Write Review
2,071,479 Total Reviews 4,082 New Reviews
11,621 Users Online

Porn Stars

Re: Post-Scriptum: Why TLC is missing?
mrfrench 2412 reads
posted

And by leaving out one of the larger, most popular agencies in your analysis (especially because you're pissed at them), it just shows that your data is faulty and your reasoning is flawed.  It's the same as if the U.S. Census data left out New Jersey or New York or some other populous state.

There's an old saying for data analysis like this: Garbage in, Garbage Out.

Pacific726168 reads

Hi,

Been a few years and a pen name ago. What is the best PSE agency to use?

ReplyQuoteReport
kenescalade023670 reads

ReplyQuoteReport
beautifulmind687399 reads

I always found posts about the 'question' which is the 'best agency?' [to use, to book porn stars X, etc.] not very useful to begin with.

There is no such thing as 'the best' in this type of market. In contrast they are specialized niches that each agency cover or attempt to do it. The process of specialization is function of the agency market, their historical trajectory, their management philosophy, their networks (both upstream and downstream), their reputation, the size of their roster, the quality of the talent they represents, just to name a few.

Hobbyists, especially those who deal with agency, have a distorted view of the market, simply because the scarse resources they deal with [e.g. money, time, etc.] force them to direct their attention to those agencies that fit their these resources better than someone else. As such, their view about agencies is at best partial, at worse just biased.

Based on my database there are 15 actually operating agencies who specialize in porn stars. Once you do a census, you get that there are a total of over 1500 talents available in the market. No one deal with all, few deal with more than half of them, the rest deal with one or few, many just have no idea because they never book, but eagerly search for direct booking.

Without entering into the discussion about the function that agencies play in this market, it is reasonable to assume that any answer about 'who is the best' is not very useful, especially for those who have been out of the hobby, who hobby rarely, or hobby when their favorite talent become available.

So since no one but you know what you are looking for, I think is better to give you the complete list of the 15 agencies who specialize in porn stars (indeed there are many porn stars who are available with agencies who also book non-porn star talent, but they are not in my databased, but in a separate one), with their website (or email in case they have not one), and from there you can make your own mind.

There are many ways of classify an agency in terms of the variable I briefly mentioned, and I constructed a simple Index, based on a set of broad indicators, that attempt to capture what their 'specialized niches' and their quality lead to. The Index is a qualitative one, even though it also attempt to capture the hard stuff (e.g. rates, size of the roster, city distribution, touring cities, etc.).

So in short: There is no such a thing as the 'best agency.' Thinking with this approach in mind lead to numerous error in evaluation, simple because we deal with a market that is dominate by 'Asymmetric Information' so the hobbysts (the agent) operate in an environment in which the information is in the hands of the 'principal' (the agency). What hoobyists think is the best is just function of their distorted information, and of course of their own taste and a little bit of bias...

Sincerely,
BM

PS:
Below is the list in rigorous alphabetical order:

Dreamgirls Agency Models
http://www.thegirlofyourdreams.com/

Exclusive Model Introductions
http://exclusivemodelintroductions.com/

Global Courtesans Agency Models
http://www.globalcourtesans.com/

HelpuBookher2
http://www.helpubookher2.com/

Lourdes Enterprise Agency Models
http://www.lourdesenterprise.com/

My Platinum Provider Agency Models
http://www.myplatinumprovider.com/

Pamela Peaks Agency Model
http://pamelapeaks.com/

Perfection Models
(Website is coming; contact email is: [email protected]

Photogirls London Escorts
http://www.photogirls.net/

PornStar Booker
http://pornstarbooker.net/

The Hetaera Agency
http://www.hetaera-agency.com/

The Luxury Companion Agency Models
http://www.theluxurycompanion.com/

Top Level Companions
http://www.toplevelcompanions.com/

UKSugarBabes
http://www.uksugarbabes.com/


-- Modified on 1/18/2013 5:52:15 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
captisteri3063 reads


My God you love to hear youself talk, or in this case, see your own post. This time you posted great info, well done!

ReplyQuoteReport
fast ffred2478 reads

ReplyQuoteReport
gteq22662 reads

Love this list.  Incredibly helpful for someone starting to dabble in the higher end of the market.

