archibaldboenker

Had an amazing time with Stella French. She’s staying in a nice hotel and booking was quick and easy. She’s even better looking than her photos, very skilled and is very friendly and eager to please. Excellent GFE. Definitely one of my new favourites at YFL. 

I’m surprised there has been no response from @SavannahSol on this yet. 

1 hour ago, Johnboy43 said:

Are any of the Asian ads pics realistic especially Dartmouth one..

Not the Dartmouth one at least. 
There are multiple ads with the same name, each with pics of a different person. She doesn’t look like any of the pics but it’s a real person. 

I completely agree. She is a very cute, pretty and petite young woman. Her photos do not do her justice. Service was excellent too.

Booking was easy and location was safe. 

I saw her in January. Pics are really her. 

Good service, to some degree reminiscent of VIPOTG but I felt more rushed. 

Seemed to be a bit higher volume but I would repeat for sure. 
 

Edit: the phone number has changed since last time. 

Had a great time with Sabrina French yesterday. Accurate photos and stats. Excellent passionate GFE service. She was very professional and eager to please. Good location and easy booking. I would definitely repeat. 

10 hours ago, DavMac said:

Curious if there was any new sign-in type procedure at the hotel? Or were you able to walk in freely? I heard some hotels are asking for names of visitors.

I was not asked to sign-in.

On 6/13/2019 at 8:44 PM, archibaldboenker said:

Just got back from seeing Rose French and it was without a doubt one of the most amazing experiences I have had in this hobby.

Physically she is absolutely stunning. Beautiful eyes and smile and a sexy, petite body. She has a great attitude and is easy to talk to and eager to please. Excellent GFE service as well.

As always with Your French Lady, the location was convenient and booking was easy. 

 

I plan on repeating every time she comes to Halifax. 

 

 

 

 

I saw Rose again and she is as beautiful as ever. Seriously, absolutely gorgeous. Service was once again absolutely incredible. A very authentic GFE.

I also want to mention that she is complying with Atlantic bubble self-isolation guidelines.  

Booking with Your French Lady was quick and easy and the location was a nice hotel. 

Just got back from seeing Rose French and it was without a doubt one of the most amazing experiences I have had in this hobby.

Physically she is absolutely stunning. Beautiful eyes and smile and a sexy, petite body. She has a great attitude and is easy to talk to and eager to please. Excellent GFE service as well.

As always with Your French Lady, the location was convenient and booking was easy. 

I plan on repeating every time she comes to Halifax. 

Just got back from a great time with Gabrielle French. Her photos and stats are accurate and attitude and service are excellent. Definitely GFE.

She's part of the Your French Lady group. Booking was easy and the location was good. 

Just now, Greenteal said:

If it makes you happy. I'm happy.

Good night.

See, that wasn't so hard. 

Good night.

19 minutes ago, Greenteal said:

  When you pay for dating services like match or eharmony, you tend to get better results because fees tend to make members more serious about the process. Unlike POF where the free membership drags a lot of spam and fraud, requiring a bit of weeding to find someone. Again if SA's services matched their rates, it wouldn't be an issue. And the argument that wealthy people don't mind being financially raped is ridiculous.

  For someone with "no vested interest in SA" you sure put a lot of energy to defend them. Are you also gonna defend bank fees? Scalpers and Ticketmaster who raped concertgoers for decades? Pharmaceutical CEO's who raise the price of life saving drugs by 2000% because it's "good business"? Any other honest businessmen you want to defend? 

The assertion that you're not getting your money's worth on SA is your opinion. It is not a fact. Some others in this thread seem to think it's worth the price. I don't think paying $150 is being financially raped, and I sincerely doubt that the target audience for SA would disagree. 

There's no reason for you to get so hostile. I never said that SA were honest businessmen. I never said they were ethical. I said that their model has led to success and that it is purely speculation that their success won't continue.    

2 minutes ago, Greenteal said:

 I tried SA over a decade ago and the rate was similar to average dating websites. The rate started rising after Kijiji and others started dropper the personals.

 As for the ratio, it was introduced to the conversation by Hornypt. Something you would know if you would have bothered following the thread. And again, it would only be worth the premium if they were all properly vetted and had exclusivity clauses with the website. Instead, many of those ladies simply skip the bottleneck to find SD's in far more efficient ways. 

Ok, so the rate rose over time... that doesn't mean they are only successful because "They accidently inherited a large part of the market after the collapse of BP"

I have followed the thread, other than an estimate from Hornypt, I don't see any evidence of this ratio that you have referenced multiple times. Of course if you had understood my last post you would know that I actually agree that the ratio is favorable to men and wasn't questioning that in my last post. 

Does match.com thoroughly vet their members and impose exclusivity clauses? And before you counter that match.com is cheaper, keep in mind that the niche market of sugar dating is geared toward wealthy people.

14 minutes ago, Greenteal said:

     Websites like SA never earned that "success". They accidently inherited a large part of the market after the collapse of BP and from many classifieds dropping their personals sections. It could have been an opportunity to profit from the extra traffic, but they instead decided to take advantage of everyone in an outrageous way.

     As for "successful businesses that sell something that is available cheaper/free", they ALWAYS sell a far superior product. Better value, better service and the difference in quality is very obvious. In term of arrangement, if you meet a lady via SA or any other cheap or free alternative, there absolutely no difference with the exception of being $150 poorer with SA.

  

  

Backpage went down in April... SA was established years earlier and was already a multi-million dollar company by then. 

The premium difference with SA is the women to men ratio that you keep mentioning. 

Edit: I should mention, I have no vested interest in SA... I haven't even signed up for it and don't intend to pursue sugar arrangements... I am just baffled by your unwillingness to admit that from a business perspective they are doing well for themselves.

