Why doesn't MFC ......

[Mila_]

Pfft opinions. Because I don't work MFC and I'm fucking QUALITY.

There are some damn fine foxes on SM for sure! But I still think @MFCGod has a point that MFC has the reputation of having the most babes. I think for the most part the reputation is true and maybe it is because they rely on word of mouth and sexy babes attract other sexy babes to the site, but also because the camscore system is so brutal.

 

[SMuser69]

There are some damn fine foxes on SM for sure! But I still think @MFCGod has a point that MFC has the reputation of having the most babes. I think for the most part the reputation is true and maybe it is because they rely on word of mouth and sexy babes attract other sexy babes to the site, but also because the camscore system is so brutal.

This reputation doesn't hold up to fact. Right this moment 1359 models on MFC and 1556 on SM. My ADD demon made me keep checking thoughout the weekend. SM never dipped below MFC for model count.

Coming from the SM environment, camscore I would had thought would cause an opposite effect. By definition, the higher the camscore the LESS attention you'll get from the model for MORE money spent. Excluding the guys that like to alpha money fetish I don't see the logic in it since the top models still have physical human limits to what they can offer (unless MFC gives models 3 boobs after they break 20k camscore)

 

[Kitcatt]

Ahh, thank you for clearing that up!

 

[Kitcatt]

I think I get what your saying smuser, the higher the cam score, the more people, the less attention paid. But models can see who spends money and I'm guessing even with a room of 1500 people only a tiny fraction of those people actually spend, so they still get attention.
I'm going to argue the "babes" point. There are plenty of babes all over the interwebs. I WOULD say that MFC skews younger and thinner (please don't crucify me for that, just an observation) which is one reason my older cellulite riddled ass is on SM.

 

[Guy]

I WOULD say that MFC skews younger and thinner which is one reason my older cellulite riddled ass is on SM.

Why is there a big difference in age range between those 2 sites?

 

[AmberCutie]

This reputation doesn't hold up to fact. Right this moment 1359 models on MFC and 1556 on SM. My ADD demon made me keep checking thoughout the weekend. SM never dipped below MFC for model count.

I don't think she was referring to the raw number, though, right @Kitsune? Quality vs. quantity, I think is what she was trying to explain.

And I think I get what she's saying. How far down/how many pages can you scroll through on each site until you reach the bulk of the studio models and girls who you don't find as attractive as those at the top? I realize attraction is subjective, though.

(Edit again to add: "studio models" doesn't mean they aren't attractive but I don't think that's the type that Kitsune may be referring to with the word "babes".)

 

[AudriTwo]

Why is there a big difference in age range between those 2 sites?

 

[Kitcatt]

I'm going to throw out my opinion about age/ weight etc and the difference between token sites such as mfc and pvt excl based sites, such as SM. Again, this is JUST my opinion, so if I'm pissing into the wind, please excuse me.
Pvt and excl based sites are generally one on one interactions, so, guys who do shows with models are looking for something specific, or...trying out something they have always wanted to try, by themselves. They pay for the show, it can be completely interactive with just the model and they play out the fantasy in that very specific setting.
On sites such as MFC, it is NOT a one on one interaction, its a group of people who bid in to get the show started, so the base of men needed to make the show start is much larger.
SO, in general, sites like MFC skew younger and thinner because a larger group of men are interested in that particular formula of younger and thinner, while on SM, the AMOUNT of people who can make that model have a show is, well, one person, so the people who do well on those sites do well with a specific group of regs, who have money and like that model because of the things they have interest in, and things like age/ thinness are less of a factor.

 

[Rosy]

All sites have their pluses and minuses, but I agree, the search function on MFC is just bizarre to me. BUT, MFC is also more of a hangout site. OKAY, question about MFC because I'm not on it. Do people like or dislike the "most popular rooms" feature. To me it seems like a freeloaders paradise. They just have to check the top 3 rooms and BAM sex show. No need to wait, or look through other models, etc.

In the evenings I actually only see one maybe two sex shows in the top 10 most popular rooms at any given time. Most of them are just really popular models sitting around, topless, or not, hanging out. It's really interesting because you would think it would be filled with cum shows.

Also, cam score doesn't necessarily reflect popularity. A girl could have a higher cam score because she is on every night while a more popular girl gets on only a couple times a week.

