Costco doesnt piggyback off of other peoples advertising. I think you just made a valid point for the advertisers though. You can look at it from both sides............This is a review board and should not discriminate against any reviews or why allow non members to be reviewed and get free exposure at the expense of paid advertisers.
A Question for the membership
- Thread starter Fred Zed
- Start date
Good point.
For me, it actually makes no difference. I stick the well known agencies anyway.
Maybe I'm not keeping up with the posts, but I don't see lots of agencies getting tons of posts who aren't already payers in the daily Agency Ad Thread. Even all the new places like Aria, West End Ladies are payers as they show up in the daily ads. Maybe I'm just not seeing all the agencies getting forum member plugs, who don't pay for ads.
Although, I don't use SPAs, so I have no idea. Maybe it's a bigger issue for those places between payers and non-payers.
This poll should be posted in all sub forums too. Its that important. I rarely visit the lounge, but log into the Massage forum frequently.
Given the number of responders, i think a lot of members are unaware of this poll.
Given the number of responders, i think a lot of members are unaware of this poll.
This is probably the most lopsided poll ever on this forum. I think the collective terb voice has been heard and is hopefully listened to. So many good points have been made by others supporting the status quo.
They have a point too...how about we allow only negative reviews of the non payers...this way us Terbites see the negative reviews and its an incentive for mooches
to participateIt's your guys board and you have the right to decide the direction it goes in. If you feel the purpose of the board is for customers to share information and advertisers are a vehicle to support that purpose then reviews of any provider should be allowed. If you think the purpose of the board is a business then it makes sense to keep the paying advertisers happy.
Of course if it's the second then you might want to consider if the traffic that drives revenue will be affected by people unhappy with your decision. I have no idea how a change might impact traffic but it's worth considering.
Of course if it's the second then you might want to consider if the traffic that drives revenue will be affected by people unhappy with your decision. I have no idea how a change might impact traffic but it's worth considering.
I can understand the paid supporters POV. And I think they must be feeling this being more serious these days or else they won’t voice their concern. It might be a bit heavy hand to shut it like that but active moderation is needed I believe.
If genuinely more people talking about a place that place will naturally join as supporter, I trust. It’s when you see threads among a tight group of folks talking about the same place....
If genuinely more people talking about a place that place will naturally join as supporter, I trust. It’s when you see threads among a tight group of folks talking about the same place....
AFAIK, Costco doesn't advertise. And COSTCO does indeed piggyback off the name brands they carry. You go to COSTCO to have a wide selection of name brands and as a result of that, you end up buying those brands and new things and brands you never even heard of.
So let's use COSTCO as an analogue to TERB. COSTCO's success is driven by the success of their suppliers, and their suppliers success is driven by their presence in COSTCO. This is synergy. When you go to COSTCO to buy toilet paper, you end up buying a new watch, some weird marshmallows and a 5 lb bag of some coffee you have never tried before. And a picnic table. And workbench for your garage you never even realized you needed until you saw it on display. Suppliers fight to get into COSTCO because COSTCO delivers qualified traffic to their products. If TERB can continue to maintain its integrity by providing unbiased access to information, it will grow traffic and advertisers will benefit from more qualified traffic. If TERB is even remotely seen as a shill board or biased towards advertisers, it will lose value and traffic will decrease. Less potential clients for advertisers.
COSTCO has found that the payoff from all those "Free" tastings has increased their traffic and per visit spend. Many people go to COSTCO in part to get "Free" samples and a cheap hot dog. They are not making money on the sale of a hot dog. I suspect they lose money on them as does IKEA. But they are increasing traffic at a very low cost. Same goes for TERB. ALL traffic helps increase the value to advertisers.
When you come to TERB for the purpose of finding a new girl to see, you go to the advertisers section to see who you are attracted to, who is available and any promotions. Then you might go check them out for any reviews. While there, you might find someone else that you might put on your TDL. But one thing is for sure. You will see more girls and spend more money when there is more choice. This is not a zero sum game.
If TERB is going to be concerned with "Free Exposure", then it has started down a path of becoming non-relevant.
If agencies and indies want to increase their business, they simply have to up their game, the standard of girls they hire and consistency of services they provide. Shutting out a few non-advertisers will not increase traffic nor take away customers. Again this is not a zero sum business.
"Zero-sum competition – a competition where one side wins by taking customers away from the other side – is an enemy of sustainability."
Unless this thread is skewed to payer/non-payer massage parlour exposure, I don't see how agencies are concerned. Are there that many non-paying no-name agencies scooping up all the headlines? I don't see it. So I'm not sure which hoard of non-paying agencies and posts are being complained about by paying agencies.
Look at MERB in Montreal as an example. I dont spend much time there, but the hobbyists in that forum take their community very seriously. And they support the advertisers on their forum almost religiously. Are there negative reviews of the agencies there ? Oh you bet. Just because you support the people that make your forum possible, doesnt mean you cant say anything negative,. Quite the opposite. It keeps the advertisers on their toes and honest.
Going back to what I said earlier - how will this board avoid the perception that advertisers are controlling content? Whether it happens or not that WILL be the perception and the result will be a hit on Terb's credibility. The poll question states that 99% of content IS about paid advertisers already. So why would they feel threatened by so called free exposure for non-advertisers? Paid advertisers may very well fund this board, but their advertising is not effective if people start to drop off. Ultimately it's the users of this board (lurkers and contributors) who help fund the advertisers. So it's a bit of a vicious circle. Not sure why anybody thinks upsetting the current balance is a good idea when it's only a 1% "problem".
I would think that the issue has more to do with the MP's as there are a lot of reviews from the usual suspects promoting Asian massage parlours and probably are receiving some type of benefit for doing so. If I were an MP advertiser, I can see where they may be upset as they are paying an advertising fee every month while these other numerous agencies are not but have many reviews done on their businesses by the same people, who may all be working together.
yes exactly. That is one of the concerns that some paid advertisers have. bang on. its not the issue of controlling their own reviews.
I like to think this gets down to the basics of supply and demand. A company spends advertising/marketing dollars to their demographic to drive an increase in business in revenue. The members of this board are the demand and thus the paid advertisers are given a direct link to this demand to hopefully increase revenues. Those that are not paid advertisers are thus limited to the demand in exposure and are purely word of mouth. I think the board in its current format meets all needs for everyone and should continue that way. Just my 2 cents.
If that is the case, the solution is very simple. Apply a rule to MP's so that no reviews can be posted unless they are a paid advertiser. It is quite obvious this is a huge problem with MP's as opposed to SP agencies.
If you separate the poll between SP's and MP's I think the results would be totally different. I know for sure I would say status quo for SP agencies but definitely change the rules for MP's.
BINGO BANGO BINGO. Thats what this debate is all about. Not whether the advertisers have control over the reviews. That would never happen. In Montreal, the promoting of unpaid advertisers is not allowed ( ie) the non paying Asian MPs.
The Asian MP's and for that matter, any Asians in the sex industry are well known to have next to zero ethics on any level. I simply refuse to patronize any of them. Having said that, I think there is no greater purpose for TERB than to allow reviews of them. So many are full of bait and switch old ladies. Yet, <sigh> so many guys go and see them... report back that they were bait and switch, yet stayed anyways! lol!
