frankie_27 - Touring Cambridge

[Magellan]

frankie_27 External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

Introduction
Frankie is a rather expensive English escort charging £200 per hour. And this is her fee as an independent escort. She can also be found on External Link/Members Only for £150 more. The first question that perhaps springs to everyone’s mind right now is ‘is she really worth £200 or even £350 for an hour?’ I will talk about this at the end of the review but first it will only be fair to describe Frankie’s various attributes without considering her high booking fee.

Location --- 8.5/10
+ Fairly luxurious 4 star hotel in Central Cambridge.
+ Big hotel hence discreet and also easy to access as you don't need a card for the lifts.
+ The room was fairly comfortable and tidy.
+ Modern and clean bathroom.
+ Clean towels and men’s toiletries available.

Comms --- 7/10
Not the best comms but OK enough. Seems she cannot answer her phone on regular times so communication is done mostly by texts. I did talk to her though the night prior to our meeting. I confirmed the booking on the day and I received the hotel name. About 30 minutes before the start of the booking she texted me again to ensure that I was really going to turn up. Once I arrived at her hotel she texted me her room number. The booking started on time.

Side note --- She appears to work only when the green light 'Available Today' is on. On the other days she offers outcalls. She might agree to meet you for an incall as well but most chances are to leave it somewhat in limbo and cancel a few hours prior to the booking. I speak from first hand experience but as enough notice was given I didn't mind. Also her working times are usually 1pm to 9pm. She says she rarely chooses to stay in whichever hotel she works from, after 9pm despite paying for the whole night. She uses the hotel room from when she checks in until 9 or 10 pm (last booking ending at 11pm at the very latest) unless she has a request for an overnight. Her overnight by the way on agencies costs £2500 but she might agree for a lower rate as independent provided she has met you once before.

Physical --- Looks: 8.5/10, Body: 8.5/10
+ Facially beautiful. She does have a glamour model look and she is nicely presented with full-on makeup. Pictures are photoshopped and blurred but they are hers. In some ways prettier from what you can make out from her pics and in some ways inferior. I think External Link/Members Only one resembles her the most. She has those External Link/Members Only and her hair looked like that when I met her.

+ Sexy curvaceous body. Body-wise she has plenty in common with glamour model External Link/Members Only. Similar dress size (both are size 10), similar height (both around 5 feet 7 inches tall), similar body shape (full hourglass), similar bust size (Frankie’s is 34FF Vs Charley’s is 34GG). I believe that if you like Charley’s body you will probably like Frankie’s too. 

+ Great 34FF boobs. They are enhanced, a little saggy and starting from a slightly lower position than what I would consider ideal but still they feel quite like natural ones and though saying that they are a bit saggy is not untrue they still look great. Look a bit similar to External Link/Members Only (Frankie's are actually a bit better).

≡ She advertises as being 26 however she is around 31. Don't get me wrong though. She is pretty youthful and way better looking than most girls in their early 20s. Charley Atwell I mentioned above is 30 and though Frankie is not quite as pretty as her they are about on par in terms of youthfulness. However despite stating the obvious Frankie now is inferior compared to herself 7-8 years ago. It is only not a problem because when you are very beautiful in your early 20s you will still look beautiful and youthful in your early 30s. Heck, there are supermodels who still look great in their late 30s and early 40s. Of course 15 years earlier they looked even better. Anyway I digress. I just mentioned the age discrepancy because simply 26 is a blatant lie, not because it actually mattered or bothered me. Even her agency profile says she is 29 and her very Adultwork name Frankie_27 which dates back to 2014 suggests that back then she wanted to advertise as being 27 so she would be 28 by now (but instead she got 26!)

≡ She is 1-1.5 dress size larger than her pictures. In the pictures she is a toned dress size 8 but currently she is a size 10 pushing towards 12 and certainly not a gym bunny. One of her feedbacks on Adutlwork suggests that she resembles pornstar External Link/Members Only. She does not resemble Lisa Ann facially (well except from being brunette) but Frankie is slightly prettier than Lisa Ann in my opinion anyway. Body-wise they do have similar skin (olive skin) and tan and they do have similar sized boobs too, however Lisa Ann has a slimmer body (size 6-8) and her boobs have better shape, are firmer and generally more appealing. Lisa Ann has the body that Frankie would possess had she eaten fewer pies, burgers and fries. But I guess I am rather overly critical here with Frankie. As I said earlier her body is very sexy and if you like Charley Atwell's fuller curvaceous figure then Frankie is a great option. 

