40% to the agency !!

[stanleyjohn]

External Link/Members Only

Exactly why I hate using agencies-40% of the money goes to the agency , wrong just plain wrong.

[Gothic D]

They don't all take as much as that.I believe Amour take 30% which I still think is quite a bit,not sure what the others take.

[yorkshire123]

External Link/Members Only

Exactly why I hate using agencies-40% of the money goes to the agency , wrong just plain wrong.

May I ask why?
Ignoring trafficked slave girls why would it bother you how the money was distributed? Prossies have the choice to go indie & have full control if they wish, many prefer to leave the accommodation & booking process/cost for others to deal with, all of which comes at a price.

[stanleyjohn]

I do not use agencies and believe that it is wrong they get such a high percentage because I believe the WG should get the money, not the 'pimp'. My preference and my choice and as can be seen by the news article they make a very good living off the WG's until plod takes an interest.

[Gothic D]

I do not use agencies and believe that it is wrong they get such a high percentage because I believe the WG should get the money, not the 'pimp'. My preference and my choice and as can be seen by the news article they make a very good living off the WG's until plod takes an interest.

While I also think the agencies cut is a bit steep many of the girls prefer it that way as it does take a lot of pressure off them.
I was recently talking to a WG who has just branched out into independancy and she herself said that she didn't realise how much work and time was involved in managing things.
The constant emails and questions that needed answering,following up on emails,the strange requests and various other things.Many of these never lead to any bookings at all so it's all time wasted.
With an agency they take care of all that and all the girl has to do is be ready at a certain time or be at a certain place.

[stanleyjohn]

Goth fully understand that and as I say it is just my preference. Some of the indies I have met have been so disorganised it was untrue and I know that they get timewasters etc ..I just prefer that the WG gets the money.
The only time I tried to use an agency was a complete disaster and I cancelled the booking when I saw the location and a police car sitting 10 yards from the front door. But again I know from here that a lot of punters rely on agencies and 'trust' them more than indies, good job we all have different preferences.
One thing I do find strange is that with some WG's who do both it can be cheaper to see them via the agency, strange. 

[AnthG]

Exactly why I hate using agencies-40% of the money goes to the agency , wrong just plain wrong.

What I have been told by multiple girls at Diamonds is 33.33% (i.e. a 1/3rd) if they use their own property. And 50% if the girl uses one of Diamonds flats.

The thing that annoys me about this is, which is one of my annoyances I constantly say, is that if a girl is prepared to work for £50 an hour via the agency, why is it she wants £120 when she enters Adutlwork as an independent.

[foreverchanges]

Its not just in the North East of course..In the Edinburgh Saunas if you were booking a girl for an hour you would pay the desk £30 and the girl £70.

It doesnt end there because at Blair Street and New Town the girls then pay the desk another £10 while at London Street the girls keep the full amount BUT have already paid the desk upfront a £50 "shift allowance"....all well and good back in the glory days of the past but nowadays..well as the saying goes, " Do the math!".

And yet ....a lot of girls still prefer it to Indie work..the main thing being the safety aspect.

[Sunil_N]

So was Gina the rude woman on phone who call herself as danni?

[stanleyjohn]

Sunil, what are you asking ?

[AnthG]

Sunil, what are you asking ?

It took me a few reads to understand too.

For ENE the lady who managed the phones for them was very abrupt is probably the polite way to describe her. She was called Dani. He was asking was Gina the same person as Dani.

[foreverchanges]

It took me a few reads to understand too.

For ENE the lady who managed the phones for them was very abrupt is probably the polite way to describe her. She was called Dani. He was asking was Gina the same person as Dani.

Very abrupt is possibly the understatement of the year Anth

[Sunil_N]

It took me a few reads to understand too.

For ENE the lady who managed the phones for them was very abrupt is probably the polite way to describe her. She was called Dani. He was asking was Gina the same person as Dani.

Above is exactly what I wanted to ask

[daviemac]

External Link/Members Only

Exactly why I hate using agencies-40% of the money goes to the agency , wrong just plain wrong.

