Nikki is a super gorgeous 5’3” blonde in her early-20s who is new to DC--she is very hot. My whole session was great--nice conversation, great BBBJ, super sex, and a lot of fun over all. Rush to see her guys--this is the real deal.
Location: Dupont
Photos: Accurate
GFE: Yes+
Services: DFK DATY anal--very full menu
Fee: $$$
Rating: 10/10
Recommended: Yes+
Full review to follow.
This nikki subject is getting weirder by the day.
Question. Are the photos her's or not?
I submitted a review Monday night; it was approved this yesterday. That was a big improvement.
His review of Nikki is the last one in August. TER orders the lastest of the month review the last one of the month. I can't stand it. They should fix it.
Just yesterday she posts she is new to area and includes a link. Her ad name is totally different than who she say's she is. Then someone says the pics are 100% fake. Today we have a mini review!
I am not buying what they are selling.
Sorry
Dr,
Here I sit in DC and I sit in a state of confusion!!! On one hand, we have a individual named Jenny that says on a TER post, "come see me", but attached to her ad is a link to an Eros ad for a Nikki Taylor. When questioned by others on the board, she basically does not address the name differences and says, I am the girl in the pictures, you will have a great time, come see me. OK, sounds good...
But wait, another wise poster says the pictures are of Suzanne Stokes, former Playboy Playmate and sure enough the pictures used in the ad for Nikki are from a Playboy shoot for Suzanne...hmmm now I am starting to get confused, but figure, oh well another Eros scam and a young lady trying to use pictures of a Playboy Playmate to attract clients...not the first time and won't be the last!!!
But, in the words of ESPN College GameDay Football Analyst, Lee Corso...not so fast my friend!!! We now have a mini review and a full review by a hobbyists with double digit reviews, claiming that Nikki (not Jenny) is a 10/10!!! That is right 10 for appearance and 10 for performance and highly recommends. He even has indicated in his full review that the pictures (from the same Eros ad) are of her and are accurate...hmmmm!!!
Now doctor, you see my confusion? Is Jenny right? Is Nikki right? Is the hobbyist who identified the person in the Eros pictures as those of Suzanne Stokes right? Is the hobbyist who provided the review of Nikki right? Or, what?
So, the only thing I can come up with is...former Playboy Playmate, Suzanne Stokes is providing under the name of Nikki Taylor (per Eros ad and review - $300 per hour) and is absolutely stunning (see 10 for appearance in review and also see pictures all over google of Suzanne) and for her base provider fee does anal (see Jenny's post and review), and is absolutely fantastic, the best provider ever (see 10 for performance)...
So, what are we all waiting for? Damn, the line must be around the block from her incall location and I am sure her voice mail is full with requests, what will I do...
I know, I call BULLSHIT!!!!
Thanks for listening Doctor, and BTW click on link below to see full Playboy shoot used in ad...agree 10 in appearance.
Signed: Confused in DC
sorry, but how can he describe those pics as accurate. They were taken 10 years ago!!! She needs to post some updated pics!
BAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAHAAAAAAAAA
killing myself here. geezus this is funny.
Apparently very stupid. Check the PB photos and I think I got a glance of a small tattoo just above the right side of her pubic area. No tat on the EROS pic. And no evidence that a tat was removed I could be wrong.
Not the girl in the pics but also NOT a scam.
I've seen ladies who didn't use her own photos for various reasons. They tried to find photos that look like them; some of them even look better than the photos. I don't consider them B&S.
As AssWax above said, some really good GFE providers have used fake pix.
call it what you like, but if the girl delivers as expected or better i wouldn't call it a scam. there is a column in the reviews that ask that question. real photo ? no photo accurate yes
A word to the honest ladies who are wasting their money on photo shoots. Don't bother. The guys don't care. Just put up pics of whichever model you wish you looked like. As long as you give a good session, there are plenty of guys who will be OK with the fraud.
Apparently, even if your profile says that your pics are fraudulent, these guys will see you anyway.
I can see it now. . . 20 Angelina Jolies on Eros visiting DC every week.
That's BS, the first thing i look at in an ad is the pics, if i don't like them i don't even bother to read the review or the ad. Yes, we care, if you are going to advertise, use your own damn pictures or don't use any picture at all.
A word to the honest ladies who are wasting their money on photo shoots. Don't bother. The guys don't care. Just put up pics of whichever model you wish you looked like. As long as you give a good session, there are plenty of guys who will be OK with the fraud.
Apparently, even if your profile says that your pics are fraudulent, these guys will see you anyway.
I can see it now. . . 20 Angelina Jolies on Eros visiting DC every week.
I can see it now. These guys that say pics don't matter...
They are ready to go on vacation in Miami Fla and pick out a gorgeous 5 star hotel on the beach (pictures show the beauty of their hotel, natch). They get to Miami airport, and the taxi takes him to a 3 star looking hotel 4 blocks from the beach.
These guys are okay with it, because while NOT the beautiful hotel pictured, the service the received at the hotel (bellhops, front desk) wwas GREAT.
Use the same scenario for car buying (bait and switch) and they are happy 'cuase the car works great.
Unreal.
DCGuy 10 weighs in with the comment that Nikki Taylor is "Not the girl in the pics but also NOT a scam." The problem, however, is that when harrydc submitted his review, he stated, "Picture Accurate: Yes." Now we know they wasn't accurate. Heck, They weren't even she! In my view, even if the girl in question is beautiful nonetheless, that does not justify stating in the review that the pictures are accurate. Guys around here have different tastss. Some like big tits; some like tiny tits. Some like blondes; some like brunettes. Some like pale-skinned Swedes; some like dark, African-American girls. For that reason, we have to be able to rely upon the pictures posted in an ad. We especially have to be able to rely upon the reviewer to tell us the truth about those pictures. Harrydc did not and so I think his credibility has taken a huge hit.
Richard O. Steele
The problem is what is acceptable.
You want to see a girl 22-25. They post 26. Okay Close enough.
Then it turns out she is 30 but looks 25. Great you have fun.
You want to see a girl 22-25. They post 26.
Then it turns out she is a beautiful 36 yr. old woman
who looks 30 or maybe 34.
If they posted accurate ages and pics, at least you can choose.
The $300 you gave for that modeling session was your hard earned money.
Unless of course you stole it.
If pics are 5-10 yrs old, who are they fooling? Only the guy who takes it lying down and repeats.
Or goes on TER and BS his review.
If Beef faked his 900+ reviews, most of you guys would have given up on this hobby by now.
Another 10/9 review was just posted by a reviewer with beaucoup reviews. Hmmm, I wonder what the real story is here...
I assume that she is genuinely awesome but that HarryCD was taken in by what have been determined to be fake pics. She must look similar. In the past, there have been discussions on this board on this very topic: some of the better providers in town have used pictures that were not them but a reasonable likeness. I recall many hobbyists defending the practice although I'm personally not a fan.
This thread seems to have taken a silly tangent. Nikki has two full reviews and both have given her a 10 for looks. The newest review is by someone with over 100 reviews and only one other 10. Another poster in the thread says they have seen her and she is not a scam. People are not seeing the forest for the trees here. Based on the reviews it seems like at least 80% of the ladies either photoshop or use fake pics. If the pictures are representative as has been stated, why all the drama?
A fraudulent or deceptive act or operation. I would think using fake pics definitely fits the definition. Almost all providers use photoshopped pics but they don't use fake ones; their pics might not be accurate but at least they're real.