Asian Providers

**BKane80** · 10-09-23 02:19

Originally Posted by Yogurt2020 [View Original Post]

I should have taken heed to this post.

I decided to see her recently since there were reviews of her being slender or slim on TER. Mimi is definitely petite, but slender or slim is not the correct way to describe her body build.

It was only until I got back to my car did I realize Mimi is a rebrand from SDAG earlier this year. I can not remember her SDAG name. She has a medium length tattoo on the side of her left thigh. Her personality can be a bit annoying with a lot of baby-talking. The only thing that shines is that she DFKs like no other and her CIM is great. Otherwise not much else.

Interesting. If you wouldn't describe her as slim or slender what would she be? She for sure isn't fat. My experience with her was pretty much the same as BigCoomer's.

Originally Posted by BigCoomer [View Original Post]

I kinda don't mind it because I feel like SDAG and FEC seem to cover taller / average height women. I love the petite and small Asians so I'm a big fan and have found myself frequenting the SAG and Lolly girls much more.

Which speaking of, saw Mimi today and was very impressed.

BBFS (no cip), lots of DFK and LFK and BJ was off the charts. Very sloppy with lots of gagging and deep throating and ball and gooch licking.

She doesn't look like the pics but she's very cute and pretty still. She has like all of the stereotypical Korean features, which I loved. Perfect little tiny natural b's, maybe a's with erect nipples and small areolas. What's really impressive is how big of an ass is on this tiny girl. I love the tiny tits, big booty and nice hips combo. She's nice and slim as well.

She's a ton of fun and loves to fuck while being cute and playful. I'm a big fan and will be repeating.

I went to SstuntCock's post of her real pic and that is definitely not the Mimi I saw. I've attached the pic below as a reference. The girl in the pic looks to have large bolt-ons and a tatoo on her stomach. The current Mimi at SAG has small A's with the tattoo on the left side of her leg as you mentioned.

**Yogurt2020** · 10-08-23 22:17

Originally Posted by SsStuntCock [View Original Post]

Hear me now, believe me later: Do Not see her. I've posted about her too many times to count, covering the LA KBB thread and the SJ one, including her real pic.

I should have taken heed to this post.

I decided to see her recently since there were reviews of her being slender or slim on TER. Mimi is definitely petite, but slender or slim is not the correct way to describe her body build.

It was only until I got back to my car did I realize Mimi is a rebrand from SDAG earlier this year. I can not remember her SDAG name. She has a medium length tattoo on the side of her left thigh. Her personality can be a bit annoying with a lot of baby-talking. The only thing that shines is that she DFKs like no other and her CIM is great. Otherwise not much else.

**IronClad999** · 10-08-23 08:10

Originally Posted by CityboysUp [View Original Post]

That's not ignorance, that's simply just an unrealistic expectation. No one here is naive enough to believe that the photos are accurate, they simply wish the photos were representative.

To accept that we're not being given the real deal, they agencies have to bear the burden of dealing with negative reviews. It goes both ways, if the product is shitty, the customers won't buy. But if the customers don't buy, the agencies don't bring more girls.

But here's the thing, LA is a MUCH harsher market, but all the girls are okay with that because it has significantly more volume. That's it. It doesn't matter what kind of reviews they get, they want volume. They'd be okay with people shitting on the girls if they had the volume that the girls in LA get.

That explains why certain agencies that handles both west and east coast has the attitude of: "doesn't care about bad reviews, its better than the girls leaving". Thanks man.

**CityboysUp** · 10-07-23 22:06

Originally Posted by Yogurt2020 [View Original Post]

But some of you are also ignorant to believe that photos and stats in ads need to be real. This is rarely ever the case with Asian establishments, and the SW industry as a whole. Of course they are going to be older than they say. Of course they aren't going to look like the super model fake picture they pick off of Instagram. It's called upselling, Marketing 101.

That's not ignorance, that's simply just an unrealistic expectation. No one here is naive enough to believe that the photos are accurate, they simply wish the photos were representative.

