Author Topic: Innocent Nicole - Cambridge - Metrics  (Read 4128 times)

Offline Currywurst

Disclaimer:
The below content is processing publicly available info, and not adding any personal opinions, nor intended to paint any picture. It's just data interpretation!
 
Motivator:
A few recent reviews steered my interest towards Innocent Nicole - Cambridge.
External Link/Members Only
 
What was surprising was the number of AW reviews accumulating in a very short period of time! What's more surprising is that on clicking through them, the reviewers seem genuine (the reviewers themselves have valid & multiple feedback from SP's).
 
So, did a tally of the max number of reviews showing (capped at 55), one thing led to another, and I ended up toying around with a model.
 
Sharing here in case it piques anyone else's fancy!
 
Probable:
1. Date of AW review publishing ≠ Date of meet. But close enough.
2. Extra promotions near end of phase, not sustainable routinely (?).
 
Inputs:    
2   Est meets for 1 genuine review posted
0.75   Avg meet duration [h]
120   Hour rate [£/h]
10   Working hours / day
50%   Cost of sales
 
Outputs:    
14   Period analysed [d]
55   AW Reviews in the period [N]
187   Maximum meets possible [N]
£9,900   Estimated receipts [£]
£4,950   Take home (after bills)
£9,900   Take home (after bills), extrapolated monthly
 
Other stuff:
Friday seems the busiest!
Weekends seem quiet!
Suggests 14 appointments in a single day (at peak) - could it really get that busy!
 

Hidden Image/Members Only

Offline life_wasted

haha this is going to be fun! I see what you mean about the age of the profile and the numbe rof reviews! if its true, wow  :yahoo:

Offline WAY-WARD

I said in an earlier post (26.1.26)....after only being registered on AW a few hours she already had a rating of 4.
All positives of course.

Offline mark.gent.552

She does actively ask for AW review after meeting is done (via WhatsApp).
This is rather rare - but I guess when SP asks for it, punters will do it. I think this in large part explains how she managed to accumulate a lot of feedback.
From chat I had with her she just came for two weeks "holiday" from her studies, so was working hard (no days off, 10am to 10pm).
Interesting statistics by the way.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2026, 09:34:24 pm by mark.gent.552 »

Offline WAY-WARD

Strange that she'd be interested in feedback if she's no intention of coming back.
Meanwhile Chloe StudentGirl has disappeared.

Offline mark.gent.552

Strange that she'd be interested in feedback if she's no intention of coming back.
Indeed. She has "no immediate plans", but I suspect she might come back at some point.

Offline funfungoodguy

for that kind of dough i would expect she will be back unless she has a remarkable alternative ready and waiting    :)

Offline Currywurst

Strange that she'd be interested in feedback if she's no intention of coming back.
Meanwhile Chloe StudentGirl has disappeared.

"Cambridge Polish Brothel PLC" though benefits from solid bullish rally with the kinds like "Innocent Nicole", "Hannah", etc. Juice out max testimonials from the best performers! Keeps the establishment afloat & keeps the circus going during periods of sub-par performers.

Offline HappyDays!

There'll always be huge demand for exceptional providers like Nicole. Plus the Polish place is clean with excellent facilties, easy to reach and free to park.

On a related note, does anyone know why the much missed Holly Love/Sexy Holly maintains a full profile despite having been OFF for a two years or so?

Offline canadianguy

There'll always be huge demand for exceptional providers like Nicole. Plus the Polish place is clean with excellent facilties, easy to reach and free to park.

On a related note, does anyone know why the much missed Holly Love/Sexy Holly maintains a full profile despite having been OFF for a two years or so?

I think she's the organiser of this place.  Maybe having a profile makes it easier to coordinate.  Somehow?

Offline HappyDays!

Yes, that's my best guess.

I keep hoping she might return but I suspect that's unlikely.