Quote:


That will never happen, unless some totalitarian government starts mandating identifying traces on every file a computer touches, with computers "licensed" or tied back to the original owners.



Again, I'm only after the original leak...if person A pays for and legally downloads the content, then makes a copy and gives it to person B who then puts it up on Rapidshare or something, then it is person A who will be getting banned because that's who I can trace the content back to.

Banning them stops them doing it again, legal action (if feasible) may help recoup lost earnings now that 100 people have downloaded it off of RS and have now re-upped it to 10 different other venues, meaning multiple thousands of theoretical sales have been lost. In some countries, (Sweden, Russia, etc.) they can get away with this quite legally...just look at Russian MP3 sites which undercut the likes of iTunes. If we're dealing with an entirely digital product of which we are the only vendor, then it becomes easier to track who supplied the content to these sites, and take them out of the game.

Quote:

Leaked content (whether tangible DVD purchase, or online download) is frequently purchased using stolen credit card information by the thieves. I guess we should also ensure the vendors never get to keep any of these fraudulent charges, too. [sarcasm ends now].



This is something I cannot legislate against, anymore than someone who has the content having their laptop stolen and the thief uploading the content to a tube or torrent. I'm just of the opinion that it is better to do something rather than nothing.

Quote:

The controls that would suit the content producers (in xxx or mainstream) are contradictory with the needs of the general population, and as long as the content producers are grossly outnumbered by the consuming population, this won't change.



My system won't be anything like DRM...you will be free to make and move copies of your legally-purchased content as you see fit, just as long as you don't re-distribute it.

Quote:

That's not an indictment -- I firmly believe more people need to create and produce their vision for art and media. Computers have helped make it easier, and the internet has made wider distribution possible in an easier manner, but there is still more to come. Only then will a greater appreciation for what it feels like to be on the producing end be available on a wider basis.



A very true sentiment...alas, tomorrow's producers (in whatever genre or medium) will have to contend with the filesharing network they helped create, popularise, and embolden.

Quote:

In my case, I can say that the worst possible scenario is finding there is nothing of value to me OTHER THAN the trailer I saw that made me join in the first place. Is it even possible to join a site without knowing anything about what is inside?



The proof of the pudding is in the eating, apparently.

Quote:

Best case scenario is that I like everything they have, but that's never happened for me (or anything even approaching it). I see real merit in a buffet-style system for xxx paysites, rather than ala carte (to use restaurant analogies). For cable TV, sure, I would love to pay on a channel by channel basis; but the hit and miss nature of adult production makes me prefer the buffet idea instead.



Good analogy...ultimately, the consumer will choose, but very few websites offer the choice of just downloading the single scene/content you want. This is where iTunes stole a march on CDs...you no longer had to buy the album to get the single track you wanted...you just buy the track by itself.

Quote:

My perceived value as a consumer for the membership only grows as I watch more clips and "get my moneys worth", as it were. Would you be suggesting that I should watch fewer movies on a paysite so as to appreciate them more, "valuing" them individually higher? Again, this isn't how I consume adult media, nor is it how I understand others do either. It is, however, how music, movie and art producers in mainstream attempt to artificially inflate the perceived value of their goods (staggering releases, holding back release dates, limiting artist output).



Value is in the eye of the beholder, and one man's wine is another man's poison in this regard. There are valid reasons for a lot of what goes on in mainstream...for example, do you really want Thom from Radiohead to release a solo album at the same time as Radiohead release a new album? What about promotion, tours, etc.? Plus, it's unwanted competition that serves to split the audience...that's why it is rare for big Hollywood stars to have two movies out at the same time. In adult, these problems really don't exist to the same extent as mainstream. All musical artists are in effect 'contract stars', because they can't work for anyone else without kind permission of their label. If I book Amy Ried tomorrow, I know my Amy Ried movie will be going up against a slew of other Amy Ried movies from other producers. Maybe mainstream has got it right on this one?

Quote:


Or, they could wait five months (or arrive on the scene late on month 5) and get all five scenes from the paysite for $30.



This is precisely my point...you make more money ($20) with Pay-per-clip as you don't have the option of jumping in late and getting it all in one go, as per monthly membership. The prospect of paying $150 for five scenes is what is either going to drive the surfer to wait and get 'em all in one go, or source them from less legal avenues. Depending upon which course of action the surfer decides to take, the monthly membership site will be out to the tune of either $20 (vs. PPC), $120 (vs. its' regular business model...surfer waits rather than join for five months) or $150 (if the surfer gets it all for free). PPC's worst case scenario is being out $50 for the same content, and this isn't factoring in what happens to any additional content the surfer may have downloaded (he may choose to upload it, for all we know).

Quote:

Or, they could get a $2.95 2-day membership to a paysite, and grab all five scenes on month 5, or get $2.95 2-day memberships, and grab them each month as they come out.



