aussiecrocsss

Taking Regular To The Extreme...

39 posts in this topic

Question for the the girls: if you had a good customer and he was willing to pay you about what you make in a year to only be with him, and assuming you got on well anyway, would you? Assume you would see him 2-3 times a week, activites all on your normal 'likes'. As for civilian relationships, no limits, you can have a partner, date, just no paid dates.

interested to hear pro/cons, from both punter and punted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could it possibly make sense for a SP to commit herself exclusively to one man and neglect the rest of her client base? Think of the extra effort involved to rebuild it when he tires of the arrangement.

 

It strikes me as being an unlikely arrangement from the punter's point of view since, for many, variety seems an intrinsic element in the motivation to punt.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the girl's perspective, I think you are right as it does seem rather short-sighted, unless the financial arrangement would cover her enough to allow time to rebuild her career or, perhaps, she already realises this, wants out and has started a non-working girl job (there's nothing in the original post to suggest that she doesn't get a job of some kind).

 

From the punter's perspective, it's less easy to generalise as there are several different species, mainly (i) those that only ever see one girl, (ii) those that never see the same girl twice, or at least no more than 2 or 3 times and (iii) those that have a regular (or 2 or 3) but do see other girls as well.

 

Me, I'm definitely in the last category although I rarely see new girls these days - I know that some guys are thrilled by the prospect of seeing someone new but, for me, I prefer not to take the risk and only see a girl who I am absolutely certain will provide the quality service that I'm looking for and have grown to expect, every time.  :)

Edited by raylondoner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bewilder I agree that is a potential downside, the notion of losing other customers, occassional or or otherwise. However, many escorts are busy in a matter of moments of putting up an advert, particularly if with an agency. And if she was a great SP, most punters would be back quickly.

I was thinking the advantages would include safety, health, sense of financial stability, opportunity to date more freely (seems many escorts say working and dating are difficult if nigh impossible).

And what about all the cancelled appointments, timewasters, physically unpleasant customers, nosy neighbors...?

Disadvantages: boredom? I said though, dating/other relationship totally allowed in this scenario.

@Ray, agree w your 3 types of punters scenario, assuming more than 50% of punters like to switch a lot, this scenario would be a nightmare for them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been asked before on here .....................  

 

I would say a very large NO...... because I would probably be bored silly...... in short.... I get my kicks by the variety of men and variety of sex..... just like you guys look forward to  different faces and bodies and the hugely diverse conversations and humours.... plus the thrill of the unknown ............................ so do I.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question for the the girls: if you had a good customer and he was willing to pay you about what you make in a year to only be with him, and assuming you got on well anyway, would you? Assume you would see him 2-3 times a week, activites all on your normal 'likes'. As for civilian relationships, no limits, you can have a partner, date, just no paid dates.

interested to hear pro/cons, from both punter and punted.

What man is going to only want to see someone 2 or 3 times a week yet pay her what she usually earns in a year. That means he would be paying far far far over the odds that he would be paying if he just booked her 2 or 3 times a week. If someone really wanted to do this then yes...up front at the start of each month. If the payment wasnt received then I could take bookings for the following month rather than turn them down all month, shag the guy 2 or 3 times a week then no payment arrived.

 

I did have a guy who wanted to pay me 1000 a month in a lump sum for a certain number of meets per week. It would have worked out at slightly less per hour than if he made individual bookings. Interestingly when I told him that it would be payment up front then he went quiet. He had wanted to pay it at the end of every month but "he was totally trustworthy"  :lol: yeah right x

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like marriage under a different name

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question for the the girls: if you had a good customer and he was willing to pay you about what you make in a year to only be with him, and assuming you got on well anyway, would you? Assume you would see him 2-3 times a week, activites all on your normal 'likes'. As for civilian relationships, no limits, you can have a partner, date, just no paid dates.

interested to hear pro/cons, from both punter and punted.

It wouldnt be provable though the WG is sticking to the deal unless you had her under 24/7 survellience which of course is wholly wrong. It solely relies on the punter taking her word for it that she isnt punting with others, perhaps regulars so she dosnnt need to advertise which the punter might spot, or indeed have a similar deal with another punter for the days punter one isnt seeing her. Plus is the money to be paid PAYG or upfront, not a good idea to pay upfront as anything could happen obviously.