ReplyQuoteReport
thighhighlover2681 reads

just my opinion...and as to whether a post is useless or not, if it's a harmless question, who the faq cares...we are not here to be graded or grade

ReplyQuoteReport
macdaddy19442471 reads

BM is correct..i try to be affiliated and known by several agencies..the variety is always there..you just have to know where to go to get it..that in itself is the agency's job..they are all good at what they do..the selection just varies..

ReplyQuoteReport
mrfrench2888 reads

As usual, I disagree with beautifulmind68. :-)

Yes, he made some valid points but I think he missed the big one: The real question is: what makes an agency good?  Is it the list of ladies available?  The prices? Or is it the way they deal with people?  I don't want to turn this into a thesis so I'll keep this short. :-)

Pam Peaks has an agency with a huge list of available porn stars, including transgender and male stars.  I won't use her.  Why? Because she requires deposits in advance.  I've been burned before so i won't do that and she won't budge on her position.  She's also hard to reach.   I've also heard from several girls that she represents, that Pam takes a very long time to give them their portion of the pay.  At Exxxotica, one starlet told me she'd been waiting 6 months.  The fact that Pam's donation amounts are usually about 20% higher than Adonia's for the same star is only one factor and not the most important one.

I used to deal with BodyMiracle before they got busted.  The people I dealt with on the phone were cold, almost nasty, and very business-like.  That's great if that's what you're looking for.  But, I don't use escorts because I want more stress.  BM double-booked.  They forgot appointments.  It was a business, and a bad one at that, IMO.  That's why they're gone.

I prefer to establish a "relationship" of sorts with an agency so they know me, I know them, they know my tastes, and they treat me with courtesy and respect.  And that's why I always recommend TLC first.  From the very start - the initial contact - Adonia treated me more like a friend than a client.  Yes, it's a business.  Yes, she was out to make money.  Yes, the girls are out to make money.  But starting with my very first date with a girl from TLC, neither Adonia nor the girl made me *feel* like it was business.  It always felt like friends hanging out with friends and at the end, I got "lucky".

I've heard from several of the ladies that I've met who deal with multiple agencies, that Adonia treats them well too.  Some of them told me that they hang out at Adonio's house, that they get together for non-business events, and that Adonia is their friend, not just an agent and has even gone out of her way on occasion to help them with personal problems.

Now that may not be everyone's experience with TLC, but it's this sort of attitude that separates good agencies from bad agencies, IMO.  It's the way they treat people - whether it's a client or a provider or just someone posting on a discussion board.  That's why I'll never use Perfection Models or other agencies that come on here and badmouth me or other hobbyists, or the ones that just come here, post an ad, and then go away.  That's why I'll probably never use Pamela Peaks.  It is why I continue to use TLC.

I want to be clear though:  I haven't used every agency on beautifulmind68's list.  You may find the same kind of attitude from one of them as from TLC.  Or TLC might not work for you as well as for me.  Chemistry happens or doesn't.  But, if I (or you) find someone you like, why mess with it?  TLC works for me so I don't *need* to go anywhere else.  

No, I don't get paid by TLC.  No, I don't get "freebies".  No, I don't get other things I've been accused of getting.  All I get is a friend who can set up dates for me when I want them, who treats me with courtesy and respect and gets the same in return.  I get to go on a date with a beautiful woman who probably wouldn't even look twice at me otherwise, and at the end of the date, I get "lucky".

Isn't that what it's all about?

ReplyQuoteReport
macdaddy19442687 reads

agree totally on Adonia..disagree on Pam..she always requires a deposit..i have never been "burned" as you put it..it is just her way of doing business to flush out the time wasters and lookers..i have used her for years now with great results..she will go out of her way to accommodate you if you are looking for something not offered on her site..she always answers her phone..i have no idea how she pays her girls..frankly it is none of our business..Perfection Models also is an great agency..i have never had a problem and there selection is top quality..IMHO they do a great job and i will continue to use them..

Posted By: mrfrench
As usual, I disagree with beautifulmind68. :-)

Yes, he made some valid points but I think he missed the big one: The real question is: what makes an agency good?  Is it the list of ladies available?  The prices? Or is it the way they deal with people?  I don't want to turn this into a thesis so I'll keep this short. :-)

Pam Peaks has an agency with a huge list of available porn stars, including transgender and male stars.  I won't use her.  Why? Because she requires deposits in advance.  I've been burned before so i won't do that and she won't budge on her position.  She's also hard to reach.   I've also heard from several girls that she represents, that Pam takes a very long time to give them their portion of the pay.  At Exxxotica, one starlet told me she'd been waiting 6 months.  The fact that Pam's donation amounts are usually about 20% higher than Adonia's for the same star is only one factor and not the most important one.