≡ Has a small tattoo on her pubic area. Discreet, no problem.


Experience --- 7.5/10
Events' time placement --- This booking started at (say) 5pm. After the formalities I took a shower (mandatory). Sexual action commenced at about 5:08pm and ended at around 5:45pm. Then I had another shower, I dressed up meanwhile having a chat with Frankie. Booking overrun by 3-4 minutes (chat). Left with a kiss and her entering the bathroom to have a shower for the next client.

+ Nice girl in general with a friendly personality. She is welcoming and polite.
+ Very good OWO. Excellent technique and she sucks your cock tirelessly and with a lot of enthusiasm.
+ Nice ball-sucking and ball-licking.
+ Seemed to enjoy reverse oral.
+ Fingering allowed (2 fingers as well). She did get quite wet.
+ Sex was OK enough. Standard positions.
+ COB. After a good tit wank I wanked my way to the end and with her kneeling on the floor (her choice) talking dirty I sprayed my load over her big tits.
+ Good handjob.
+ No clockwatching (as to not kicking you out). Booking overrun by about 3-4 minutes. That said it was conversation. The sexual part of the session had been over since the 45th minute. Also bear in mind there were two showers. One at the beginning and one at the end.
+ She was wearing a sexy black camisole.   
+ Excellent personal hygiene. She was freshly showered and when I left she was entering the bathroom to take a shower herself.

≡ Good kissing. It was fairly sensual open-mouth puckers. Nice, frequent and quite intimate. However there was no tongue involvement. So no true FK/DFK.

≡ No CIM or facials. Not advertised anyway. Worth mentioning that she does offer facials if you are her last client of the day. Reason for not offering the service prior to that is to not have to redo all her make-up.

≡ The interaction with her in person lacked spontaneity. You could certainly feel that at some moments the interaction was rather prescribed and contrived. Not particularly negative but that is not what I would class as 'clicking' with a WG and experiencing a GFE level of connection or intimacy. Also you could feel that you were just another client which though true you shouldn't be able to feel it during the punt.

≡ I found her being somewhat manipulative. Although there was no explicit rushing to cum she was cleverly but clearly pressing for it. Like keep asking 'where I want to cum' or that 'it was time to cum on her boobs'.  And prior to that, during sex after a while some of her actions and reactions made me feel the pressure to get the sexual action over soon. Like the somewhat depressed exhaling while been asked to change positions or some incredulous remarks 'You are a very naughty boy!' when asked to get into 69. The only thing that saved it a bit was that she was quite happy giving blowjob and handjob. Of course to encourage speedier ejaculation but still felt nice.

x After coming back from the shower during the end of the booking, while I was dressing up to leave, she kept using her phone, answering texts. She was conversing with me at the same time but I am paying to have her full attention. That was at around 5:50-5:55pm. And though the booking ultimately ended at 6:04pm, the overrun was basically 3-4 more minutes of half-arsed conversation.

x Refused a few basic sex positions like doggy. Which is a shame as it would be a great view to shag her while looking at her big peachy bottom. She did cite a reason (she had put a contraception coil and as such she could not do some positions at the time) but my general impression is that she is lazy when it comes to sex. Not that she can't take serious hammering. She can! But she prefers lazy for her positions where she just lays back. Even during cowgirl it was me who was doing all the work. Didn't quite bother me but it is very evident that she is not quite keen to tire herself during vaginal sex. No surprise here though, as if she was doing proper cowgirl workout 4 times everyday she would be a fit size 8 instead of 10 pushing towards 12.

Final Words
Overall a satisfactory enough punt. I guess though when you pay £200 for an hour, satisfactory is not good enough. You want to have a brilliant one which will leave you saying 'expensive but worth every penny'. I cannot say that for my punt with Frankie. I strongly considered marking this review a neutral but ultimately I felt it would be too harsh to do so. It is also Christmas period so better give a very soft positive than a harsh neutral. Anyway I feel there were enough good points to justify a positive rating despite the somewhat underwhelming experience. After all, some of the non-positive points I elaborated upon are minor things that only an experienced punter would be able to spot. And most chances are that most of her perspective clients are newbies who have no VFM and/or top punt reference frames.

