JustPassing

Most outrageous hourly rate seen?

23 posts in this topic

After the thread today about paying £300/hr and the one a few days ago highlighting that FR where some unlucky punter paid £500 for a HJ ;), just wondering what is the highest hourly rate currently advertised that you know about? Links would be good :D

Of course what I'd really like to find out is what's the most anybody's "wasted" on a one hour punt :D, but not sure people would be willing to share the truly heroic stories (eg spent £1000/hr and she looked like Frankie Howerd in drag etc)

For me, it's a pretty average top-end amount of £300/hr. Total waste.

[ PS Sorry if this one's been done to death - couldn't find any hits via the search ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
After the thread today about paying £300/hr and the one a few days ago highlighting that FR where some unlucky punter paid £500 for a HJ ;), just wondering what is the highest hourly rate currently advertised that you know about? Links would be good :D

Of course what I'd really like to find out is what's the most anybody's "wasted" on a one hour punt :D, but not sure people would be willing to share the truly heroic stories (eg spent £1000/hr and she looked like Frankie Howerd in drag etc)

For me, it's a pretty average top-end amount of £300/hr. Total waste.

[ PS Sorry if this one's been done to death - couldn't find any hits via the search ]

Carmen Secrets is the rogue agency that specialises in targeting banker wankers. It was involved in that £500 for a hand job scam - they also have this prostitute on offer at a bargain £1,000 an hour.

http://www.carmenssecrets.com/escort-gallery/london-escorts/view_escort_portfolio.cfm?sE=Kianna&iEscortID=538&sK=female_escort_service_uk&iSet=0

I wonder if they'll get any callers ?

:o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a nosey at those two...:D

The second ones pics are pretty poor quality you would have thought charging that much she would have new ones done....;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just had a nosey at those two...:D

The second ones pics are pretty poor quality you would have thought charging that much she would have new ones done....;)

It's strange looking at websites where girls like Selina charge £1000 per hour. I noticed that Elle only charges £500 per hour and I began to wonder what must be wrong with her. Then I noticed Carmella had dropped her price to £300 per hour and warning bells began to ring inside my head. When I noticed Felicia had hit rock-bottom and was charging a paltry £200 per hour, I felt all dirty and had to leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carmen Secrets is the rogue agency that specialises in targeting banker wankers. It was involved in that £500 for a hand job scam - they also have this prostitute on offer at a bargain £1,000 an hour.

http://www.carmenssecrets.com/escort-gallery/london-escorts/view_escort_portfolio.cfm?sE=Kianna&iEscortID=538&sK=female_escort_service_uk&iSet=0

I wonder if they'll get any callers ?

;)

They have Kianna at £1,000 without a full facial photo. I'm sure she's very nice looking but I wouldn't be surprised if she's a self-absorbed prima donna who thinks she is better than everyone else.

Yes, there is a market of wanker bankers who specifically want to brag to their colleagues about the £1,000 per hour high class escort they have indulged. My Mercedes is bigger than yours and all that crap!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't pay that. A quick google will reveal loads of girls with the same vital stats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew of a fairly famous wealthy businessman who had his chauffeur bring a different girl every night for 2 hours or more, and I bet they were not cheap.

To some, if they are less than £500/hour, they are not exclusive enough, so they are off the menu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's strange looking at websites where girls like Selina charge £1000 per hour. I noticed that Elle only charges £500 per hour and I began to wonder what must be wrong with her. Then I noticed Carmella had dropped her price to £300 per hour and warning bells began to ring inside my head. When I noticed Felicia had hit rock-bottom and was charging a paltry £200 per hour, I felt all dirty and had to leave.

Brilliant just brilliant :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was involved in that £500 for a hand job scam - they also have this prostitute on offer at a bargain £1,000 an hour.......

I wonder if they'll get any callers ?

:eek:

Of course they will.

Here's an illustration of the same syndrom at work.

"A bottle of Perrier Jouet's Belle Epoque will cost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's strange looking at websites where girls like Selina charge £1000 per hour. I noticed that Elle only charges £500 per hour and I began to wonder what must be wrong with her. Then I noticed Carmella had dropped her price to £300 per hour and warning bells began to ring inside my head. When I noticed Felicia had hit rock-bottom and was charging a paltry £200 per hour, I felt all dirty and had to leave.

This in a nut shell is how many wealthy punters i have met or know think, they simply go on the price and pictures believing paying £1000 means the WG MUST be better than the WG who is charging £500, their logic and to them common sense dictates this MUST be the case.

