You have looks and performance in your ratings.... Obviously If I'm paying $600+ for an hour I expect the looks and performance to be stellar.

Value should be a rating that we should be able to search. I've come across ladies for $300 where the value for the amount of $$ spent was 10 and I've come across ladies that were a 10/9 in your current system that were $600+ where I would rate the value at 7.

In this day and age where "Value" is so important in everything when it comes to consumers.... you should certainly add "Value for Services Provided" to the menu.

Thanks!

Your suggestion makes no sense.

For example, if you use a linear measurement scale, then a gal who charges $250/hr and is rated a 5 would be equivalent to a gal who charges $500/hr and is rated a 10:

250/5 = 500/10

But in real life, no one looks at it that way.  So, we'd need someone to try and fix up the relationship to the two sets of numbers, and then you'd have to adjust for both performance and looks.

It would end up being harder than Chinese algebra.

I suppose if we could settle on an effective formula, it would have some usability.

For now, we just have to wing it in our heads.

... because "value" is totally subjective, even more so than looks. Furthermore, this isn't K-Mart. You really can't assume a direct correlation between rates and service quality, and it's misguided to expect more from a $600 provider than a $300 one. That's just not how pricing works in this market. All you can do is see providers within your budget and give them a performance score that reflects the perceived "value for services provided," if that's a factor in your overall assessment of the experience. And/or mention it in the text of your review. But I'd say "value" is definitely not a quantifiable metric in this arena.

END OF MESSAGE

END OF MESSAGE

Impossible to measure. Do the research and you'll find what you're looking for. There no shortcuts like what you're proposing.