KarlheinzBonkhausen

Soho Cottage yesterday

27 posts in this topic

I'm basically a supporter of Soho Cottage - I love Sam and Lucy. But yesterday I called and was told about Amelia: early 20s and natural auburn hair apparently. But I get there to find she's at least ten years older and, in fact, has dyed black hair. I left immediately. Why the pretense? Did they think I wouldn't notice? Soho Cottage never used to be like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes Karlheinz, the Cottage never used to be like that when I used to go there about 9 years ago now, when the line up was Sam, Emma and Mel.

ps. love the name, how can someone called KarlheinzBonkhausen have made 33 posts without me noticing? Shows how often I come here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fear the Cottage is becoming (has become?) a victim of its own former high standards. There's nothing wrong with black haired girls in their early 30s. In fact, Far from it. But the Soho Cottage of old would never have tried to pull a stunt like that. Agreed about the Mel and Emma era. Anyone remember cute little Elizabeth? Fair skin and gorgeous little bush. Sigh...

Pleased you like my name. Barrack kinda rings a bell too....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're both right and it's very sad. We are witnessing the now terminal decline of what was once one of the best establishments around. It's similar to what happened to Les Girls - they can't attract and retain the sort of girls that their reputation was based upon, so they are having to take girls that they wouldn't have looked at in the past. If you look at the picture on their website of the girl referred to by the OP, you can see that she isn't someone who they would have taken on in their heyday.

Their are other possible little telltale signs -

http://www.punternet.com/frs/fr_view.php?recnum=94815

from a first time poster, looks a bit like a plant to me, and there was a bit of blatant cheerleading recently on the "best lady for french kissing" thread from a first timer called "Socottage"...:confused:, claiming, falsely, that all the girls at SC offer deep, lingering FK, a claim which the FR referred to above repeats.

Also, two rave reviews for Lucy have appeared recently on their Visitors' Book blog - presumably intended to boost the bookings of a girl who told me a year ago that she wanted to get out of prostitution. She has told other posters on this forum the same thing, but she is still there a year later because she can't afford to leave. She is pimping herself, and is capable these days of giving a very disinterested level of service indeed, as at least one of her FRs, and my own experience, shows.

The rota at SC, once rock steady, has been all over the place for some time now, as they struggle to retain girls - some quite promising girls have lasted only a week or two recently.

As I say, sincerely - all very sad.......:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I fear the Cottage is becoming (has become?) a victim of its own former high standards. There's nothing wrong with black haired girls in their early 30s. In fact, Far from it. But the Soho Cottage of old would never have tried to pull a stunt like that. Agreed about the Mel and Emma era. Anyone remember cute little Elizabeth? Fair skin and gorgeous little bush. Sigh...

Pleased you like my name. Barrack kinda rings a bell too....

Agree with all you say here - especially about Elizabeth. Lovely..:confused:

But she was clever - she worked for a while, saved some money and went off travelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"they can't attract and retain the sort of girls that their reputation was based upon, so they are having to take girls that they wouldn't have looked at in the past."

I reckon you're right, but I wonder why? The CD market is screwed because of Amazon but it's not one can indulge this hobby online! I retain a real soft spot for Lucy. She's genuine and her body never fails leave me quivering with excitement.

Edited by KarlheinzBonkhausen
quotes didn't work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"they can't attract and retain the sort of girls that their reputation was based upon, so they are having to take girls that they wouldn't have looked at in the past."

"I reckon you're right, but I wonder why? The CD market is screwed because of Amazon but it's not one can indulge this hobby online!"

Same reason - punters are finding better value elsewhere. Simple economics, and don't forget there's a recession on, and value for money really matters now to some guys. HOD opening, for example, is a nail in their coffin, for sure - better premises, better girls, better services, better price.......

" I retain a real soft spot for Lucy. She's genuine and her body never fails leave me quivering with excitement."

I know what you mean - I had about a dozen really good punts with her. But then 2 or 3 poor ones :confused: And I also feel there is a real ethical issue with seeing a girl who has told you that she really wants and needs to get out of prostitution, that it's holding back her whole life and she really doesn't enjoy it anymore. Sorry.

I don't incidentally dispute that you may well be one of a number of regulars that Lucy makes an effort for, but not everyone gets as good a service, as my own experience and at least one FR testify.

It gives me no pleasure to say any of this :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most parlours give false descriptions however it is sad to see that Soho Cottage has now adopted this policy.

I am pleased to hear that you walked away, if more guys did the same then maybe they would learn a lesson.:D;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're both right and it's very sad. We are witnessing the now terminal decline of what was once one of the best establishments around. It's similar to what happened to Les Girls - they can't attract and retain the sort of girls that their reputation was based upon, so they are having to take girls that they wouldn't have looked at in the past. If you look at the picture on their website of the girl referred to by the OP, you can see that she isn't someone who they would have taken on in their heyday.

Their are other possible little telltale signs -

http://www.punternet.com/frs/fr_view.php?recnum=94815

from a first time poster, looks a bit like a plant to me, and there was a bit of blatant cheerleading recently on the "best lady for french kissing" thread from a first timer called "Socottage"...:D, claiming, falsely, that all the girls at SC offer deep, lingering FK, a claim which the FR referred to above repeats.

Also, two rave reviews for Lucy have appeared recently on their Visitors' Book blog - presumably intended to boost the bookings of a girl who told me a year ago that she wanted to get out of prostitution. She has told other posters on this forum the same thing, but she is still there a year later because she can't afford to leave. She is pimping herself, and is capable these days of giving a very disinterested level of service indeed, as at least one of her FRs, and my own experience, shows.

The rota at SC, once rock steady, has been all over the place for some time now, as they struggle to retain girls - some quite promising girls have lasted only a week or two recently.

