Undercutting Local Prices

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

I couldn't agree with whiteman more. I understand the value and beauty we have in Ottawa, though if I could make $100/hr with no *need* for an education, not to say we're all uneducated here ladies, but if I could, I would. Now that being said rates per hour are generally double that of $100. I know that there is more work that goes Into service providing than specifically billable hour it's still outrageously good money in my books. Now this is a very touchy subject on all points of the spectrum.

 

You can't look at this business as a by-the-hour salary.

We don't work eight hours a day, five days a week. The time and money that goes into replying to message boards, replying to emails, posting ads, taking phone calls, self-care/hygiene, photo shoots, the cost of maintaining an incall or transportation to outcalls, website upkeep, travel costs for touring etc. eats into that "per hour" figure as well. This business also ebbs and flows, and there are downtimes that balance out busy periods. We don't have sick time or vacation pay.

Yes, this can be a very touchy subject, especially when there are assumptions made.

 

Additional Comments:

I merely brought attention to the FACT that there are girls out there that are selling themselves too cheap and they may or may not be taken advantage of by pimps and clients. We never know...maybe it's a case of ignorance, undervaluing themselves(as in Summer's case) or maybe they just love sex with strangers and lots of them. With the issue of human trafficking in the news, it certainly would draw the attention of the law since many of these girls are working through "agencies".

1. They're not "selling themselves". We sell a service, not our bodies. Let's not use the same language abolitionist groups use when creating moral panic and conflating human trafficking with sex work.

2. "Too cheap" -- according to whom? There are many reasons why someone chooses to set their rates at what they are, and quite honestly, it's not up to us to judge. There is no regulatory board that oversees our industry.

To some people, my rates can be "too high" or "too low". To that, I say that is none of your business. It's MY business.

My rates have increased since I started in this business, as I figured out what my expenses were and how often I wanted to work. They are at a price-point which allows me to see the clients I want to see while maintaining a modest lifestyle and going to school. It has afforded me some opportunities I wouldn't ordinarily have, like buying my first car, but at the same time, I don't feel I am living an extravagant lifestyle (it was a great deal on a used car).

There is always going to be someone with lower rates or higher rates than you. That is how this business, and all businesses work. Stop looking at other providers and comparing yourself to them; concentrate on your own self. It's not a matter of "s/he's stealing clients from me", IMHO, but rather "what am *I* doing to attract and retain clients?"

3. Let's not make assumptions about what a "lower" price-point implies, especially when it's making potentially stigmatizing and dangerous statements about having a pimp or drug addiction. We don't know their situation.

 

I'm honestly quite surprised that this thread is still going on, just as I was surprised to see in another thread a provider pose the question of someone she had never met being underage. Statements like the ones in this thread have the possibility of impacting someone else's business and well-being, and not in a good way.

[Ann Gallerie 7910]

Interesting discussion.

 

I don't know much, but I am aware that all over the GTA, businesses that used to be solid are being undercut drastically. I have heard of providers who won't come to Toronto because the rates are dropping.

 

This is a business, but it is also one of relationships, as pointed out. There is a big difference between a provider who enjoys the company and her work, as opposed to someone compelled to grab the cash at $80/hr or less.

 

Personally (here we go) I get very nervous when I hear of providers working like this, but not because they hurt my business per se. My greater concern is that they are being forced, and this should in fact be everyone's concern.

[Layah 7013]

Personally, I'd prefer to see a client who chooses the ladies he sees because his interest was piqued by them and not based on the cheapest price. I've been asked more times than I care to count if I'd lower my rate or if I offer specials/discounts for this or that. I understand quite well that money is often tight for most people but if you can't afford a lady's requested donation, either save up until you can, opt for less time or shop for a more economical encounter.

While undercutting can have an affect on other ladies (myself included), the positive side is that it creates options for hobbyists who can't afford the higher priced SPs. There is a silver lining in every shit storm ladies and gents. You just have to look for it. :-)

[roamingguy 300292]

 

I'm seeing far too many people comparing lower-priced SP's to McDonald's or Baskin-Robbins, when in fact, even the lowest prices are well into the high-end luxury market. Even if somebody is "only" charging $100/hr, how many other businesses do you know that can charge that much?

