly soon then yeah, no number no booking, not like they can't get a punting phone/sim too.

 

      A whole £1 !    i mean they get a £60+ for 1/2hr but payout a a whole £1 

[cockneybstrd]

 

      A whole £1 !    i mean they get a £60+ for 1/2hr but payout a a whole £1 

I think he meant those that operate at the low end like 60 quid for an hour.

Anyway surely its 'Winston' or 'Demtri' who has to front the quid a day for putting the number up

[pleasure]

I think he meant those that operate at the low end like 60 quid for an hour.

Anyway surely its 'Winston' or 'Demtri' who has to front the quid a day for putting the number up

If a girl only gets one booking at £30 in a day, £1 is still less than 5% of her income. I think we can safely assume the girls who don't show their number have some reason other than the fact they can't scrape a quid together.

[ForrestGump]

I can see a time when Adultwork start insisting on punters verifying themselves too!

I suspect the folks at aw realise they stand to lose too much by doing that. What I mean by that is if it becomes too much hassle to get to the point where you can book a punt then a much higher proportion of punters will start to look elsewhere for easier alternative sources. And I suspect they're also aware that it's only a matter of time until there's a viable aw alternative.

[pleasure]

Just wasted another hour of my life trawling through a load of rubbish - fakes, poor photos, bait and switch, no phone, too far away, authenticity called into question, etcetera, and most annoying of all the fucking webcammers who have ticked the escort service, so appear in your search criteria when they obviously DO NOT ESCORT!   

All of the above is totally true, but until some kind soul comes along and creates a better site, AW is all we have. I for one am grateful as hell that it exists - I wouldn't fuck a fraction of the women that I do without it.

Most of the above problems aren't easy ones to solve. If I created a new AW-style site, with all the best intentions of being a better place for punters, I wouldn't know where to start fixing most of these things. AW are pretty good at taking down fake or scammy profiles once they're reported, but the girls get them up faster than the site can remove them.

Luckily you develop a sixth sense for the genuine girls after using AW for a while. Sure, it's annoying that the fakes and scammers exist, but that's life. I'd rather spend an hour or two researching my next punt than end up with a time-waster, a scammer, or no girl at all.

[Wowgeek]

My 'seeking services' profile on AW  is over 10 years old and, in all that time, nothing has come close to rivalling it, sadly.

There have been a few false dawns (and Sarahs and Louises) with other companies promising to create sites that will provide the good and get rid of the bad, but they just don't appear.

The problem is that to run such a site takes money and lots of it, where will that money come from? The general consensus, on here, is no adverts and lots won't pay for a PG or RB and the girls won't pay to be listed, as they don't have to on AW, so where is the philanthropic, multi millionaire, computer wizard, with time on their hands and a who is a punter supporting messiah?

It's not me, that's for sure!

[smiths]

Why do you think its getting a little blurry on here?

Strange, despite you being logged on this morning no answer forthcoming to my question here. Can you please answer why you think its getting a little blurry on here Belphoger?

[Dani]

Most of the ones who don't have a phone number are the ones who wont take same day bookings and like to have it all booked in advance.  It is near impossible to sort out a same day booking via just email on the site as none of us stay logged into AW all day so emails get missed and not seen then we reply and the reply is not seen and by the time it is sorted the time they want has gone.  So if you only want advance bookings I guess it works for them
I guess some also want more feedback than they have so insist on booking via AW to get more. 
Same day bookings however do need a phone number listed.

[JV547845]

      A whole £1 !    i mean they get a £60+ for 1/2hr but payout a a whole £1 

Clearly they don't see it like that or they'd be a lot more numbers on the profiles without PGs to pay for them.  It's like what someone else said - some of us still like to park for free when we go for a punt.  And yeah I had £60/hr in mind.

[redhat]

If the girl doesn't have a phone number I don't book. This is usually a spare of the moment ting for me day of, not often the day before and all that gaffing about would just put me off.

May have missed out on some nice ones but not really arsed.

[wristjob]

Clearly they don't see it like that or they'd be a lot more numbers on the profiles without PGs to pay for them.  It's like what someone else said - some of us still like to park for free when we go for a punt.  And yeah I had £60/hr in mind.

Well if AW didn't charge their £1 here and there they wouldn't exist. If I operated in a business where £1/day got me potentially hundreds of pounds of income - how great would that be. I don't think £1 would get you much of an advertising budget.

Most of us drive somewhere to work - or get a bus or a tube - and that will cost more than a quid.