I used to deal with BodyMiracle before they got busted.  The people I dealt with on the phone were cold, almost nasty, and very business-like.  That's great if that's what you're looking for.  But, I don't use escorts because I want more stress.  BM double-booked.  They forgot appointments.  It was a business, and a bad one at that, IMO.  That's why they're gone.

I prefer to establish a "relationship" of sorts with an agency so they know me, I know them, they know my tastes, and they treat me with courtesy and respect.  And that's why I always recommend TLC first.  From the very start - the initial contact - Adonia treated me more like a friend than a client.  Yes, it's a business.  Yes, she was out to make money.  Yes, the girls are out to make money.  But starting with my very first date with a girl from TLC, neither Adonia nor the girl made me *feel* like it was business.  It always felt like friends hanging out with friends and at the end, I got "lucky".

I've heard from several of the ladies that I've met who deal with multiple agencies, that Adonia treats them well too.  Some of them told me that they hang out at Adonio's house, that they get together for non-business events, and that Adonia is their friend, not just an agent and has even gone out of her way on occasion to help them with personal problems.

Now that may not be everyone's experience with TLC, but it's this sort of attitude that separates good agencies from bad agencies, IMO.  It's the way they treat people - whether it's a client or a provider or just someone posting on a discussion board.  That's why I'll never use Perfection Models or other agencies that come on here and badmouth me or other hobbyists, or the ones that just come here, post an ad, and then go away.  That's why I'll probably never use Pamela Peaks.  It is why I continue to use TLC.

I want to be clear though:  I haven't used every agency on beautifulmind68's list.  You may find the same kind of attitude from one of them as from TLC.  Or TLC might not work for you as well as for me.  Chemistry happens or doesn't.  But, if I (or you) find someone you like, why mess with it?  TLC works for me so I don't *need* to go anywhere else.  

No, I don't get paid by TLC.  No, I don't get "freebies".  No, I don't get other things I've been accused of getting.  All I get is a friend who can set up dates for me when I want them, who treats me with courtesy and respect and gets the same in return.  I get to go on a date with a beautiful woman who probably wouldn't even look twice at me otherwise, and at the end of the date, I get "lucky".

Isn't that what it's all about?
-- Modified on 1/19/2013 12:43:37 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
beautifulmind682746 reads

Just to support your take on Pam Peaks, with a little data snapshot:

Pam's agency patterns on several dimensions look like this:

1) The higher distribution of reviews on TER than any of the 15 other agencies, both on monthly basis and especially on a year-basis: baseline ratio since TER databased appeared is 7/1
2) It has more total number of reviews than anyone else: ratio is 5/1
3) Porn stars represented by her when touring cover more cities than any other agency: ratio is 10/1
4) Her touring pattern in the big metro areas is on a par with Lita and Perfection [based on the 3-times period NYC case study]: ratio is 1/1 for Lita and Perfections, and 3/1 with the rest;
5) The largest roster in the market, both as publicly available and as UTRs: ratio is 3/1.
6) The most complete portfolio of porn stars niches (e.g. MILF, Teens, Super Stars, Big Tits, etc.): ratio is 4/1

Now you may think that the 'deposit' has nothing to do with this pattern: I modestly think has "everything" to do with it. Deposit play many functions in a business model, and in the long run allow an agency to set up a 'machine' that run at full speed. Pam's machine may not be for everyone, and indeed the deposit has eliminate all 'noise' in her market, but seeing the deposit as a 'It-burn-me-tool' is not particularly accurate.

What hobbyists see as a 'negative' piece in an agency machine may turn out to be the fundamental engineering one. The long run is what ultimately count, and Pam's machine, not matter what many have to say about, has runned on full speed for over a decade.

BM

PS: The ratio that appears at the end of each items must be interpreted in this way: the formula is U = Y/X where U is the ratio of two random variables, being Y (Pam's Agency) and X (being the other agencies weighted proportionally to their own normal distribution). The ratio numerically indicates what is the ratio distribution of the probability of Y over X; so in terms of the first ratio, the 7/1 indicated that Pam's agency has the probability of having 7 over 1 reviews on a monthly and on a year basis compared to other agencies. The other ratios follow the same structure.