 

 

First this profession, this lifestyle, has no comparison to any other profession. So comparing the rates a lady charges can't be compared to rates charged in other businesses/professions. Each business can only compare itself to itself, a comparison of SP's rates to say an accountants' hourly rates is comparing apples to bricks. Also this lifestyle is a luxury, some use the term hobby, meaning you are free to partake in it or not. But it isn't a necessity, it is a luxury. But other professions that charge (what may seem a high) hourly rate (quick examples, lawyers, accountants etc) are a necessity. And their rates can't be compared to a companion's rates, and vice versa. Different services, different purposes.

Think about what lower, real lower rates would truly mean to this lifestyle.

Why would any lady want to consider becoming a professional companion?

It is a profession that a lady gives of herself, as cliché as it sounds, body, mind and soul. BTW name any other business that requires that. What a lady charges for that, is never too much. In fact it has a value in my experience far exceeding any donation asked for. And any gentleman who feels a lady's rate is too much for him, is free to see someone else. It isn't as if he is forced to see her.

Anyhow, a morning rambling

 

RG

[whiteman 14028]

First this profession, this lifestyle, has no comparison to any other profession. So comparing the rates a lady charges can't be compared to rates charged in other businesses/professions. Each business can only compare itself to itself, a comparison of SP's rates to say an accountants' hourly rates is comparing apples to bricks. Also this lifestyle is a luxury, some use the term hobby, meaning you are free to partake in it or not. But it isn't a necessity, it is a luxury. But other professions that charge (what may seem a high) hourly rate (quick examples, lawyers, accountants etc) are a necessity. And their rates can't be compared to a companion's rates, and vice versa. Different services, different purposes.

 

Frankly, this isn't a profession sent down to mankind by god, no matter what you may think of a favourite provider. Yes, you can compare it to plenty of other professions and luxuries. I personally don't need a lawyer or an accountant as much as I need a provider. I'm sure plenty of other guys would say the same thing. So it's extremely relevant to find the best prices.

[Liv Waters 52361]

You can't look at this business as a by-the-hour salary.

We don't work eight hours a day, five days a week. The time and money that goes into replying to message boards, replying to emails, posting ads, taking phone calls, self-care/hygiene, photo shoots, the cost of maintaining an incall or transportation to outcalls, website upkeep, travel costs for touring etc. eats into that "per hour" figure as well. This business also ebbs and flows, and there are downtimes that balance out busy periods. We don't have sick time or vacation pay.

Yes, this can be a very touchy subject, especially when there are assumptions made.

 

Additional Comments:

 

1. They're not "selling themselves". We sell a service, not our bodies. Let's not use the same language abolitionist groups use when creating moral panic and conflating human trafficking with sex work.

2. "Too cheap" -- according to whom? There are many reasons why someone chooses to set their rates at what they are, and quite honestly, it's not up to us to judge. There is no regulatory board that oversees our industry.

To some people, my rates can be "too high" or "too low". To that, I say that is none of your business. It's MY business.

My rates have increased since I started in this business, as I figured out what my expenses were and how often I wanted to work. They are at a price-point which allows me to see the clients I want to see while maintaining a modest lifestyle and going to school. It has afforded me some opportunities I wouldn't ordinarily have, like buying my first car, but at the same time, I don't feel I am living an extravagant lifestyle (it was a great deal on a used car).

There is always going to be someone with lower rates or higher rates than you. That is how this business, and all businesses work. Stop looking at other providers and comparing yourself to them; concentrate on your own self. It's not a matter of "s/he's stealing clients from me", IMHO, but rather "what am *I* doing to attract and retain clients?"

3. Let's not make assumptions about what a "lower" price-point implies, especially when it's making potentially stigmatizing and dangerous statements about having a pimp or drug addiction. We don't know their situation.

 

I'm honestly quite surprised that this thread is still going on, just as I was surprised to see in another thread a provider pose the question of someone she had never met being underage. Statements like the ones in this thread have the possibility of impacting someone else's business and well-being, and not in a good way.

Thank you for this response! I could not agree more with all you have said.

[Carrie Moon 68826]

I've been at this almost 25 years.. I started as a student and was charging $125 1/2 hr, $230/hr.. When I moved to Ottawa I matched what most ladies were charging $150 1/2 hr and $250/hr..

 

BUT when I was arrested in the mid 90's I went underground mostly.. and worked out of another ladies incall who's father was a judge! so I felt safe that he'd protect me same as her if it came down to it.. whether he would have or not.. I felt okay.

She was only charging $80 for half hr.. so I matched it for the short few weeks I was there.. I thought I would be run off my feet!!!

 

Nope.. same amount of clients.. including a few who found me under a different name (keeping in mind this was only paper ads and no pics) solely by my stats.. some guys have a type! I was also doing this in a completely diff part of the city in Toronto.

