https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/bills-to-pay/college-debt-fears-have-millions-turning-to-sugar-daddies/ar-BBEQKlZ?li=BBnbfcN
Honestly are Sugar Daddies this pathetic as to pay god knows how much to these girls just to hang out? And if this girl is so stigmatized being a sexless Sugar Baby would not a Go Fund Me page showing some cleavage do just as well? Unless this article is full of shit which I really hope it is.... sugar babies can be cheaper then escorts. Of course you take your risks as they (mostly) aren't pros.
$250,000 mentioned in the article, I guess I'll have to stick with providers. TER membership is inexpensive compared to the $80 a month mentioned for membership in a sugar daddy/baby site. Or, did I read something wrong?
You can save more than that a month, if you count on a hourly basis. Nevertheless, if you are actually a sugar daddy, it implies seeing the same sugar babe regularly. You really don't need a membership beyond the time required to create your rotation (if you are polyamorous.)
But we all know the reality of the situation is for every HDH asking $2,000 hour, there are hundreds of willing hookers at a fraction of that rate.
The same applies to the Sugar World, I am sure there are some clueless guys willing to pay thousands of dollars to some PYT and never even get their willy wet, but there are thousands more that have found the Sugar Bowl can be MUCH less expensive than fucking hookers if you play the game correctly. Speaking strictly for myself, the MOST I have ever paid a Sugar Baby for a date has been $500, which I have done a handful of times, but every single one of those dates was an overnight date lasting at least 10-12 hours, and I have had many overnighters for much less than that in the Sugar Bowl.
If you actually read her quotes, she doesn't specifically say that she wasn't intimate with her regular long-term SDs. Basically yes she won't just show up and have sex for money, or on a first date, of course not. However almost all arrangements turn physical once the money spout turns on.
I bet you articles like this flood the sugar bowl with eager newbies. They’ll quickly realize they’re not gonna get THAT much money unless they run into the rare whale.
...he just writes a check? Uh, sure. Does he need a divorce lawyer yet? Lawd knows, when the wife finds one of those checks, he’ll be writing new checks to someone else - her!
They probably should replace the word "other" with "most". I doubt there are that many "platonic" SDs out there.
The average annual income for Sugar Daddies who use SeekingArrangement.com is $250,000 and the average net worth is $1.5 million, she said, although those figures are self-reported.
Go peruse the men's profiles, I swear SA has the greatest collection of millionaires anywhere in the world!
My ex SBs account had 2 guys claiming net worth of $100 M. Suuure.
Interestingly she saw one of them for about 8 months. He was 32 and drove a lime green Lamborghini. Look at me! I told her I thought he was shady. A few weeks ago he drove it into a palm tree going over 100mph. Killed himself and a female passenger. A Mexican model. Follow stories said he had been convicted of mortgage fraud and thr company he "owned " booted him out 5 years ago.
I agree - the more showy the less their net worth. I work in the financial service business and see many personal financial statements and noticed years ago the ones with the high net worth usually are the least flashy. The flashy ones usually have a net worth less than you think and typically younger (under 35).
While that’s totally true, it’s the showy ones that get the attention. The girls just totally suck it up. A friend of mine has a ridiculously showy account with pictures of him alongside celebrities, private jets and fancy cars, etc. He’s single and 22. Net worth and income are total bullshit, yet he gets hundreds of messages a day sometimes.
The downside is that you just can’t possibly have time to go through all of that shit. I’d much rather have my honest account that already gets me more pussy than I know what to do with.