Had no phone numbers on the site this morning, now the extended url shows ‘suspended’.
Any intel? Maybe they just forgot to pay the hosting bill? sagNothing concrete. Site is back up. Phone did get removed from the site and so was Gigi, which is... eyebrow-raising?
Birds are coming back to the aa nest?
This is all fascinating.
GFEI also put out a large statement about raising prices and market rates. I dont necessarily agree with it, but at least they pretend to care to communicate why they're raising the prices. This is a lot more than I can say for other orgs
Not trying to be combative, but how can you not agree with a price increase to $240/hr when other markets in CA are charging $260-$280/hr? Even if the talent isn't as good as those markets, the price is still lower than them and substantially lower than the EC.
I mean that I don't necessarily agree with their evaluation of factors. A huge part of reason bay area prices have been kept low is high volume, and that conveniently was not mentioned. When you fail to mention one of the biggest contributing factors, it somewhat devalues this report.
I believe I mentioned many times that I personally have very little issue with paying more as long as this money goes to the girls (obviously) - not the POs or org owners - and they are happier and the talent exodus is halted.
With that said, I also have solidarity and understanding for those who can barely afford to hobby as it is. This doesn't make them "cheap" or doesn't mean others can flex their sense of superiority over them because they have more money.
This kind of turmoil and drama is part and parcel of the Bay Area kgirl experience. It’s part of a cycle that has been going on since back in the rouge livre days.
Note: part of this cycle has been the occasional forum storm of posts on kgirl rates across the country. More than a few times these have been instigated or egged on by people who are allegedly “new mongers” (hmm). When a significant pay disparity is exposed by one of these forum discussions, the Bay Area orgs begin adjusting rates. For example, check out the letter from GFEI. They quote review sites and forums as their primary source of information. Yes, folks. That would be us.
Just because an org says one of their sources was review sites and forums, doesn't make it so.
I would think someone who says that you shouldn't
trust anyone, would agree with me here.
The last entity you should trust in this case is a type of entity that wants to make money and have shown they're not above making up fake reviews and even criminal activity.
GFEI, with all that said, is an exemplary org to at least show concern for their customers by publicly addressing the issue. Kudos to them. All other orgs should take notes. At least make a fucking effort like you care about your customers.
The only thing I would say about GFEI’s post is that a burrito in one city can cost much more than one in another city. Market in Oakland would not support a $15 burrito whereas one in SF is routinely that expensive.
Wages vs cost of living must be considered. My 100,000 cannot support $300 dates. Texas has wages on par with ours but no income tax and $1.99/lb ground beef. The math is not going to work because of market forces which don’t make sense just saying that this is Silicon Valley so they must have a ton of spare ducats. It’s weird to wrap your head around because this is literally the highest income area in the country but when you let a typical monger do his finances, he might not have &300/pop just because he works for facebook. So away they go, to be Korean immigrants in places with no koreatown, no connection, and no cultural worth to them. It’s like having a really good job but being stationed in Alaska. You’re making the bucks, but is that all there is? Maybe. But as weird as it sounds, $300 ain’t gonna fly here. More power to them for doing what they have to do, but that seems pretty simple to grok in my mind. That’s the catch of GFEI’s post. They’re preaching to a clientele that will likely diminish since it ain’t the McLaren driving crowd that’s supporting the orgs.
But yeah, at least they took the time to say what they need, and if they put the hot young talent behimd it rather than what we’re seeing now in the bay, they’ll do well and deserve to.
sag
Is the Korean community in LA that much different from the one in the Bay? It's not as nice as anything in CA, but NoVa does have a pretty robust Korean community.
I'm curious why you think cost of living is largely only relevant to the consumer and not the service provider?
But taking what you say as correct for the BA market, the clear implication to me is that the K-girl clientele apparently cannot support the quality providers so will always see only lower quality on some or all margins (looks, attitude, age, service).