I learned a very good lesson..

 

I may mostly get different clients at a different price point... BUT I got the same number of clients pretty much at basically 30% lower rate.

 

Of course that isn't true to any infinite rate value..

Having said that...Lower rates generally will get you more volume and higher rates less volume. Rates over $250 now esp over $350 will bring you much less business simply because there is a smaller piece of the pie now to go around (less clientelle to escort ratio).

 

You don't know the circumstances of anyone out there.. whether they have had a great deal of debt come upon them quickly and need to get their head above water? or do they have a comfortable 2nd income that makes escorting a part time venture.

 

There are so many factors to consider.. and it's not an easy one.

[whiteman 14028]

I may mostly get different clients at a different price point... BUT I got the same number of clients pretty much at basically 30% lower rate.

 

Of course that isn't true to any infinite rate value..

Having said that...Lower rates generally will get you more volume and higher rates less volume. Rates over $250 now esp over $350 will bring you much less business simply because there is a smaller piece of the pie now to go around (less clientelle to escort ratio).

So basically sex work follows the quantum mechanical rules of supply/demand. It follows distinct steppings of prices rather than a continuous flow. :handjob:

[2bigalow2 2938]

If business is slow, businesses liquidate items or put on a sale to pay the bills. There is no such thing as under cutting local prices.

The person who was mad at you for this is afraid of the competition. I have seen prices on here from $180 to $1000 for an hour. I am at the lower end of $180 to $260 per hour its what I can afford.

And I find the lower end price ladies less snobbish and down to earth and easier to have a good conversation with.

You are a business unfortunately.

that's my 2 cents lol

[cat 262460]

You are assuming a LOT here, Cat, especially when it comes to presuming to know someone else's own lived experience and priviledge or lack thereof.

 

Guidance? If both parties are consenting, it can be a beneficial arrangement. There are some established providers who take newer providers under their wing. There is a lot of information available on sites like these; I know I learned a lot from being here. And yes, some people don't have those sources of information or guidance to help them in establishing their businesses.

However, if a corner store opened up selling the same products as all the other convenience stores in the area, but at a reduced price-point, those other owners would not be entitled to tell the new kid on the block what they "should" be pricing their items at. Advice might be offered, and that is one thing. But some of what is happening is akin to bullying, where lower rates are frowned upon by some, and assumptions are made as to why that is, which is usually not a positive reflection of that provider's services or personality. It's gossip, and it's stigmatizing, and why does Person A or Group A get to tell Person B or Group B how things "ought" to be?

 

Comparing this industry to a corner store is not a valid comparison. You have already clarified that we are not a product but a service. Yes, I am making what some might consider assumptions but I feel it is experience that qualifies me to make the statements I have. I have dealt with hundreds (literally) of women in this industry for almost 3 decades. I have worked extensively in every aspect of this business from agency girl, lock down illegal brothel worker with foreign workers, as an agency owner to the independent I am today. I am more than willing to call bullshit on the "I am woman hear me roar" philosophy that is touted by some of the advocates. The illusion online providers present is not the reality of the industry for sex workers. It's a gritty, hard, honest work that can literally tear a person apart or make them stronger than steel as people; depending on their training and support when they enter the trade.

 

Obviously, there need to be rules that govern our industry as there are every other legitimate TRADE. I'm not advocating control, I'm advocating protection. Just as the asbestos workers in Ontario had to go to bat to have their occupation classified as a trade to ensure they were given the proper training and protective equipment then paid adequately for the risks they take on the job every day. I can't imagine a union leader standing up and stating that the salaries for their members should be dictated by what the members were comfortable receiving for their labour. We can be sure the employers would be quietly whispering to the workers that they are only worth half of what the union was asking but if they agree to the lower wage and no contract, they promise to keep them working and take care of them until they die. How many times have we heard "If you give me a deal, I'm going to be a really good regular! I promise!!!" And how often do those men come back? The SP's here know the answer, it's almost always a one off. With mandatory minimums, the provider can fall back on it and stand her ground. Eventually, the clients would learn not to ask.