To accept that we're not being given the real deal, they agencies have to bear the burden of dealing with negative reviews. It goes both ways, if the product is shitty, the customers won't buy. But if the customers don't buy, the agencies don't bring more girls.

But here's the thing, LA is a MUCH harsher market, but all the girls are okay with that because it has significantly more volume. That's it. It doesn't matter what kind of reviews they get, they want volume. They'd be okay with people shitting on the girls if they had the volume that the girls in LA get.

**SsStuntCock** · 10-07-23 02:20

Originally Posted by BillyIsTheOne [View Original Post]

I'm just going to play devils advocate here and say that I can see where they are coming from. I 've seen many sdag girls and have had great experiences with some that had a terrible review and and terrible experiences from some that had great reviews. Everyone clicks differently and if you leave a bad review, the girls rep is ruined and they have to leave and find a new name. Most reviews don't differentiate between 'didn't click' and 'service was terrible' and sometimes its hard to categorize the experience either way. With all that said, sdag has been bitching and whining about bad reviews for a long time and hey made a big mistake by making this threat. You can't control what anonymous people post online so they just have to get over it. FEC and others dont behave that way.

How 'about nobody behaves this way? And here's the ironic part: They equate a '7' with negative reviews that "kill business. " When in actuality, a '7' on TER literally means "Hot time. ".

To put things in perspective, Dami (TER: 367565) is the 4th most popular girl in SJ -AKA the largest kgirl market in the US- with an average of 7. 95 for Looks and 7. 96 for Performance. And to further drive home my point, it looks like all SDAG girls have been removed from TER. Well, except for Cuban Ginger who has -wait for it- 7. 82 for looks.

**BillyIsTheOne** · 10-07-23 01:29

I'm just going to play devils advocate here and say that I can see where they are coming from. I 've seen many sdag girls and have had great experiences with some that had a terrible review and and terrible experiences from some that had great reviews. Everyone clicks differently and if you leave a bad review, the girls rep is ruined and they have to leave and find a new name. Most reviews don't differentiate between 'didn't click' and 'service was terrible' and sometimes its hard to categorize the experience either way. With all that said, sdag has been bitching and whining about bad reviews for a long time and hey made a big mistake by making this threat. You can't control what anonymous people post online so they just have to get over it. FEC and others dont behave that way.

**JulianK** · 10-06-23 15:49

Originally Posted by SirBishop [View Original Post]

Here is a list of known K-Girl Agencies that will occasionally have girls in San Diego or are known to cycle girls here. The same girl may pop up on different agencies, as we have recently seen. So pick your fave booker if she's on multiple listings. This listing is provided as your starting point and the usual warnings about pics applies. Some websites show rates, ages, more info. This is not an endorsement of any agency.

https://www.yourlollygirls.com/sandiego

https://topangels.ch/all-angels/

https://www.thetopgirls.com

https://www.sweetasiangem.com/san-diego

https://get9irl.com/index.php?route=...ategory&path=2

https://www.candygirlla.com

https://www.cakdolls.cr/sd/

SDAG was my intro to K girls and I have given them most of my hobbying business since. Some great, some OK, some outstanding and a few no repeats. And that's with reviews. As biased as the policy made them, I've been able to read between the lines and have not had a bad experience with an SDAG girl with good reviews. Too many good times with SDAG to give up on them, scheduling and service has been solid for me. The calendar is looking a little light right now though. I'm verified with most of the above so we'll see how things go.

**Yogurt2020** · 10-06-23 13:31

SDAG should've just kept their mouth shut and keep doing business as usual. There's been good providers this year and they seemed to expanded their incall apartments. I assumed business was going well, so to sour that with a strict review policy was a bad move on them.

But some of you are also ignorant to believe that photos and stats in ads need to be real. This is rarely ever the case with Asian establishments, and the SW industry as a whole. Of course they are going to be older than they say. Of course they aren't going to look like the super model fake picture they pick off of Instagram. It's called upselling, Marketing 101.

