Author Topic: The Sugar Daddy / Secret Benefits Scam – What are the “Mechanics”?  (Read 35945 times)

Offline Vice Admiral

my only comment is - be mindful that this site (presumably) has a commercial arrangement with SB.

Which site? 

Offline Vice Admiral

Southcoastpunter's comment seemed on the face of it to be referring to UK Punting, but I couldn't see how he could know there might be a commercial connection.  Silly me.

I've just discovered – later than almost everyone else, I imagine! – that if you click on the large "Sugar Babies" tab at the top right of every page here, you get taken to an ad for Secret Benefits.

Offline hungrypunt

how the fuck do they manage to change from this to that....my lord



Hidden Image/Members Only


Hidden Image/Members Only

Online mr.bluesky


Offline ik8133

how the fuck do they manage to change from this to that....my lord



Hidden Image/Members Only


Hidden Image/Members Only

Yes I know! Some look really presentable until you view the video.

Offline theaccountant

how the fuck do they manage to change from this to that....my lord



Hidden Image/Members Only


Hidden Image/Members Only

You'd be surprised at some of the TikTok filters out there now. They can make Shrek look like Fiona. Some of these girls must be deluded at times.

Offline tynetunnel

I prefer the ordinary, girl next door look. So I personally prefer her verification pic to her profile pic. Probably just me, but it takes all kinds to make a world!

Offline PaulRuff

I prefer the ordinary, girl next door look. So I personally prefer her verification pic to her profile pic. Probably just me, but it takes all kinds to make a world!

Nope, same here.
Banned reason: Calling members losers.
Banned by: 90125

Offline Mr_Shins

I prefer the ordinary, girl next door look. So I personally prefer her verification pic to her profile pic. Probably just me, but it takes all kinds to make a world!

Personality is pretty much everything for me.

I have now deactivated on all those sites having hooked up with the most gorgeous woman from WYP.

Offline Vice Admiral


The Background

To recap.

It’s been established beyond reasonable doubt that Secret Benefits leaves a girl’s status as “online” for several hours after she’s signed out.  (Not the end of the world.)

It’s also been established that SB’s bots are constantly sending out a girl’s “standard message” to male members – luring them into paying a fiver to open the message in the belief that the girl has taken an interest in their profile and made a decision to message them.  Almost all “conversation-opening” messages that men get from girls fall into this category.  (Disgraceful.  In fact fraudulent.)

In addition, there's strong evidence that the site’s bots bump up dormant profiles in order to generate payments from men.  (If so, this is the worst thing of all, because girls have reported that this has caused them major difficulties, when a girl has told her one and only sugar daddy that he was exclusive and that she is no longer using the site – and he has seen her apparently online.)

A Recent Event

In the context of the final point, I had an odd experience recently.

A girl I'd messaged several weeks earlier suddenly replied as follows:  “Sorry!!! I haven’t been on this site in a very very long time, truthfully I never go on it! Drop me a text if you want 07xxxxxx419 x”  (I’ve left in the last three digits of the phone number just in case anyone else has had the same message from a different girl.)

Now the girl in question, far from “never going on the site” as she told me, is in fact apparently regularly there.  She’s seemingly been online on SB almost every day for months and months – and indeed that's been the case also over the course of the week or so since she messaged me.

On face value, therefore, this message would appear to confirm that the site’s bots often show girls as active when their profiles are in fact dormant.

However, there’s something a bit odd about this communication.

First, if this girl wanted to start a conversation, why not continue it on the site (where she has my profile to remind her who I am) rather than by text (where I’m just a random person coming out of the blue)?

Secondly, if her message is genuine, the girl must have found dozens and dozens of messages waiting for her when she signed in after a long absence.  Did she send all the men the same message, resulting in her mobile phone being flooded with texts from men she knows nothing about?

I texted her, as suggested, but – not greatly to my surprise – got no reply. 

But why not?  On the surface it doesn’t make sense.  Was this message some kind of weird bot activity?

Having not received a reply to my text, I sent her a message on the site.  There's been no reply, although she’s apparently been regularly online since I sent it.

Make of this what you will.

Offline Carl Adams

I had that sort of experience but not with her.

I have talked to a couple of ladies and asked why they were still on - they were adamant that they had not been.

When I suggested that maybe they had logged on in the last 24 hours to be shown as "today" and I think online means they have been within a certain period. I think an IT person might know better but there has to be some delay as we all access the site through different servers & SPs so their online status cannot be changed instantly across all those platforms.

