Korean Agency BB

**BobLove** · 03-31-22 12:42

Originally Posted by JrueArtist [View Original Post]

Met her today and it was a good time. I agree with Corndog about her service. She is sweet and super nice. Her pussy was like velvet, massaging my dick for 2 nuts within 40 minutes of me stepping in. Pics not real but I was happy to see her. Much better than pics. She is pretty small, nice soft C cups and a really cute innocent look to her. She is far from innocent though. Looks are 8. Attitude and service 9. 5..

Creampied Haru last night. Pics are not real, but looks young and cute and seems new to this line of work. Tramp stamp on her lower back.

**Toungsten** · 03-31-22 12:19

M. Stacy, Ava, Viki (WLA). Aria Audrey (MW) https://myalbum.com/album/4j4zspr3tJSf...

https://preciousklove.escortbook.com/ Remi, Saige, Nicole (WLA). MW.

http://www.kgla.net/ Saige, Nicole, Remi (WLA) . MW.

Sexy Angels. https://sexyangels.site/...

SFK. https://sexyfunkgirls.escortbook.com/ Lucy, Viki.

https://kbliss.net/ Jessica, Lucy.

**IAmGib1** · 03-31-22 08:37

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.

Here are the facts. CGLA. Has different girls in different locations; MidWilshire, KTown, OC, DTLA, WLA, LV.

Yes, some are rebrands but not as many as on other websites. Also the booker is open about it if you ask.

Most K-org pics are fake nowadays or the real face on a superimposed photoshopped body with rare exceptions.

This protects the girls anonymity and enhances their market appeal.

This is the game we are in and the current reality. We pay to play. The choice is ours. Their are many other flavors to choose from on different venues but the fact is none offer the service and quality you get from the K-orgs for the price you pay. IMHO and I have tried many over the past few decades and continue to do so.

**Ramen25** · 03-31-22 07:36

Originally Posted by Francescoo [View Original Post]

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.

Yes looks like CGLA is bringing some international flavor to their roster (Romanian / Columbian).

Just curious, anyone have prior experience with these Amazonian women LOL? (Listed at 5'7" / 5'10").

**Ramen25** · 03-31-22 07:18

Originally Posted by BastardChorum [View Original Post]

I think if CGLA started to post multiple listings of the same girl, reports of it would start trickling in like in MKC and Booker Gray's case. Considering that LA is kgirl central in the US, it's a reasonable amount of available girls. I remember during the heyday of CV, I counted more than 120 girls listed as available in any given day. For CGLA to have over 60 girls is unusual for a single agency but I'm more inclined to believe that it's multiple agencies that came together under the same umbrella. Especially given that they cover multiple cities / neighborhoods with one being out of state to boot.

Could be. I guess we'll never really know for sure unless we see each and every girl listed ourselves which will never happen LOL. But I will echo what BA said, I do like that CGLA updates their website daily to show who's currently availabe and if they are not, their anticipated return date.

BTW while we're on the topic of re-brands, I believe CGLA Yuri was formerly Grace, measurements and availability / rates are essentially the same and her listing disappeared once Yuri's was posted.

**Bastard Chorum** · 03-31-22 05:57

Originally Posted by FortunateSon01 [View Original Post]

Hey all,

New to this forum, but not the hobby. I'm east coast and was hoping to check out the west coast business. Unfortunately, everyone I've contacted wants references and I don't have them. I contacted Gardenksecret and they told me name race age and TER or HX I'd if I had it. Then said 2 references by different bookers. So am I reading this as all of the above or have an I'd or two different references? Just trying to understand the rules.

Thanks.

It's the classic catch 22 of kgirls. They want you to give them references of other kgirl agencies but if you're new you don't have them. Unlike years ago, having references don't guarantee entry either unfortunately. If you're new to kgirls, then I would suggest you be honest about it and let the bookers know. Disclose what personal information you're willing to or just move on if it's too much skin in the game for you. Odds are stacked against you for being an out of towner too so don't be too discouraged if you'll met with silence. Ideally, start locally if your city has kgirls as local bookers or the girls themselves may connect you to west coast agencies. Good Luck.

**Bastard Chorum** · 03-31-22 05:45

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.

I think if CGLA started to post multiple listings of the same girl, reports of it would start trickling in like in MKC and Booker Gray's case. Considering that LA is kgirl central in the US, it's a reasonable amount of available girls. I remember during the heyday of CV, I counted more than 120 girls listed as available in any given day. For CGLA to have over 60 girls is unusual for a single agency but I'm more inclined to believe that it's multiple agencies that came together under the same umbrella. Especially given that they cover multiple cities / neighborhoods with one being out of state to boot.

**SsStuntCock** · 03-31-22 03:23

Originally Posted by BonerAppetitty [View Original Post]

53 girls available today and 13 more available next 3 days. Booker is good and that's why they book many girls. There are rebrands but only duplicate ads may be Aria = Vixen.

CGLA booker is the best at keeping the site updated.

CGLA must be doing something right. Wish I could say the same for the others.

Speaking of agencies that "don't remove the pics of the girls that are no longer there," why on earth is Sexy Angels still advertising Jenny as "Available now! Knowing damn well she's been long gone. Are they in denial or is this just lazy advertising?

I know one or two of you are in bed with them literally and figuratively so I invite you to enlighten us inquiring minds.

