Thread: "Sugarbabies" / "Arrangements" Amateurs or Not?
+
Add Report
Results 13,621 to 13,635 of 23557
-
08-05-15 10:38 #9937Awaiting Email Confirmation

Posts: 1287I guess online sales of what would be the salient question. Sometimes a simple media trend can cause a run on anything. Just a couple of weeks ago, anyone selling confederate flags was pretty much an overnight success as folks started stockpiling them. The economy overall is in good shape though. Folks can say what they want about Obama but I'll take this over the Bush era anyday.
Originally Posted by HollywoodGuy
[View Original Post]
-
08-05-15 10:24 #9936Senior Member

Posts: 5587Is the Trumpster rejuvenating the American spirit? Something is going on, on the Internet. Online sales have jumped dramatically in the last 5 weeks (in the slowest month of the year except August). This directly impacts my ability to play in the bowl. And part of my reason for having the confidence to offer $$ to that model below. I hope this keeps up, because my game is way up even from a couple years ago. So if my paycheck goes up proportionately, I could go on an awesome sugar run till the end of the year.
Smiley Face.
-
08-05-15 10:09 #9935Awaiting Email Confirmation

Posts: 1287I mentioned earlier in this discussion that the worlds oldest profession will never go away.
Originally Posted by Dsprdo
[View Original Post]
What would be in jeopardy, however, of diminishing is the simple convenience of meeting good clean college aged babes by simply signing up for a website. If it is not dead-simple and convenient, free of legal risk and social stigma for them, the numbers would drop off exponentially and we'd mostly be dealing with escorts and BP skanks.
Trust me when I say SBs can still be found on Match/POF etc all day long. It's just a LOT more work to do so with much less to choose from.
-
08-05-15 09:19 #9934Senior Member

Posts: 498I had two of those early this year. They qualified as a few extra pounds for sure.
Originally Posted by TravelinSD
[View Original Post]
-
08-05-15 09:16 #9933Senior Member

Posts: 498Well said. It is a fine line. I was thinking along the lines of your second paragraph type of SB. I too like that type of SB. In fact my senior to be at a university is like that, as she took her profile down a couple of months ago.
Originally Posted by FredMoore
[View Original Post]
-
08-05-15 09:01 #9932Senior Member

Posts: 5587And here is a front shot of the aforementioned 6 foot girl. After sleeping on it. I am just not sure. But I guess I can meet her for free and see what happens.
Originally Posted by HollywoodGuy
[View Original Post]
-
08-05-15 07:08 #9931Senior Member

Posts: 45Pro Didn't Know
So I contacted a college student a couple of weeks ago who had the usual profile about looking for LTR with a SD to help out with tuition. Her reply was only for me to send her a text. A google search turned up her many ads and pics.
I didn't reply as I wasn't interested in going that route. Last night she wrote back why I had contacted her. So you explained why. She replied that she wasn't an escort and wanted to know why I thought that. After sending her the link I got off of google, she replied back, "Oh ok but how did you find that as all I get is nothing like that when I look up my phone number". After I told her how to search for her ads, she said thanks and call me if I change my mind.
I don't have anything against escorts as I've used them before but I prefer to know upfront. Just started meeting another college student who is probably utr but at least we did a m&g and a couple of dinners before hitting the fc.
-
08-05-15 00:59 #9930Senior Member

Posts: 347Societal norms do change over time, I agree. Don't think that women's desire to trade on their attractiveness to men has changed since the beginning of time, and doubt that it ever will, based on empirical evidence. A generalization that some women will hate, I know, but I'm pretty confident that position is backed by a myriad of day to day examples.
Originally Posted by JeezLizard
[View Original Post]
-
08-04-15 23:41 #9929Awaiting Email Confirmation

Posts: 1287As I said in an earlier message, sugar daddying was around before the websites and would be around after. The negative side effect however would be that if the websites are pushed underground or if there is a stigma of illegality created around it in the media, there is a certain category of girls that will no longer use those sites. Unfortunately that category of girls are the best kind.
Originally Posted by Dsprdo
[View Original Post]
The SD sites would continue to popup under different names and find ways to continue operating, but if they aren't getting basically promoted on the Dr. Phil show and similar, we are not going to benefit from the same level of popularity.
Its not the willingness of the men to seek out the hobby that would fade -- the problem is all the young ladies that would be chased away by a stigma that there is something wrong / illegal with the hobby.
-
08-04-15 22:27 #9928Senior Member