The other factor I got back from a couple of girls was that they had the site open in their phone browser but they were not actually looking at it which is also plausible I guess.

However, harder to prove is the messaging one and I recently had a text from a lass that had provided a minimal previous response - I replied and a week later am waiting to hear anything back event though she has been on.

Unfortunately, at £70 a pop for 20 texts, I am not going on regularly these days

Offline datwabbit

Leaving a browser tab open will show them as being online unless they specifically log out. However this cannot last for several hours as it will chew up memory on the server. So there has to be a cut off.

The auto-greetings is annoying but once you know about it, you know that you cannot rely on a first message to be genuine.

So you don't know if someone is still online and if they sent a message. That only leaves Admirers. If someone admires you they have to be online.

I've messaged local Admirers if I've favourited them first. The idea being that it is the only thing I can rely on and by responding to my action, it shows that she is genuine.

However I only got 2 replies. One was a scammer and one was a newbie and not sure what she wanted.

So the question is: why are people admiring me and not acknowledging my follow up message?

Is it just someone deciding they're not interested and not replying?
Or another scam?
« Last Edit: April 19, 2023, 10:07:32 am by datwabbit »

Offline Natwest

I managed to get myself off the Naughty Step with Seeking Arrangements after being banned for a couple of years. The one thing that sticks in my mind as being noted on here is how many girls are "online" on Secret Benefits each day. Bearing in mind Seeking Arrangements must have many, many times more members, where I am searching around Cambridge, at the very most some days there might be between 10 and 20 girls online but in the morning maybe 2 or 3. Compare that with Secret Benefits.

I'll never forget the trouble Secret Benefits went to, to ensure my review was taken down. Their modus operandi seems to be that of the small percentage who can be bothered to protest, give them them loads of free credit or money back to keep the Trust Pilot score as high as possible.

All the evidence points to it being an elaborate scam.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2023, 09:19:04 pm by daviemac »

Offline Carl Adams

It must be a very elaborate scam indeed!!   :)

I have met 4 girls off SB from West Yorkshire & Manchester and spoken to several others who were keen but for various reasons it did not happen (usually money).

Most of those girls are still showing on SB but I know from my conversations with them that they find the approach of some guys to be tedious or even threatening and so their tolerance is now minimal. 




Offline southcoastpunter

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,121
  • Likes: 164
  •  
  • Reviews: 27
It must be a very elaborate scam indeed!!   :)

I have met 4 girls off SB from West Yorkshire & Manchester and spoken to several others who were keen but for various reasons it did not happen (usually money).

Most of those girls are still showing on SB but I know from my conversations with them that they find the approach of some guys to be tedious or even threatening and so their tolerance is now minimal.

and its not just this site (which i have never used) but so many ladies from Seeking say the same thing - "you would never believe some of the first/early messages i receive, they are rude, aggressive, downright weird" etc. And it seems that this is not the odd message here and there but more the majority of messages they get. So many ladies have said they decided to continue conversations with me and/or meet me because i seemed "nice and normal". 

Offline Natwest

It must be a very elaborate scam indeed!!   :)

I have met 4 girls off SB from West Yorkshire & Manchester and spoken to several others who were keen but for various reasons it did not happen (usually money).

Most of those girls are still showing on SB but I know from my conversations with them that they find the approach of some guys to be tedious or even threatening and so their tolerance is now minimal.

I was on the site for probably a year or two and I also met maybe 3 or 4 girls so I am not by any means saying it does not have some genuine SB's on there. But the number logged on at any one time in this area far exceeds the number logged on for Seeking Arrangements and I just don't believe it.

I got more canny later on managing my credits by checking when I received a message that they had actually looked at my profile. Also if I was favourited, again had they opened my profile? My experience has been similar in hearing tales and I have been sent copies of the most incredible unsolicited pictures. I have been using these sites for over 6 years and I certainly am not the sort who does not get replies because his first message is a load of filth. As most people find on Secret Benefits, you seem to receive many messages that just say "hi" and you politely reply and nothing ever comes back.

All I can say is having extricated myself off the naughty step at Seeking after 3 years, I would never bother with Secret Benefits again.

Offline datwabbit

It must be a very elaborate scam indeed!!   :)

I have met 4 girls off SB from West Yorkshire & Manchester and spoken to several others who were keen but for various reasons it did not happen (usually money).