5 minutes ago, Greenteal said:

   The magic word is "right now" until people wake up to the fact they're paying for something they can get for free.

They can screw newcomers out of their money, but once they get more educated on the practice, they'll find cheaper/free alternatives.

Maybe, but again that's speculation. There's all kinds of examples of successful businesses that sell something that is available cheaper/free. You don't even need to look past the world of dating websites to see this.

10 minutes ago, Greenteal said:

The business model is unsustainable in the long-term. If they offered more than a dating website interface with better screening, it would at least be kind of worth it. But it's not, and just a question of time before a few cheap apps take over. I'm not supporting scalpers.

That's entirely speculation. All we know is that it is profitable right now and that they have a majority of the market share.   

2 minutes ago, Greenteal said:

  If you enjoy throwing money in the fire. Enjoy.

Once again, irrelevant to my point. I never signed up for it. I am just pointing out that you're wrong about the business model. 

51 minutes ago, Greenteal said:

 And 80% of those sugar babies are left with little chances to get extra income from those websites. Other than the scalper in the middle, nobody wins.

We seem to have our wires crossed.

The comment which you responded to stated: "Well to be completely honest, those websites should charge what ever anyone is willing to pay, that's economics."

Your response to this was: ""there are at least 5 to 1 women to men ratio", meaning most men are not willing to pay that amount" 

This (along with you mentioning a degree in economics) leads me to believe we are discussing the economics of the business model and not the ethics of the company. As such, my response pointed out that the high women to men ratio is a selling feature of the website and that encouraging a closer women to men ratio would be a poor business decision.

Is it fair to sugar babies? Maybe not. Is it economically sound? Yes.    

On a related note, I would be curious if there is a source for this 5:1 ratio and how inactive accounts and scammers are weeded out when determining that ratio.  

7 hours ago, Greenteal said:

    To quote Hornypt, "there are at least 5 to 1 women to men ratio", meaning most men are not willing to pay that amount.

 To use your example about apartments, it would be like owners doubling the rent to correct an 80% vacancy situation. I don't have a degree in economics , but I'm pretty sure you got it wrong.

You do realize that the (alleged) "5 to 1 women to men ratio" is precisely why they can charge what they do? That ratio is actually part of their sales pitch. Maintaining that ratio is their objective, that's why the service is free for sugar babies.  

I've never seen her personally but you might want to check out Brooke Diamond. She's well reviewed here:

27 minutes ago, Greenteal said:

  Even if not clear, her ads are honest enough to give you a good idea of what to expect.

According to your own post in this thread it's not so clear exactly what she's offering:

5 hours ago, Greenteal said:

I understand the "BestBBInTheCity" title can be opened to interpretation, but her ad only refers to bj's.

30 minutes ago, Greenteal said:

Again, the purpose of this board is to respectfully share first hand information about new providers. Not to speculate, judge and point the obvious.

There's no speculating, judging, or pointing out the obvious in this thread. A member of this forum was nice enough to warn us of what was offered in the providers older ads. That isn't slander, or a negative review, or something mean. If you disagree you can report the post and let the mods be the judge. 

2 hours ago, Greenteal said:

There's a forum for dangerous encounters, scams and fraud for this kind of warning. If some absolutely want unprotected experiences, this won't deter them. It's a forum for adults and we shouldn't need to hold peoples hands and tell them to act responsibly. If everything is clear in her ads , we shouldn't need to discuss it here.

 If nobody can say anything positive about her, this thread should have died after the opening post. This is the way this place works.

 

Except it's not clear in her recent ads... As stated in the post you quoted:

2 hours ago, Mikeyboy said:

 

She has in fact advertised bbfs regularly in the past. Normally I'd be the first to agree with you about keeping things positive here, but this kind of thing is dangerous. People deserve to be warned. 

Personally I'm glad to have read these warnings. Like many people I don't take a lack of positive recommendations to necessarily imply anything negative. A lack of positive posts could just mean that no one has seen her and that you should consider "TOFTT". The other users responses to this post have been helpful and not slanderous.

As a new user I'm genuinely curious what the actual mods have to say on the matter. I would have thought that the "dangerous situations" referred to in the Warnings forum is for people trying to rob you, not for this sort of thing.

The ad has been deleted. I remember seeing the ad and I think a few weeks ago they posted an almost identical ad for another asian girl ("Rina" I think).

I never bothered responding to either ad because the pictures were fake and there were no reviews but I would also be curious if anyone has any actual experience with her (or that agency).

Thanks guys. I finally got through long enough to speak them.

My advice to any other new customers (echoing some of what has been said before),

1. Send them a message on Lyla with your phone number
2. Send them a text message with your Lyla username
3. Call them on the phone (repeatedly if necessary), when they eventually respond the first words out of your mouth should be "I am a Lyla member"
4. They will ask if you sent them a message on Lyla, tell them you did and then wait while they check

That's as far as I got... they seem to keep moving the goalposts. Apparently now you have to have an account that is at least a year old to be trusted enough to book.  What a waste of time, I wish they would just state this up front... I can't imagine going through this much trouble again even when my account is a year old. 

Have any new clients had success booking with VIPOTG recently (searched for threads on the subject but haven't seen anything in the last few months)? 

I understand that they expect you to message them on Lyla if you are a new client but they don't seem to log in very often. As of right now it's been a week since they last logged in. 

I have tried texting and calling and the rare time that I can get through on the phone the person on the other end says she will call me back later but never does. In text messages I confirm that I am a Lyla member and that I have sent a private message to them from my Lyla account but still no response. 

If anyone has had success recently, what is the trick? Are we supposed to just keeping calling/texting?