Thank you for your responses but, now what amount of money is a fair amount to give if your not happy with what you see???  

I get the lie...  Zero.

But now she's just not what you were looking for nor there isn't a single amount of attraction there.  How much do you give her???

SP

...in this particular hypothetical, you just end up not being attracted to her (through no fault or misrepresentation of her own). In that case, it's your problem and she shouldn't suffer for that. A true gentleman would give her at least half, if not more. Again, this is assuming that she didn't misrepresent herself.  

If she didn't misrepresent herself and you had an opportunity to view her pics, even with blurred out faces, then I think you're on the hook for the full fee. She's reserved the time for you and in the process probably turned away other guys. So there's opportunity cost at a minimum. She may also be out of pocket for the hotel room. So if you get there and decide you're not into it then that's on you. Lay the envelope down and hit the road.

One note....had to suspend disbelief on this scenario. Most guys are going to say fuck it...I'm already here...

if she deliberately represented herself, I'd even charge her for my time
but if there are no pics, 1/2 sounds reasonable, depending on the actual $

but in all honestly, I think you are referring to those that look completely different in person, than they do on pics.. well, TER does a nice job of providing avg looks score, and if you're still not happy or not attracted, it may not be her fault.  maybe you're expecting too much?!
so I don't know.. technically, 1/2 should do the trick.. sorry, we didn't click.  you didn't spend the $$$, and she didn't waste her time too much, so 1/2 should keep things ok.

While you're likely to stir an interesting debate with this topic, the bottom line is that this is a completely unregulated enterprise where there are absolutely no rules or guidelines to follow. You can do all the research in the world, but it's still a crapshoot the first time you meet with a provider. This is a service industry fueled by alluring and enticing marketing strategies to generate business. There are countless stories of hobbyists doing their homework and arranging a date with the expectation that they have hit a home run, only to leave the session thinking WTF was the hype all about. You're trading in intimate human interactions, something that is entirely subjective and deeply personal. The bottom line:the decision to walk out the door, as well as whether to leave any compensation at all for a cancelled engagement, is entirely up to the client. The provider obviously has no legal recourse, but she can certainly seek retribution fairly easy by spreading the word electronically, and alerting others of the perils of booking an appointment with a canceling hobbyist who walks and does not pay. Communication and the dissemination of information (whether accurate or not) is so easy these days, and as the adage goes, you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. The advice already provided by others is pretty straight-forward and is something I would definitely follow. If there has been a deliberate misrepresentation by the provider you don't have a valid agreement to meet, so you politely tell her so and leave without any form of compensation. If the provider has been relatively straight-forward in her dealings with you, but for whatever reason you get to the arranged meeting and are disappointed with what is being presented, you MAN UP and fulfill the bargain you have made with her. You can walk if you want, but the proper thing to do would be to turn over the agreed-to donation and chalk it up to experience.

to see if she's interesting enough to talk to for the time booked, but yeah, pay the tax imo

n those cases where you arrive at an appointment and are disappointed with the provider's appearance, I think it's more about OUR expectations not being met and less about the provider being deceitful in portraying herself.  Remember most higher end providers present themselves with professional photoshopped pictures, which are never a realistic image of them.  So you need to lower expectations in most cases and realize the lady behind the door is NOT going to look like her glammed up pictures in person.  Since the disappointment is self created by the hobbyist, it's not appropriate to cancel a date just because she doesn't look like you built her up in your mind to look like.  Besides, there is far more that adds to an encounter than just looks.  I've met with a number of pretty women (but not drop dead gorgeous) who provided awesome, memorable experiences.  It's the whole package that excites me.  So in answering your question (in a round about way), I give her the full donation and hang around to play for the hour