Most of those girls are still showing on SB but I know from my conversations with them that they find the approach of some guys to be tedious or even threatening and so their tolerance is now minimal.

There's always going to be exceptions but the fact is, the majority are finding that things don't add up. So you can't ignore the majority.

Offline Vice Admiral

On a long thread like this there’s so much material that’s it easy for the salient points to get lost in the postings.

So here are the salient points again.

1.  The probability is that all the profiles on Secret Benefits are genuine – although it’s likely that many girls join “just for a laugh”, with no serious intention of finding a sugar daddy; and rapidly lose interest.

2.  Central to SB’s business plan is having their bots send every male member dozens and dozens of messages to lure him into spending a fiver each time in the belief that the girl in question has taken an interest in his profile and actively decided to message him.  I suspect that this fraudulent activity is how the site makes most of its money.

3.  The site shows girls as online for several hours after they’ve signed off. 
In addition, I suspect that “[Online] Today” represents a considerably longer period than 24 hours. 
An hour or so ago I did a search on girls aged 18 to 25 within five miles of Portsmouth. 
Six such girls were supposedly online and another 68 have supposedly been online today.
A comparable search on Seeking (girls aged 18-25 within 8 kilometres of Portsmouth) shows 16 girls as having been online either today or yesterday.
16 Portsmouth girls active on Seeking, the market leader, and 74 active on SB in roughly the same period?
Yeah right, as la jeunesse is wont to say!

4.   There is strong evidence that the site often bumps up long-dormant profiles and shows them as online.  The “survey” I did an hour ago points in the same direction.

5.  It is just possible that the bots sometimes send out messages other than the default “conversation-opener”, to amuse themselves.  (In the age of AI, I guess that some bots have a sense of humour.)

More generally, I should mention that, as well as my “puzzling” experiences, I have had some very pleasant conversations on SB.  The theme of this thread is the site’s scam elements, so that has been my focus. 

Like others who have recently posted on this thread, my approach to girls on SB is always relaxed and civilised, and general in tone.  And I too have received appreciative responses:  “First decent conversation I've had on here"; "More of a connection with you than with anyone else I’ve spoken to”; and so on. 

These pleasant conversation have almost never led anywhere, however.  I get the impression that the girls enjoyed having a conversation with a reasonably intelligent-sounding man, and that was it – because on several occasions when I’ve finally suggested we might meet for a chat and a drink, the conversation has fizzled out. 

I did meet one girl a few times for some pleasant social encounters, but – like I suspect the majority of girls on the site – she only ever wanted social interaction, and had joined the site with a belief in the existence of those mythical “mentors” who will give a pretty girl shed-loads of money just for the pleasure of occasionally taking her out to dinner at an expensive restaurant.  (I do love the expression “fine dining”, by the way!)  Indeed I think I was the only man this girl ever met off the site, because most of the others had cut straight to the chase.

I would guess, incidentally, that those members of UKP who have reported what might be described as "full-scale success" with girls from SB are probably, erm, rather younger than me.

Anyway, for all the above reasons, my interest in the site has for a long time been almost entirely investigative.   (The site refunded me 100 credits almost four months ago, enough to pay for ten conversation-starters – and I’ve still got ten of those credits left.) 

« Last Edit: April 21, 2023, 10:29:16 am by Vice Admiral »

Offline Natwest

Excellent post. I agree and concur 100% Vice Admiral.

Offline DirtyHarry74

Completely concur Vice Admiral, a previous experiment with one of my SBs, we timed that the 'online' switches off after approximately 90 minutes of inactivity.  The last seen "today" lasts around 36 to 48 hours, before it reverts to the status "1d" etc.  BTW this also applies to Sugar Daddy profiles too.

Like any of these sites, the percentage of conversations that turn into some form of arrangement is very small.  Out of all my initial conversations, converted ten into a meet and six moved onto some form of arrangement.

On the negative side, I've hidden around 900 profiles.


Offline Vice Admiral

A previous experiment with one of my SBs, we timed that the 'online' switches off after approximately 90 minutes of inactivity.  The last seen "today" lasts around 36 to 48 hours, before it reverts to the status "1d" etc.

Most interesting.  Detailed evidence of this kind is very helpful in forming part of the "case file" should anyone – not me, I'm afraid – have the energy and determination to drive these crooks off the internet.