 

I think that assuming all providers are capable of learning to function within this industry without coming out the other side of it with unnecessary hardships is negligent and naive. Historically, this game was sold not told for a reason. There is a reason clients where called "Tricks" but of course that was before your time. As you well know, it's in many peoples nature to take advantage of providers. Times have changed and we now have providers entering the industry without an inkling of what they are getting into. They initially get most of their business advice from less than savoury clients which inevitably leads to difficult situations. As anti-establishment as I am, I do believe that if we want the stigma to disolve then we need to take responsibility for the industry. As I've said before, we can't have our cake and eat it too; it's not going to happen. If we as an industry can't self regulate or simply refuse to by claiming intimidation or bullying then the government will step in and set the rules. I personally would prefer the guidelines be set by us, the people doing the work...

 

cat

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

Cat, you said:

Those that represent us and are the most vocal are the privileged providers but it seems to me that they fight for the street based demographic, erroneously assuming the indoor workers are as they are; intelligent, organized and highly functioning which often for sex workers is far from the truth.

And then went on to say that the advocates speak from a level of priviledge and don't understand the hardships faced by those with less priviledge.

 

However, with the minimum pricing you are suggesting, that in its very self doesn't take into consideration the less priviledged workers you claim to understand. Do you really think it fair to dictate a minimum price that *ALL* providers must adhere to? The street-based workers, the workers who would be excluded from working for a third-party due to past legal problems or addiction/mental health issues or immigrant status, the workers who only wish to work part-time, the workers who are on the "edge" of society's idea of what constitutes the norm for gender expression or body type or sexuality, the workers who want to "only" provide X and Y services, but not Z services? You are not advocating protection for those workers. You're advocating a tiered system that would only feed into the stigmatization and marginalization faced by workers.

 

And yes, I do believe we should be advocating from the position of and consideration for the less priviledged because historically they have been the ones to bear the majority of the criminalization, stigmatization, and marginalization compared to other sectors within the sex trade.

 

 

Additional Comments:

Comparing this industry to a corner store is not a valid comparison. You have already clarified that we are not a product but a service.

Alright, I can make comparisons all night:

If Sally wants to start babysitting and offers her services for $5/hr, and Jimmy, Sue, and Polly all have been babysitting for a number of years, is it then fair for the three of them to dictate Sally's prices?

What if Sally has no experience, but the other three do?

What if Sally comes from a single-family home and understands that not all families come from the same socio-economic backgrounds as the other three children?

 

Yes, I am making what some might consider assumptions but I feel it is experience that qualifies me to make the statements I have. I have dealt with hundreds (literally) of women in this industry for almost 3 decades. I have worked extensively in every aspect of this business from agency girl, lock down illegal brothel worker with foreign workers, as an agency owner to the independent I am today.

Your experience is different from mine. That doesn't make it any more or less valid, and doesn't mean you are a fountain of wisdom that trumps mine every time. We are coming at this from different angles, the only difference is that you are only considering the indoor workers, and yes, that would be *more* priviledged workers.

 

As you well know, it's in many peoples nature to take advantage of providers.

Including other providers, who do so out of motivation for their own interests.

 

Saying that we need to protect these poor, disadvantaged women who don't know what they are getting into is really invalidating and infantilizing. Provide guidance should people wish to access those support services, but don't presume to know what is best for everyone or what everyone "should" do. By dictating a mandatory minimum, which, let's face it, would come from the position of an indoor worker, you would be sentencing those who cannot command those prices to work illegally, unsafely, and in the darkness. That is not protecting those providers.

[Daniel17 3616]

I agree with Gabriella... the clientelle is different in different price ranges...and please don't kill me for the analogy,but McDonald's is not stealing business from Wolfgang Puck's restaurant.

 

The guys going to the 100$ girl wouldn't be going to see you anyways.

 

I totally get your point though and I'm sorry you're feeling frustrated,

 

This is inaccurate, offensive, and wrong on so many levels.

[Nathalie L 112512]

I'm going to stay away from all the other points you've brought up because I have absolutely zero knowledge on it.

 

But on this point, a mandatory minimum seems improbable. I guess my biggest question, among many, many questions is who gets to decide what the minimum is?

 

I think a more important question is: how would the mandatory minimum be enforced? It's a scary thought.

 

I do echo Kathryn's concerns, as well.

[cat 262460]

I'm going to stay away from all the other points you've brought up because I have absolutely zero knowledge on it.

 

But on this point, a mandatory minimum seems improbable. I guess my biggest question, among many, many questions is who gets to decide what the minimum is?

 

I agree it is improbably but not impossible. I think a rate that varied region to region to accommodate area pricing set by local providers would be a good start...

 

Cat, you said:

 

And then went on to say that the advocates speak from a level of priviledge and don't understand the hardships faced by those with less priviledge.