**RolfTorren** · 10-06-23 08:39

Its a pity because they used to be the premier AAMP in SD and really outshone their rivals. I've had awesome experiences there over the years, and even in more recent times. But I pick and choose very carefully. The penchant for SoCal AAMPS to use fake picks is almost universal, at least for K-girls. Lets face it, today it takes just a few seconds to shoot and upload a real pic. They could all do it if they wanted, but they don't. And as for the objection that these girls' identities need to be protected. That's nonsense too. You can hide tattoos and not show faces. They are simply hiding the fact that these girls are probably in their 30's at least. Very few 20-somethings for sure, especially in the post-Covid era. And if you want to know which ones are less attractive, just assume that's the case with anyone who offers BBFS. The hotter ones don't need to go that route. Think of the amazing Petra. Don't get me wrong. Ash has a great reputation for service, but lets face it, she's way older than the website stated and also facially quite plain. But she fucks like a dynamo and is great.

The booker, whoever that is. And I think there's more than one person. Has always had attitude. I think they've changed over the years, just observing their style of communicating. But all have been less than friendly and basically interested in getting as much money out of patrons as they can. Never once was an underwhelming session compensated for with a discount, money back or a genuine promise of better service next time.

And they are not above banning guys who dare to write honest reviews.

So the lesson is, make sure you and your handle on this site and others are not connectable. Don't sit in the parking lot and write a review straight after a session. Wait at least a day or so. And if you have been rejected, there are a number of other good options in town to choose from.

Originally Posted by Will008 [View Original Post]

I've never went to SDAG. When I tried to verify, who ever it was I was texting was an ass. So I guess they didn't need my money. Plenty happy to see other organizations and sure am not missing out on anything.

**Will008** · 10-05-23 20:50

Originally Posted by CityboysUp [View Original Post]

It's a shame really because they've had a lot of great providers in the past and even some new ones.

For example, Rachel has great sensual service. But admittedly she does not look like the pictures provided and she even is older. Which is honestly not a problem, but SDAG has been operating on shady principles to draw up business.

* Posting up photoshopped or completely fake pictures.

* Falsifying details (let's be real, most of those girls are NOT in their 20's).

* Upcharging (this +100 rate for BBFS is absurd, especially when girls ask for finishing outside).

* Sending shills to post on these boards (pretty sure one of them was the booker too).

And now they're hitting all new lows by threatening retaliation against customers for posting low scores. That is just unacceptable.

I admire the fact that the booker is on the side of the provider, but he should only do so if the provider can provide the right level of service. Like Yoji, Dallas, Jaine, etc. Are all fantastic girls. But stop upselling garbage girls or less attractive girls. If they don't have what it takes, lower their rates so they can make more on volume. Don't inflate these provider's egos, if they're not hot enough, they shouldn't be pampered.

I've never went to SDAG. When I tried to verify, who ever it was I was texting was an ass. So I guess they didn't need my money. Plenty happy to see other organizations and sure am not missing out on anything.

**Sir Bishop** · 10-05-23 20:10

Here is a list of known K-Girl Agencies that will occasionally have girls in San Diego or are known to cycle girls here. The same girl may pop up on different agencies, as we have recently seen. So pick your fave booker if she's on multiple listings. This listing is provided as your starting point and the usual warnings about pics applies. Some websites show rates, ages, more info. This is not an endorsement of any agency.

https://www.yourlollygirls.com/sandiego

https://topangels.ch/all-angels/

https://www.thetopgirls.com

https://www.sweetasiangem.com/san-diego

https://get9irl.com/index.php?route=...ategory&path=2

https://www.candygirlla.com

https://www.cakdolls.cr/sd/

**CityboysUp** · 10-05-23 18:51

It's a shame really because they've had a lot of great providers in the past and even some new ones.

For example, Rachel has great sensual service. But admittedly she does not look like the pictures provided and she even is older. Which is honestly not a problem, but SDAG has been operating on shady principles to draw up business.

* Posting up photoshopped or completely fake pictures.