The sad thing is that Secret Benefits is a well-designed and easy-to-use site – more user-friendly, in my opinion, than Seeking – and, if they ran it honestly, it would be a real asset to old (or middle-aged) pervs like us.  But they make more money by running it dishonestly.

I dare say they reckon that old pervs deserve to be scammed.

BTW this also applies to Sugar Daddy profiles too.

As I said in my initial post on this thread, to all intents and purposes External Link/Members Only and External Link/Members Only are simply two links leading to the same site.  All the same profiles appear identically on the two sites. 

On the negative side, I've hidden around 900 profiles.

Wow!

Offline ik8133


Offline paul_tall_

Leaving a browser tab open will show them as being online unless they specifically log out. However this cannot last for several hours as it will chew up memory on the server. So there has to be a cut off.
That last bit would not be the case, it doesnt cost anything to just hold an online flag in the database. Sites can be quite stateless and only hold for performance reasons certain information in a cache for a certain amount of time but that can be easily refreshed when next interacting if no cached information exists

It will come down as to how they have implemented noting profiles as online or not or other security type measures

The sort of scenario some companies implement is you log on and its recorded against your profile as last online/interacted, interactions again may then update the last online/interacted. At certain points maybe daily, a process runs in the background setting accounts that haven't interacted for a period of time as offline or the user of the account has chosen to log out (always a wise move esp. on shared computers).

It is possible they have implemented a beacon/web worker type of thing that constantly sends signals but you could see that if you monitor the network requests from your browser




Offline Vice Admiral

Don't pay too much attention to the 'online' status [on Secret Benefits] either - the site cycles the profiles around to make it look busier than it is.  Right now there is a profile showing "online" and "in the UK", but I know for certain that individual is abroad and has been since the start of this week.

I've quoted here part of a post that Dirty Harry recently made on the "Seeking" thread because it's useful to have this further piece of evidence about the Secret Benefits modus operandi on this thread as well.

Offline southcoastpunter

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,121
  • Likes: 164
  •  
  • Reviews: 27
VA - you seem to be obsessed with SB.

  Out of all my initial conversations, converted ten into a meet and six moved onto some form of arrangement.,


so its not a complete scam then - he got 6 arrangements from it. depending over what length of time and how much time input was needed and how much money was spent, thats not so bad!

Offline Vice Admiral

VA - you seem to be obsessed with SB.

No, not really.  I just find the whole thing rather intriguing.  Also my British sense of fair play has become engaged.  I dislike seeing people get away with crooked behaviour. 

so its not a complete scam then - he got 6 arrangements from it. depending over what length of time and how much time input was needed and how much money was spent, thats not so bad!

I’ve never suggested that SB is “a complete scam”.  The five numbered points that comprise the first half of my post #117 summarise the position.

Since it's probable that all the profiles are genuine, there are certainly good pickings to be had, and I don't doubt that some committed users of the site have had positive experiences, particularly if they navigate past the various scam elements – the first rule being never to waste a fiver replying to an unsolicited message from a girl, because in almost every case it will have been bot-generated.

SB could be a truly excellent site if its management ran it honestly – but they won't, because it's clearly through the scam side of things that they make most of their money.

« Last Edit: May 04, 2023, 06:48:26 pm by Vice Admiral »

Offline tynetunnel

Your research VA has proved profoundly accurate and I am grateful to you for it. People can take it on board or not, as they wish. But it marries up with my own experiences and explains things I wondered about  :thumbsup:

Offline rubric


SB could be a truly excellent site if its management ran it honestly – but they won't, because it's clearly through the scam side of things that they make most of their money.

To an extent this is true to all dating/meeting sites.  They all make money by keeping people subbed for as long as possible.

Offline Kieslowski

I recently bought another batch of credits and messaged about half a dozen girls, all of whom were showing as having been online recently. One had even given me permission to see her private gallery and had requested access to mine. After a couple of days, during which I saw their profiles showing as "online", I turned on read receipts for a few of them, and saw that none of the messages had been read. I sent some follow-up messages, and still nothing. I then messaged SB querying the fact that nobody was even reading my messages, despite showing as online, and that it felt like they were scamming me.

Today, they emailed me out of the blue to say they'd reimbursed me for my credits, and were deleting my profile. Felt a bit like they were throwing the toys out of the pram, but at least I've got my refund.

A bit of a stupid move on their part, because if they'd just left my profile, I would probably have ended up being tempted to get credits again eventually. Instead, I'm simply going to try and forget the site even exists.