 

As for me being interested in such a deal, no way, i require variety which is a main reason i punt so this kind of set-up wouldnt suit me on any level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it would not interest me at all.I do not like the feeling of being 'owned'.I would miss my job and the variety and interesting people and adventures it brings.

As has been said if the guy suddenly moves on its my reputation and business I have to then build again from scratch.If I quit I will do so when I wnt to not because I have been bought.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could it possibly make sense for a SP to commit herself exclusively to one man and neglect the rest of her client base? Think of the extra effort involved to rebuild it when he tires of the arrangement.

 

It strikes me as being an unlikely arrangement from the punter's point of view since, for many, variety seems an intrinsic element in the motivation to punt.

Very good point. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I did have a guy who wanted to pay me 1000 a month in a lump sum for a certain number of meets per week. It would have worked out at slightly less per hour than if he made individual bookings. Interestingly when I told him that it would be payment up front then he went quiet. He had wanted to pay it at the end of every month but "he was totally trustworthy"  :lol: yeah right x

 

Ah, I had that one too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could it possibly make sense for a SP to commit herself exclusively to one man and neglect the rest of her client base? Think of the extra effort involved to rebuild it when he tires of the arrangement.

 

It strikes me as being an unlikely arrangement from the punter's point of view since, for many, variety seems an intrinsic element in the motivation to punt.

I agree. Why would any man do this, unless he'd made a calculation that the price would be a far cheaper alternative to a sugar daddy arrangement? I'm sure there are woman out there who could empty a guy's pockets faster than a cash register, so that may well be the case!  :P And anyway, the guy couldn't guarantee that the WG wouldn't see other punters. I know two people who were naïve enough to think they could buy exclusivity with some Thai girls, by sending them a small fortune (in Thai terms) each month. Surprise, surprise, both girls played them and were receiving additional income from other men on the same basis! :D

 

And likewise, why an earth should any WG put her blind faith in some complete stranger? First of all, it would have to be cash up front because he could be using exactly the same tactic on several women and picking up freebies along the way. Even if she received payment up front, what time period would that payment cover? Surely it would have to be for a whole year, otherwise he can pull the plug at any time, whilst her  had cleaned up all her previous customer base.

Edited by drzhivago
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like marriage under a different name

 

True, wonder when the ''headaches'' would start? :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep sounds like marriage or controlling

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it would not interest me at all.I do not like the feeling of being 'owned'.I would miss my job and the variety and interesting people and adventures it brings.

As has been said if the guy suddenly moves on its my reputation and business I have to then build again from scratch.If I quit I will do so when I wnt to not because I have been bought.

 

That's very well put. To be exclusively at the beck and call of one man must surely mean the end of any independence. SPs often (rightly) insist that they are not 'selling' their bodies but this arrangement would mean that they would virtually be handing control to someone else.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's very well put. To be exclusively at the beck and call of one man must surely mean the end of any independence. SPs often (rightly) insist that they are not 'selling' their bodies but this arrangement would mean that they would virtually be handing control to someone else.

I think that selling and controlling are two completely different things.

 

I'd argue that any WG is effectively 'selling themselves' or at least selling their services, which includes their body surely, to any acceptable man for a defined period of time. I don't see any difference between one hour and an arrangement for two or three visits a week.  The principle is the same for me.

 

However, it is a completely different matter for her independence and therefore, her freedom of action, to be taken away and be dictated to by a man. To lose her right to decide who she wishes to sell those services to and when. That is control or being exploited and wrong.

Edited by drzhivago
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, I had that one too!

I bet a lot of us did..wonder if anyone was daft enough to take him up on it though  :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, it is a completely different matter for her independence and therefore, her freedom of action, to be taken away and be dictated to by a man. To lose her right to decide who she wishes to sell those services to and when. That is control or being exploited and wrong.

 

I think the 'when' would be a huge part of it - I also doubt it would stay at a couple of times a week for long, and the thought of being at somebody's beck and call because they're your only source of income makes my hair stand on end. No matter what had been said at the the beginning, I suspect the lady would be expected to pretty much drop whatever she was doing at a moment's notice - I'd wonder what would happen if she wasn't able to answer her phone one day, or something.

 

I think it can be done, because people do it - there's all sort of 'sugar daddy' sites about for men who don't think they're punters to meet women who don't think they're prostitutes and I suppose it's really just another one of the many different ways of working/punting. But I don't think people who (like most of us here) are used to everything being very clear and upfront about what's on offer, how much it costs for how long and when/where it's going to happen would ever be able to settle very comfortably into such a situation.