This feeling of whats wrong with her because she is cheaper is the exact point some SPs exploit seemingly very well . Its clever marketing aimed at the punter who has more money than sense or simply doesnt care what he pays, if it turns out to be bad it doesnt impact him enough financially to concern him enough to do anything but try someone else.:eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes of course you can sell sex for £1000 per hour....and more.

Surely it is better for a call girl to market herself at £150 per hour, in London, or £120 per hour, outside London, and be certain of a steady stream of work rather than charge £300-£400 an hour and only get a few calls a month or £1,000 and get a call once in a blue moon? Over the course of a year, the girl on a £120 an hour will end up earning far more than the girl on a £1,000 an hour, simply because she'll have a continuous stream of regular and dependable clients.

Besides, these silly girls on £1,000 an hour are taking enormous risks because the men who pay that money expect to be pampered and given "preferential" treatment - and preferential treatment always works out to mean bareback.

Also, a man's expectations would rise, I would very happily pay £10,000 - if and only if - the girl was Petra Verkaik, who, quite literally, is a sex goddess; pure sex on legs. The vast majority of girls have the common sense not to charge silly prices because they know they'll never, ever be able to meet a man's expectations and he'll end up leaving unsatisfied and discontented.

Certainly, for a £1,000 an hour a man would have every right to expect the girl to give him a Kama Sutra Experience and a Tantric lingam massage. But how many girls are honestly good at KSE and Tantra ?

What makes these rogue agencies so absurd is that they charge a £1,000 an hour and then seriously expect the man to be happy with a GFE ! Gordon Bennett ! you can get a GFE for one tenth of that price ! These agencies prey on men who are sexually naive or who have more money than sense or who are banker wankers.

As for the girls themselves, more often than not, they have the attitude that a man should be grateful that he is being allowed anywhere near her body and that he should be content with whatever she deigns to do.

A £1,000 an hour would be justified if the girl was a real courtesan who was an expert in KSE and Tantra, such girls are rare but worth every single penny.

In most cases, however, a £1,000 punt ends badly for the guy because his expectations are left unfulfilled or badly for the girls because she has been required to do bareback because the guy is a "preferential" client.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely it is better for a call girl to market herself at £150 per hour, in London, or £120 per hour, outside London, and be certain of a steady stream of work rather than charge £300-£400 an hour and only get a few calls a month or £1,000 and get a call once in a blue moon? Over the course of a year, the girl on a £120 an hour will end up earning far more than the girl on a £1,000 an hour, simply because she'll have a continuous stream of regular and dependable clients.

Besides, these silly girls on £1,000 an hour are taking enormous risks because the men who pay that money expect to be pampered and given "preferential" treatment - and preferential treatment always works out to mean bareback.

Also, a man's expectations would rise, I would very happily pay £10,000 - if and only if - the girl was Petra Verkaik, who, quite literally, is a sex goddess; pure sex on legs. The vast majority of girls have the common sense not to charge silly prices because they know they'll never, ever be able to meet a man's expectations and he'll end up leaving unsatisfied and discontented.

Certainly, for a £1,000 an hour a man would have every right to expect the girl to give him a Kama Sutra Experience and a Tantric lingam massage. But how many girls are honestly good at KSE and Tantra ?

What makes these rogue agencies so absurd is that they charge a £1,000 an hour and then seriously expect the man to be happy with a GFE ! Gordon Bennett ! you can get a GFE for one tenth of that price ! These agencies prey on men who are sexually naive or who have more money than sense or who are banker wankers.

As for the girls themselves, more often than not, they have the attitude that a man should be grateful that he is being allowed anywhere near her body and that he should be content with whatever she deigns to do.

A £1,000 an hour would be justified if the girl was a real courtesan who was an expert in KSE and Tantra, such girls are rare but worth every single penny.

In most cases, however, a £1,000 punt ends badly for the guy because his expectations are left unfulfilled or badly for the girls because she has been required to do bareback because the guy is a "preferential" client.

Your assumptions as usual are incorrect. Not everyone wants a 'steady stream' of clients as you put it. Some ladies ony want to see one guy a week or month. I have a friend who only sees one client a month and at £12,000 she can afford to. Not such a silly girl methinks. Also some of us have other jobs/lives and cant fit many clients into our diary or maybe even dont want to, so we all choose our way of working and what makes us feel comfortable.

Clients who pay more are in no way any more demanding. I dont know where you get your information from, I suspect its plucked from the ether. I cant speak for agency ladies but I can speak for myself. My fees in Devon were once £150 per hour and I can tell you some of those guys could be pretty demanding with expectations way beyond what was reasonable or indeed stated on my site at the time. They definitely like to get their money's worth. And so they should you will probably whine but to say a guy is more demanding the more they pay is wrong.