I'm wondering if it's related to the fact I was saying in some of my most recent messages that I wasn't sure if the women were actually online or if the site was just scamming people - perhaps they were worried the women would log back in for real eventually, see my messages, realise the site was pretending they'd been online, and delete their accounts?

Offline Natwest

I recently bought another batch of credits and messaged about half a dozen girls, all of whom were showing as having been online recently. One had even given me permission to see her private gallery and had requested access to mine. After a couple of days, during which I saw their profiles showing as "online", I turned on read receipts for a few of them, and saw that none of the messages had been read. I sent some follow-up messages, and still nothing. I then messaged SB querying the fact that nobody was even reading my messages, despite showing as online, and that it felt like they were scamming me.

Today, they emailed me out of the blue to say they'd reimbursed me for my credits, and were deleting my profile. Felt a bit like they were throwing the toys out of the pram, but at least I've got my refund.

A bit of a stupid move on their part, because if they'd just left my profile, I would probably have ended up being tempted to get credits again eventually. Instead, I'm simply going to try and forget the site even exists.

I'm wondering if it's related to the fact I was saying in some of my most recent messages that I wasn't sure if the women were actually online or if the site was just scamming people - perhaps they were worried the women would log back in for real eventually, see my messages, realise the site was pretending they'd been online, and delete their accounts?

This is pretty much what happened to me. It seems if you play along and play nicely, they will be generous in refunding credits. Start to point out that things do not stack up and you get booted off. If you have time put a negative review on a review site. Then stand back and watch how hard they fight to get it taken down. There's no doubt as others have pointed out, there are genuine girls on the site. Indeed I had a few meets when I was on there. But unless you get pretty savvy pretty quick you will burn through your credits as you start to receive messages from girls who clearly aren't sending them. I come back to the point i have made in the past. If you are a member of Secret Benefits and Seeking Arrangements just compare the number of people online in your area on both sites. In my experience there were loads more logged in on Secret Benefits than Seeking, yet I believe Secret Benefits must have a fraction of the number of girls signed up compared to Seeking.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2023, 10:07:55 am by daviemac »

Offline Natwest

As an aside, (though as my post is in moderation it might not appear before this!) am I the only one that when I post to this thread it needs approval by a moderator? Not sure what I am doing that leads to this?

Offline daviemac

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,218
  • Likes: 798
  •  
  • Reviews: 24
As an aside, (though as my post is in moderation it might not appear before this!) am I the only one that when I post to this thread it needs approval by a moderator? Not sure what I am doing that leads to this?
Look at the second line of your post and you will see what has been change, the name of the site you posted is caught by the auto-censor.

Offline Natwest

Look at the second line of your post and you will see what has been change, the name of the site you posted is caught by the auto-censor.

I can see that now. And it would be a lot more useful if people reviewed their experiences on Secret Benefits on that particular site as well as here so people could make more informed choices. What is wrong with mentioning it in the context of this discussion? I accept the decision, just curious?

Offline daviemac

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Board Moderator
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 32,218
  • Likes: 798
  •  
  • Reviews: 24
I can see that now. And it would be a lot more useful if people reviewed their experiences on Secret Benefits on that particular site as well as here so people could make more informed choices. What is wrong with mentioning it in the context of this discussion? I accept the decision, just curious?
In the past it hasn't been favourable to us and you are telling people to review on another review site.

Offline datwabbit

It's easy to find SA. It's heavy on the hype and the market leader.

Anyone know how easy it is for women to find Secret Benefits? I'm wondering why legit seekers would go there and not SA. Serious seekers would do both.

My latest situation was 1 reply out of 10 on SB, just stopped messaging on WA while looking good for a social. Just set me thinking why she's on the site.

Offline Vice Admiral

My latest situation was 1 reply out of 10 on SB, just stopped messaging on WA while looking good for a social. Just set me thinking why she's on the site.

May I ask, Datwabbit, whether the ten messages you sent were in response to unsolicited (that is, bot-sent) messages you received from girls?   Or did you yourself "start the conversation" by messaging ten girls you liked the look of?

As for the girl who suddenly stopped messaging when things were "looking good for a social", I find that odd, just as you do.

I have had similar experiences (see the second half of my post #117), and it just doesn't add up.  Why should a girl with whom a fellow seems to be getting on really well suddenly fall silent the moment he suggests a relaxed social meeting, with her perhaps bringing a friend to help the conversation flow?

