Good point. If I can learn how to scrape P4 web pages automatically, I could update this much more easily. Beyond some point, Gina might object...
Yes, "Men and their desires/spending habits are very difficult to predict and plot on a graph", but what I was looking for when I started playing with the numbers was to see if provider availability scales in some way from city to city. Population? Nope. Money? Ding, ding, ding! I need to find a better way to measure "money", because it's disposable income, not overall income that counts. For instance, Detroit looks hugely underserved until you look at the income distribution. Lots of money in the area, yes, but the large portion of it is distributed amongst a lot of poor people, so the "market" is actually lots smaller than it looksSorry, this is long...bottom line, I'm trying to figure out where providers SHOULD tour, just based on economics.
The previous thread "Touring Cities you think providers should visit" got me thinking. From a -providers- POV, where should the ladies tour? Should it be about, oh, I don't know, MONEY or something? Yes, but what can we say about where prospects look good, or not so good? There are data sources that can begin to answer this question.
Conclusions first for the tl;dr crowd:
===========================================================================
1. It takes roughly $1B (yes, billion) in the local economy to attract one provider on P4. In a $16T economy, this would allow for roughly 16,000 providers in the US (again, just P4). In many cities in the USA, 15 of 23, this $1B/provider is a very accurate prediction of how many ladies are available in those cities.
2. In the cities listed, there are 4842 active providers (on P4) in cities that total $3.7T of US GDP.
3. The most over served city (lots of providers for dollars in the local economy) is....surprise, Las Vegas. Las Vegas, being a destination for this, is just loaded with hookers. Not a place I'd try to go touring. With just 1/8th of the population, Vegas has as many providers as New York City!
4. After Las Vegas, the toughest markets (lots of providers per dollar in the local economy, appear to be: Houston, Dallas, Denver. Touring ladies, based JUST on the local economy size, these markets look pretty saturated.
5. Despite lots of providers already, Boston, New York and DC look like attractive markets for new ladies since there is a lot of money per provider.
6. Two POTENTIALLY underserved markets are Detroit and Philadelphia. Detroit, of course, has a bad local economy, so if I were suggesting one new place to try, it would be Philly.
7. I don't live in any of this cities listed, so this is just a straight economic analysis.
8. I'd welcome replies or PMs to improve this analysis. Please no rants, and I'll tolerate anecdotes, since they may suggest systematic ways to improve the analysis. I'm aware of many shortcomings of this first cut: I only used P4. Per capita income is not DISPOSABLE income, which is what really counts. The TER Top 100 list has odd quirks, like "Carolinas" and Cleveland, but not Columbus or Cincinnati, etc.
==========================================================================
Here's the list of every locale that TER has with a Top 100 list (except Carolinas and New Jersey, which are large geographical areas, not cities, so I took them out). Here's the number of active listings on P4 for each location and the wealth in that location. Wealth is population times per capita income. (I used Wolram Alpha for population and per capita income, but google gives similar numbers).
Then we normalize this by dividing wealth by number of providers. That number is the economic base available to support the "next" provider who comes to the city.
Cities with a small Dollars/Provider are "over served", cities with a large Dollars/Provider are "underserved".
City Dollars/Provider
Albuquerque 824,704,621
Atlanta 851,882,345
Boston 1,133,875,728
Chicago 960,283,154
Cleveland 683,942,727
Dallas 312,404,804
Denver 460,781,949
Detroit 2,033,447,368
Houston 342,862,579
Las Vegas 122,238,876
Los Angeles 925,172,152
Miami 921,986,047
Minnesota 1,015,710,843
New York 1,300,089,372
Orange Count 1,094,044,330
Orlando 978,876,923
Philadelphia 1,936,411,765
Phoenix 822,801,587
San Diego 609,150,000
San Francisc 892,803,433
Seattle 852,250,000
Tampa 1,033,092,308
DC 1,329,133,679
My ATF is away on an extended vacation, so yes, I'm bored. The inclusion of Albuquerque on the list is a HINT. Ahem.
For the Powerpoint presentation I would probably divide all your City$/provider by 1B and present a bar graph highlighting the positive and negative deviation from 1.
From a touring perspective maybe some data from the each city's tourism agency about the average cost per day in that city (or GSA Per Diem rates) to examine if touring in an expensive city like NY is really that advantageous over a smaller/cheaper city like Orlando.