Anyone who doesn't put the number on AW is missing out on business. if that's by choice because of circumstances fair enough. If they are too tight to pay it, well it's costing them more than they save.

[JV547845]

Anyone who doesn't put the number on AW is missing out on business. if that's by choice because of circumstances fair enough.

Wristjob - I know, £1 shouldn't be a lot of money on paper but people (myself included) rightly or wrongly (probably wrongly) take websites for granted and think they should be free.  Even facebook decided not to charge its users/products and introduced ads.  In business you can have too many shit customers too.  I'm pretty sure WGs get a lot of hassle from weirdos on their phone if their number's visible to the entire world.

[GeeWiz]

It's not illegal - now. If that changes who is to say they won't go retrospective on it.

Is there any law that has changed for which prosecutions have been made retrospectively?  Even when Max Clifford et al are found guilty of their heinous crimes, the sentencing guidelines of the time have to be used.

Besides, I would have thought the Max Mosleys and Russell Brands are the easier targets.

[zatoichi]

I suspect the folks at aw realise they stand to lose too much by doing that. What I mean by that is if it becomes too much hassle to get to the point where you can book a punt then a much higher proportion of punters will start to look elsewhere for easier alternative sources. And I suspect they're also aware that it's only a matter of time until there's a viable aw alternative.

But if age verification gets forced through then registering is exactly what will happen in effect.

[Marmalade]

Nothing compared to the hoops punters have to jump thru in some states in the USA...

[wristjob]

Is there any law that has changed for which prosecutions have been made retrospectively? 

Besides, I would have thought the Max Mosleys and Russell Brands are the easier targets.

Probably just tax laws where I think they take the piss retrospectively sometimes. Not sure if any other laws have but the law can be flexible - eg how brothels are handled - and if an employer or the state want you gone they will find something  Actually the comparison to brothels is a good one - they always get shut down on suspicion of trafficking, which is then proven false. Doesn't help them it's false, they are shut down then.



If I'm honest it would be more a case of hacking or leak that would be an issue. If that info was leaked it could be handed out to anybody. The thing with data now is it can be indexed in so may ways, ways people often don't think about til after it's done.

[zatoichi]

Probably just tax laws where I think they take the piss retrospectively sometimes. Not sure if any other laws have but the law can be flexible - eg how brothels are handled - and if an employer or the state want you gone they will find something  Actually the comparison to brothels is a good one - they always get shut down on suspicion of trafficking, which is then proven false. Doesn't help them it's false, they are shut down then.



If I'm honest it would be more a case of hacking or leak that would be an issue. If that info was leaked it could be handed out to anybody. The thing with data now is it can be indexed in so may ways, ways people often don't think about til after it's done.

Youre right on the tax law part.Criminal laws cannot be created,then enacted retroactively

[Dani]

Wristjob - I know, £1 shouldn't be a lot of money on paper but people (myself included) rightly or wrongly (probably wrongly) take websites for granted and think they should be free.  Even facebook decided not to charge its users/products and introduced ads.  In business you can have too many shit customers too.  I'm pretty sure WGs get a lot of hassle from weirdos on their phone if their number's visible to the entire world.

I agree on websites should eb free to use but not for people who advertise on them, Why should it be free.  where else can anyone advertise their services regardless of what services they are for free?  even shop windows cost something to put a card in.
AW offer a great FREE resource to those seeking services but of course they should charge advertisers.  As you said facebook brought in advertisers to pay for the site well  on AW we prossies are the advertisers.  They give us a free shop front and then we pay for anything else like phone number display £1, Available today £5, Featured anything up to £45 escort of the day goes for silly money anything over £400 and upwards and have seen it go for £1000 before.

[ForrestGump]

I'm totally amazed that the multitude of folks making money out advertising on aw aren't charged to have a basic profile. Strange logic behind that.

I'm sure charging advertisers to have a profile would instantly remove a lot of the time-wasters.

[wristjob]

I agree on websites should eb free to use but not for people who advertise on them, Why should it be free.  where else can anyone advertise their services regardless of what services they are for free?  even shop windows cost something to put a card in.

Exactly - and it takes people to provide that service and they need to earn a living. I'd bet AW gets more denial of service attacks and hacking attempts than most sites so you need some top class IT guys there. They probably have quite a big legal team. I reckon all of them want to earn a living out of it.

I'm sure charging advertisers to have a profile would instantly remove a lot of the time-wasters.