What seems surprising to me, a high quality market segment doesn't seem to exist in the BA given there are clearly very a lot high income people in that area even when considering cost of real estate and taxes. I'm not talking about the $1000, $5000, $10,000 rate girls but just those in the $350 - $500 range that might be happy with half the work for 90% of the income working at the agencies. (If the girls are making $120/hr, have 6 sessions a day and work an average or 5 days a week for the year they are bringing in over 180K.)
Except to say I agree with it 100% lol
I can't understand for the life of me how a person can argue that a provider should charge LESS in a market with a high cost of living, that has got to be the dumbest thing I have ever heard of.
Can you imagine mongers in NYC arguing that hookers should charge LESS in NYC because the cost of living is so high? Yeah, I can see how far they would get with that attitude. lol
I don't frequent the BA even though I was born and raised there, but it does seem odd that according to the posters from that area there doesn't seem to be any "middle class" where it comes to hookers, I honestly am having a VERY hard time believing that is indeed the case there. Maybe there aren't any/many $3-500 Asian providers, but somebody has to be filling that void in the market that these guys claim exists there.
"Jensen, go fuck yourself" but I'll be low keyed and accept the alternative here. lol
"Jensen, go fuck yourself" would have been appropriate if you have proven ME wrong, but since I was never on the opposite side of the argument there was no need for such high praise. lol
There was a time, even after the economy went south in 2008, when BA mongers were more likely to schedule multi hour sessions and tip $100 or more to girls they liked. I knew girls who had weeks where their tips alone were several thousand dollars. Some of them used that as an excuse to take the weekend off and go shopping.
Some mongers would take a top girl, it was almost always one of the top girls, and pay the org’s exorbitant day rate just so they could say they spent a day with a popular kgirl. Not just anybody could do that, though. It wasn’t just the money. The girl had to OK the monger.
When there’s money like that to be had, those girls we all will admit qualify as “top girls” are attracted to it. And the whales who book those longer sessions and pay those large tips are essentially subsidizing the presence of those girls for all the rest of us to enjoy.
But we now have a very different culture here. We have prolific posters who practically mock anyone who, in their mind, wastes their money for those longer sessions. They actually try to convince everyone that the service you get in a one hour session is either identical to what you get in a multi-hour. Or they claim the differences are so negligible as to not be worth the time or money.
Though YMMV always applies, all my experience and that of quite a few other mongers I know and have known indicates that there is usually a pretty significant difference between what happens in a one hour compared to a two hour session. There may or may not be things that can’t be put into a review. YMMV always applies. That said, it is not for everyone. Just like the 30 minute guys, the die hard one hour only guys get all that they care about in their 60 minutes. And that’s cool.
But they really need to quit trying to convince everyone that anything more than 60 minutes is a waste. They are, I hope unintentionally, actually helping to create a culture that discourages newer mongers from trying longer sessions and even from tipping. And that is bad for those mongers who are missing out on potentially great experiences that those highly vocal 60 minute guys don’t care about. While also making our market less attractive to higher quality girls.
There are other market forces at work here. But those should probably be in another post. And maybe another thread.
Somehow it feels like this quip about people mocking anyone who does more than a one hour session is directed at me.
I'll be on record - I never mocked anyone for doing longer sessions. I never mock anyone for their preferences. I never even called them waste of time - twoon did. About the most I've said that per-minute, I think (emphasis on think) that one hour session iwh different girls are slightly more efficient if ones refractory periods are long, and the prospect of new pussy plays a part
I would never even think of mocking someone who enjoys several hours or even whole day with a girl. Who am I to tell them?
I've been mongering for 30 + years and it is my opinion that sessions longer than one hour are a waste of good time and money. I'd rather take that same money and do two girls with a few hours in between to rehydrate.
YMMV
-- Modified on 1/22/2021 1:36:07 AM
And I'm BL at this org and my QUEEN is over yonder.
Sigh
all my experience and that of quite a few other mongers I know and have known indicates that there is usually a pretty significant difference between what happens in a one hour compared to a two hour session.
One, Bay area is a sausage fest. Hence why the prices were low. It's because orgs are concentrate in tech heavy areas and drive heavy volume. You literally can exit a Cisco building and walk to your appointment.
This also means girls are working back to backs. Cdl always tried to argue this, but it's not uncommon (pre covid) for BA girls to serve 70 guys a week.