Impressive work!
Good suggestions. I would have much preferred a graph, but TER doesn't support it directly. I'll see if I can link to an image on an external server for the next iteration, and normalize it as you suggest.
As in the time of the year you choose to tour to a place, how many other touring ladies are there at the same time, what area of the city you stay in, how far ahead you advertise. Men and their desires/spending habits are very difficult to predict and plot on a graph. For example Phoenix has a large population and when I toured once in April I did very well. This last tour in June when it was 1000 degrees, not so good. Likewise in Albuquerque. I've toured 3 times in the last 2 years. Twice was great and the last time in June, not so good.
Good point. If I can learn how to scrape P4 web pages automatically, I could update this much more easily. Beyond some point, Gina might object...
Yes, "Men and their desires/spending habits are very difficult to predict and plot on a graph", but what I was looking for when I started playing with the numbers was to see if provider availability scales in some way from city to city. Population? Nope. Money? Ding, ding, ding! I need to find a better way to measure "money", because it's disposable income, not overall income that counts.
For instance, Detroit looks hugely underserved until you look at the income distribution. Lots of money in the area, yes, but the large portion of it is distributed amongst a lot of poor people, so the "market" is actually lots smaller than it looks
...don't limit your list to the cities that TER has a top 100 list. There are other metro areas which you've missed where a lot of ladies visit. St. Louis, Columbus, Cincinnati, Pittsburg, Milwaukee, Omaha, New Orleans, Memphis, Nashville, to name a few.
I heard Ohio is a great place to play. I am going to add it to my Sin is In 2016 tour schedule. Nashville would be fun too 🤗
"St. Louis, Columbus, Cincinnati, Pittsburg, Milwaukee, Omaha, New Orleans, Memphis, Nashville"
I'll add them and repost. Pretty easy to do now that the spreadsheet is made. TER Top 100 page was just a starting point and P4 has a much more detailed breakdown by city.
Other cities, anyone?
Smaller cities such as Charlottesville, NC, Providence, RI and Buffalo, NY/Niagra Falls Canada come to mind. Far enough from other major cities like Atlanta, DC, NYC and Boston to have their own clients who dont want to travel to see providers.
you clearly have to much "time" on your hands.
Thank you very much xo Erin
Thanks for the data. You have landed on the question that we wrestle with the most. Although saturation is potentially a big factor, as well as the economics, there are other factors that work into the mix including LE, convention/tourism business and how liberal a community is with respect to sexual issues.
It all turns into a complicated math problem. I wish there was a way on TER to pose the question to hobbiests so that we could plan better. We are always open to hobbiests' advice and recommendations.
Tori & Nick
in the stock market these days - can you please make recommendations?!
So, there are 4842 active providers in these cities. I wonder how many active clients.
From P4:
Provider Listings: 12,862
Client Members: 35,03
So, 3 times as many Clients as Providers....sounds like we need more Clients for the Providers! The real question is, how active are the Clients and Providers. A Client who sees a Provider 3 times per year isn't active. A Provider who sees a Client 4 times per year isn't active. Averages are, of course, misleading
I think for the most part it is really hard to try to find out where to tour because it really depends on so much now that I think about this. Really I do wish it was a easier way. Sometimes major cities are the best and sometimes small cities are the best. I guess the only way to know is to become a nationwide provider and tour all over and then take your top 5 states from that.
I've seen that done a lot.
I've found the smaller to mid size cities work best for me to tour. I also prefer them to stay in. In really big cities you need to stay in 3 or 4 areas because everywhere you decide to stay is too far for some guys to travel. For example Chicago - I stay downtown because I like it but I should probably also try Schaumberg, Ohare, Oakbrook etc as separate tour places.
my bedroom, my living room and my dining room ...
is that what you meant by other areas
Hahahahahaha I think we could have fun in all those 'areas' and do some excellent analysis 
)
The previous thread "Touring Cities you think providers should visit" got me thinking. From a -providers- POV, where should the ladies tour? Should it be about, oh, I don't know, MONEY or something? Yes, but what can we say about where prospects look good, or not so good? There are data sources that can begin to answer this question.
