This is a taken to the extreme, but i understood your point. I can tell you that i have subscribed to this site for one place. It wasn’t much sex happening but there was a lot of interaction, parties , people coming and going, always something to watch, very rarely a dead or dull moment. I did watch only that place for months and months until i opened this forum. That’s when the real pure voyeur experience i was having, totally changed (yes, there are two very different experiences ). So, based on my experience, i can say that this forum is what changed the site (and the content) in worse (less)…
If that was the case, apartments like Hector and Marla, Gella & Winston, etc. wouldn’t have existed. In fact, they do exist and they are here for many years. Reality: we do not have the stats for every apartment, we only make suppositions based on our own interests.
There is clearly a problem with their system if those apartments are still here, while many popular and more liked apartments are not. I haven’t seen them in the most viewed cam previews in the last two years. If the subscription were more tailored to specific apartments, I doubt they would have lasted.
I disagree. Those apartments are here because they generate views. Let’s not forget that this is primarily a voyeur site, not a porn one. In fact, i would never understand people paying here for sex/porn when the internet is absolutely full with much better everything you can possibly name porn. And free. How is that making any sense ? 
How is this even possible ? Based on what criteria ?
It s clearly a voyeur porn site. Yes, they don’t have sex 24/7, but ultimately, members subscribe for the sexual content. I don’t think they would have many members if they weren’t any sexual content on the site. There s a reason why the archive videos section is full of sexual content. I don’t see sections like ‘‘people hanging around a table’’ in the archive.
By offering different subscription prices based on the number of apartments included:
For example, 10$/month access to 3 apartments, 15$/month access to 5 apartments.
That way, it would be clear what the viewers are willing to pay for.
the best vhtv was in the years 2018/2019/2020 was spoiled for choice looking at apartments…
2 Likes
We need to agree to disagree on this. I already named few apartments (there are a lot more) that wouldn’t exist if that was the case. Yes, sex is important but only a fraction of what we get to see here.
That wouldn’t change much the content… The participants will do the exact same as they do now.
You’re asking for more diversity and more sexual content. For this, the participants willing to do it , will need to earn a lot more money than they do now. For that to happen, the subscription fee will need to sky rocket. Not sure how many will be willing to pay
You are not giving me to the logic behind your reasoning or points to support it. I already explained my logic multiple times. I explained the flaws in the current system. I gave a scenario showing what s wrong. It would help if you pointed where my explanations are wrong or if you supported more your reasoning.
People are watching their favourite apartments anyway, so make it 3 or 5 in a package won’t change much for them. They will still watch the same apartments like before. How would that change the content ?
In fact, it is likely that Vhtv might even get less money than they do now…
2 Likes
After reading the thread, I feel that the current subscription model is probably the best value for money. I do appreciate that a competitor to VHTV has just launched a light version of the parent site. It will be interesting to look at the next comparison figures to gauge how the site is attracting viewers.
John has made an interesting point that if the model is changed then an unintended outcome could be a fall in revenue.
2 Likes
With limited number of apartment access, members won’t select 5 copycats apartments or 5 apartments with the same group of people. Most members would subscribe to 1 or 2 of them. It would prevent all those Radu and Yuneska guests apartments as : 1. it would reduce radu and yuneska s revenue 2. Managers would see which apartments really bring money and also see more clearly what viewers want to pay for
Well, not really. For the ones like myself ( i have exactly 4 apartments in my fav list), an option with 3 or 5 for 10 or 15 dollars instead of 40 would definitely be a much better value for money. For Vhtv instead…well, it is quite clear which one is the better choice
just remember the opinions on the forum are from a very tiny section of viewers of the main site , we dont know what the other members of the main site view , we dont know how popular each appartment is , the statistics that float about on the forum are only a partial view and due to the tiny percentage they cannot be used to warrant a change
4 Likes
And only seven members have posted comments on this particular thread as well.
3 Likes
You also have to consider that many people don’t subscribe because they don’t feel the price is justified by the number of apartments they follow, or they simply find the current price too high. Lowering prices options could attract a lot of new subscribers.
Additionally, you have to take into account that there would a kind of regulation of apartments as it would much more clear what members are paying for. The current system encourages group teasing, as larger groups bring in more viewers, and you can tease for hours. I don’t blame them; if I were in their shoes, I’d invite different friends and play cards every day with that kind of remuneration.
Sorry but this is a very subjective opinion and very inaccurate.
- Radu and Yuneska revenue is reduced anyway by opening a copycat apartment.
- Managers know exactly which apartment brings money at how much at any moment of the day and night. They have enough tolls to measure that. Oh, participants know as well at every moment how much they made.
Again, opening so many copycat apartments is totally in the managers interest (the more they have, the bigger share from the total views on site they get )
If you don’t see an apartment in the popular cam previews for 2 years, it gives you a good idea on the popularity of that apartment.
Exactly! The current system favours the lack of diversity.
if you mean the thumbnails on the screen , then i guess you have not been a member here long , they can be easily manipulated and as been proven within the forum , i would not take any notice of the validity of the thumbnails .
2 Likes
On this, i totally agree with you. But (again) we do have only one option available: watch it or not. Realistically speaking