* Falsifying details (let's be real, most of those girls are NOT in their 20's).

* Upcharging (this +100 rate for BBFS is absurd, especially when girls ask for finishing outside).

* Sending shills to post on these boards (pretty sure one of them was the booker too).

And now they're hitting all new lows by threatening retaliation against customers for posting low scores. That is just unacceptable.

I admire the fact that the booker is on the side of the provider, but he should only do so if the provider can provide the right level of service. Like Yoji, Dallas, Jaine, etc. Are all fantastic girls. But stop upselling garbage girls or less attractive girls. If they don't have what it takes, lower their rates so they can make more on volume. Don't inflate these provider's egos, if they're not hot enough, they shouldn't be pampered.

**RocketManP** · 10-05-23 17:46

In the long term, maybe the booker apologizes and stops harassing and threatening customers. At the very least I'd hope he learned his lesson. And this debacle can be used to deter other orgs from doing the same.

And I disagree. You are saying "do think that whoever posted that on behalf of SDAG messed up big time."

No! They messed up when they instituted the policy, not when they got caught posting it publicly. I've canvassed many people throughout the years and many have told me the same thing about this place. If they (the agency) are proud of their policy and really believe in it, why hide it? Wear it proudly. Post it publicly.

The agency wants to have their cake and eat it too.

If the only thing they're sorry about is them accidentally posting it publicly, then they haven't learned their lesson. Which is. Let customers write any reviews they'd like to write provided they are honest and truthful. How hard is that? If they are so good as people say they are why do they need to silence people?

Originally Posted by Laf85 [View Original Post]

My guess would be any provider with an active link to an SDAG account got banned / deleted. Often times when a girl gets cycled out the link to their profile is no longer active and thus on the ter review the "current website / ad" defaults to a need a new url message. So you can see previous reviews under those conditions but I'm willing to bet as new reviews submitted with an SDAG website link gets submitted that will probably flag ter to remove those reviews. In the grand scheme of things it is quite a Lose-Lose situation for both the business and customers alike. Unreliable info mixed with real info allows the user to at least use his own smarts to differentiate between shill and legit reviews. But no info= no info. To boot no info for the business is an obvious drop in revenue.

I do think that whoever posted that on behalf of SDAG messed up big time. But before you call for pitchforks, understand that a lot of mongers still get their fill on Asian cravings through this business and with no ter to rely on now for reviews this site might be the best option for exchange of info at the moment and calling for any reviews to banned here might leave your fellow mongers completely in the dark when trying new girls. Just my two cents. Happy hunting all!

**FreeWally** · 10-05-23 17:39

Originally Posted by SirBishop [View Original Post]

It's pretty common for the non-sdag groups popping up in sd that a flat-rate, all-inclusive of 320 is to be found. True, the turnaround on girls is quick yet that is determined by the girls, not the bookers. Reviews are fine when filtered through the bull shit lens. I want better value for my money. I'll donate 320 all-inclusive over the 280+100 option any day. The new kids on the block are bringing in younger girls, more accurate pics, better service, low rates.

Don't know how much this helps but I've rarely had accurate pics from any Korean bookers. Occasionally it's the actual girl in the photo. Whereas the Thai bookers SweetCandies, Sandra, Diamond seem to use real photos. I can confirm SweetCandies was 2 for 2 the actual girl with clear photos. But I will say the girls I've tried were both amateur (just started) and didn't offer the full range of services the Korean bookers offer (it hasn't mattered which one to me). On the plus I could preview and select by photo and so far the girls have been younger, early 20's.

Visited Chichi recently, she is curvy with big boobs for an Asian, English not too good (even compared to the Korean girls), loves having her tits sucked. Seems new. So pros and cons. Also it's in MV not UTC if that's a factor. But much simpler parking situation (lots of free 1 hour parking outside) and a straightforward gate unlike FEC. I was even thinking to go FEC but I guess I'm getting lazy when I think I'll have to try three ways just to get in.

Hope this helps.