Two, I think you're making a gross generalization about high quality. Just a couple of years ago we had some of the best quality service girls available.
Id put a prime Yuna, prime Claire prime Yuffie against anyone, period.
Three, 180k a year even without taxes is not that much in the bay area. It's very modest for fucking 6 dudes a day,most likely bbfs.
The reason there is nothing midrange is because of this. Fucking many guys a week is not attractive to girls who can afford to live in this area.
Finally, like I've said to others in this thread, I hear many girls right now aren't exactly happy that for some orgs, these raises go straight to org pockets and NOT actually to girls who are working.
-- Modified on 1/21/2021 4:16:06 PM
I notice you qualify "high quality" with "service girls" where as for most of us service is only one aspect of being a top quality provider -- looks, youth (not necessarily early 20s or under -- but not late 30s and above, especially when they look their age to western eyes).
What I was saying is that what most of us outside BA seems to think are top quality providers seem to have left BA for various reasons. I would speculate that in part they left because of pricing. From what you say about the organizations there keeping any increase is just another reason they leave. A client base that is very vocal about never letting them raise rates to a comparable real income in other areas is another. Sounds to me like the girls are getting beat up from both sides.
While I can agree that 180K in the bay area is not awesome income it's hardly bad income -- median household income was 114K in 2019 and looks like median individual pretax income for the 2013-2017 Census Bureau's American Community Survey was about 75K. Add in that most of these girls are likely sharing places to live with a higher roommate density than most Americans would expect or living where they work that 180K is not that bad. It's certainly given plenty to send home or squirrel away for later living back in Korea (or some lower cost of living area than BA). So, if you were suggesting that some how the girl would be happier fucking 70 guys a week rather than 30 to make another 20K working at the agency rates rather than a higher rate I'm missing the logic.
I do get that it's not cheap to live in the BA but the fact remains the bitching about K-girls raising their rates to par with other markets is no different than guys here making 50K, perhaps with a family, bitching about why they cannot find a great escort for $150. They might find someone that looks okay and offers a 15 minute fuck but they are not getting an hour or GFE -- or even much PSE in a 15 minute window. If the BA market cannot support the price other markets can then the girls will simply go to the other markets and BA guys are going to be stuck with what's left.
That's not the girls fault -- or event he agencies or mongers fault. It's the problem of living in an area that is largely brain dead from an economic knowledge/IQ perspective. Or perhaps not brain dead but just corrupt enough that politicians and special interests are screwing the rest of the people over with local policies. (and will say no more on that as this is NOT the P&R board)
I largely agree with your viewpoint. But I believe the Bay Area monger emphasis on keeping the price low, avoiding tips and multi-hour sessions has had a very significant impact as well.
From your response it seems somebody is trying yet again to convince everyone that good service is all that’s important.
The trouble is I’ve sessioned with more than a few of the old Bay Area Legends. And both their looks, and frequently their service, and almost always their attitude was significantly better than any of the “service girls” we have left here. No matter how you slice it, I don’t know of any top tier kgirls (who genuinely qualify as top tier for looks, attitude and service) who are currently working in the Bay Area. Not that we don’t have some reasonably good girls. Or did until recently anyway.
We used to have girls like Betty/Ran who took a few sessions to decide she could relax with you. But when you saw her for the first time she was so gorgeous it took your breath away. Or Leah who was nearly model pretty (though tiny she loved posing in dramatic lighting but rarely used or needed photoshopping) and was game for pretty much anything you could think of if you were one of her two hour session “special friends”. Or Pink who had a master’s degree in blowjobs and edging - and just about everything else if she liked you. And many other choices as well.
I will also reiterate that it’s not just the low session price that drives away girls. It’s the rather dramatic decrease in number of guys scheduling multi-hour sessions as well as the erosion of the tipping culture we once had here. 100% of tips go to the girl. And top tier girls are accustomed to being tipped. Because they blow your socks off. Pun intended. If you take away the tips and their preferred longer sessions? Well, you drive away the top tier girls and eliminate the ability to bring new ones into the area.