Conclusions first for the tl;dr crowd:
===========================================================================
1. It takes roughly $1B (yes, billion) in the local economy to attract one provider on P4. In a $16T economy, this would allow for roughly 16,000 providers in the US (again, just P4). In many cities in the USA, 15 of 23, this $1B/provider is a very accurate prediction of how many ladies are available in those cities.
2. In the cities listed, there are 4842 active providers (on P4) in cities that total $3.7T of US GDP.
3. The most over served city (lots of providers for dollars in the local economy) is....surprise, Las Vegas. Las Vegas, being a destination for this, is just loaded with hookers. Not a place I'd try to go touring. With just 1/8th of the population, Vegas has as many providers as New York City!
4. After Las Vegas, the toughest markets (lots of providers per dollar in the local economy, appear to be: Houston, Dallas, Denver. Touring ladies, based JUST on the local economy size, these markets look pretty saturated.
5. Despite lots of providers already, Boston, New York and DC look like attractive markets for new ladies since there is a lot of money per provider.
6. Two POTENTIALLY underserved markets are Detroit and Philadelphia. Detroit, of course, has a bad local economy, so if I were suggesting one new place to try, it would be Philly.
7. I don't live in any of this cities listed, so this is just a straight economic analysis.
8. I'd welcome replies or PMs to improve this analysis. Please no rants, and I'll tolerate anecdotes, since they may suggest systematic ways to improve the analysis. I'm aware of many shortcomings of this first cut: I only used P4. Per capita income is not DISPOSABLE income, which is what really counts. The TER Top 100 list has odd quirks, like "Carolinas" and Cleveland, but not Columbus or Cincinnati, etc.
==========================================================================
Here's the list of every locale that TER has with a Top 100 list (except Carolinas and New Jersey, which are large geographical areas, not cities, so I took them out). Here's the number of active listings on P4 for each location and the wealth in that location. Wealth is population times per capita income. (I used Wolram Alpha for population and per capita income, but google gives similar numbers).
Then we normalize this by dividing wealth by number of providers. That number is the economic base available to support the "next" provider who comes to the city.
Cities with a small Dollars/Provider are "over served", cities with a large Dollars/Provider are "underserved".
City Dollars/Provider
Albuquerque 824,704,621
Atlanta 851,882,345
Boston 1,133,875,728
Chicago 960,283,154
Cleveland 683,942,727
Dallas 312,404,804
Denver 460,781,949
Detroit 2,033,447,368
Houston 342,862,579
Las Vegas 122,238,876
Los Angeles 925,172,152
Miami 921,986,047
Minnesota 1,015,710,843
New York 1,300,089,372
Orange Count 1,094,044,330
Orlando 978,876,923
Philadelphia 1,936,411,765
Phoenix 822,801,587
San Diego 609,150,000
San Francisc 892,803,433
Seattle 852,250,000
Tampa 1,033,092,308
DC 1,329,133,679
My ATF is away on an extended vacation, so yes, I'm bored. The inclusion of Albuquerque on the list is a HINT. Ahem.
very interesting ... I like thinking about the industry from an economic perspective and your analysis is very helpful.
Plus I hail from one of the underserved cities in your list and so anything that encourages more ladies to visit is always welcome.
I think another way to phrase the question you are asking is what is the supply like relative to demand, and one way to answer this question is what is the average provider rate in each market. Cities where the demand is high relative to supply (i.e. underserved) will see the average hourly rate climb until supply and demand are in balance. Similarly overserved cities will see rates fall. So looking at the average hourly rate would give another to tell if a market is overserved or underserved. You can eyeball the average rate by just looking through the listings, but a better way would be to take the date from P4 and average the hourly rates for all the providers in each market. I haven't done this calculation, but based solely on my experience from visiting different cities, I suspect that this average price data would track your figures reasonably well. For example, Dallas appears to have lower average rates and is shown to be overserved in your calculations. Similarly, NYC seems to have higher rates and your data shows it to be underserved. I also suspect there would be some differences between these two approaches with Las Vegas being the city that comes to mind. My experience is that Las Vegas has a fairly high average rate but is shown as overserved in your table. My guess for the reason is that the official GDP figures don't fully account for the wealth of the visitors.
just my thoughts anyway ..
I have worked in Albuquerque and Atlanta. They are not cool to work in. The guys are cheap hagglers and or NCNS.
No one haggled or gave me any grief!!