I believe that if you go by the crap British hookers' market alone then Frankie's price on Adultwork is not that bad. She is certainly way more attractive than the vast majority of British escorts on Adultwork (some of them daring to charge £150 per hour while looking rough as shit or being obese size 16+). Apart from her good looks Frankie also works from expensive locations and service is decent enough. All in all I would have no qualms about recommending her if she was priced up to £150 per hour but the lack of tongue during French kissing, the laziness during vaginal sex, the slightly manipulative behaviour, the somewhat contrived interaction and the lack of GFE type of 'clicking' make me very hesitant to recommend her for any higher prices. If she can up her game then she can surely justify £200 per hour. But that is a very huge if and rather wishful thinking. Also if service is not your primary concern but it is just looks you are after instead, then you can find for less a number of EE girls that rival or even best Frankie's looks.

I am not sure whether I will visit her again. Probably I will. Not rushing back though.

Hidden Image/Members Only

[Magellan]

Just a clarification for those interested to meet this girl and might be a little confused after reading her UKP reviews.

I would say the description of her (in her other review here) is pretty much spot on. Although there is no saggy tits so I don't get that nor was she size 10 at all!! So either that was a mistake or she has lost weight since then.

I don’t want to have a dig at Rock123 but this is an example showing once again that most punters’ knowledge about women’s dress sizes is limited and what these numbers actually represent is often misinterpreted.

First, no, there is no mistake in my review about Frankie’s dress size nor has she lost weight since then. Even External Link/Members Only says she is size 10 and Rock123 seems to agree that Frankie at the moment is larger than her photos by at least one dress size so since in External Link/Members Only she appears as a size 8 it follows she is at least size 10. And if you examine Frankie’s profile pictures more closely you can clearly see the effects of size retouching anyway. In the External Link/Members Only her legs were trimmed only above the knees, something that made her thighs about the same thickness as her lower legs (her lower legs were left at their original size). Furthermore Rock123 seems to agree that Frankie’s figure is like that of Charley Atwell’s and according to External Link/Members Only her dress size is 10-12.

Her tits are a little saggy. Being saggy is an intrinsic issue of big natural tits and her tits though enhanced are natural-looking/feeling. It is impossible to find natural tits that are that big and aren’t saggy at all. Also due to their size and weight, the starting line of such big boobs recesses more and more below the armpits’ line over time. Frankie’s boobs at the moment start at about an inch or two below that line. Anyway in the review I gave an example of what sort of tits to expect. As I commented they are great-looking tits regardless.

Despite the pedantic physical description my main criticism is not about her appearance but her service. Though her service is decent enough to earn a soft positive and even a future revisit (in a punting desert like Cambridge), there is a number of less-than-positive points that after being added up keep me from wholeheartedly recommending her for the premium rate of £200 per hour. I do though recommend her for an hourly rate of £150, so as long as you don’t care about a £50 'surcharge' then by all means book her.

[Rock123]

She seemed to me  size 8 or 9 although I am not saying I am a master of the subject of sizes, far from it. Perhaps I have a perception of size 10 being bigger than that...if she is size 10.

Indeed in this desert of Cambridge finding an english working girl of good repute is few and far between, so paying that extra £50 (if in your mind £150 p/h is the limit) is perhaps on occasion worth it.

[Watts.E.Dunn]

!dress size so since in her photoshopped profile pictures she appears as a size 8"

Well well wonder where that was taken?, there's a Revox tape recorder in the background!, excellent machine for sound but not perhaps sex;!.

I must get out more, I know;-(

[Magellan]

Indeed in this desert of Cambridge finding an english working girl of good repute is few and far between, so paying that extra £50 (if in your mind £150 p/h is the limit) is perhaps on occasion worth it.