-- Modified on 1/20/2013 11:01:07 AM

-- Modified on 1/20/2013 11:12:12 AM

ReplyQuoteReport
macdaddy19442860 reads

agree..Pam has used the deposit for years..it enables her to set all the appointments in advance and lets her schedule easier..she gets back to you almost immediately and you are set..i wish more agencies would use deposits to eliminate the " i"m not sure" and the "dreamers"...

ReplyQuoteReport
beautifulmind682453 reads

You mentioned two outcomes of using deposit:
a) setting appointment in advance;
b) setting schedule for porn stars and their clients.

As such the deposit is like the middle age 'commenda': It is a form of enforcing a limited contract between a principal (the agency) and the agent (the client/hobbyist). It establish the boundary of a limited partneship (the X time for booking Y-Porn star/Model), with reciprocal obbligation: to respect the limited contract. If the principal or the agent violate the contract, both have obbligation to set up a new boundary (e.g. changing time, dates, etc.) without entering into conflict and thus loosing the business on both side.

The deposit, like its medieval prototype the commenda, is an institutional liability for the partners which reciprocal interest matches: to avoid 'risk' and protect the noise coming from a market dominated by 'uncertainty.'

As you correctly pointed out it eliminate a huge chunk of 'I am not sure', the 'dreamers', etc. That is to say it eliminate 'uncertainty' on the agent side of the 'limited contract.'

Interestingly the commenda was invented in the 12th century in the 'maritime trade' business, a business which believe it or not is structurally identical to the one that involve an agency and a hobbyist.

Of course the content of the limited contract involve a different type of transaction::))

The are many consequences coming out of using the deposit beyond the two you mentioned, but that is for another time.

ReplyQuoteReport
UCLA2K42587 reads

Indeed and it sets performance expectations on both sides.

Never had any problems with PP, and when events transpired outside our control forcing a canceled appointment, she was immediate in refunding the deposit. Rescheduled with no problem at a later date.

ReplyQuoteReport
brk_balls2252 reads

Just to show how different strokes work for different hobbyists:

I've never had anything less than prompt, pleasurable dealings with Pam. She only charged me a deposit once, and she clearly stated that particular PS required one well before I booked. Otherwise, I've never had a problem.

I had a good relationship with Adonia, even tried steering a couple of girls her way for work, but then I posted on this board a recommendation for a girl who wasn't listed with her as a reply to a thread asking about one of her ladies in particular, and Adonia apparently got very angry. She revoked my VIP membership and refused to answer any further emails or contact with her. But she has a great roster, and I always had pleasant experiences with her before that time.

My advice: always shop around. The same lady may be available at 4 different agencies for 4 different rates. Or she may be exclusive, and if you want to see her, you pay the price or move on. Buildgood relationships with the agencies, i.e. don't flake or cancel same day, follow all instructions,  and you won't have problems.

ReplyQuoteReport
jwk98673 reads

Has anyone used Exclusive Model Introductions?  I went through their screening, but was ultimately unable to book an appointment due to my own scheduling issues.  They're one of the few agencies I've encountered that will verify via P411.  Just wondering if their appointments were any good.  

Also, would anyone have recommendations for who has more available dates for New York?  I'm under the impression it's Perfection Models, EMI, or Lita Lourdes, but I could be wrong.  

Thanks for the help, everyone.  

JWK9

ReplyQuoteReport
beautifulmind683884 reads

To answer your question: I have done some research on the 'geographic distribution of touring' among USA big cities. I run a 3-time period analysis, based on two parameter:

1) The distribution of TER reviews that related to porn stars;
2) The frequency of Agencies touring post on their website and EROS-NYC.

There is a distinction to be made among Agencies business models, and niche specialization, which has a huge influence on how they set up their 'preferred location for tours.'

I skip this part because its a variable that requires some lenghthy elaboration.

Thus: based on those two parameter [e.g. 1 and 2], on average about 35-40 porn stars visit NYC each month [time period was June, September, December/January], and the distribution has a probabilistic ranking of this form:

1. Perfection Models and Lita Lourdes
2. Pam Peaks
3. Exclusive
4. PornStar Booker, and Global Courtesan
5. MyPlatinium Provider
6. Top Level Companion, Helpubookher

The other agencies do not appear to tour that much in NYC.

There are many reasons why this sort of ranking take this form. But I cannot go there.