This particular oddity, however, can’t be blamed on those who run the site.

Surely? 

Unless this half-serious paragraph from my post #117 has validity?
5.  It is just possible that the bots sometimes send out messages other than the default “conversation-opener”, to amuse themselves.  (In the age of AI, I guess that some bots have a sense of humour.)

Offline datwabbit

May I ask, Datwabbit, whether the ten messages you sent were in response to unsolicited (that is, bot-sent) messages you received from girls?   Or did you yourself "start the conversation" by messaging ten girls you liked the look of?

As for the girl who suddenly stopped messaging when things were "looking good for a social", I find that odd, just as you do.

I have had similar experiences (see the second half of my post #117), and it just doesn't add up.  Why should a girl with whom a fellow seems to be getting on really well suddenly fall silent the moment he suggests a relaxed social meeting, with her perhaps bringing a friend to help the conversation flow?

This particular oddity, however, can’t be blamed on those who run the site.

Surely? 

Unless this half-serious paragraph from my post #117 has validity?
5.  It is just possible that the bots sometimes send out messages other than the default “conversation-opener”, to amuse themselves.  (In the age of AI, I guess that some bots have a sense of humour.)

The 10 were chosen by me because they "admired" me. So I took that as pro-active non-bot interest. No idea why the WA conversation ended. I'm an old pro at this and avoided obvious sex talk. Personally I feel she didn't know what she wanted from this. She had a vague idea but that's not enough.

Offline Vice Admiral

The 10 were chosen by me because they "admired" me. So I took that as pro-active non-bot interest.

Like you, my view has always been that "being admired" is non-bot activity – not least because it happens much less than the bot-sent introductory e-mails, which are relentless.  Or at least they are until you complain to SB about non-replies and get a fresh set of credits, after which you never receive any more.

However if you e-mailed ten of your "admirers" and got only one reply, that's a bit fishy, particularly because – as with me and (I would guess) most men who cast their nets into the waters of Sugar Babe Lake – your approach is cautious and avoids anything that might alarm the recipient.

Doesn't make sense.

Offline Vice Admiral

Like you, my view has always been that "being admired" is non-bot activity – not least because it happens much less than the bot-sent introductory e-mails, which are relentless. 

Correction.  The opinion I expressed earlier is clearly wrong.

I've just been to my Secret Benefits account to count how many "admirers" I have.

Answer: 327!   (All but a handful date from before I went through the complaint-and-refund process.)

So we can safely assume that being admired is also bot-generated.


Offline datwabbit

So we can safely assume that being admired is also bot-generated.
NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!

Offline Vice Admiral

And I'm afraid I'm about to shatter what may be another of your illusions, Datwabbit.

Being "viewed" on Secret Benefits is also bot-generated!

I've just visited my profile to find out how many girls have supposedly viewed me.  In the end I lost count, but it was over 800.

Now you might argue that the explanation is either that I'm a bit of a Sugar Babe magnet or that there are an awful lot of chicks with too much time on their hands.

How do I know that neither explanation applies? 

Because fewer than ten of my views have been within the four months since I complained to Secret Benefits and was given 100 credits in compensation.  The other 800+ date from before that.  And almost all of the fewer than ten views in the past four months have been by girls I've exchanged messages with or "favourited".

So, to summarise, as far as men who use the site are concerned:
1.  Almost all unsolicited messages from girls are bot-sent.
2.  Almost all "favouriting" is done by bots.
3.  Almost all "viewing" is done by bots.

Offline datwabbit

And I'm afraid I'm about to shatter what may be another of your illusions, Datwabbit.

Being "viewed" on Secret Benefits is also bot-generated!

I've just visited my profile to find out how many girls have supposedly viewed me.  In the end I lost count, but it was over 800.

Now you might argue that the explanation is either that I'm a bit of a Sugar Babe magnet or that there are an awful lot of chicks with too much time on their hands.

How do I know that neither explanation applies? 

Because fewer than ten of my views have been within the four months since I complained to Secret Benefits and was given 100 credits in compensation.  The other 800+ date from before that.  And almost all of the fewer than ten views in the past four months have been by girls I've exchanged messages with or "favourited".

So, to summarise, as far as men who use the site are concerned:
1.  Almost all unsolicited messages from girls are bot-sent.
2.  Almost all "favouriting" is done by bots.
3.  Almost all "viewing" is done by bots.

