It was said by a certain character that even so much as discussing a boycott on a message board can result in "damage" that is raising prices by orgs. I've yet to see any, even anecdotal, evidence of this being true.

Rocketbro,

You are certainly under no obligation to correctly quote anyone. As you’ve exhibited in many cases. Some people are even considering giving you an award for your creative reading achievements. All this misquoting others just to justify a rant is damaging that reputation for telling the truth you claim to treasure so much.  

Sounds like you're the one who ranted here.  

You’re still doing a pretty poor job of reading what I wrote. But, hey, you are free to make things up however you wish. Since, according to you, you’re not getting laid these days, nobody can blame you for being a bit off your reading game.

Thank you brother twoon for answering this. I don't really see the link here, because I think they raised it before the boycott was discussed, but it certainly is some evidence.  

What you meant because I think what's quoted is pretty easily understood.

Yet somehow he thinks I’m saying there is solid evidence and a direct link. Some people will misread even what most will say is easily understood.

I think he was referring to a comment I made about price increases by providers. The suggestion was that if quantity demanded was dropping it was not something driven by prices. Therefore, if the women are not paying their bills at their current rate, and given reducing prices would not be expected to increase number of visits, they really loose nothing by increasing their prices. In fact increasing the price to the point where their limited sessions would then support their basic needs makes sense.

First, thank you for actually answering. We don't really see face to face on many things,but I will give you props here. And I mean it.  

I'm not sure if "the quoted" is what you quoted from useyrhead's post in the other thread or something I wrote.

Right, your plane analogy makes sense - but the point is, if death was not feared, it wouldn't make sense to say that.

I don't think there is a DIRECT link between boycotts and price increases, but since its a supply and demand market, it certainly makes sense that if  demand drops, orgs will close up some of the incalls, thereby reducing the number of available work spaces for Kgirls.  When the boycott is over, and there is a surge in demand, it is an opportune time to raise prices before meeting the demand by adding more apartments to the incall inventory.  

I would humbly add my theory about the Bay Area. The reason that the average age of kgirls is skyrocketing (bordering on the absurd that they are still advertising as 20-somethings) is because price point is way higher in most other markets. We’re becoming a backwater the way emeryville is to the greater Bay Area. Just a thought. Maybe I’m totally wrong.

Makes sense too -- and I don't really think there is just one thing driving the outcome.

That all the girls at one agency are 26, at a few others they are 23, and most all of them are never older than 27.  I guess some agencies just get lucky that way.  Then we show up to see these supposedly "low-mileage" girls and are sometimes confronted with a pussy with so many miles, its out of warranty.  Lol

Right now the kgirls aren’t trusting each other very much when it comes to Covid prevention. The Bay Area girls look at the stats for LA and want nothing to do with anyone from down there. Though that’s easing up from what it was a few months ago.

Speaking of age, one thing I dislike severely about ter is that profiles stay static and aren't updated unless girl age on ad is updated.

concentrated in low-income "hot spots."  East LA has had over 2000 new cases in the last month, while Malibu has had less than 50, and dropping steadily.  That's why our state gov just moved the goal posts by declaring the whole county must meet certain guidelines before opening ANY PORTION of it up, even if a hot spot is 50 miles away.  East LA has a problem with its citizens following the Covid guidelines and wearing masks, so the Malibu residents who do follow the guidelines will also be punished.  This is similar to what the Nazis did during WWII when they would line up a whole town and then just randomly shoot every 10th person in the line because the "resistance" groups scattered throughout the town were still fighting back.  At least they haven't started shooting us yet for not wearing a mask, but its still a draconian measure.  

Oh my God, you have to wear a mask, such Nazi measure!

He referred to the punishment as being not able to “open up”. Not wearing a mask.

If I can't get into some place without one, and there are many businesses like that in OC where I live. It's actually better for the species as a whole if those with weak genetics are culled form the herd. Why allow them to pass their shitty genes onto another generation?  In the every-man-for-himself of our current society, the concept of personal sacrifice for the greater good is a thing of the past. You may find these comments shocking, but its the way most people thought a couple of generations ago, not to mention its backed up by science.

you were going to follow up the "I only wear a mask . . ." with "when I join into a TER Boycott!"

It’s a new game!