 

[Mila_]

I don't think she was referring to the raw number, though, right @Kitsune? Quality vs. quantity, I think is what she was trying to explain.

And I think I get what she's saying. How far down/how many pages can you scroll through on each site until you reach the bulk of the studio models and girls who you don't find as attractive as those at the top? I realize attraction is subjective, though.

(Edit again to add: "studio models" doesn't mean they aren't attractive but I don't think that's the type that Kitsune may be referring to with the word "babes".)

Yeah, the model number is just a number, I was talking about the type of model each site attracts... think in terms of demographics, how even when both Dunkin Donuts and Starbucks serve breakfast, they attract completely different crowds. Each site attracts a different audience and a different model type.

Take Chaturbate, for example, it attracts more of a casual amateur girl. Models in Chaturbate are less likely to have good lighting, image quality, strategies and games simply because girls dont have a fixed position on the homepage and there is nothing to mantain, no risk attached to taking a break. On MFC models are subjected to camscore so unless they have their shit together they will tank, you only ever get to see the successful girls many of which happen to be young and sexy

And like someone said above SM tends to skew older because private based sites are more of a "no bullshit" business where you only have to cater to people who actually pay you. While young girls are more innocent and tend to do well on token sites because they give more than they should, experienced models sometimes realize they dont have to do so much to earn well so they switch to SM. It also benefits girls with a fixed schedule so if you have children to go to school or other compromises you might find SM is a better fit and older women have lives with more obligations.

Obviously these are just my theories and I might be wrong about the cause, but I think the pattern is true.

 

[JoleneBrody]

If a model has a no privates policy she will mention it on her profile.

Not always, most models who just straight up don't take privates actually turn the option off. so if you don't see the private option she probably doesn't take them... like me!

 

[Shaun__]

Not always, most models who just straight up don't take privates actually turn the option off. so if you don't see the private option she probably doesn't take them... like me!

Turning them off does not really help me since I do not try to go private without clear permission first. It would be so nice if all models would list it in their profiles, I always feel so awkward trying to politely ask about privates/skypes. Then even if they do them I sometimes have to find polite ways to walk away if they are uncomfortable doing what I like.

 

[Lelo1]

Streaming is really expensive because bandwidth is really expensive so the costs for the site increase with each single viewer.

MFC's strategy has always been to have small rooms with high tippers, they give priority to quality traffic over quantity. They maximize their revenue that way.

If you were to price out what MFC pays with a CDN.
100 people watching a model for an hour is some where between 1.10 to 2.00 dollars.
MFC may actually have a much lower rate then that, who knows right.

I'm going to guess that what MFC pays in bandwidth is payed off be just what they make from a couple top models.

But your probable right, bandwidth may be one of their most variable and costly expenses.

 

[Mila_]

If you were to price out what MFC pays with a CDN.
100 people watching a model for an hour is some where between 1.10 to 2.00 dollars.
MFC may actually have a much lower rate then that, who knows right.

I'm going to guess that what MFC pays in bandwidth is payed off be just what they make from a couple top models.

But your probable right, bandwidth may be one of their most variable and costly expenses.

How did you arrive at those numbers? I am curious.

 

[Lelo1]

How did you arrive at those numbers? I am curious.

Publicly posted Analytics for MFC traffic, CDN Pricing, Information on model payout. Estimating the average number of hours per visitor.

If you take credit card processing into account. You'd probable double the models it takes.

It could really be off. Especially if for some reason their paying more for CDN. Also CND for video is only a part of their costs. They have developers, web hosting, chat, legal, billing, extra.

Really it's just a guess, I don't think any cam site is really going to tell us what their costs are.

 

[Empress Mika]

From a more affiliate standpoint (that I've gotten into more recently - I'm by no means an expert but I do have some basic knowledge), think about the differences between SM/LJ and MFC. MFC has a lot of models that host shows (nude or otherwise) in free chat and many of her viewers do not have to pay at all. Of course that is going to attract a lot of free traffic in and of itself that MFC doesn't have to pay for. If you contrast that to private based sites like LJ/SM, that don't even allow nudity in free chat, then they have to work a lot harder from an advertising standpoint.

The review sites mentioned by Guy, most of them are affiliate sites themselves that get a sweet kick back if people sign up to LJ/SM through them. So, of course they are going to say that LJ/SM are their favorite site. MFC currently does not have a good affiliate program and, really, doesn't seem to need one.