 

Plus, and I know it's already been said, but there is no way on earth that woman wouldn't still be working even if it was just with a handful of regs after her ads had been taken down. The only exceptions would be ladies who really hated the job to start off with, and although I've met no shortage of daft blokes with more money than sense, I can't imagine many punters wanting to spend an entire year with anybody like that :P.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the 'when' would be a huge part of it - I also doubt it would stay at a couple of times a week for long, and the thought of being at somebody's beck and call because they're your only source of income makes my hair stand on end. No matter what had been said at the the beginning, I suspect the lady would be expected to pretty much drop whatever she was doing at a moment's notice - I'd wonder what would happen if she wasn't able to answer her phone one day, or something.

 

I think it can be done, because people do it - there's all sort of 'sugar daddy' sites about for men who don't think they're punters to meet women who don't think they're prostitutes and I suppose it's really just another one of the many different ways of working/punting. But I don't think people who (like most of us here) are used to everything being very clear and upfront about what's on offer, how much it costs for how long and when/where it's going to happen would ever be able to settle very comfortably into such a situation.

 

Plus, and I know it's already been said, but there is no way on earth that woman wouldn't still be working even if it was just with a handful of regs after her ads had been taken down. The only exceptions would be ladies who really hated the job to start off with, and although I've met no shortage of daft blokes with more money than sense, I can't imagine many punters wanting to spend an entire year with anybody like that :P.

Yep. Good post. I agree with all of that. Key points being, yes of course, she'd still see her regulars; even if it was simply on another sim! If I was her, I certainly would! She'd be stupid not to. And as you say, if the man had her under that much control, three days would become four, very quickly and then he'd probably try to push for other services too.

 

The danger for her would come if the man realised this too and became 'obsessive' and started staking out her place, or trying to get into her life. I cannot see how she'd be able to keep him out of it, being at his beck and call.

 

And your other point. Men like this are simply in denial. It is the same principle as the so-called High Class Courtesan, who thinks she's a cut above other girls. She is a prostitute all the same, just like the recipient of a sugar daddy service. In exactly the same way that the man who prefers to be known as a client, is a punter all the same, as is the sugar daddy, who is uncomfortable with that tag, so sugar coats it with different words. Bottom line is, the woman wouldn't be interested in him if he wasn't paying.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, I find myself going against the grain. I don't like writing long posts, but please do bear with me...

 

I have been exlusively booked twice. [i'm not counting the fornight/month ones]. Both times were nothing like what some have perceived to be in above posts.

 

Not once did I feel owned. I chose to accept the offers. I was not at his beck and call. I did not give up my freedom. If anything, it gave me the freedom to persue other ventures that had been in the pipeline for far too long.

 

One was a northern regular who had been posted to London for a 12 month contract.

The other was an overseas regular who had been posted to London for a 4 month period.

 

Why is it unfair to regulars if a WG accepts an exlusive deal? Do they own the WG? No. She is free to do as she pleases. So that blows the 'she is owned' theory right out of the water!

 

No I did not carry on accepting bookings from other gentlemen while I were in the exclusive arrangement. I took my website down and a voicemail on my phone explained I were alive and well and would be back in [add month or year here].  I had no desire to deceive anyone. I wanted to be able to sleep at night with a clear conscience. I did exactly that.

 

I lost none of my regulars. Of course we missed each other. That's only natural. I tried to do my bit by pointing them to ladies whom I thought might be suitable to their needs while I were away.

 

Dr Z. You said... "the woman wouldn't be interested in him if he wasn't paying" in the above post.

 

I think that goes without saying. The arrangement between an escort and client is a professional one, no matter how they feel about each other. If the gentleman were looking for a relationship, he would not be booking an escort for her time. He would get listed on dating sites. We all know there are lots of reasons why gentlemen prefer to book escorts rather than go into a commited relations, so I wont go through the list again. If I stopped accepting payment from a gentlemen, we are effectively in a relationship. Simple as. You don't think I've fallen for a client? Hell yes I have! Truly, madly, and deeply. Does that mean I would cross the borderline? Hell no! I'm no homewrecker!!! << You see? Circumstances my prevent you from having a relationship with a client.