Shocking? You're reciting the same perverted adaptation of the Ubermensch/untermensch concept, hat, ironically enough, Nazis used and liked. Not shocking at all.  

Why would you eschew something which gives you an additional sense of anonymity, if nothing else? Even if the incall doesn't require it but the people around there use them, you stand out.

Wearing a mask apparently also is a punishment for him.

That may or may not be true. My comment only dealt with the content of the post above where he only referred to punishment in regard to opening.

...or is it more of your bullshit?  "...it's the way most people thought a couple of generations ago."  EXACTLY - a couple of generations ago.  People's thinking, not to mention science, have made incredible advances since "a couple of generations ago."  And the herd immunity theory has never been tried to stop a pandemic.  You really have contempt for the readers of your posts, don't you?  You expect them to swallow your bullshit and ask for more.

apartment complexes, there are just about as many people without masks as there are with masks.  OC is ahead of LA in the phased reopening of  everything.  

apartment complexes, there are just about as many people without masks as there are with masks.  OC is ahead of LA in the phased reopening of  everything.  

Reopening doesn't mean you don't still have to wear a mask, if anything, it's the opposite because businesses are experiencing increased foot traffic.

The punishment is not being able to open up ANY part of a county because other parts still have a problem because certain areas are not complying in efforts to control the spread of new cases.  Wearing a mask isn't a punishment, but it IS  an annoyance, but still a duty if you are in an area with a lot of new cases.  Me wearing a mask does NOT save lives unless I have Covid, which I don't.  If I get it, then I WILL wear a mask.  

Most people dont know when they get covid until they test for it. Many don't have any symptoms. Wearing a mask might save someone's life.

let's NOT keep rehashing old COVID shit. And not just saying that to you rocket; let's just try to keep this board at least on K related discussions.

I agree. Let’s keep this about k-girls.

I don't think I ever said I'm anti-org. I'm anti-bullshit, and unfortunately, they be peddling a whole lot of ol' bullshit.

I get it.

It took you more than 7 minutes and 3 edits to make this comment?

That is not my reasoning at all. I simply am not convinced, or haven't seen any indication that "drama" as you call it creates opportunity for orgs to raise prices. Some orgs already been raising prices for certain providers. I do not know whose call it was (provider's or the orgs'), but I certainly did not remember much drama around those small raises.  

wear one while you fuck if you want, or are  you one of those low-volume guys who is using coronavirus as an "excuse" for not seeing Kgirls?   I'm not worried.  According to my doc, I'm in better shape than most guys half my age.  

those that are high-risk be responsible for their OWN health and look out for themselves.  I'm not my brother's keeper, so why would I do it for a stranger?  If they are worried about catching Covid, then they should operate on the premise that EVERYBODY else has it, and do what they have to do to protect themselves.  My dad is 95, and he wears a mask AND a face shield, and carries hand sanitizer in his pocket.  He' being responsible for himself and assumes he is coming in contact with others on a daily basis that are shedding Covid virus.  Like I said, is I do get it, I will take additional precautions, but I don't see the need to wear a mask all the time I'm away from home.  No one in my office has worn a mask during this whole covid period.  We do a temp scan when people arrive and so far have not had to send anyone back home.  

If you possess any type of insurance or contribute to social welfare programs, which you likely do, you're in direct opposition to this philosophy.

I wonder if Halsey is returning to LA. We swapped numbers but haven't heard back in a bit.  

but to get it i need you to "kill 3 guys with a fucking pencil"!!!!!!

for my employees, but I use a HSA for myself, so I'm self-insured.  So you could say I'm looking out for others who can't fully look  out after themselves, but I don't consider it a social welfare program, because its a closed group.  Nice try, though.  You took a calculated risk that the odds were in your favor because average Americans usually have insurance.  However, I'm not an average American.  You don't look that dumb this time.  Congrats.  Lol

You don't pay payroll tax or contribute to Social Security and Medicare? Sad. What sort of risk calculation do you do for a comment online? This isn't actuarial science.

the employer's portion of Social Security and Medicare, because those are required by law.  Your question was about CONTRIBUTING to  social causes.  Then it was about buying insurance.  Now its about whether I pay the tax man sums that ARE REQUIRED BY LAW.   You're moving the goal posts again, a sure sign that you know you lost this debate. Lol