So, in my opinion, this all contributes as to why you don't really see MFC advertising as much as private based sites.

 

[Guy]

From a more affiliate standpoint (that I've gotten into more recently - I'm by no means an expert but I do have some basic knowledge), think about the differences between SM/LJ and MFC. MFC has a lot of models that host shows (nude or otherwise) in free chat and many of her viewers do not have to pay at all. Of course that is going to attract a lot of free traffic in and of itself that MFC doesn't have to pay for. If you contrast that to private based sites like LJ/SM, that don't even allow nudity in free chat, then they have to work a lot harder from an advertising standpoint.

The review sites mentioned by Guy, most of them are affiliate sites themselves that get a sweet kick back if people sign up to LJ/SM through them. So, of course they are going to say that LJ/SM are their favorite site. MFC currently does not have a good affiliate program and, really, doesn't seem to need one.

So, in my opinion, this all contributes as to why you don't really see MFC advertising as much as private based sites.

I wonder if this review site is an affiliate. It has SM as its editor's choice, lies about SM's per-minute prices, and claims that SM has 8 million members. http://livewebcamreviews.com/streamate-tv/

 

[Empress Mika]

I wonder if this review site is an affiliate. It has SM as its editor's choice, lies about SM's per-minute prices, and claims that SM has 8 million members. http://livewebcamreviews.com/streamate-tv/

Yes, this is an affiliate.

 

[JoleneBrody]

Turning them off does not really help me since I do not try to go private without clear permission first. It would be so nice if all models would list it in their profiles, I always feel so awkward trying to politely ask about privates/skypes. Then even if they do them I sometimes have to find polite ways to walk away if they are uncomfortable doing what I like.

I just assume if the option is not clickable, she doesn't do them so why ask? You don't have to have permission to know that it's not doable. I'm sure there is no doubt issues that arise beyond this but if she doesn't talk about privates anywhere or have the option turned on, you are pretty safe to bet that she doesn't do them.

 

[AmberCutie]

I just assume if the option is not clickable, she doesn't do them so why ask? You don't have to have permission to know that it's not doable. I'm sure there is no doubt issues that arise beyond this but if she doesn't talk about privates anywhere or have the option turned on, you are pretty safe to bet that she doesn't do them.

I was all on board to completely agree here, but then I realized... MFC does not gray out our link for "go private" if we have them disabled. So I can certainly see his point about not wanting to click and find out, because it would prompt the model to accept the private if it *does* work. And we all know that many models would probably prefer to have someone discuss the private before initiating one, right?

MFC should gray out our link when we have it disabled.

 

[JoleneBrody]

I was all on board to completely agree here, but then I realized... MFC does not gray out our link for "go private" if we have them disabled. So I can certainly see his point about not wanting to click and find out, because it would prompt the model to accept the private if it *does* work. And we all know that many models would probably prefer to have someone discuss the private before initiating one, right?

MFC should gray out our link when we have it disabled.

whaaaaaaaaaa really? I wonder if this changed sometime because it totally used too when i last cared to check... but that was like 2 or 3 years ago.

Well dang... yeah... they should fix that.

 

[AmberCutie]

whaaaaaaaaaa really? I wonder if this changed sometime because it totally used too when i last cared to check... but that was like 2 or 3 years ago.

Well dang... yeah... they should fix that.

I sent a message with this suggestion, we'll see!

 

[Always_Tim]

I was all on board to completely agree here, but then I realized... MFC does not gray out our link for "go private" if we have them disabled. So I can certainly see his point about not wanting to click and find out, because it would prompt the model to accept the private if it *does* work. And we all know that many models would probably prefer to have someone discuss the private before initiating one, right?

MFC should gray out our link when we have it disabled.

Odd. It used to. But they've made so many changes in the past few years I wouldn't be surprised if they broke it.

 

[AmberCutie]

Odd. It used to. But they've made so many changes in the past few years I wouldn't be surprised if they broke it.

There is a chance I am wrong, I'll have someone check tonight when I get on cam.

 

[Mikachu_MFC]

If a model has a no privates policy she will mention it on her profile.

Really? All of them? Every model? Ever?

Look, blanket statements like this (what a model maybe should do vs what many models actually do) are zero help to anyone and tend to cause more confusion about how things work among users/members (exactly what no one wants, trust me).