I see that you tend to only go for British WGs. As I said in my review if you compare Frankie only with British WGs then she is fairly priced as most British prostitutes are both crap and overpriced. I agree that paying £200 and even £300 per hour is on occasion worth it and I was really hoping Frankie to turn out to be that occasion. But she wasn’t quite. You see, unlike you, I compare her against the entire market and not just the other British WGs. And my conclusion is that £150 is the upper limit I can wholeheartedly recommend Frankie and that anything more you spend on her is a ‘surcharge’. Probably worth paying the 'surcharge' in a punting desert like Cambridge but not in the UK in general (and this girl is in Birmingham now). If Frankie were to start offering tongue kissing, putting more effort during sex, offering the doggy position and generally rectyfying most non-positive points I mentioned in my review then (depending on the amendments) I would recommend her for a higher hourly rate.

[Diehard]

frankie_27 External Link/Members Only or External Link/Members Only

Introduction
Frankie is a rather expensive English escort charging £200 per hour. And this is her fee as an independent escort. She can also be found on External Link/Members Only for £150 more. The first question that perhaps springs to everyone’s mind right now is ‘is she really worth £200 or even £350 for an hour?’ I will talk about this at the end of the review but first it will only be fair to describe Frankie’s various attributes without considering her high booking fee.

Location --- 8.5/10
+ Fairly luxurious 4 star hotel in Central Cambridge.
+ Big hotel hence discreet and also easy to access as you don't need a card for the lifts.
+ The room was fairly comfortable and tidy.
+ Modern and clean bathroom.
+ Clean towels and men’s toiletries available.

Comms --- 7/10
Not the best comms but OK enough. Seems she cannot answer her phone on regular times so communication is done mostly by texts. I did talk to her though the night prior to our meeting. I confirmed the booking on the day and I received the hotel name. About 30 minutes before the start of the booking she texted me again to ensure that I was really going to turn up. Once I arrived at her hotel she texted me her room number. The booking started on time.

Side note --- She appears to work only when the green light 'Available Today' is on. On the other days she offers outcalls. She might agree to meet you for an incall as well but most chances are to leave it somewhat in limbo and cancel a few hours prior to the booking. I speak from first hand experience but as enough notice was given I didn't mind. Also her working times are usually 1pm to 9pm. She says she rarely chooses to stay in whichever hotel she works from, after 9pm despite paying for the whole night. She uses the hotel room from when she checks in until 9 or 10 pm (last booking ending at 11pm at the very latest) unless she has a request for an overnight. Her overnight by the way on agencies costs £2500 but she might agree for a lower rate as independent provided she has met you once before.

Physical --- Looks: 8.5/10, Body: 8.5/10
+ Facially beautiful. She does have a glamour model look and she is nicely presented with full-on makeup. Pictures are photoshopped and blurred but they are hers. In some ways prettier from what you can make out from her pics and in some ways inferior. I think External Link/Members Only one resembles her the most. She has those External Link/Members Only and her hair looked like that when I met her.

+ Sexy curvaceous body. Body-wise she has plenty in common with glamour model External Link/Members Only. Similar dress size (both are size 10), similar height (both around 5 feet 7 inches tall), similar body shape (full hourglass), similar bust size (Frankie’s is 34FF Vs Charley’s is 34GG). I believe that if you like Charley’s body you will probably like Frankie’s too. 

+ Great 34FF boobs. They are enhanced, a little saggy and starting from a slightly lower position than what I would consider ideal but still they feel quite like natural ones and though saying that they are a bit saggy is not untrue they still look great. Look a bit similar to External Link/Members Only (Frankie's are actually a bit better).

≡ She advertises as being 26 however she is around 31. Don't get me wrong though. She is pretty youthful and way better looking than most girls in their early 20s. Charley Atwell I mentioned above is 30 and though Frankie is not quite as pretty as her they are about on par in terms of youthfulness. However despite stating the obvious Frankie now is inferior compared to herself 7-8 years ago. It is only not a problem because when you are very beautiful in your early 20s you will still look beautiful and youthful in your early 30s. Heck, there are supermodels who still look great in their late 30s and early 40s. Of course 15 years earlier they looked even better. Anyway I digress. I just mentioned the age discrepancy because simply 26 is a blatant lie, not because it actually mattered or bothered me. Even her agency profile says she is 29 and her very Adultwork name Frankie_27 which dates back to 2014 suggests that back then she wanted to advertise as being 27 so she would be 28 by now (but instead she got 26!)