Fine in theory, but surfers tend to be very wary of trial memberships because a lot of sites limit the content they have access to (understandably), plus they're worried about full-rate rebill traps. If (and it is a big if) sites were prepared to make their newest (and thus most valuable) scene available @ $2.95, for two days, then you are effectively using a PPC system already, just with the added threat/bonus of potential full-price rebilling.

Quote:

Or, the same company could do pay-per-clip and bulk paysites, and take money from consumers in whichever manner they desired to fork it over. A buyer's market -- who would have imagined.



It's so logical, you'd think someone would have thought to try it by now...surely anything that makes it easier/more likely for the customer to spend money with you is a good thing, right?

Quote:


I totally agree, we need better stats. However, the uglier girls often finance the prettier ones, as it were, just like in other businesses. PPV helps drill down the consumer's preferences for the marketer / biz owner, but from the consumer's side, I see it as less value for the money.



I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on the VFM bit, but it would be a moot point if both options were available to the consumer and the marketplace was allowed to decide.

As for stats...a major bugbear of mine...how come AVN or XBiz can't organise a proper, sales based chart, rather than one based on anecdotal evidence. I'd also love to see AEBN, HotMovies etc. share their stats with the world...I think we would be in for some major surprises as to who the MVP's of porn really are. On a level playing field, I believe the prettier girls would help finance the less pretty ones, however, I am starting to come around to the idea that this relationship may very well be inverted (See my comment re: popularity and piracy below).

Quote:


Possible, but likely more entrepreneurial than most consumers actually get to be. Recent download limit caps on the cheap consumer internet plans will also likely force consumers to start considering where they do their downloading from -- a 700MB bangbros scene may not seem as attractive if you only have 20GB for the month without paying overage fees to Time Warner.



Personally, I'm really starting to baulk at 400mb plus scenes...I'm not capped, but live in an area of the UK where speeds are pretty slow. If Bangbros cut all the lameness on the part of male talent/directors out of their movies, I think they could clock in at under 200mb though.

Quote:


The potential for chargebacks is a risk (and cost) of doing business in any of the vice products (porn, gaming, etc), as well as in other markets selling intangibles online. I don't see PPV porn as any more immune to chargebacks.



The only advantage would be in terms of the amount of content accessed per transaction. To get two scenes via PPC, it is two transactions, which opens up the line of questioning 'Well, you claim the product was not as described, so why did you proceed to download ten other clips? Why didn't the penny drop?'. It's much easier to do with a monthly membership model...one transaction, rape and pillage the content, and then one chargeback.

Quote:


It's not even l33t-speak -- this type of side benefit to the site owner of less resources consumed is akin to an externality / spillover in economics-speak.

There are tons of sites and small authors that I would love to support or just send a $2 or $5 tip their way (be it software, how-to's, or media), but they don't have an easy way to donate to them.



Very true...perhaps some form of pre-paid or token system might be the order of the day? Most people have a donate via Paypal gizmo on their sites, but everyone hates Paypal.

Quote:

Imagine how motivating it would be for Holly Randall, for example, if she was able to monetize goodwill by fans paying $1.72 here, $0.86 there (x10000) for little bonuses or surprises, or even for entirely unsolicited encouragement.



I can guarantee that Da Burglar is jacking off to this post as we speak.

Quote:


For musicians, for example, I think this type of idea has also been poo-poohed by the music companies, who don't want consumers paying the artist directly unless the record company is able to take a cut first. Selling merch at shows is labour intensive, so my guess is they stay out of that, but taking a slice of benevolence / tipjars online would be something they could stick their beak in (and likely eventually will).



Absolutely true, and in with regards to what we've already discussed about stats and piracy, let me add that I'd like to see a future wherein some Playboy Playmate or Penthouse Pet can say 'I can bring a paying audience of 10,000 fans to a project. If I can make $15 selling a hardcore b/g clip of myself, then I can make $150,000 rather than the $1,200 that Joe Producer has offered me.'

I very much doubt this day will ever come though, as despite having established that people are prepared to fork over a $30 monthly fee for just one particular scene, we have no idea of which girls bring which kind or size of audience (as I have alluded to before, perhaps you'll stand to make more money with less popular girls simply because the demand for them, and thus the potential for piracy, is less), plus the fact that piracy will inevitably eat into the projected profits.

Quote:


My example wasn't meant to slam down your point, but rather to demonstrate alternate revenue streams possible from an existing single endpoint (web content) for some companies.

Also, if you're not already familiar with it, there is a "new" idea especially relevant for digital distribution called The Long Tail. When storage/hosting/distro is cheap (as it is for digital media), and consumer preferences are seemingly boundless, you can sell nearly anything ever created to any interested party with a (low) fixed maximum on operating expenses, and still capitalize on / monetize / personalize the purchase for every single consumer (lot of -ize words in there).



I have some quite revolutionary ideas about squeezing the maximum bang-for-buck out of some way-out-there niche content, but I shall read up on this also...thanks for the tip!