 

However, with the minimum pricing you are suggesting, that in its very self doesn't take into consideration the less priviledged workers you claim to understand. Do you really think it fair to dictate a minimum price that *ALL* providers must adhere to? The street-based workers, the workers who would be excluded from working for a third-party due to past legal problems or addiction/mental health issues or immigrant status, the workers who only wish to work part-time, the workers who are on the "edge" of society's idea of what constitutes the norm for gender expression or body type or sexuality, the workers who want to "only" provide X and Y services, but not Z services?[/font][/font][/size]

 

I don't see why any of these providers couldn't chose to adopt the mandatory minimums. It would be in their best interests to do so. Gender type, body type and sexuality is irrelevant to this discussion because we are ALL SEX WORKERS. There needs to be unity amongst all. I apologize but my loyalties don't lie with the street workers. I don't feel their situation will can be fixed, only made safer. Their issues run far deeper than the injustice of sex work. It seems only the bottom of already established tiered system barrel is worthy of a voice. Who speaks for the rest of us? I support POWER and all that they do but they are not my voice and they don't adequately represent me in this industry. I have always said street workers are our equivalent of societies homeless. They need representation without a doubt but what about the workers in between the privileged and the street workers?

 

For those of us who are not "the workers who would be excluded from working for a third-party due to past legal problems or addiction/mental health issues or immigrant status, the workers who only wish to work part-time, the workers who are on the "edge" of society's idea of what constitutes the norm for gender expression or body type or sexuality, the workers who want to "only" provide X and Y services, but not Z services" are they suppose to roll over and take it up the ass while our industry is gutted from the inside out without even raising an eyebrow? This is their sole means of support and while they don't fall into the "so much less fortunate than others", they deserve to be protected. It's not a difficult thing to wrap one's brain around. Minimum pay for work provided.

 

You are not advocating protection for those workers. You're advocating a tiered system that would only feed into the stigmatization and marginalization faced by workers.[/font][/font][/size]

 

I'm advocating a tiered system? As opposed to what we already have? If you don't see the tiers that are already here, this discussion is moot. Anything that we as an industry does that indicates there is any common business sense will be welcomed with open arms here in Canada. Organizing and presenting a unified front that takes responsibility for itself will do far more to lessen the stigmatization and marginalization for the majority of the sex workers than parading around protesting ever will...

 

cat

[piano8950 32577]

10 characters

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

I don't see why any of these providers couldn't chose to adopt the mandatory minimums.

And that is exactly the problem.

 

A mandatory minimum is not a choice. Nor is it accessible for everyone.

[piano8950 32577]

10 characters

[Guest S****r]

It seems only the bottom of already established tiered system barrel is worthy of a voice. Who speaks for the rest of us?

 

This has been my observation, too. I found it a disturbing surprise when I realized it.

[Malika Fantasy 144625]

So...if we are to impose a minimum to what "type" of sex worker does it apply?

 

The street worker, the average escort advertise on Cerb and various board, those only on BP, those who has a pimp, that does will do everything except actual penetration, the sugar baby, the one that get paid but doesn't realize it etc.

 

There is no way, nor will it ever be a way to impose a minimum donation.

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

This has been my observation, too. I found it a disturbing surprise when I realized it.

There is a difference between having a voice, and dictating decisions without realizing how they may affect people differently.

 

What if all the higher-priced providers got together and decided the industry minimum should be $1000/hr? So, again, who gets to decide what the minimum would be, and who would it affect?

[cat 262460]

Additional Comments:

 

Alright, I can make comparisons all night:

If Sally wants to start babysitting and offers her services for $5/hr, and Jimmy, Sue, and Polly all have been babysitting for a number of years, is it then fair for the three of them to dictate Sally's prices?

What if Sally has no experience, but the other three do?

What if Sally comes from a single-family home and understands that not all families come from the same socio-economic backgrounds as the other three children?

 

Trying to compare this to any other industry is futile. It has no equal. I can blow them all out of the water so lets not waste time going there...

 

Your experience is different from mine. That doesn't make it any more or less valid, and doesn't mean you are a fountain of wisdom that trumps mine every time. We are coming at this from different angles, the only difference is that you are only considering the indoor workers, and yes, that would be *more* priviledged workers.

 

Including other providers, who do so out of motivation for their own interests.