So on average for NYC you should have 1 porn star x day to book, with spike in specific days and weekends. Only Los Angeles [for obvious reasons] offer better options on a daily basis when compared to NYC. For the record Chicago and Las Vegas are moving up in the ranking among big metro areas.

Hope it helps,
Sincerely,
BM

-- Modified on 1/19/2013 7:14:43 AM

ReplyQuoteReport
mrfrench2818 reads

Your research is flawed, IMO.

1. The period of time you used in your "research" is limited and not representative.  For example, it excludes months like November when there are a lot of porn stars in the area because of Exxotica.  It excludes much of the summer - July and August.

2.  You ignore other ad sites.

3.  You ignore other review sites.

4.  You ignore word of mouth, direct mail messages, and other ways of "advertising" to hobbyists.

5.  You ignore the fact that just because an agency doesn't post an ad, that you can't book someone through them.  What I mean by that is an agency may not post an ad because they didn't pay for the star to come out to NYC, book the hotel room, etc.  but that doesn't mean that if the agency has a relationship with that star (i.e. has them on the website) they can't set up a date for you.

So, your answer is sort of skewed towards agencies that advertise heavily in certain locations, and during certain months and ignores other factors.

ReplyQuoteReport
beautifulmind683010 reads

I am aware of the flaws, but there are different from the ones you mention.

In order:

1) Since monthly data require a monumental effort, and I do this in my night time and when I have some holidays here and there, the 3 months served as a first pilot study to be repeated in a two-year period; I did not claim that these months are representative, indeed I called it a snapshot. When you measure changes in price of stock you can measure them on a minutes-by-minutes basis, but it would not be the right methodology if you want understand the aggregate patterns of the shift in the stock market. Once you establish an aggregate pattern, then you test it using smaller aggregate units. However, monthly data, even using only Eros, require a lot of time to put together. That said, since I am for now interested in establishing aggregate patterns, using ‘events’ like Exxxotica or AVN, would create noise in the data, and thus confounding the trend in aggregate terms. Summers are low-booking period for agencies and porn stars, so the aggregate patterns would not be revealed, but simple add noise to the big picture.

2) There are of course many sites where agencies advertise; and I used Eros as “benchmark” and checked others as a metric of comparison. I have a time-series on Eros starting since 2010 that showed me the huge increase in frequency of ads compared to any other ad site, so to establish a ‘benchmark’ that is both suitable for my type of analysis and robust enough in terms of data structure, Eros is the way to start.

3) Other reviews sites have data structure that are at least 3 levels lower than TER, and more importantly TER goes back to 2002. I did a lot of preparatory research before venturing in this type of analysis, and my database based on TER review cannot be matched by any other site. Many of course are not aware of the fact that reviews on TER have a data structure that with the opportune calibration, can be statistically tested with econometric modeling base on probabilistic-led-Bayes analysis that can reveals underlying patterns that no other review site can even get close to. From TER reviews, I have created many datasets that are now suitable to more refined statistical modeling: You need robust dataset to do the kind of analysis I run, and other reviews site are full of holes, both temporally and spatially. Data structure needs a lot of cleaning, and TER is the less dirty to start with.

4) Word of mouth, emailing and other ways of advertising are of course an important source of info, but they cannot be used since they are not available. This research project, to which the NYC snapshot is just the starting point, attempt to measure the geographic distribution of ‘touring’ in large metro areas, and it does based on agencies. The fact that a porn stars tell you she is coming to NYC, that she send an email to announce her plans and other forms of personal contact are poor indicators of aggregate patterns, since deal with individual data. This is called 'ecological fallacy' and that is the reason I work mainly with aggregate data: You cannot describe the movement of ‘touring’ based on individual level, but the other way around. As noted long time ago by Bela Gold, “One can, of course, survey the topography of the earth from distances great enough to minimize the significance of mountain chains. But one would not do so if the purpose of such observations were to build roads.” My purpose is to build roads, not single individual trajectories. Furthermore, considering that porn stars who do this are usually going through personal avenue (themselves, booker, etc.) and since based on my dataset the total sample is weighted probabilistically to the roster of agencies, the proportion and the distribution of this sample is reflected in the data structure I have build for the agencies. Thus, the aggregate data is more solid and robust that individual-level data, which I find hard to believe any porn stars, can take track for more than 3 hours. Indeed, agencies are the best benchmark to measure touring patterns, since when they tour many porn stars are actually touring because there is an agency behind the tour. Many porn stars without agencies will not tour that often.