As I say, sincerely - all very sad.......:o

Thanks for pointing this out, the relevant posts have been deleted.

If you have suspicions about false claims like this in the future, the Report button is your friend, as mods will pick up on it much quicker via that route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Elizabeth was wonderful. <sigh> :D

AAAhh - the good old days :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most parlours give false descriptions however it is sad to see that Soho Cottage has now adopted this policy.

I am pleased to hear that you walked away, if more guys did the same then maybe they would learn a lesson.:D;)

Absolutely agree, Mr Cab, as I usually do.... :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a FR a few months ago from a punter claiming he received OWO. In the past the establishment have issued a swift rebuttal when this has happened, but not this time. Don't know if their rules have changed but it used to be a house rule that the girls didn't offer DFK or OWO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There was a FR a few months ago from a punter claiming he received OWO. In the past the establishment have issued a swift rebuttal when this has happened, but not this time. Don't know if their rules have changed but it used to be a house rule that the girls didn't offer DFK or OWO.

If they have changed, it must have been quite recently. Personally I doubt it, as Emily was asked to leave fairly recently because she was doing OWO. I can't see their long-serving girls, Sam and Lucy, changing their working habits myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been a reader rather than a poster for some time. I just felt I should defend Lucy as I see her regularly. There is of course the argument that she shouldn't let her moods affect her work - but is she not human?

If she is disinterested it may be a personality thing - sometimes people don't continue to gel.

I have noticed that the rota has been up and down a little. But there have been some fantastic girls there recently too. One girl left for reasons entirely beyond anyone's control, and I think the crunch has taken its toll too.

I'm also sure that the OWO thing is not tolerated or offered.

However, this thread has the capacity to cause more damage to the establishment and personally to Lucy than, in my opinion, either deserve.

On the other hand, free speech and all that. And Elizabeth was amazing. Sigh.

HS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"However, this thread has the capacity to cause more damage to the establishment and personally to Lucy than, in my opinion, either deserve."

I'm sure that nobody is trying to "damage" anybody here - we're just telling it like we see it. Forgive me, but are you saying that anything being said here is untrue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all. However, it could be seen as a little unpleasant from one point of view that what was said to you (and others) in what I assume was a private conversation is posted for all to see.

I happen to have a job I love. There are days when I would rather poke my eyes out than do it though, and I may say that to someone I like or trust at the time. It doesn't make it true - we're all complex - and if one of those people then posted it on an internet message board it would skew the bigger picture - that I love my job.

As I type, I remember you wrote:

"Also, two rave reviews for Lucy have appeared recently on their Visitors' Book blog - presumably intended to boost the bookings of a girl....etc"

do you have evidence that these are false? Because if they're genuine I think it would be fair to call that rather spiteful speculation. Words are powerful things. I think my need to post was in response to an agenda it seems you have..

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As with any Visitor's Book, the accusation can always be levelled that the proprietor is posting false entries. Looking at the Cottage's blog, the postings are fairly spasmodic (only 20 all year) and it's not as if a central theme is being pushed, leading me to think they are genuine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm not a habitual poster, but i've just noticed this thread. My one off experience of Roxy at the Cottage a few weeks back still makes me tingle. While Sam and Lucy - as the other posts indicate - are still lovely and still delivering. I did have a rubbish punt there a few weeks back - i've forgotten her name - of the sort that left me thinking i had a case under the trades descriptions act. But Roxy....I'm moving heaven and earth, and my personal schedule, to get back there this Tuesday. Over and out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

""Also, two rave reviews for Lucy have appeared recently on their Visitors' Book blog - presumably intended to boost the bookings of a girl....etc"

do you have evidence that these are false? "

I didn't say that they were false, actually, and I'm not claiming that you are false either, despite the fact that you've only posted once before this thread.

If you're happy with the service you're getting, and the price you're paying, fine. And if you're happy seeing a girl who has told a number of people over the last year that she wants to get out of prostitution, then fine.

I don't have an agenda, but my interest is in the way that the industry works and is working, and the way an establishment that was one of the best seems to be struggling in the face of competition and the changes in the industry. I might base my A-level Economics project on what I'm observing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As with any Visitor’s Book, the accusation can always be levelled that the proprietor is posting false entries. Looking at the Cottage’s blog, the postings are fairly spasmodic (only 20 all year) and it's not as if a central theme is being pushed, leading me to think they are genuine.

You don't think there's a central theme being pushed, when they all say the girl involved was gorgeous/wonderful/cute/sexy etc etc ?:D:rolleyes:

[don't know why this has appeared twice - tried to cancel, but can't. Sorry]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i'm not a habitual poster, but i've just noticed this thread. My one off experience of Roxy at the Cottage a few weeks back still makes me tingle. While Sam and Lucy - as the other posts indicate - are still lovely and still delivering. I did have a rubbish punt there a few weeks back - i've forgotten her name - of the sort that left me thinking i had a case under the trades descriptions act. But Roxy....I'm moving heaven and earth, and my personal schedule, to get back there this Tuesday. Over and out.

Interesting that they've started putting pictures on the new girls' pages - that was always something they refused to do, even specifically saying so on the website. Obviously, in some ways, they're trying to change and keep up with the industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yes Karlheinz, the Cottage never used to be like that when I used to go there about 9 years ago now, when the line up was Sam, Emma and Mel.

ps. love the name, how can someone called KarlheinzBonkhausen have made 33 posts without me noticing? Shows how often I come here.

I think Mel was actually FR no1 by Galahad in 1999

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a well known and normal practice in this business. They do it all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I left immediately.

Well done. If everyone just walked out of these places without having a service then the blatant fucking packs of lies they try to peddle would have to stop.

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