Korean Agency BB

**JrueArtist** · 03-30-22 21:11

Let's not state the obvious here. Talking about that proverbial box LOL. Didn't you build that box?

Originally Posted by Toungsten [View Original Post]

I guess you must have missed the sarcasm in my reply. It was emphasized by quotation marks. Instead of categorizing others reviews as shilling or self glorification it is best not to read them if that's where it leads you. Just write your own reviews and hope you're not put into that proverbial box. All I can say about my reviews is that I've received many thanks from many mongers for the intel.

.

**JrueArtist** · 03-30-22 21:08

Yes they do have that many girls. Those that are in can attest to that. Guys that don't even know saying things here like it's the truth. More of that I hear, my friend says etc. Why'all should just stick to the 4 girls you flood this forum with. Shouldn't trash others.

Originally Posted by Toungsten [View Original Post]

Some agencies just don't remove the pics of the girls that are no longer there. No way are they close to that number.

.

**Toungsten** · 03-30-22 20:00

Originally Posted by Ramen25 [View Original Post]

That's how many girls are currently listed on CGLA's website. There can't possibly be that many different girls currently available. I'm sure half if not more are just re-brands of the same girl.

It makes it just that more difficult to keep track of who's who. I'm starting to think this is by design sadly. I remember back when the agency just started there were only just 6-8 girls listed! The good ole days.

Now we live a world where we have to navigate the re-brands, fake pics, upcharges etc.

Some agencies just don't remove the pics of the girls that are no longer there. No way are they close to that number.

**Toungsten** · 03-30-22 19:56

Originally Posted by TheSexorcist [View Original Post]

You saying No we do not agree at all wasn't in quotations sir, and that is what I referred to regarding your not getting my sarcasm, as I didn't think we concurred whatsoever. I'm sure there are those here who express an appreciation for the reviews you post (interesting that you defended them, even though I have not once during this exchange directly accused you of writing "possibly embellished" posts) yet that takes me back to the subjectivity of mediocre art and good art: like you said, one man's house painter is another man's Michelangelo. I suppose it's not only YMMV when seeing a provider but also when reading an account of someone who has been with one. Good day.

Go back and see where my quotation marks are. You must have skimmed over it as you have skimmed over my reviews and don't think anyone is confused as to whom you are referring. If it's only YMMV then why bother to read reviews?

**Atrr1** · 03-30-22 19:55

Originally Posted by Francescoo [View Original Post]

They need to bring it back! I got into the hobby seeing so many different girls on here. LOL.

It was Trump that said no pussy for you!

**The Sexorcist** · 03-30-22 19:06

Originally Posted by Toungsten [View Original Post]

I guess you must have missed the sarcasm in my reply. It was emphasized by quotation marks. Instead of categorizing others reviews as shilling or self glorification it is best not to read them if that's where it leads you. Just write your own reviews and hope you're not put into that proverbial box. All I can say about my reviews is that I've received many thanks from many mongers for the intel.

You saying No we do not agree at all wasn't in quotations sir, and that is what I referred to regarding your not getting my sarcasm, as I didn't think we concurred whatsoever. I'm sure there are those here who express an appreciation for the reviews you post (interesting that you defended them, even though I have not once during this exchange directly accused you of writing "possibly embellished" posts) yet that takes me back to the subjectivity of mediocre art and good art: like you said, one man's house painter is another man's Michelangelo. I suppose it's not only YMMV when seeing a provider but also when reading an account of someone who has been with one. Good day.

**Francescoo** · 03-30-22 18:45

They need to bring it back! I got into the hobby seeing so many different girls on here. LOL.

**Throwawayhok89** · 03-30-22 18:42

Originally Posted by GoJoyutaji [View Original Post]

Thanks! Will they accept my driver license and paystub if I blur out my name and address?

I doubt it. They were pretty particular with the images. Booker grey might have an easier verification, but I haven't tried yet, you can find poor communication stories across the forum with booker grey. Once you're in Cgla, they are professional and responsive with booking and instructions. GL.

**Francescoo** · 03-30-22 18:41

Originally Posted by Ramen25 [View Original Post]

That's how many girls are currently listed on CGLA's website. There can't possibly be that many different girls currently available. I'm sure half if not more are just re-brands of the same girl.

It makes it just that more difficult to keep track of who's who. I'm starting to think this is by design sadly. I remember back when the agency just started there were only just 6-8 girls listed! The good ole days.

Now we live a world where we have to navigate the re-brands, fake pics, upcharges etc.

They have a Romanian girl! Might check her out tbh.

Her rate is 350 but I need to double check! LOL but yes they have a huge selection.

**Ramen25** · 03-30-22 18:14

That's how many girls are currently listed on CGLA's website. There can't possibly be that many different girls currently available. I'm sure half if not more are just re-brands of the same girl.

It makes it just that more difficult to keep track of who's who. I'm starting to think this is by design sadly. I remember back when the agency just started there were only just 6-8 girls listed! The good ole days.

Now we live a world where we have to navigate the re-brands, fake pics, upcharges etc.

**AbelForSure** · 03-30-22 17:43

Originally Posted by AbelForSure [View Original Post]

Any feedback on her service?

Found some recent reviews. Thanks for the search function.

**Toungsten** · 03-30-22 16:43

Originally Posted by TheSexorcist [View Original Post]

You apparently missed the sarcasm. The "possible lemon" and the "more earnest and trustworthy purveyor" were simply in reference to dismissing a review which could "possibly" be embellished (possible lemon) for other reports which read as more realistic and less A: shilling for the provider B: self glorification or C: both (more earnest and trustworthy purveyor). Of course, that all depends upon the perception of the person reading the review so that decision has everything to do with me and nothing to do with anyone else. Good day sir.

I guess you must have missed the sarcasm in my reply. It was emphasized by quotation marks. Instead of categorizing others reviews as shilling or self glorification it is best not to read them if that's where it leads you. Just write your own reviews and hope you're not put into that proverbial box. All I can say about my reviews is that I've received many thanks from many mongers for the intel.

**Atrr1** · 03-30-22 16:02

Originally Posted by GoJoyutaji [View Original Post]

Thanks! Will they accept my driver license and paystub if I blur out my name and address?

Nope, k-man will visit you at your home, if 2nd payment is needed.

**The Sexorcist** · 03-30-22 15:27

Originally Posted by Toungsten [View Original Post]

We have found a need for lemon laws to protect us from those "earnest and trustworthy" purveyors of automotive transportation. Unfortunately with providers we have no laws to protect us from lemons so we have to go by recommendations. There are always lemons that are "possible" which by definition means that there are always diamonds when you think a lemon exists. You use the term possibly as if it means probably and even then there is no guarantee. No we do not agree at all. Caveat Emptor. Find another source of intel.

You apparently missed the sarcasm. The "possible lemon" and the "more earnest and trustworthy purveyor" were simply in reference to dismissing a review which could "possibly" be embellished (possible lemon) for other reports which read as more realistic and less A: shilling for the provider B: self glorification or C: both (more earnest and trustworthy purveyor). Of course, that all depends upon the perception of the person reading the review so that decision has everything to do with me and nothing to do with anyone else. Good day sir.