5) When an agency does not post an ad and you can still book that star, well, that is different issue, which does not relate with this research project. I attempt to measure ‘the geographical distribution of touring in large metro areas” using public available data: I treat the available data using Bayes-inverse probability distribution to capture an approximation of the overall distribution of the population, which we do not know (and never will know), which real distribution is. When porn star X, Y, Z and W do tours NYC and the agency does not advertise them, but still someone can book them, when they travel to NYC that sample is captured by the Bayes-formula. I then weight that sample distribution on the monthly distribution I got from the Eros and TER ads to get an approximation of the likely population that is really ‘touring’ big metro areas. Furthermore, since I have my data on the UTR and I know who is touring with agencies, well, I have a pretty solid analysis of that part of the touring population who even though DOES not advertise still is touring certain cities at certain time of the years I selected for my pilot study.

Any statistical analysis and even more any probabilistic modeling is built on a set of assumptions. There are not such things as non-skewed or un-biased results in this type of research, especially when you deal with data structure that are so hard to built.

Each time you talk with porn stars about anything, you are basically ‘extracting’ a non-random sample from the overall population to which you do not know the probabilistic distribution. Any piece of info you get when talking with this type of ‘sample’ is equivalent to going to the casino and throw yourself on gambling based on the talk you got with the non-random sample of players you meet walking from the lobby to the table, or otherwise know in probabilistic literature as the Gambler’s fallacy. The fallacy arises out of a belief in the law of small numbers, or the erroneous belief that small samples must be representative of the larger population. According to Kahneman and Tversky the people afflicted from the “Gambler’s fallacy’ suffer from cognitive bias. Cognitive bias states that people evaluate the probability of a certain event by assessing how similar it is to events they have experienced before, and how similar the events surrounding those two processes are. Which is to say: The more you talk to porn stars the more you believe that what they tell you is similar or representative of the large population of porn stars.

I will not venture on understanding the geographic distribution of touring based on this ‘believe.’


-- Modified on 1/20/2013 5:10:07 AM

ReplyQuoteReport
mrfrench2351 reads

Posted By: beautifulmind68

Any statistical analysis and even more any probabilistic modeling is built on a set of assumptions. There are not such things as non-skewed or un-biased results in this type of research, especially when you deal with data structure that are so hard to built.

Each time you talk with porn stars about anything, you are basically ‘extracting’ a non-random sample from the overall population to which you do not know the probabilistic distribution. Any piece of info you get when talking with this type of ‘sample’ is equivalent to going to the casino and throw yourself on gambling based on the talk you got with the non-random sample of players you meet walking from the lobby to the table, or otherwise know in probabilistic literature as the Gambler’s fallacy. The fallacy arises out of a belief in the law of small numbers, or the erroneous belief that small samples must be representative of the larger population. According to Kahneman and Tversky the people afflicted from the “Gambler’s fallacy’ suffer from cognitive bias. Cognitive bias states that people evaluate the probability of a certain event by assessing how similar it is to events they have experienced before, and how similar the events surrounding those two processes are. Which is to say: The more you talk to porn stars the more you believe that what they tell you is similar or representative of the large population of porn stars.
Now that I have some free time, I can respond to this.  Most of the post is just nonsense but this in particular is bad and shows a lack of understanding of the subject matter.

First of all, that's not the Gambler's Fallacy.  The Gambler's Fallacy, otherwise known as the fallacy of the maturity of chances is the belief that when you see a lot of a certain type of behavior over time, that the opposite behavior is more likely.  To put quite simply (and why it's called the Gambler's Fallacy): if you see red numbers come up a lot on the roulette wheel, that it's more likely that the next number is going to be black because that's the opposite deviation.  That's a very, very simplistic explanation.  

But, that has nothing to do with using a small sample of data as representative of larger sets of data which is what we are talking about.  In fact, that's the way that political polls work, the way the Nielsen ratings work and is a tried a proven method of handling large data and making predictions using a small populace.  In other words, if you take a small representative sample of information that is large enough to be diverse enough you can use that small sample to make analyses and predictions about a larger set of data.

Which is to say that it's a proven method to sample a small number and use that to represent a larger number.  So that, yes, talking to a small number of representative porn stars can tell you what the larger population of porn stars experience or believe or whatever.  This is the way most statistical analysis systems work such as, as stated earlier, the Nielsen ratings, and political polls as well as most consumer research.