≡ She is 1-1.5 dress size larger than her pictures. In the pictures she is a toned dress size 8 but currently she is a size 10 pushing towards 12 and certainly not a gym bunny. One of her feedbacks on Adutlwork suggests that she resembles pornstar External Link/Members Only. She does not resemble Lisa Ann facially (well except from being brunette) but Frankie is slightly prettier than Lisa Ann in my opinion anyway. Body-wise they do have similar skin (olive skin) and tan and they do have similar sized boobs too, however Lisa Ann has a slimmer body (size 6-8) and her boobs have better shape, are firmer and generally more appealing. Lisa Ann has the body that Frankie would possess had she eaten fewer pies, burgers and fries. But I guess I am rather overly critical here with Frankie. As I said earlier her body is very sexy and if you like Charley Atwell's fuller curvaceous figure then Frankie is a great option. 

≡ Has a small tattoo on her pubic area. Discreet, no problem.


Experience --- 7.5/10
Events' time placement --- This booking started at (say) 5pm. After the formalities I took a shower (mandatory). Sexual action commenced at about 5:08pm and ended at around 5:45pm. Then I had another shower, I dressed up meanwhile having a chat with Frankie. Booking overrun by 3-4 minutes (chat). Left with a kiss and her entering the bathroom to have a shower for the next client.

+ Nice girl in general with a friendly personality. She is welcoming and polite.
+ Very good OWO. Excellent technique and she sucks your cock tirelessly and with a lot of enthusiasm.
+ Nice ball-sucking and ball-licking.
+ Seemed to enjoy reverse oral.
+ Fingering allowed (2 fingers as well). She did get quite wet.
+ Sex was OK enough. Standard positions.
+ COB. After a good tit wank I wanked my way to the end and with her kneeling on the floor (her choice) talking dirty I sprayed my load over her big tits.
+ Good handjob.
+ No clockwatching (as to not kicking you out). Booking overrun by about 3-4 minutes. That said it was conversation. The sexual part of the session had been over since the 45th minute. Also bear in mind there were two showers. One at the beginning and one at the end.
+ She was wearing a sexy black camisole.   
+ Excellent personal hygiene. She was freshly showered and when I left she was entering the bathroom to take a shower herself.

≡ Good kissing. It was fairly sensual open-mouth puckers. Nice, frequent and quite intimate. However there was no tongue involvement. So no true FK/DFK.

≡ No CIM or facials. Not advertised anyway. Worth mentioning that she does offer facials if you are her last client of the day. Reason for not offering the service prior to that is to not have to redo all her make-up.

≡ The interaction with her in person lacked spontaneity. You could certainly feel that at some moments the interaction was rather prescribed and contrived. Not particularly negative but that is not what I would class as 'clicking' with a WG and experiencing a GFE level of connection or intimacy. Also you could feel that you were just another client which though true you shouldn't be able to feel it during the punt.

≡ I found her being somewhat manipulative. Although there was no explicit rushing to cum she was cleverly but clearly pressing for it. Like keep asking 'where I want to cum' or that 'it was time to cum on her boobs'.  And prior to that, during sex after a while some of her actions and reactions made me feel the pressure to get the sexual action over soon. Like the somewhat depressed exhaling while been asked to change positions or some incredulous remarks 'You are a very naughty boy!' when asked to get into 69. The only thing that saved it a bit was that she was quite happy giving blowjob and handjob. Of course to encourage speedier ejaculation but still felt nice.

x After coming back from the shower during the end of the booking, while I was dressing up to leave, she kept using her phone, answering texts. She was conversing with me at the same time but I am paying to have her full attention. That was at around 5:50-5:55pm. And though the booking ultimately ended at 6:04pm, the overrun was basically 3-4 more minutes of half-arsed conversation.

x Refused a few basic sex positions like doggy. Which is a shame as it would be a great view to shag her while looking at her big peachy bottom. She did cite a reason (she had put a contraception coil and as such she could not do some positions at the time) but my general impression is that she is lazy when it comes to sex. Not that she can't take serious hammering. She can! But she prefers lazy for her positions where she just lays back. Even during cowgirl it was me who was doing all the work. Didn't quite bother me but it is very evident that she is not quite keen to tire herself during vaginal sex. No surprise here though, as if she was doing proper cowgirl workout 4 times everyday she would be a fit size 8 instead of 10 pushing towards 12.