Bot viewing I understand. I think that happens on SA.

But Bot admiration is something else.

Offline Vice Admiral

Bot viewing I understand. I think that happens on SA.
But Bot admiration is something else.

Look on the bright side – some of the bots who admire you who may in fact be hotter than the girls they're pretending to be.

Indeed, in the age of AI, hot bots may be the way to go?

« Last Edit: May 08, 2023, 03:06:49 pm by Vice Admiral »

Offline akauya

Look on the bright side – some of the bots who admire you who may in fact be hotter than the girls they're pretending to be.

Indeed, in the age of AI, hot bots may be the way to go?



Hidden Image/Members Only

Offline Vice Admiral

Inspired by the exceptionally hot bot-shot that Akauya kindly posted for us, I went a-googling to see whether the grands fromages and bot-meisters of Secret Benefits look anything like that image – and indeed to see what else the internet might throw up about the site.

The information that follows derives from a variety of sources.

Cecelia Truax Basilotto, the CEO of Secret Benefits, bears no resemblance to the bot.  She’s an overweight 68-year-old grandmother from Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania with grey hair and spectacles.  In the photograph of her that I found she’s wearing a baggy red and white floral T-shirt, tight-fitting knee-length blue denim shorts and a pair of trainers. 

The owner of Secret Benefits – and Director of Communications – is Herb Rose, who's based in Auckland, New Zealand.  Herb's much younger than Cecelia.  In the photograph I found of him he looks around 35.  Herb clearly fancies himself as a bit of a smoothie: perfectly arranged hair, hand on chin, expensive wrist-watch artfully displayed.  I wonder how he and Cecelia know each other, living as they do almost 9,000 miles apart, or how they came up with their cunning plan for fleecing old pervs?  Because they seem a rather unlikely pairing.  (Incidentally, if anyone would like to tell Herb what they think of his site, he can be e-mailed at [email protected].)

In January 2021 Secret Benefits had 50 employees worldwide.  That would seem to be an awful lot for a website that you would think, once designed, would largely be able to “run itself”.  I’d be surprised if Adult Work – a much bigger and more complex site – employs even a quarter of that number.*  But what do I know?

Either way, what do those 50 dudes and dudesses do – other than reply to disgruntled users of the site, post fake positive reviews on the internet, and try to get genuine negative reviews taken down?  Perhaps, therefore, not all the scamming activity on Secret Benefits is bot-generated, and there’s more “manual intervention” than I’ve tended to assume.

Postscript

*After writing the above, I went back to Google to see if I could find out how many employees Adult Work has.  One site told me 28.  Another told me 10.  So I'm not much the wiser.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2023, 02:17:41 pm by Vice Admiral »

Offline datwabbit

Inspired by the exceptionally hot bot-shot that Akauya kindly posted for us, I went a-googling to see whether the grands fromages and bot-meisters of Secret Benefits look anything like that image – and indeed to see what else the internet might throw up about the site.

The information that follows derives from a variety of sources.

Cecelia Truax Basilotto, the CEO of Secret Benefits, bears no resemblance to the bot.  She’s an overweight 68-year-old grandmother from Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania with grey hair and spectacles.  In the photograph of her that I found she’s wearing a baggy red and white floral T-shirt, tight-fitting knee-length blue denim shorts and a pair of trainers. 

The owner of Secret Benefits – and Director of Communications – is Herb Rose, who's based in Auckland, New Zealand.  Herb's much younger than Cecelia.  In the photograph I found of him he looks around 35.  Herb clearly fancies himself as a bit of a smoothie: perfectly arranged hair, hand on chin, expensive wrist-watch artfully displayed.  I wonder how he and Cecelia know each other, living as they do almost 9,000 miles apart, or how they came up with their cunning plan for fleecing old pervs?  Because they seem a rather unlikely pairing.  (Incidentally, if anyone would like to tell Herb what they think of his site, he can be e-mailed at [email protected].)


In keeping with dating sites protocol, Cecelia probably messaged Herb when he first subscribed to another site. He forgot to ignore any messages from people > 100 miles from him and the rest is history.

Offline Mr_Shins

In keeping with dating sites protocol, Cecelia probably messaged Herb when he first subscribed to another site. He forgot to ignore any messages from people > 100 miles from him and the rest is history.