 

Our experiences are very different. I'm not saying your is any less valid and I'm not saying that my opinion trumps anyones. What I said is that I have more experience with underprivileged providers than you will in the next decade if you dealt with them on a daily basis and I'm telling you what my perception is. If you don't want to hear it, that's fine just ignore what I'm saying. And of course other providers are motivated by their own interests! It's their very survival; it's how bills are paid and children are fed! Self preservation is hardwired into us as mammals. Isn't it preferable that it's done democratically than thru old school techniques? While I don't condone the tactics that girls use today against those who do under cut, I understand their motivation. I don't see how setting price minimums would be contrary to any providers best interests?

 

Saying that we need to protect these poor, disadvantaged women who don't know what they are getting into is really invalidating and infantilizing.

 

I disagree. It's called training and every licensed TRADE requires it. Want to work, follow the rules. It's not rocket science, every legitimate industry is governed and even those that are illegal are self governed and run as a business. Why should we be any different just because of the internet? This industry had rules for centuries and everyone made money. It is now the wild west and I promise, it will only get worse for the majority of providers. That of course doesn't impact privileged providers as their guests are a segment of the client base that comprehends and appreciated the acumen it takes to be an elite provider. Other providers are not so lucky.

 

Provide guidance should people wish to access those support services, but don't presume to know what is best for everyone or what everyone "should" do.

 

This is a business, not a lifestyle choice. I believe that the successful industries figure out how to work together so everyone benefits. Sex work is no exception.

 

By dictating a mandatory minimum, which, let's face it, would come from the position of an indoor worker, you would be sentencing those who cannot command those prices to work illegally, unsafely, and in the darkness. That is not protecting those providers.

 

Perhaps it would but I can assure you that it would help the industry as whole. Those who work illegally, unsafely and in the darkness have you and many others funded by the government to champion them. Who represents the remaining of the industry? The rest of the providers on this board? No one that I have found and our voice is not included except when the media needs a feature piece, then one of our best and brightest privileged providers is put on display as an accurate representation of our industry when in fact she is a minority. I do not understand how lifting the entire industry up would hurt anyone...

 

I think there needs to be a dose of reality injected here against the ideological rhetoric. I appreciate the need to protect those who can't protect themselves as we all know who they are. It doesn't change the fact that the rest of the industry needs to be organized and championed as well. Providers that do not have a voice need to heard including ones that don't practice their trade on a street corner or for $300+/hr...

 

cat

[mrgreen760 37785]

A supply management system like a marketing board?....Manitoba Sex Workers Marketing Board or MSWMB for short. Though price fixing and collusion might be an issue for the customers.

 

Peace

MG

[cat 262460]

There is a difference between having a voice, and dictating decisions without realizing how they may affect people differently.

 

What if all the higher-priced providers got together and decided the industry minimum should be $1000/hr? So, again, who gets to decide what the minimum would be, and who would it affect?

 

Again, let's have a dose of reality here Kathryn. This is the same style of mongering that the media resorts to isn't it? It would be easy to have various minimums depending on the providers circumstances and if we are genuinely organized; it could easily be voluntary with the majority compliant. I see this as a tool, not an imposition...

 

cat

[LeeRichards 177238]

Frankly, this isn't a profession sent down to mankind by god, no matter what you may think of a favourite provider. Yes, you can compare it to plenty of other professions and luxuries. I personally don't need a lawyer or an accountant as much as I need a provider. I'm sure plenty of other guys would say the same thing. So it's extremely relevant to find the best prices.

 

Well actually Job # 1 for God was Adam and Eve and a fig leaf. The fig leaf fell off and they fucked. It's kinda contagious and fun. Accountants and lawyers came later after marriages and divorces and $$$ opportunities. ;) SEX has been kicking around from day 1.

 

Would be wonderful to regulate prices and most importantly to protect the ladies in this industry.....yet be fair to the gentlemen. Not even a remote possibility at this given time to regulate. Nobody to actually do that job. Some day :) Not just quite yet.

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

Again, let's have a dose of reality here Kathryn. This is the same style of mongering that the media resorts to isn't it? It would be easy to have various minimums depending on the providers circumstances and if we are genuinely organized; it could easily be voluntary with the majority compliant. I see this as a tool, not an imposition...

 

cat

Really, it's not. You're talking about regulating a mandatory minimum based on indoor work, which we'll say is at $200-250hr.

Street-based work we'll say is $40-60.

Which is roughly x500%.

So a number of $1000, which I agree is ridiculous, fits into that. You're advocating for a minimum fee which would be 500% more than what street-based workers charge, which is ridiculous and akin to asking indoor workers who charge $200/hr to agree to a minimum charge of $1000/hr.

 

Just putting it into perspective.