 

So that's it from the other side of the fence! My experience on exlusive bookings was 100% positive. Would I do it again? If the timing were right, then yes :)

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, I find myself going against the grain. I don't like writing long posts, but please do bear with me...

 

I have been exlusively booked twice. [i'm not counting the fornight/month ones]. Both times were nothing like what some have perceived to be in above posts.

 

Not once did I feel owned. I chose to accept the offers. I was not at his beck and call. I did not give up my freedom. If anything, it gave me the freedom to persue other ventures that had been in the pipeline for far too long.

 

One was a northern regular who had been posted to London for a 12 month contract.

The other was an overseas regular who had been posted to London for a 4 month period.

 

Why is it unfair to regulars if a WG accepts an exlusive deal? Do they own the WG? No. She is free to do as she pleases. So that blows the 'she is owned' theory right out of the water!

 

No I did not carry on accepting bookings from other gentlemen while I were in the exclusive arrangement. I took my website down and a voicemail on my phone explained I were alive and well and would be back in [add month or year here].  I had no desire to deceive anyone. I wanted to be able to sleep at night with a clear conscience. I did exactly that.

 

I lost none of my regulars. Of course we missed each other. That's only natural. I tried to do my bit by pointing them to ladies whom I thought might be suitable to their needs while I were away.

 

Dr Z. You said... "the woman wouldn't be interested in him if he wasn't paying" in the above post.

 

I think that goes without saying. The arrangement between an escort and client is a professional one, no matter how they feel about each other. If the gentleman were looking for a relationship, he would not be booking an escort for her time. He would get listed on dating sites. We all know there are lots of reasons why gentlemen prefer to book escorts rather than go into a commited relations, so I wont go through the list again. If I stopped accepting payment from a gentlemen, we are effectively in a relationship. Simple as. You don't think I've fallen for a client? Hell yes I have! Truly, madly, and deeply. Does that mean I would cross the borderline? Hell no! I'm no homewrecker!!! << You see? Circumstances my prevent you from having a relationship with a client.

 

So that's it from the other side of the fence! My experience on exlusive bookings was 100% positive. Would I do it again? If the timing were right, then yes :)

 

How interesting! It might 'go against the grain' but this is very persuasively argued and illustrates the huge variety of experience and opportunity in this world. You're also convincing on the 'ownership' question, but I guess that depends on the dynamics of each arrangement.

 

The fact that it's a minority view doesn't invalidate it at all but I'd be surprised if it was the experience (or even the ambition) of many SPs or punters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im sorry, I dont see how anyone could be "owned" just because she has been booked for 6 months. Wether its an hour or a year..its still a booking, the difference is you are not in the bedroom for the whole time x

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went travelling abroad with a client on a couple of occasions which meant I wasn't available for other clients for a few months.  Didn't feel owned, it was rather enjoyable, but it did cause some problems, I'm sure I must have lost new clients judging by the calls when I got back, work was slow to pick up again for a little while when I did get back and my head kept dwelling on the fact that I must have lost money doing it, but then money isn't everything is it?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of interesting and insightful responses. Seems this issue of 'ownership' comes in, but like Chloe, I didnt think about it that way. Are professional athletes 'owned'? No they are paid a fixed salary, expected to play a few games a week, stay fit, practice and then some of their off court behaviour has some contractual limits but not much.

I think if the SP is hot, going off the market for a while might even rev up income when she comes back, but I defer to those who know from experience on that one.

The dating thing didnt come up in any comments, I thought that would be a big one. If many SPs do this for the money (that is a constant theme in this hobby), surely making same money with less work and people and ability to explore civvie relationships especially for younger women who might want to have kids would be extremely important, no? Maybe I have it backwards and punting does lead to more long term civvie relationships than I am aware of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't even go there, if it's a biz contract then get it done legally through a lawyer otherwise it will end up a mess, he may go off, she may go off, she will give up all her regs then he may dump her when he has found someone else, she may take the money then refuse to see him only but  one time a month may be, he will then may be want to call around all the time, he will get upset she has a reg proper boyfriend on others days................stay clear of that idea unless it's rubber stamped in high court.

Question for the the girls: if you had a good customer and he was willing to pay you about what you make in a year to only be with him, and assuming you got on well anyway, would you? Assume you would see him 2-3 times a week, activites all on your normal 'likes'. As for civilian relationships, no limits, you can have a partner, date, just no paid dates.

interested to hear pro/cons, from both punter and punted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now