In many ways it would be the best thing they could do - but it could well put them out of business. With an site like that it's about who has the most girls advertising - if they charge others will do it free and get more profiles, and AW will be gone. If 50% of the profiles are fake it's best for AW to keep them because it makes it look better. Companies like facebook rarely remove inactive accounts - why have 200m users when you can say you have 800m?

[pleasure]

If I'm honest it would be more a case of hacking or leak that would be an issue. If that info was leaked it could be handed out to anybody. The thing with data now is it can be indexed in so may ways, ways people often don't think about til after it's done.

That's why I'm always 100% certain never to give any of my real info to a site like AW. Of course, if this age verification lark gets pushed through then it appears I'll be screwed... or more accurately, I'll be a lot less likely to be screwed in the foreseeable future. 

[ForrestGump]

If 50% of the profiles are fake it's best for AW to keep them because it makes it look better. Companies like facebook rarely remove inactive accounts - why have 200m users when you can say you have 800m?

I agree that fb thrives on the fact that it boasts an astronomical number of users. However the bogus profiles on fb are of little consequence to the average fb user. For a site like aw, though, it needs to be mindful of maintaining a certain level of quality in the profiles rather than sheer quantity. After all having a site loaded with time-wasting profiles is of no benefit to the genuine service providers nor does it benefit the genuine service seekers. 

[smiths]

I'm totally amazed that the multitude of folks making money out advertising on aw aren't charged to have a basic profile. Strange logic behind that.

I'm sure charging advertisers to have a profile would instantly remove a lot of the time-wasters.

I dont see it as strange logic at all myself. A/W can take any credits accrued on a profile at any time they wish. Why would you think A/W want less time-wasters, the more the merrier as the more they make for themselves.

As i have posted before i believe A/W are behind some of the PG fake profiles, its obviously so easy for them to do and completely unprovable thats its them that have posted them up. We arent talking of dealing with a regulated company here, just a bunch of low lifes out to rip punters off. Thats the level of faith i have in A/W.

[Marmalade]

Booking through the site is not that big a deal. Have you seen the frickin hoops a punter has to go thru in the USA to 'verify' himself?

It means the prossie can ask you for 'feedback' afterwards (I usually tell her I don't leave feedback). It also means she can slag you off if you are abusive.

The fact that she wants you to book through the site maybe increases the chances that she's genuine and expecting you will think she gives good service.

But horses for courses. It is very common in Scotland. Most of the better Scottish ones ask you to book through the site unless they know you. But if a girl asked me the same down in London I'd probably think she'd got a cheek. Who wants to bother with the paperwork when it's a giant market stall with all the tits hangin' out so to speak.

[NIK]

Well I don't go just for the punting. I'm actually on a training course on the Friday. I've also arranged to see a mate on Thursday evening. Sat Afternoon I may meet another friend if he's available or go to the theatre. I also simply enjoy the change of pubs. I've actually become quite friendly with a doorman at one of my regular venues since I first met him last autumn and have had lots of good chats with him in their outside area towards the end of the evening.
I also like walking around different areas on the outskirts of Central London just to see what the are like. One of the few localities I haven't been to is Highgate, been to Hampstead loads, so maybe Highgate is next on my agenda.
So the punting is only part of the experience. Having said that I'd be disappointed if I didn't manage at least one punt.

Wish I hadn't bothered with the punting this time. Everything has been great apart from that! 

[berksboy]

"Booking through the site is not that big a deal. Have you seen the frickin hoops a punter has to go thru in the USA to 'verify' himself? "

  Nope and i dont care as i fuck over here .

[Davehorn]

I don't think it's a big deal and is a sign of sincerity on both parts

[Jimmyredcab]

It's not illegal - now. If that changes who is to say they won't go retrospective on it.

Don't be paranoid for fucks sake.   

Do you think the police have nothing better to do.   

[Jimmyredcab]

Booking through the site is not that big a deal. Have you seen the frickin hoops a punter has to go thru in the USA to 'verify' himself?

That could be because prostitution is illegal in most of America.   

If a prostitute insists on booking through Adultwork she can fuck off, I make the rules not them. 

[Marmalade]

That could be because prostitution is illegal in most of America.   

yeah I just thought I'd make a comparison ffs

If a prostitute insists on booking through Adultwork she can fuck off, I make the rules not them. 

Calm down Jimmy. I know you think that. You make the rules for you. I make the rules for me. And I live in a pretty laid-back city. You don't.

[Daffodil]

Clearly they don't see it like that or they'd be a lot more numbers on the profiles without PGs to pay for them.  It's like what someone else said - some of us still like to park for free when we go for a punt.  And yeah I had £60/hr in mind.