"I've got the brains, you've got the looks, let's make lots of money"

Offline Vice Admiral

The research continues…

I very much hope that the moderators of this site won't remove the two main links below.  I know that links to review sites are not allowed, but these are not, repeat not, genuine review sites.  They are fake sites created by Secret Benefits to try to demonstrate that SB is a genuine and well-regarded site.

External Link/Members Only

News Direct is simply an umbrella website which allows other firms to rent website space, and SB has hired space to construct a totally fake review page.   How clever, incidentally, is the headline “Secret Benefits Reviews [2023] - Don't Join SecretBenefits.com Before Reading this Review”.  Ashley Madison, another site that makes much of its money from scamming, uses similar tactics (see the Wikipedia link below).

External Link/Members Only

This is again a fake site, not a genuine review site – but in this case the scam is even cleverer and subtler and more persuasive. 

Needless to say, the sugar babe sites given the top two scores are Secret Benefits and its variant Sugar Daddy – which get scores of 9.9 and 9.8 out of ten respectively! 

Then various other sugar babe type sites appear, starting with Ashley Madison which, although not in the same ownership as SB, also earns much of its revenue from scamming activity:
External Link/Members Only
(See in particular the sections "Fake female bot accounts" and "Advertising".)

I imagine that SB gives Ashley Madison the third highest score because it operates in a slightly different field from SB.  Also it probably pays SB a significant amount of money to appear at No. 3.

Interestingly WhatsYourPrice (although owned by Seeking) comes fifth – doubtless in order to try to show that sugardaddysites.pro is a genuine review site.  However Seeking, the market leader, appears nowhere on the list of supposed top 17 sugar babe sites, because that would be giving exposure to SB’s main rival.

I was going to end by saying that you’ve got to admire the ingenuity with which SB runs its multi-million-dollar scam operation – but no, there is nothing to admire.  Fraudsters are vile people, and Cecelia and Herb and their chums should be behind bars.


Offline datwabbit

I was going to suggest you had misinterpreted the data but there's no way that Seeking would be so low compared to SB.

Have you identified anything solid linking SB to the site? Like a name or reference.

Offline Vice Admiral

Have you identified anything solid linking SB to the site? Like a name or reference.

Whatever else the crooks who run Secret Benefits may be, they're not stupid – and leaving any "direct" fingerprint establishing a link between SB and External Link/Members Only would be very stupid indeed.

Anyone spending a few minutes on Sugar Daddy Websites will, however, find a number of "indirect" fingerprints.  Here's the most obvious, to be getting along with.

On the right of each page on the website, prominently displayed, is the table of “Top Sites for Sugar Dating” – which features just five sites, as follows:

Top Sites for Sugar Dating
1. Secret Benefits
2. Sugar Daddy
3. Ashley Madison
4. Cougar Pour Moi
5. Cougar Life

Then there is the tab for “Sugar Rankings”, which has nine categories.  When you click on each category, you just see the top three to begin with.  Here they are for each category:

Top-15 Legit Sugar Daddy Apps In 2023
1. Secret Benefits
2. Sugar Daddy
3. Ashley Madison

Best Sugar Daddy Sites in Canada
1. Secret Benefits
2. Sugar Daddy
3. Ashley Madison

Best Sugar Daddy Sites In UK
1. Secret Benefits
2. Sugar Daddy
3. Ashley Madison

Best Sugar Daddy Apps in UK
1. Secret Benefits
2. Sugar Daddy
3. Ashley Madison

Best Sugar Baby Sites
1. Secret Benefits
2. Sugar Daddy
3. Ashley Madison

Best Sugar Baby Apps
1. Secret Benefits
2. Sugar Daddy
3. Ashley Madison

Best Sugar Baby Sites Without Meeting
1. Secret Benefits
2. Sugar Daddy
3. Ashley Madison

Best Male Sugar Baby Apps
1. Cougar Life
2. Secret Benefits
3. Cougar Pour Moi

Best Sugar Momma Sites
1. Cougar Life
2. Secret Benefits
3. Cougar Pour Moi

On reflection, perhaps the Secret Benefits people aren’t as bright as all that – since it would look a little more convincing if Secret Benefits did not constantly sweep the board.

Also Seeking, the market leader, does not appear in any of the rankings lists (which each consist of between 10 and 17 Sugar Daddy sites).

Odd that…


« Last Edit: May 13, 2023, 08:30:15 am by Vice Admiral »