Final Words
Overall a satisfactory enough punt. I guess though when you pay £200 for an hour, satisfactory is not good enough. You want to have a brilliant one which will leave you saying 'expensive but worth every penny'. I cannot say that for my punt with Frankie. I strongly considered marking this review a neutral but ultimately I felt it would be too harsh to do so. It is also Christmas period so better give a very soft positive than a harsh neutral. Anyway I feel there were enough good points to justify a positive rating despite the somewhat underwhelming experience. After all, some of the non-positive points I elaborated upon are minor things that only an experienced punter would be able to spot. And most chances are that most of her perspective clients are newbies who have no VFM and/or top punt reference frames.

I believe that if you go by the crap British hookers' market alone then Frankie's price on Adultwork is not that bad. She is certainly way more attractive than the vast majority of British escorts on Adultwork (some of them daring to charge £150 per hour while looking rough as shit or being obese size 16+). Apart from her good looks Frankie also works from expensive locations and service is decent enough. All in all I would have no qualms about recommending her if she was priced up to £150 per hour but the lack of tongue during French kissing, the laziness during vaginal sex, the slightly manipulative behaviour, the somewhat contrived interaction and the lack of GFE type of 'clicking' make me very hesitant to recommend her for any higher prices. If she can up her game then she can surely justify £200 per hour. But that is a very huge if and rather wishful thinking. Also if service is not your primary concern but it is just looks you are after instead, then you can find for less a number of EE girls that rival or even best Frankie's looks.

I am not sure whether I will visit her again. Probably I will. Not rushing back though.

Hidden Image/Members Only

How this isn't a negative review is beyond me! For what she offers she is grossly overpriced and is not as described in her pictures which is an automatic negative.

Another one off the hotlist.

[oohermrs]

Magellan - I think you're being a bit generous here.  When you pay that sort of money, you really do expect an amazing time - way beyond the standard £120-£130ph fare.

At best, I'd say this was a neutral...

Having said that, a useful review - thanks mate.

[Badvicar]

Hold tight a second, as I was never the brightest. You gave her a "soft positive" after what reads like a sub par punt for £200, because it was Christmas and Cambridge is a bit shit? But it would be ok if you paid £150 with a £50 "surcharge"? So you pretend to give her £150 but really give her....£200 still for a poor punt. Or do you give Cambridge the £50 to help it feel better for being a bit shit?

Baffling.

[Corsaire]

Hold tight a second, as I was never the brightest. You gave her a "soft positive" after what reads like a sub par punt for £200, because it was Christmas and Cambridge is a bit shit? But it would be ok if you paid £150 with a £50 "surcharge"? So you pretend to give her £150 but really give her....£200 still for a poor punt. Or do you give Cambridge the £50 to help it feel better for being a bit shit?

Baffling.

So I had a laugh, then suddenly realised that there is nothing funny about this at all!
I wonder, If he had paid £100 would he have still given a neutral report? I think he would. That being so are we now seeing a split between quality of service and value for money. For example here SERVICE : Neutral, VFM : overpriced. Indeed, apart from her looks which are misrepresented as she is weightier, £100 isn't quite VFM is it? This reviewing lark could be complicated if we let it be!

[Magellan]

It seems that a few members on here instead of appreciating the actual information provided inside reviews, love commenting about how justifiable the overall rating is. It’s like a hobby of theirs probably. Well listen pundits, things are simple. If something you read in this review put you off from booking this hooker then simply don’t book her. But remember this is my review, and I am entitled to give whatever rating I wish and base this rating on whatever logic I want.

How this sn't a negative review is beyond me! For what she offers she is grossly overpriced and is not as described in her pictures which is an automatic negative.

First buddy, you didn't need to quote the entire review. It takes up a lot of space! I would also like to thank you for your reviews. This one in particular for a girl charging £180 per hour is a masterpiece. I guess such reviews are much more helpful than mine.

Another one off the hotlist.

Glad I helped you in your decision. I didn't have such help when I made mine.