In conclusion, your data is flawed, your methodology is flawed and your understanding of statistics is flawed.

ReplyQuoteReport
beautifulmind682283 reads

It not necessary to point out all of your misleading of the simple probability sampling, and few notes will suffice:

1) Your confuse the Gambler's Fallacy with simple poker rules about the structure of events in a set of successive probability distribution: this the reason because casino make money and hobbysts like you believe that having friendships is what the hobby is about;

2) Nielsen rating system is based on self-selected bias, so their sample is not a random sample of the population. Inference from sample based on self-selection is in probability jargon 'garbage sampling.'

3) Political poll and consumer research are based on stratified sample from population which normal standard distribution is known (e.g. registered voters vs non-registered voters, republicans vs democrats; household with income above $50,000 vs household with income belove $50,000).

Both analogies show how deep is your ignorance in simple probability theory, the one that student learn in a 101 intro at first year of college. The fact that you use this analogy as 'supporting' your approach to talking with porn stars tell you have no idea of the problem of this approach, so let me help you a little bit.

a) margin of error in non-random sample is a higher as the sample you deal with;
b) non-response bias: If you talk to 20 porn stars out of 120, you don't know what the other 100 think of your questions;
c) selection bias. Of the 20 you can talk about their characteristic are markedly distinct of the other 100 who declined to talk to you or you cannot reach;
d) response bias. Of the 20 answers given by your porn stars the responces do not reflect their true beliefs. Some will tell you about your questions in terms that reflect the idea that you are a genius because they think you gonna book them, others since think you are a douchbag for asking such questions will tell you the first thing come to their mind to get you out of their way as soon as possible;
e) ording of the questions. Even if you word your questions in identical manner for all 20 some they will respond in one way because they are articulated, understand the questions, others will tell you all sort of bla bla bla simply because they do not care at all about the questions and spent time with you because other porn stars told them that you are a nice dude;
f) coverage bias. You may talk to some after their shows and they will tell you that you are a genius since you watched them to be able to talk with. You may talk to others when they are doing their signature for fans and tell you to comeback later, and indeed they are gone already;

This is just to mention few examples from a probability perspective. Since you have no idea about the other 100 anything you talk about is related with the 20 and only with them. Any inference you make from a non-random sample carry so many bias that venturing forward is equivalent to 'walking over a cliff and screaming for help when no one is around.'

Interesting enough, the more you try to argue the deeper it get the cognitive bias that forms your understanding of everything. Before throwing around the word 'flawed' on everything you read you may want trying to understand the origin of your cognitive bias. Until then your logical reasoning is so full of fallacies that appeal to emotions is the only way to go for you.

I do not have problem with that, but at least step back from your ignorance in probability theory and continue to argue based on the talk you have with this and that. Just understand that this talk does lead to nowhere but information-processing shortcuts, which are the precipe for nothing but self-illusion.

BM

-- Modified on 1/21/2013 1:48:02 PM

-- Modified on 1/21/2013 2:00:45 PM

-- Modified on 1/21/2013 2:17:47 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
mrfrench2553 reads

I know quite a bit of probability theory.  I used to tutor people in college.  They all passed their courses.

You clearly show a misunderstanding of all that you talk about, despite your claims to the contrary.

And it's quite common in debates for the person who is in the worse position to claim the other is ignorant, as you have done, when they really don't know what they are talking about.  For example, the "Gambler's Fallacy" is not based on poker rules... and it applies to ALL games of chance but in particular slot machines.  You might want to read about it.  There's a nice article at Wikipedia that explains it.

Secondly, the best times I've ever had with escorts, whether porn stars or nots, involved treating them like friends, rather than whores.  I've had many friendships over the years with a lot of people from this hobby and made a good number of contacts from it.  Maybe that's why when I go to shows like Exxxotica, or when some of these ladies come to NYC, I get to hang with them AS FRIENDS. And that's got nothing to do with dates, or play for pay... that still occurs because even though I'm friends with them, I don't get freebies - that's their business.  It's how they make a living.

Last, you really have no understanding how to deal with people, how to conduct research, or probability theory.  You spout a lot of nonsense.  That's fine - I'm not here to grade you.  But, it makes everything you say worthless.

And I'm done arguing with you.

ReplyQuoteReport
beautifulmind682856 reads

A friendly buddy noticed that TLC is missing from my ranking.