I thought part of your question was about why there doesn't exist a happy medium of 350-500 range of midrange providers here. Not necessarily Asian providers.
And that was my answer - girls who can afford to live here usually don't want to bang a lot of guys to make money that is relatively weak compared to average salaries. A lot of hookers want to have the lifestyle if they are to fuck random men for money, and you're not going to have that kinda of lifestyle in the bay area just off 350-500 an hour appointments. At least that's my take on it. Asian providers are more disciplined and generally can troop out less than ideal lifestyle conditions and hence do high volume. Like you've said, living with roommates and so on. LA also has different culture. Lots of hookers in LA of all kind.
I don't really know what you're referring to about an area having bad economic iq, but if it's politics related, I'd rather not wanna know. Lol.
It's kind a ironic to think that pse aka bbfs sorta contributed the most to this shift. When girls in LA and Vegas realized they can do bbfs they already did in the bay and upcharge a lot for it and msog, and have all the upcharge money go to them, of course they'd work where it's higher pay. Bay still had volume, but covid put an end to that. What you see right now in the bay is low demand and a very polarized bookings. With limited time to see girls, mongers choose to either see the top ones or stay at home.
Hopefully, nobody will buy the argument we hear all the time that “service girls” are as good or better than “top girls”.
Only someone who hasn’t actually realized that more than a few of those top girls are service queens as well as being drop dead gorgeous. If they decide they like you and you’re booking a long enough session so that they feel comfortable going that extra mile or two. And it’s always better to get both great looks and great service. Except for those guys who are so focused on price and their 60 minute sessions that they are in hog heaven with an older, far less good looking girl who is so glad that somebody actually still pays to see her that they pull out all the stops to keep them coming back.
You, sag, I, and cdl all have seen Yuna.
She is a service queen. Is she a top girl? I don't know the definiton here so I'll defer to those who actually know. Maybe you can answer this.
Is Yuna fitting the "far less good looking girl who is so glad that somebody actually still pays to see her that they pull out all the stops to keep them coming back" narrative?
to answer for those who have only seen her once or when there was more than a year between visits. Regulars are more likely to be able to tell you ACCURATELY if she fits UYH's description. Any girl can "pull out all the stops" for a particular session, but when you are a regular with a girl, you will not get the same service all the time. Kgirls have good days and bad days at work just like the rest of us. If you take all of the guys who have seen her it wouldn't surprise me if half said yes and half said no to your question.
For me, she was a good time, but not close to being a top-girl girl service-wise. She was an 8.5 for service, but I rounded her up to a 9 because of her flawless DT technique and her willingness to not leave anything on the table during DATY. She was totally into it as most older girls are. She does have exceptional gag control. At least she did with me. She will be memorable for me because she is one of the smallest Kgirls I have seen, and I will remember her for that more than the service. With that said, neither her looks nor her overall service were top-tier quality for me compared to the what I consider a top-tier girl in SoCal. In fact, there have been very few BA girls over the past 10 years that could compare to the top girls in SoCal, IMO, where you get a beautiful face and body with a session you won't forget.
Its just as likely that there are guys who have only seen her once that are going to read this and think to themselves that their session was not near as good as what I'm describing for MY session, and based on their own session may think she's not even a second tier girl. That's why its hard to pin a label on a girl like you are asking unless you are seeing her regularly and know her ups and downs.
OK, the reason I asked is that you guys always want to ridicule me for seeing some "fatties or uglies", but for most part - I see the same girls as everyone else.
I don't think Yuna has great looks, but I also don't think she is anywhere near someone "far less good looking girl who is so glad that somebody actually still pays to see her that they pull out all the stops to keep them coming back"
honesty in coming out and admitting that you see girls that are not good-looking (I do , too, but its usually only once), and girls that most mongers would consider fat (and if you want to keep your honest streak going, you have to admit that a 150 pound 5-foot spinner is a fat girl. There's no two ways about it). I have fucked a few fat girls along the way, but it wasn't on purpose, I would never repeat, and I can usually screen them off of my list based on the corroboration of their chubbiness in their reviews. Nevertheless, some will still get through. Unless I'm wrong, weight is NOT an automatic pass for you like is it for me, so your willingness to look past what most of us would consider a major flaw means your idea of what a top-tier girl is would not be the same as most of the other Kgirl fans here. I don't think its possible to have a girl be considered a top-tier girl on service alone. The top-tier girls I know are above-average in BOTH looks and service . . . . . . . . . . . 10-9's and 9-9's, one and all.