What you find acceptable to pay and/or expect for that money is not the same as someone who can actually afford to see these ladies. Good luck to them, and the gents. Clients who can afford £1000 per hour are not idiots, they are usually very successful and astute businessmen and they are not all 'banker w******' as you so delightfully call them, but I am positive they wont lose any sleep over your ramblings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am positive they wont lose any sleep over your ramblings.

Rhia Charles: :eek:

http://www.rhiacharles.co.uk/fees.php

"A 2 hour light lunch including 2 courses, fine wine or champagne and 1 hour personal time. £500. A £150 non-refundable deposit is required please."

2 hours for £500, and somehow I don't think you'll be paying for the "light lunch, fine wine or champagne", will you?:)

You must be living in a dream world.:eek:

Sounds to me by your reply that Matium hit a nerve there too.

I know that I can't afford to see you, but don't worry I won't be losing any sleep over it either - you and your wanker bankers are welcome to each other.

I can take some solace from the fact that at least with you, they're been taken for a ride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rhia Charles: :eek:

http://www.rhiacharles.co.uk/fees.php

"A 2 hour light lunch including 2 courses, fine wine or champagne and 1 hour personal time. £500. A £150 non-refundable deposit is required please."

2 hours for £500, and somehow I don't think you'll be paying for the "light lunch, fine wine or champagne", will you?:)

You must be living in a dream world.:eek:

Sounds to me by your reply that Matium hit a nerve there too.

I know that I can't afford to see you, but don't worry I won't be losing any sleep over it either - you and your wanker bankers are welcome to each other.

I can take some solace from the fact that at least with you, they're been taken for a ride.

Horses for courses Kayak. Has it ever occured to you that us ladies structure our fees to perhaps avoid clients like your fine self? Its done the trick obviously. Oh and no Matium hasnt hit a nerve at all, I do have a problem with liars and hypocrites though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours for £500, and somehow I don't think you'll be paying for the "light lunch, fine wine or champagne", will you?:eek:

You must be living in a dream world.:eek:

Sounds to me by your reply that Matium hit a nerve there too.

I know that I can't afford to see you, but don't worry I won't be losing any sleep over it either - you and your wanker bankers are welcome to each other.

Why the nastiness and outrage Kayak?

I just don't understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why the nastiness and outrage Kayak?

I just don't understand it.

You're right Hephaestion, it wasn't necessary to be nasty was it.

Bit stressed and annoyed at the moment, so I shouldn't really be taking it out on innocent people here on my adult social networking site should I?

@ Rhia Charles:

Apologies, You didn't deserve to see the nasty side of me. I'm sure you're worth every penny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would have been better if it hadn't been said, but all credit to Kayak for such a straightforward apology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit stressed and annoyed at the moment, so I shouldn't really be taking it out on innocent people here on my adult social networking site should I?

@ Rhia Charles:

Apologies, You didn't deserve to see the nasty side of me. I'm sure you're worth every penny.

< Applause and hat's off > the man's got character, grace and balls. :eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do you blame aston martin or rolls-royce? they build objectively shitty cars that cost a fortune, but thats their business.

they only hit the nerve of their owners and we all understand and respect

that. we respect that there are people outside who can afford it and spend that

crazy amount of money for their passion.

so when its about the girls, what in my opinion is even more subjective,

why do we blame the guys who are willing to afford the money?

why are we blaming the girls? its only their business and everybody

wants be be payed as good as possible.

and on the other hand, there will be always somebody who offer something

for less.

its the freedom of choice - no reason to be angry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clients who can afford £1000 per hour are not idiots, they are usually very successful and astute businessmen

Bit off topic, but do people remember those BBC Test The Nation programmes with Anne Robinson and the like. They did one testing IQ with tens of thousands of people taking part on line. They produced stats on average IQ of various groups in the UK and broadcast that the average IQ of millionaires was 98 - ie below the national average. I think the rationale was that millionaires are more characterised by their risk taking rather than by being intelligent.

Anyway, God bless all WGs and punters for creating this business - warts and all ;)

(Not that I believe in God but let's not go there)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're right Hephaestion, it wasn't necessary to be nasty was it.

Bit stressed and annoyed at the moment, so I shouldn't really be taking it out on innocent people here on my adult social networking site should I?

@ Rhia Charles:

Apologies, You didn't deserve to see the nasty side of me. I'm sure you're worth every penny.

Good apology

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