Hold tight a second, as I was never the brightest. You gave her a "soft positive" after what reads like a sub par punt for £200, because it was Christmas and Cambridge is a bit shit? But it would be ok if you paid £150 with a £50 "surcharge"? So you pretend to give her £150 but really give her....£200 still for a poor punt. Or do you give Cambridge the £50 to help it feel better for being a bit shit?Baffling.

And apparently you will remain very far from ever being the brightest. I never said this was poor punt for me. I said was that it was a satisfactory punt worth in my opinion £150. As I paid £200 it means it was £50 overpriced. You know for me there are punts that are complete waste of money. Like for example punting a minger for £340 like you did. As for my logic it's like this. In absolute terms this experience was worth 75% of what it cost me. But a difference of 25% is not, for me, big enough to rate this review a negative. And though it is more than enough to rate it a neutral I chose to give a positive due to the festive period and my generous mood at the time. Which was a reference to the contrast to my previous reviews at the time too. Also the fact that Cambridge is a punting desert and that Frankie is a beautiful British girl means that in relative terms it is not that bad value. It is like buying water in Sahara. Of course if you don't like my logic, tough luck.

So I had a laugh, then suddenly realised that there is nothing funny about this at all!
I wonder, If he had paid £100 would he have still given a neutral report? I think he would. That being so are we now seeing a split between quality of service and value for money. For example here SERVICE : Neutral, VFM : overpriced. Indeed, apart from her looks which are misrepresented as she is weightier, £100 isn't quite VFM is it? This reviewing lark could be complicated if we let it be!

Could you please explain why you are so worried about general ratings? You do realise how meaningless they are, don't you? For example you posted a positive review that to me reads at best like neutral but you decided to give a positive for the 'honesty and niceness of the people, even though you didn't have a service'. Whatever, your call. But that was not of any substance anyway. What is important is what is inside the review. As long as its content is critical and helpful then the review serves its purpose, irrespective of the rating. As for your question whether I would have given Frankie a positive if the cost was £100 per hour. That is a no brainer. Of course yes. That would be half price.

[Corsaire]

I actually said that I thought you would give a NEUTRAL report for £100.
You are obviously getting in a state now so I'm saying no more.

[madeinwales56]

I think I'll wait for the summary to be published. The review probably took longer to write than the punt.

[Diehard]

It seems that a few members on here instead of appreciating the actual information provided inside reviews, love commenting about how justifiable the overall rating is. It’s like a hobby of theirs probably. Well listen pundits, things are simple. If something you read in this review put you off from booking this hooker then simply don’t book her. But remember this is my review, and I am entitled to give whatever rating I wish and base this rating on whatever logic I want.
 First buddy, you didn't need to quote the entire review. It takes up a lot of space! I would also like to thank you for your reviews. This one in particular for a girl charging £180 per hour is a masterpiece. I guess such reviews are much more helpful than mine.
Glad I helped you in your decision. I didn't have such help when I made mine.
And apparently you will remain very far from ever being the brightest. I never said this was poor punt for me. I said was that it was a satisfactory punt worth in my opinion £150. As I paid £200 it means it was £50 overpriced. You know for me there are punts that are complete waste of money. Like for example punting a minger for £340 like you did. As for my logic it's like this. In absolute terms this experience was worth 75% of what it cost me. But a difference of 25% is not, for me, big enough to rate this review a negative. And though it is more than enough to rate it a neutral I chose to give a positive due to the festive period and my generous mood at the time. Which was a reference to the contrast to my previous reviews at the time too. Also the fact that Cambridge is a punting desert and that Frankie is a beautiful British girl means that in relative terms it is not that bad value. It is like buying water in Sahara. Of course if you don't like my logic, tough luck.
 Could you please explain why you are so worried about general ratings? You do realise how meaningless they are, don't you? For example you posted a positive review that to me reads at best like neutral but you decided to give a positive for the 'honesty and niceness of the people, even though you didn't have a service'. Whatever, your call. But that was not of any substance anyway. What is important is what is inside the review. As long as its content is critical and helpful then the review serves its purpose, irrespective of the rating. As for your question whether I would have given Frankie a positive if the cost was £100 per hour. That is a no brainer. Of course yes. That would be half price.

Luciebabe was excellent, but you left it too late bud she seems to have retired.