There are no two ways about it, for a girl to be a top tier k girl, she has to have both looks and service in the 9 or 10 zone. She can't just have one or the other, but must have both, that is what a top tier k girl is.
Over the years, I have said I do not like to compromise looks for service or vice versa, and sometimes people would wonder why. That is the reason, I am mainly interested in top level talent, and for a girl to be at the top, both looks and service must be at a high level.
You will find it out there if you know where to look.
I never said anything about a 5'0 150 pound spinner.
I said that I usually do prefer spinners.
Then I was talking about ranges. I said height wise I usually wouldn't want a girl over 6'0. And I also usually wouldnt want a girl over 150 pounds.
Somehow you went and combined these preferences into some story about me seeing fat girls who are 5'0 and 150 pounds.
And, this has nothing to do with Yuna. Again, there are only so many kgirls in bay area. Most of us have seen the same damn girls.
I stand corrected, Rocket, you actually said a minimum of 5-2 and LESS than 150 pounds. However, 5-2 and 149 pounds is still too fat for most Kgirl mongers. For me, 5-2 and 120# is too fat.
Your assessment of Yuna is pretty dead on. And I’ve seen her enough to know what she’s like on both good and bad days.
She is very consistent with her service level. But the only thing genuinely special about her service is her deep throat ability. Though I’ve seen girls who were better at it.
She does have a very nice, fit little spinner body, too. Not perfect. But still pretty darned nice. And she is fit enough to keep the energy level high enough even for me.
Yuna is a 2nd tier girl at best. If she were younger and prettier she’d be solidly in the middle of that tier, I think.
Still, I don’t understand the purpose of the question here. It sounds like someone is attempting to distract from the real issue. What can we do to attract top tier girls back to the Bay Area? I’ve already weighed in on that. What do y’all think? Yes, I know what the trolls and the 60 minutes and no tips guys will say. They just want to have cheap sessions with reasonably good service.
I wouldn’t have a problem with that. Except they spend a tremendous amount of effort “teaching” new mongers that any other approach is a waste of time and money. Just look back over the past year of posts where a few of them wrote post after post explaining why anything other than a 60 minute no tip session made no sense to them (in other words, anyone who claimed differently was spouting nonsense, in their opinion). Not sure what they get out of that other than an ego boost, though.
I would disagree about what makes Yuna's service special. Aside from incredible DT skills, she also has uncanny ability for her size to take a pounding by almost any sized member (as you would likely to confirm), but even moreso she has probably the best or at very least one of th best, acg rhythm and technique of any girl I've seen. A pure energizer bunny for 10-20 minutes in acg, her tiny body slamming up and down coming hard on your pelvis.
For someone who isn't a nymph per se, Yunas work ethic and dedication to the "old PSE" brand should be commanded.
Anyway. Just wanted to voice my opinion of what made Yuna one of my atfs.
that you DON'T put ground beef in your burrito, no matter how cheap it is. LOL
The solution for those in Tech that are getting killed by the cost of living in the BA is to move to a company that will allow you to work from home. The technology is there to check on you anytime they want to without disturbing or interrupting you. Many employees become more efficient, which also seems counterintuitive. My second son did that. He took his EQUITY from his overpriced California tract home and used it to pay cash for a house half again as large on 10 acres of land fronting a lake outside of Austin, which is 30 minutes away and offers all of the benefits of a larger city when the need arises. He had to do some extra work to get a better internet connection from the local cable company, but its now been three years and he loves it. You'd be surprised how much further that $100,000 income goes when you have no cost of housing other than property taxes and insurance. I've been mortgage free for years and that is part of the reason I can hobby six or seven hours a week.