I totally disagree. You condone a provider placing "professional photoshopped pictures, which are never a realistic image of them[selves]" on their websites, and then somehow blame the hobbyist for having unrealistic expectations that the pictures are actually an accurate representation of the woman he/she desires to spend time with after laying out a considerable financial consideration! The "disappointment is self created by the hobbyist?" Did you really write that as a serious commentary, or are you simply trying to be humorous? Let's take your position to its logical conclusion then. If it is acceptable for the provider to entice and mislead the hobbyist with false representations of their physical appearance, then the entire basis for this "services contract" between the two is highly suspect, and everything about the arrangement is open for negotiation and compromise. If I enter an agreement to pay X amount of money, for X amount of time, to engage in X activities with the woman being represented in the pictures on the website, and a woman with a different representation actually appears for the scheduled tryst, it is only fair that I be allowed to negotiate different financial, time, and activity terms because I relied on a very material misrepresentation in agreeing to the contract in the first place. If you really expect the hobbyist to "lower expectations" (I really can't believe you wrote that), then it's only right to lower other things as well, including consideration.

If you are just not happy with what you see then you should at least comp her the amount of her lowest appt that could be offered to you.  So say you are a new guest and you want to see me, but because I blur my face you can't see how I look.  Maybe I look too much like someone you know, or just don't find me attractive for one reason or another.  You can either go through with what you booked, reduce the time which I am sometimes though not always able or willing to do(but no harm to ask), or comp me the cost of my lowest offered to you session which would be the 1/2hr massage.  You can take the massage if you like, or just leave the $ and roll.  Up to you.

I think it is at least fair to comp her for her lowest session since it is no fault of her own that you are bailing.

-- Modified on 1/30/2014 3:52:41 PM

I never said I condone a provider for professional photoshopped pics.  My point was that if a provider's pics ARE professionally photoshopped (Scott Church, Aldo Antonio, etc.), then you're a fool to think the lady behind the door is going to look as glamorous as her photos.  And if you DO think that's what she is going to look like, then your expectations are exaggerated and yes, your imminent disappointment is self created.  Similarly if you make an appointment with a provider who blurs her face, you will formulate a mental image of what you expect her to look like and that mental image will be one that is attractive to you.  When the door opens and she looks nothing like your mental image and disappointment sets in, is it the providers fault?  No, again the disappointment was self created.  OK, so maybe I shouldn't have stated that hobbyists "lower expectations", a better phrase would of been to have "realistic expectations".

If you approach situations in life with high expectations, then the best outcome will be to meet those expectations, with the worse outcome being great disappointment.  If you approach situations with realistic expectations, then the best outcome can be to exceed those expectations, with the worse outcome being mild disappointment.  I'll live with the later philosophy any day.

You can backtrack all you want, but when you criticize the hobbyist for having expectations based on distorted and misrepresentative images that are posted by the provider for the express purpose of inducing you to purchase her services, and over which she has exclusive control, you are tacitly condoning the practice. In addition, not one word from you that even hints at any type of complaint or criticism for this underhanded advertising. If a car dealership posts a picture of a new Mercedes Benz with a sale price of $25,000, and then tells you it's really a Ford Focus that is being offered for that price when you arrive to pick it up, do you really blame the buyer for being upset and accuse him of having exaggerated expectations? I am only speaking for myself, but I think the vast majority of hobbyists will agree, the providers websites are not online versions of Playboy or Penthouse that we comb through to satisfy our voyeuristic urges. I am also sure the providers will agree that they do not create these cites so men can have online pictorials to pleasure themselves with. They are  created, paid for, and maintained for the express purpose of soliciting clients for their business. The vast majority of hobbyists peruse the cites so they can make an informed decision as to who they want to spend time with in consideration for what is oftentimes substantial cash outlays.  

I find your comment about "realistic expectations" to be absurd. You may be the exception, but I would guess that most hobbyists have exceedingly high expectations, and rightfully so. The last I looked this entire enterprise is based on sexual fantasy. If you want realistic expectations you stay home with your SO and save your money. Or, you go online, seek out what it is that will fulfill your particular sexual needs and/or desires, and hopefully make an informed decision that produces positive results. Do you think it's merely chance that there is a significant disparity between the median age of the providers vis a vis the median age of the hobbyists. Perhaps you're different, but I am completely cognizant of the fact that in the real world I no longer p have any chance of engaging in intimate sexual contact with beautiful, intelligent, charming young woman. Fortunately, this hobby allows me the opportunity to do so. And when/if I make plans based on erroneous and misleading information, I am going to be upset when the deception is revealed. It has happened in the past, and I have simply continued the session, acted like a gentleman, provided the agreed-to compensation, and left without a scene, knowing full well I would never return. But to somehow infer that I was wrong for having unrealistic expectations, you sir, are sadly mistaken.

