Howard

How did you come up with hourly average views? That can only come from VH.

I see she also has a bandage on her right shoulder. Looks like blood near the wound....or maybe iodine?

Now...if I too was also really curious about VH's subscription base, I think there is a way (a very loose, quasi-scientific way) to figure out how many subscribers they have (same for RLC). I think the formula for these numbers lies within CamCaps. I am not a statistician, but I think gathering the data of responses/participation in each of the VH and/or RLC forums is where to start. It doesn't take a statistician to know that the GIRLS ON VACATION and LEORA/PAUL apartments are the most watched for RLC. One would have to fine tune the data - possibly looking at the last three months and the amount of original posts vs how many times one person posts within a given period. As for VH, also need to look at the last three months of CC participation to see that Nina/Alan/Serena & Em, Lisa & Grant generate the most traffic for VH. Yes, I am using CC data and not VH or RLC. But it is a good indication (first start) determining which apartments are most likely the top earners for RLC/VH.

Well..that's a LOUSY business model. Of what I have read, IMO VH should take 65% & residents 35%. The only reason I can see why VH wants to work with a manager is they don't want resident interaction. If I was a business owner in this situation, *I* would want the rent for the apartment in my name and screen the residents for a sub-lease. Yes, *I* would take on whatever risks presents itself (as all business owners do). No need for a manager. Then again, I don't know how they do things in the motherland (i.e. rent apartments). But...it seems to work for VH. Let's be realistic: Most of the tenants don't appear that bright, limited education and my educated guess is 75% are "troubled" in a way that is not expected social behavior outside the apartment. With that said, VH has managers as a go-between because they don't want one-on-one interaction with most anyone willing to bang in front of the cameras or conduct social behavior out of the norm of society (what immediately came to mind was Silvia and Josh from a year ago). If I owned VH, managers go to the unemployment line and increase my share to 65%.

I'm not taking a position one way or the other on your numbers. I'm just saying never under-estimate a customer (subscription) base when marketing to a world-wide audience. As for the monetary discrepancy between residents, managers and VH, there really isn't a business model to refer to. But *I* would think that for each dollar made, 65% would go to VH, 25% to the residents and 10% to managers (I think you're being to generaous to VH, Amy). 65% covers apartment expenses (including cameras and related items). 25% for the residents being their "work" income. 10% to the managers I equate (similar) to a real estate agent's fee for introducing "buyer" and "seller". On a side issue, I don't think there is an equation/calculation basing viewing time to monthly subscription. A subscriber can watch 24/7 or maybe just a couple hours total over a 30 day period. The business model has to be based on monthly viewership (clicks) per apartment (with some incremental statistical analysis to supplement the main business model). Length of time for each 'visit' is not an accurate measure for compensation purposes but it is good data for VH to determine if there is still interest in the apartment. On a side note, its the start up expenses for an apartment that is a big cost to VH. VH has to determine if the resident of an apartment will bring in revenue. Nina/Alan/Serena have the right chemistry for a revenue stream as do Clara & Stas. On the other hand, we've seen that homosexual couples don't bring in viewers and neither do unattractive (or obese) people.

Ouch! That hurts the head following these numbers. 🙂 But on a side note, never...never under-estimate the amount of subscribers a company has with a world-wide audience. Early in my career (1990s), I had the opportunity to have a product sell in all Sears stores in the southeast of the USA (Sears is (was) a large department store for those out of the US). I declined because my profit margin would be 12% less then I needed to be a viable opportunity. I blew it. I under-estimated their customer base after seeing a competitor do well having their product selling in Sears. A few years later, I had another product (actually six products with little variation from one another) I 'pitched' to Walmart (a very large department store in he US). The short version is Walmart told me what they can sell the product for. Walmrts general formula is their selling price is 100% + 2 cents mark-up on what they determine should be the cost to produce. Nevertheless, *I* had to determine if my costs (and profit margin) is acceptable for my business to proceed. We ended up with a 6 month test run in 42 locations (I accepted 17% less profit then I needed with the hope that volume will make that up). Five of my products did well after 6 months that by the end of the 12th month, I was in 92% of all Walmarts. I was able to cut my costs based on the volume of orders, reach my original profit margin and everything went well (relationship with Walmart lasted 4 1/2 years). I sold the business and the product was in Walmarts for an additional two years. You just don't know what volume (subscribers) VH has. They have nearly 30 apartments so they must be doing something right (even though their streaming gets poor when there is 'action' in an apartment). One question should be how long before a subscriber is no longer a subscriber (what's their cost to acquire more subscribers). My guess is less then 3 months - with subscriptions at their peak between April thru September. The next step for VH should be discreet (subliminal) product placement. But let's save that for another thread.

From earlier this month (props to whoever uploaded this file). https://www12.zippyshare.com/v/WPnubbQ9/file.html

Cold fish v2.0

When this is on, it will mess with the dog's senses when Leora is getting frisky. 🙂

...and if I'm not mistaken, Kira is always the pitcher. Not the catcher.

Not the best photo but Kira has a sexy back. Maybe its good posture but sometimes its what you don't see, becomes intriguing.

Busy beaver.

She came twice in the LR using the Mandingo dildo about 4-5 weeks ago.

Of course. But attracting more people to one more channel without fixing the problem will make matters worse. It's like adding another food item on the menu today when you still don't have enough kitchen staff to serve yesterday's customers.

VH keeps adding apartments + more stress on servers/bandwidth = streaming quality will suck worse.

Those are fighting words! 🙂 I'm open minded. Besides free rent and $$$, what would dictate her behavior to fuck on line w/ a guy she just met (applies to this dude and Jerar)? She's selling nudity and sex. I don't think she just got out of a convent and changed career paths. She definitely has a past (experience) that is unconventional.

She's experienced. IMO you don't get naked on camera (or have sex) for the world to see if you aren't already sexually promiscuous. This isn't JenniCam v2.0

...and that's why I asked a few posts back if during round 1, she reciprocated. She seems the kind of girl that likes to get fucked but not put much effort into fucking. Back in high school those girls were called 'lazy fucks' (also a 'sure thing').

Cold fish seems to have turned into a hot tamale. I didn't see the action but my question is, did she reciprocate? Or was it all him?

My gut tells me Chloe will be gone from RLC within 6 months. Not because RLC wants to get rid of her. But you can tell she's bored. Rarely does she go out (possibly her RLC agreement requires her indoors). She can bate 2...3x a day and boink her b/f. But after a while, that gets old - she seems to want more out of life.

Maybe Cleo & Axel have discussed various "3rd party" situations and for now, they are testing out the waters.

It is often the 'controversial' ones that brings in viewership (and the money). Then again, as long as VH doesn't invest in infrastructure (i.e. buffering, bad streaming), money will stay in people's wallets.