Posts: 347I know I should stay out of this, BUT-"simple file sharing and copyright laws" are in effect taking hundreds of millions of dollars OUT of the pockets of people in the entertainment industry that have the motivation, the contacts, the money, and the legal backing to influence the government to take action. The only motivation of the government to commit all the might of the Federal machine to shutting down SA, SD4 M or others are headlines during an election cycle. The history of politicians grandstanding against vice goes back as long as we've had a government, is cyclical in nature, and will probably never end. That being said, if there is big money out there on one side of this issue, it is on the side of the internet services that are filling a market. Something like this is GOING to exist in one form or another. Can the government shut down SD4 M? Absolutely. Is the government going to eliminate men with means' desire for the company of younger women or the desire of those women to have more than they can get otherwise? Never.
Originally Posted by JeezLizard
[View Original Post]
Now, as a smart guy said, how about that pussy?
-
08-04-15 22:12 #9927Senior Member

Posts: 5587And speaking of pussy. I while back I said I might decide to go an alternate route and pay $$ a date (here and there), but then just date a little less. I just made my first $$ offer today, to this girl, based off her message to me that a $ just wasn't going to cut it.
I would never normally do this, but since being with my ATF who is 6' tall, I have come to appreciate the kinetic dynamics of our love making. This girl is close to 6 feet as well.
Anyway, she just accepted my offer of a "no sex, no money" date to see if we click.
-
08-04-15 21:42 #9926Awaiting Email Confirmation

Posts: 1287The SD sites aren't illegal, when used according to terms of service. Neither are nightclubs in most cities, but the cities can still choose to shut them down as a "public nuisance" if too much illegal activity is tied to the business. It's the same sort of risk. As I said before, it's not going to happen over the occasional misdemeanor transaction taking place, but something like a high profile case in the media (examples I used before are something like the Google exec / heroin death, or maybe someone gets caught trafficking some minor on one of the sites).
Originally Posted by HollywoodGuy
[View Original Post]
Allofmp3 wasn't breaking the law. Neither was megaupload. Their users were. Its an almost perfect analogy.
-
08-04-15 21:30 #9925Senior Member

Posts: 5587All those sites are what's referred to as egregious offenders. No dating site can stop the occasional pro from posting an ad. And even if a girl is a pro that doesn't mean she isn't entitled to a social life. Men paying women for their company is part of every cultures traditions. I just don't see a dating site, that is obviously not an escort site getting shut down. A BP may be a different story. Those sites you mention were violating so many laws as were the individual owners on a personal level, that you couldn't count the number of felonies they were committing. The SD sites and especially SA are run by a totally different crowd. The primary owner of SD4M was once run out of a business a number of years ago. The business was not illegal in any way, but his particular business practices were. And would have eventually forced any owner to close practicing similar tactics to defraud or abuse the telecom system. Just my 2 cents.
Originally Posted by JeezLizard
[View Original Post]
Now hey, what about that pussy?
-
08-04-15 21:04 #9924Awaiting Email Confirmation

Posts: 1287Believe me if the US government can shut down Megaupload, which was based in Hong Kong and run by folks who never set foot on US soil, and put the owner in jail in his country of residence (New Zealand) with a constant threat of extradition to the USA for trial, you better believe that no website in any country is safe.
Originally Posted by HollywoodGuy
[View Original Post]
And they didn't do this over human trafficking. They did it over simple file sharing and copyright laws. They weren't based in the US, they just passed network traffic through our servers and its game-fucking-over for them.
In terms of credentials, I've been involved in this sort of stuff since before Americans had ever heard the word Internet. Online and the legalities that drive it have been around since we first connected computers to phone lines, long before the world wide web was created.
I'm really not trying to be a dick here but I've given numerous examples that prove the "offshore" theory is just plain wrong. Allofmp3, silkroad, megaupload. They all prove my point in one way or another.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaupload
-
08-04-15 20:12 #9923Senior Member

Posts: 5587Sorry, but truly a bad idea. Site owners throw those complaints straight into the trash. I did get one person thrown off SD4M, but only because they sent me like 50 emails asking for money, were obviously offshore and I had a record of all the messaging they did. And they had been on there for 4 years harassing people. But to turn in pros is like the pot calling the kettle black.
Originally Posted by FredMoore
[View Original Post]












Reply With Quote









