Dearest Peanut Gallery,

Which is a better rate structure (for you)?

A:  one hour minimum for $400

B:  ninety minimum for $500

Thank you for letting me use you as market research Guinea pigs!

B wins every time!

Which is better?

A:  spending a smaller amount money, but getting less time

B:  spending a larger amount of money, but getting way more time-for-your-buck

B B B B B B B B B B B B B all day long...

My personal preference would be A, even though B is obviously the better value. My rationale is strictly financial. I'm a bit on the younger side for hobbyists and have more limited resources allocated to "extra-curriculars" at this stage in my life than many hobbyists. So $400 gets me in the door with a great provider and over a period of time, the $ difference would allow me too see said lady more often.

Now, give me a couple more years of continued wealth accumulation and B will become my preference. But for now, A provides the flexibility that appeals most to me. Besides, I tend to be one and done right now - except when i see your friend SG :>) - so an hour is generally sufficient.... although I do enjoy the time spent with a lady as well.

Hour is too rushed & 2 hours can often be too expensive-------90 min is a great compromise; an ideal time frame, particularly for MSOG-----

C: two hour for 700

I don't like the idea of a 90 minute minimum.

half hour and 45 minute rates...how much?

Since an hour date is too rushed for me, almost all my encounters are 90 m or longer.

Guinea pig #57

I usually prefer 2-3 hrs, so those are the rates I focus on.  I tend to be attracted to the providers who encourage multi-hr visits by their price structure.  Something like $400/1 hr, $100 or $150 per hr after that.

I prefer an initial 1 hour appointment to establish the relationship and sample the chemistry and services. If everything gels during the initial 1 hour appointment then I prefer follow-up multiple hour appointments with a reduced hourly rate schedule to thorougly enjoy the chemistry and services, i.e. 1-400, 2-700, 3-900 and each additional hour plus 200. My logic for the reduced hourly rate schedule is the first hour absorbs the fixed costs of the appointment and the additional hours are for the time shared together only with 200 per hour a reasonable rate in my honest opinion.

Providers who use a straight hourly rate, i.e. 1-400, 2-800, 3-1,200 and each additional hour plus 400 do not capture my attention.

Option A.

While option B is the better "deal" as some have pointed out, for me, it's not about the deal, it's about the flexibility.  I generally only want one pop out of a session, so it's infrequent that I book for more than an hour.

But since $500 is not that much more than $400, the 90 minute/$500 wouldn't stop me from visiting a "must see", but it might stop me from seeing a "like to see."

especially during the weekend when I have bigger windows of opportunity, but I'd probably go with a. during a weekday.

If I'm not going to enjoy her for an hour, why would I want to book more?

ANY discussion of rates cannot be meaningfully concluded without a concomitant discussion of service quality, and without touching upon the intangible of how well the client and provider "click".

But then again, I mostly book 1hr once n dones with PYTs so who am I to talk.....

One hour 400
Ninety minutes  650

I refuse to visit providers dumber than me .

I prefer A for first time. then B normally, but would like a short time option.

My guess is you'll get a split based on the type of client they are.

I could easily go either way. I personally tend to be cautious up front and like to book and hour first, but another 1/2 hour for an additional Ben isn't an issue.

This is especially true in your case, because of your reputation, reviews, etc. It would definitely be an issue for someone with a less stellar background. Of course, I probably wouldn't even do four Benjamins in that case.

I am normally a one pop only guy, so I would be leary of a 90 minute minimum. Quite often, my dates are pretty much a done deal in 30 minutes, or less, and hanging around to chat seems kind of pointless. IMO, longer dates are over-rated, unless you have meet her previously and really get along well. But then you are talking about dinner dates, and those can get pricey quick.

A little different if the date is an incall to your hotel room or house, where you can at least turn on the tv, or share a bottle of wine, blah, blah, and then maybe go for another round. But once again, for me anyway, that means getting to the main event pretty quick, instead of the nice, long, let's get to know each other chat to start.

Cost is definitely a factor for me anymore, and $$$ for an hour is about it, but I show up ready to tip, if that helps.

Why not offer both options..