Why it is so? Why TLC is not appearing in the analysis? Or it is that possible that the most 'recommended' agency on the PS Board is not even cited?

My explanation is simple: TLC in the person of Adonia, has lsome time ago suddenly cut me off from their site, and when I asked for an explanation I did not get any. Without access to the VIP area there is no way for me to run my analysis of TLC database and thus run my probabilistic analysis.

I do not know why Adonia decided to operate in such a way. I do respect her choice. However, as far I am concerned, TLC is not going to affect my results on any type of analysis I am running and I will run in the future.

One out of 15 is such a small probability distribution from the agencies sample, that even though TLC claim to represent through their website a certain number of porn stars the type of analysis I run will not be seriously effected.

From my calculation based on the available info, TLC talent (don't know the UTRs) count as 17.5% of the overall distribution, so that mean that I have 82.5% data available. This info suffice to my purpose, even though having a complete sample would be nice.

But you can go as far as data availability goes. Based on the above TLC sample has been dropped out from my database, and as such TLC will never appear in any posts I may decide to put out in regard my current and hopefully my future research.

BM

-- Modified on 1/20/2013 7:02:46 AM

ReplyQuoteReport
mrfrench2413 reads

And by leaving out one of the larger, most popular agencies in your analysis (especially because you're pissed at them), it just shows that your data is faulty and your reasoning is flawed.  It's the same as if the U.S. Census data left out New Jersey or New York or some other populous state.

There's an old saying for data analysis like this: Garbage in, Garbage Out.

ReplyQuoteReport
beautifulmind682297 reads

so perhaps you have a totally flawed perception of the market for porn stars.

As I said, with 82.5%, and 14 agencies plus the database I constructed for complete independent porn stars, missing TLC from the analysis does not affect my results at all.

You analogy with the US Census display your ignorance on basic statistical analysis: the numbers about population by state which the US Census collect each 10 years are constructed by a sample design that rely on 'survey' administrate by census taker. The sample desing rely on probability sampling that estimate coefficient of variations to weight sampling errors. The goal of the US Census is to estimate population, labor force, ethnicity, housing, etc, from which it is assumed that the standard distribution is normal.

The porn stars market is not a population that reflect a probability sample, since the normal standard distribution is completely unknown, neither can be measured by a 'survey.' The porn stars population is always a 'truncated sample' and as such requires complicated probabilistic analysis (Bayesian probability inverse function, to estimate the approximation of the unknow normal distribution).

If your goal is to understand the total population of US leaving out NJ or NY or California then is not a good idea, but if you want to understand how many 'illegal aliens' live in small metropolitan areas then leaving out the most populous states make very good sense.

For porn stars and many other population to which there is no way to do a census or a survey, the only methodological avenue is to construct from the 'truncated sample' their approximate normal distribution and from there make some probabilistic inference based on Bayes' approach.

In regard to TLC: I am not pissed at them, they decided to cut me off. Its their choice and as I said I respect that. One of the good thing of leaving out TLC from the analysis is, that the results are more robust, since even though you are not aware of that, TLC numbers are over-inflated in all dimensions. Secondly, TLC is a particular business enterprise that depend heavily on a peculariar channel, and since that channel is in turn not representative of the overall universe of the porn stars market, they are structural reasons to take TLC numbers with 'grain of salt.'

As far as concerning their 'larger roster' and their 'popularity' I think that based on my research that both evaluations are based on  the 'Gambler's Fallacy.' Since you are the one who suffer most from it, I can see the correlation between your perception of TLC and the misperception of everything else.

BM

ReplyQuoteReport
kenescalade022766 reads

I deal with numbers all day, lets get back to naked porn stars.

ReplyQuoteReport
beautifulmind682680 reads

Hey Ken,

sorry for the heavy stuff, you can always skip them::))

Hope you like the pic: its a kind of top naked number::))
Stay tuned...
BM

ReplyQuoteReport
kenescalade022526 reads

Yes and thank you.  

Naked number are way better.

Even Fibonacci would agree.

ReplyQuoteReport
beautifulmind682561 reads

It's a sequence that goes from top to bottom, or if you prefer from bottom to top::))

Stay tuned too::))

BM

-- Modified on 1/21/2013 9:40:56 AM

ReplyQuoteReport
kenescalade022751 reads


This is taylor's series now LOL

ReplyQuoteReport
Post Reply Back To Forum
Register Now!