Agents are a fact of life, not just in prostitution, footballers, word famous actors / actresses, groups, singers, even local pub and club singers all pay agents to look after their interests and it's all commission based. And don't forget the estate agents!!   

[Jamessn]

The girls paid 25% commission and the £10 for use of the flat

So from £120 incall they paid £30 + £10 = £40 which is 33.33333%

On an outcall they paid £30 which is 25%, they had the same rates for in and out calls, none of this stupid £20-£50 extra for an outcall.

How do I know this? I was friendly with one of the girls there a few years ago and she told me how it all worked when she had had a few.

Dani was the rude one on the phone, Gina didn't do the phones. 

They always had multiple girls working out of the flats, so Diamonds and NNE should take note maybe.

[greychap]

In a normal situation I don't think 30% is a fee too high for agencies to take there a business at the end of the day, but with what the escorts are doing for it and at a low starting price of £50 for amour and diamonds it shows to me it is all about as many punters as possible for these agencies.

A girl that has to pay 30% to 50% to work at these type of places it shows that the fees are very low and the only benefit is the agencies doing loads of bookings as they have loads of girls on the books and the punter that still get it cheap. You expect an independent escort to charge £50 for half an hour not an agency it shows there greedy by trying to get as many bookings as possible where the girls working there are only getting a small amount for what they are doing.

I have no idea why most are not independent if some are only clearing £25 after a punter.

Its always the busy cheaper agencies that earn the most that seem to be the most greedy in my opinion.

[greychap]

The girls paid 25% commission and the £10 for use of the flat

So from £120 incall they paid £30 + £10 = £40 which is 33.33333%

On an outcall they paid £30 which is 25%, they had the same rates for in and out calls, none of this stupid £20-£50 extra for an outcall.

How do I know this? I was friendly with one of the girls there a few years ago and she told me how it all worked when she had had a few.

Dani was the rude one on the phone, Gina didn't do the phones. 

They always had multiple girls working out of the flats, so Diamonds and NNE should take note maybe.

I think Diamonds and naughty northern escorts are doing exactly the same as this agency that has just been done and Amour in some way as they send punters to 2 girls working in flats knowing that as well, and as the owners are now facing prison and all there income taken from them with the proceeds of crime act they have got nothing out of running these type of operations.

As the police have had a result there will be nothing stopping them going after the others for the brothels especially Diamonds and naughty northern escorts they probably know they are busy have a lot of girls on the books too and its easy to take all there earnings.

I can see why some agencies want as many bookings as possible and want to take higher fees because they know its a risk for them facing prison and losing all there money and there cars and houses.

[greychap]

External Link/Members Only

Exactly why I hate using agencies-40% of the money goes to the agency , wrong just plain wrong.

The point is though considering these owners of the agency know by running the brothels it is illegal and they are taking big risks there not going to take 10 or 20% are they. They want it and need it to be worth while.

 Also if some of it was going through business bank accounts there would be tax to come out of it and possibly 20% vat on top payable from all fees put through and the cost of adverts marketing, costs of rent on the flats and bills so can see why they do it even though I don't always agree how its run.

[HappyandLucky]

Agency or parlour % doesn't bother me and is just a fact of punting. WG and water will find their right  level and how this gets shared is between the WG and Agency is down to them. If the WG wants more % then they can dump the agency, go indie and take on the management aspects.

[smiths]

External Link/Members Only

Exactly why I hate using agencies-40% of the money goes to the agency , wrong just plain wrong.

If a WG is working from her own free will its up to her if she agrees to hand 40% or whatever the agreed cut is to their pimp in my view.

What is pure greed are Agencies in my area, London who take the same cut as a parlour/brothel yet don't supply the WGs premises, I don't punt through them as I can find so called Indies cheaper.

[greychap]

Agency or parlour % doesn't bother me and is just a fact of punting. WG and water will find their right  level and how this gets shared is between the WG and Agency is down to them. If the WG wants more % then they can dump the agency, go indie and take on the management aspects.