When you, or any other provider, blurs their face I can only assume that you do so for issues of privacy and/or safety. I personally don't find that to be deceptive, and if I was somehow disappointed in how you looked when we met, I would still pay the entire negotiated donation. It was my choice to see you, I knew that your face was obscured when I made the appointment, but I chose to schedule the date anyway. That is a far cry from affirmatively altering your image, so that my choice is not based on an accurate depiction, but on an altered photograph that leads me to an erroneous conclusion. That is what I personally feel is wrong.

First impressions are temporary. I've found some of my best lady friends were not lookers at first blush.

I think too many guys, at least from posts here, think of this as some kind of real business, where if you are unsatisfied you can take it up with management and get your way. Maybe its' because guys here are higher income and they are use to that sort of treatment.

As for me, I grew up sort of poor and eventually did all right so maybe I still see things from that level. This is a blackmarket type of business. You take what you get and sometimes deals go bad. If things don't quite work out, you learn from it and move on. It shows a little bit of pettiness and entitlement if you think just because you don't "click" with a girl you can somehow ditch out on the agreed upon money. Think about the opposite situation, if she saw you, and didn't like you and decided not to see you, you would be on the boards cussing and swearing to ruin her good name calling her flake and whatever else.

It's a blackmarket, underground economy thing. You take what you get. Some deals are going to go bad, some are going to go great.

I'm not trying to come off as a great guy or anything, I'm probably the biggest asshole here if we all met in person. But a deal is a deal, as soon as you agree to it, you gotta follow through.

Ask yourself this, would you pull the same shit if you were making a shady illegal deal in a hotel room with a 300lb guy who is probably carrying a gun? I doubt it. Would you say, "here's some taxi fare, now get lost the deals off"?

Where you one of the fellas at the Deerfield motel Squeezy identified above. You made a couple of good points but generally missed the boat on the relevant issue. While the legislature finds it objectionable, I would venture to say that the vast majority of the women on the legitimate boards definitely look at this as a legitimate, professional service industry and act accordingly. They are serious as a heart attack, and expend vast resources in marketing their particular brand, travel and lodging costs, wardrobe, makeup, professional photography, etc. It is hardly underground as anyone with a computer and internet service can see untold examples of what is being offered for hire.  

You are right in that there is no legal recourse in the event the contract between the provider and hobbyist is broken or unfulfilled. You are also right that the providers take an enormous risk, despite all of the screening they do, every time they open that door and let a stranger in for his/her first visit. The hobbyist may turn out to be the most kindhearted gentleman in the world, but have the looks and appearance of a deranged serial killer. I know some of the providers make light of this, and rationalize that the beauty of the donation is paramount, but it still amazes me that they do their best to fulfill the gents fantasies and dreams. If that doesn't scream professionalism then nothing does. That is not a description of an underground business.

Which brings me to the point. The entire industry at this point, with the few exceptions where it has been legalized, is self-policing. And the way that is accomplished is through the various online forums where information can be shared and monitored, and issues can be debated in a hopefully rational and sane manner. So the fact of the matter is that when a provider shells out upwards of thousands of dollars to participate in this endeavor, it is my personal opinion that he/she should receive the benefit of what he bargained for. When a provider deliberately manipulates images to falsely enhance their physical being, for the sole purpose of soliciting business, I feel there should be an opportunity to renegotiate the terms of the agreement as there has been a material misrepresentation that misled and induced one side to agree to the terms of the session. I realize that is taboo, for any number of reasons, but in my opinion it would be a fair compromise. I have absolutely no false illusions that this will ever happen, and this is all speculative and hypothetical to begin with, but it's still an opinion, just like the ones you presented, and that is what these board's are all about.