**BonerAppetitty** · 03-31-22 01:47

In that case, Amy was on my recommended list LOL. I wouldn't mind seeing Seulgi again. However, I prefer to chase after new young and cute girls.

Originally Posted by SuperMan333 [View Original Post]

No, the Amy that started at ktownkgirlz along with Suzy.

**SuperMan333** · 03-31-22 01:39

Originally Posted by BonerAppetitty [View Original Post]

Thanks for this. I hesitated to see Amy / Ara in the past cause of doubt. I may end up seeing them eventually as they keep rebranding. Luckily, bookers kept me on an enjoyable path so far.

No, the Amy that started at ktownkgirlz along with Suzy.

**BonerAppetitty** · 03-31-22 01:38

Thank you for the accurate review, and likewise to Bastard Chorum for the review of Zoe. Both Bree & Zoe are USDA Prime to me. Bree looked happy to see me and I was in ecstasy with Bree.

She was the only girl this year who made me feel young again. I suppressed my desire to rec her in HYA thread cause it's bad luck for a girl if I am the first to review LOL.

Bree's contact: (click here) 5'3" 34 C 115 lbs.

Originally Posted by KGirlAddict [View Original Post]

Boner, you're a gentleman and a scholar, and one of our MVP's. Bree is young looking, sweet girl and I think you'd like her. Real pics but add 5 years and 15 pounds, same face if you like the pics but older, face is her best feature. Nice fake tits, soft but can feel the hard firm underneath, big brown areolas with lighter button nipples, large belly tattoo that's been photoshopped out, needs to lose that Covid weight (but I'm a thin chaser) although I could see the mongers that like thick girls, really like Bree and say she was prime. For me she was almost too heavy, but her face reminded me of someone. Nice personality, sweet and bubbly, likes to go at her own pace, takes slightly longer shower, acts young. BBBJ a little but toothy and not deep, BLS good, NO RIM, BBFSCIP, goes slow at first but can really get into it, won't complain, pussy feels good and soft, natural wetness, tired at the end but still a trooper, doggy looks good with thick ass to grab. I'll repeat after I've shopped around the new talent.

**BonerAppetitty** · 03-31-22 01:33

Thanks for this. I hesitated to see Amy / Ara in the past cause of doubt. I may end up seeing them eventually as they keep rebranding. Luckily, bookers kept me on an enjoyable path so far.

Originally Posted by SuperMan333 [View Original Post]

This is Amy. I think he saw her before too so I'm not sure why he didn't disclose that.

**Jack926** · 03-31-22 00:55

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.

CGLA does have lots of talents and she does do a daily update on who is available and who is not-There are no duplicate girl or rebrand of the same girl but there are definitely some fake photos. The thing with CGLA booker is that she shoots straight with me. And if you treat her nice, she will give you great feedback.

All and all, she is very pleasant to deal with.

**KGirlAddict** · 03-31-22 00:34

Originally Posted by BonerAppetitty [View Original Post]

I created this thread (click here) for avoiding MILFs. When you guys make this claim without names, I am not sure if you guys are picky or my standard is too low LOL. I still TOFTT happily.

Boner, you're a gentleman and a scholar, and one of our MVP's. Bree is young looking, sweet girl and I think you'd like her. Real pics but add 5 years and 15 pounds, same face if you like the pics but older, face is her best feature. Nice fake tits, soft but can feel the hard firm underneath, big brown areolas with lighter button nipples, large belly tattoo that's been photoshopped out, needs to lose that Covid weight (but I'm a thin chaser) although I could see the mongers that like thick girls, really like Bree and say she was prime. For me she was almost too heavy, but her face reminded me of someone. Nice personality, sweet and bubbly, likes to go at her own pace, takes slightly longer shower, acts young. BBBJ a little but toothy and not deep, BLS good, NO RIM, BBFSCIP, goes slow at first but can really get into it, won't complain, pussy feels good and soft, natural wetness, tired at the end but still a trooper, doggy looks good with thick ass to grab. I'll repeat after I've shopped around the new talent.

**Toungsten** · 03-31-22 00:29

Originally Posted by TheSexorcist [View Original Post]

No sir, I don't need to look at the comment in question as I did that prior to my most recent post. The only words you used quotations for were "earnest and trustworthy" and "possible". As I previously stated, you did not use quotations on the phrase No we do not agree at all, which is indicative of you missing the sarcasm when I wrote something about being glad that we could resolve this exchange in agreement. And respectfully, I don't skim over your reviews I simply ignore them, as I know what they will contain and, as should be quite apparent by now, it doesn't interest me. "If it's only YMMV then why bother to read reviews?" Head scratcher. If seeing providers is YMMV then why see providers? Obviously because for every provider (or monger's review of one) that you don't care for, there's some other provider (or some other monger's review of one) that you get something positive from.

That's correct. That is exactly where I put the quotation marks and it's obvious now that the sarcasm passed right by you. To answer your question why see providers if it is YMMV the answer is as I said earlier wait for several reviews. Read the reviews, compare them and do a little legwork as to who wrote them and who else they have reviewed. Also get clued in by some bookers before it became so open. It's pretty simple. That's why I'm not disappointed very often. And that's why BBFS was available to me with virtually every provider (not all) before it was part of the daily routine of hobbyists. No one even talked about it back then.