The list of stupid business decisions that prossies make is as long as your arm (that's why they're prossies  ). This is a classic example.

Restaurants display phone numbers, as do plumbers, lawyers, tv repairmen, driveway pavers, climbing schools, joiners, and pretty much any service provider you care to name. Except prossies 

[Daffodil]

Bookings on AW are pretty simple and, whilst I do try to avoid them, will make one if the girl insists. As pleasure (I think) says, it can also imply the prossie is concerned about feedback and may indicate a better likelihood of a good punt. 'May', being the operative word of course 

[Daffodil]

Booking through the site is not that big a deal. Have you seen the frickin hoops a punter has to go thru in the USA to 'verify' himself?

It means the prossie can ask you for 'feedback' afterwards (I usually tell her I don't leave feedback). It also means she can slag you off if you are abusive.

The fact that she wants you to book through the site maybe increases the chances that she's genuine and expecting you will think she gives good service.

But horses for courses. It is very common in Scotland. Most of the better Scottish ones ask you to book through the site unless they know you. But if a girl asked me the same down in London I'd probably think she'd got a cheek. Who wants to bother with the paperwork when it's a giant market stall with all the tits hangin' out so to speak.

Posted before reading this. Pretty much my thoughts too.

[Aspen]

they need to go to court to obtain warrants to start looking through personal information and making links.

You don't seriously think they actually abide by that do you?

Such Naïvety. It happens for sure when there is a legal case likely, but I can tell you with confidence that law enforcement agencies routinely trawl through data without such hindrances.

I agree with the rest in the sense that examining bulk data on individuals would overwhelm the system. But that's not how it is done. They build databases with vast quantities of information and look for keywords and links - such as phone numbers - in much the same way as you do when you are doing a google search. Any link that anyone might have with data under investigation will show up.

[Aspen]

Every time I have been asked to make a booking through AW it has gone sour. So, I just don't do it any more. Not worth the hassle, or the risk of identifying yourself to others.

[jesus_jones]

It's the only reason I haven't seen Platinum Cindy (I am sure she will survive anyway).

There is simply too much choice in London for me to be fucking around making bookings or collecting enough feedback for myself so I can see one particular wg.

I agree with the cab driver for once, I am paying so I will go by my own rules.

[Jimmyredcab]

The list of stupid business decisions that prossies make is as long as your arm (that's why they're prossies  ). This is a classic example.

Restaurants display phone numbers, as do plumbers, lawyers, tv repairmen, driveway pavers, climbing schools, joiners, and pretty much any service provider you care to name. Except prossies 

You are 100% right, many pro$$ies are totally brain dead, they put up shit photos, refuse to pay to display a phone number and then wonder why they have very few clients.     

If they ever tried to run a REAL business they would go bankrupt within a week.     

[dandaley]

Booking through the site is not that big a deal. Have you seen the frickin hoops a punter has to go thru in the USA to 'verify' himself?

It means the prossie can ask you for 'feedback' afterwards (I usually tell her I don't leave feedback). It also means she can slag you off if you are abusive.

The fact that she wants you to book through the site maybe increases the chances that she's genuine and expecting you will think she gives good service.

+1

no big deal and it usually means they are sure they look like their pics and are going to be good to welcome you reviewing them and firms up the app for them so its all good for me and them too.

[mattylondon]

Booking through the site is not that big a deal. Have you seen the frickin hoops a punter has to go thru in the USA to 'verify' himself?

It means the prossie can ask you for 'feedback' afterwards (I usually tell her I don't leave feedback). It also means she can slag you off if you are abusive.

The fact that she wants you to book through the site maybe increases the chances that she's genuine and expecting you will think she gives good service.

But horses for courses. It is very common in Scotland. Most of the better Scottish ones ask you to book through the site unless they know you. But if a girl asked me the same down in London I'd probably think she'd got a cheek. Who wants to bother with the paperwork when it's a giant market stall with all the tits hangin' out so to speak.

Good post. I completely agree with you too, especially as far as London is concerned.

I have to say that I only tend to see this with British prossies. The foreign ones simply wanting your money and not giving a fuck, which is fine by me! I find the British ones tend to be more 'high maintenance' and 'feedback collectors'. More hoops to jump through and a pain in the arse to book. Far too much trouble, in general. I've no interest whatsoever in boosting their ratings and popularity. I also think many consider it an ego boost, due to their lack of self esteem. An increase in ratings doesn't benefit me at all. In fact, in the longer term it's bad for me as a punter because their rates then tend to go up.