Exactly! the choice is all the escorts, its so easy to be an independent with little over heads nobody has to work for an agency if they don't want to especially if the people behind it are horrible. There is always other options.

[smiths]

I do not use agencies and believe that it is wrong they get such a high percentage because I believe the WG should get the money, not the 'pimp'. My preference and my choice and as can be seen by the news article they make a very good living off the WG's until plod takes an interest.

In reality you cant know if ANY WG actually has a pimp or not, with an Agency you know they do of course so can avoid punting through them, but that's not to say a so called Indie you punt with doesn't give her pimp a cut.

[greychap]

In reality you cant know if ANY WG actually has a pimp or not, with an Agency you know they do of course so can avoid punting through them, but that's not to say a so called Indie you punt with doesn't give her pimp a cut.

Very true sometimes you think there independent but they have a boyfriend or pimp or both taking the money they earn.

[smiths]

The point is though considering these owners of the agency know by running the brothels it is illegal and they are taking big risks there not going to take 10 or 20% are they. They want it and need it to be worth while.

 Also if some of it was going through business bank accounts there would be tax to come out of it and possibly 20% vat on top payable from all fees put through and the cost of adverts marketing, costs of rent on the flats and bills so can see why they do it even though I don't always agree how its run.

As I have posted before these pimps are thick idiots as they have no need to run a brothel like a Parlour has to. They COULD tell the WGs they have to provide the premises themselves as happens with many Agencies in London, thus avoiding a possible conviction for running a brothel and only face controlling prostitutes for gain.

Although not difficult if the police choose to to target an Agency to gain enough evidence to raid and charge them its much easier and cheaper for the police to raid a brothel, and many police want easy nicks.

[smiths]

Very true sometimes you think there independent but they have a boyfriend or pimp or both taking the money they earn.

Indeed, and he or she COULD be taking all of their fees for all punters would know. All well and good making a stand not too punt through obvious pimps but it doesn't mean a punter wont with ANY other WG he punts with. Pimps have always been involved in prostitution and I imagine that will continue, them being illegal hasn't stopped many so far.

I take a pragmatic view myself, if the price is right it could be punt on whether I know the WG has a pimp or not. What she then does with my money I have no idea and its not my business. The only exception to that is if I thought a WG was being coerced/forced when I would ring Crimestoppers anonymously.

[greychap]

As I have posted before these pimps are thick idiots as they have no need to run a brothel like a Parlour has to. They COULD tell the WGs they have to provide the premises themselves as happens with many Agencies in London, thus avoiding a possible conviction for running a brothel and only face controlling prostitutes for gain.

Although not difficult if the police choose to to target an Agency to gain enough evidence to raid and charge them its much easier and cheaper for the police to raid a brothel, and many police want easy nicks.

Yes a lot of these people in this industry are thick idiots and running the brothels themselves and listing sexual services on there website is asking for trouble but the greed takes over.

[namaste]

Is that the Gina who used to work at north easts escorts? Always wanted to see her but never got round to it

[smiths]

What I have been told by multiple girls at Diamonds is 33.33% (i.e. a 1/3rd) if they use their own property. And 50% if the girl uses one of Diamonds flats.

The thing that annoys me about this is, which is one of my annoyances I constantly say, is that if a girl is prepared to work for £50 an hour via the agency, why is it she wants £120 when she enters Adutlwork as an independent.

Its called greed and what the WG thinks or perhaps knows she can charge and still get enough punters.

[Jamessn]

Yes Bigboobman it is Gina who worked there.

The argument from agencies has always been that the girls don't work for them and don't know what they do in private.

They like to think of themselves as an employment agency. If they were employment agencies they would have responsibilities for insurance and the safety of those they send on jobs. Plus they would have to keep records of all jobs to show the tax man.

So the law could go down on agencies from the employment agency acts and the tax angle.

Just like Al Capone was done for tax evasion not organised crime.

I won't use an agency flat, ever now.