PornBox.com

First off, let me state that I have no knowledge of how models are currently paid, but I presume that they get a one-off flat rate from the producer/studio at the start, who takes all the risk of whether the scene makes profit or a loss. However, I've been wondering if adding in some kind of royalty payment to the models once a scene recovers its costs and moves into profit might be a good thing for everyone?

It seems the big issue at the moment is persuading people to pay for porn, instead of watching it on tubesites or downloading it for free illegally. Yet at the same time, there has been an explosion in sites like [spam], where people seem to be happy to pay what are often relatively high prices for often not great content. I'm guessing a big reason for this is that they know they are directly supporting the girl in question (and maybe this is where you get this new phenomenon of so-called 'simps' etc getting off on chucking cash at girls).

If these people know that buying a scene on LegalPorno/AnalVids would lead to a percentage going to the model featured, would it encourage more of them to pay? Knowing that they were directly hurting the girl involved, and not just some faceless company? Would it also encourage the models themselves to play more of a role in promoting their scenes, and encouraging people to buy them?

Just some thoughts. Any takers on this, or is it completely unworkable?

They can already do that here by financing and starring in their own scenes, and releasing them in Porn Box.

OP: Your proposal would significantly weaken producers who already struggle to survive in an already saturated & highly consolidated market.

The best solution is for models to produce their own content, which they are doing already both here and elsewhere, but they’re paid pretty damn well by the studios as it is. We can debate that back and forth, but $1,000 in a single day is nothing to scoff at.

Mister Ananas wrote:OP: Your proposal would significantly weaken producers who already struggle to survive in an already saturated & highly consolidated market.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but just out of interest, how would it weaken the producers? I wouldn't expect the royalty payments to come out of nowhere - more like a girl is offered a choice at the start of the shoot. A higher one-off flat fee at whatever the current rate is, or a smaller initial payment + an agreed percentage royalty stream of any profits. If the scene doesn't sell then the producers take less of a fall as they paid less in the first place, if it makes a profit then everyone wins. What am I missing?

Profit margins are narrow AF in this industry. Producers use profits to fund future growth. Without growth, they won’t be able to compete.

Also, good luck finding any models who will work for a reduced initial fee.

This might seem crude but studios can use model’s birthdays as a sale Day?

I like the idea of supporting models directly on something like [spam], but holy crap is [spam] a terrible platform. If they have a lot of posts, there's absolutely no way to search/filter them, other than just scrolling through all of them. Seems like it's more geared towards the parasocial aspect of interacting with the model

For the kind of content LP puts out, it really can't be done independently. Having a studio with good lighting, competent cameramen, and a pack of studs would be very expensive and difficult to manage while also focusing on putting on a good performance.

When I was first introduced to it, I hated the payment model here on LP. I was used to monthly memberships where you get full access. But I realized I think I prefer it now; monthly memberships end, and there's only so much hard drive space you can allocate before you lose access (or keep paying indefinitely). With LP, having access to the scenes you purchase forever feels better in the long term. Idk how the pay is for the models compared to other payment systems, but there are other pay-per-clip sites with profiles managed directly by the models, so it's kinda like a blend of how payment works at LP, but independent like OF.

Using [spam] is like shoving a metal rod into your urethra with no lube. Unless you’re into that sort of thing.

I don’t think models understand how badly they’re going to fuck themselves by going all-in on this [spam] bullshit. Sure, it might be better for them in the short term, but it’s really only great for the top 1%, and it’s going to end up over-saturating the market to the point that the other 99% will be begging for work. Customers only have so much money to spend on porn. If they’re getting charged $50 for a shitty 10 minute anal scene shot with an iPhone on a tripod, they're not going to have much left for anything else.

For sure, there is some good content on [spam], but good luck finding it. OF might be the most user-hostile porn UI in Internet history.

Mostly people join a model’s [spam] to chat - assumption

I agree. [spam] is successful because it sells the illusion of exclusivity and interactivity with models.

I think you guys are missing the point.

Content that models can do on their own, will never be as good,
as content that is produced as a collaboration.

But content that models produce on their own, is more profitable for them as individuals,
which is worse for us, because content is trending to be lower quality as time moves forward.

That's the gap between where we are and where we want to be.

OP wants producers to explore new business models that lure models back
to want to work, more often than not, for big producers, so we end users, get better porn.

A bonus is a good idea, "I will give you an additional 200 if the piss drinking performance is good", so they will improve their performance, movie will sell...

I would love to do this, I though about it many time, but there are 2 problems

- to be paid in royalty means the model have to wait (not every time, but very often) up to 3-4 months for her scene to be released and her revenue calculated.
- 5% of model would have higher payout than now, but 95% of model will have a payout lowered up to 60% (30-40% on average)

it is not doable

Thats a problem
But performance like this should be encouraged,
https://www.analvids.com/watch/216464/b ... llow_gl449
So they will do more kinky stuffs next time...
"You know a good movie when you see one"

Giorgio Grandi wrote:I would love to do this, I though about it many time, but there are 2 problems

- to be paid in royalty means the model have to wait (not every time, but very often) up to 3-4 months for her scene to be released and her revenue calculated.
- 5% of model would have higher payout than now, but 95% of model will have a payout lowered up to 60% (30-40% on average)

it is not doable

Also, a third point, which is that your profit margins would be impacted adversely.

Another possible solution

Prepaid postpaid choices for models

Prepaid option - current option, payment before shooting(fixed charge)

Postpaid- Model can choose this option if she wants, she will get 40% of profit(total money earned), 20% for the male actors, 30% studio and 10% for website. (You can choose the best ratio).Payment will be 14 days after the release of movie.

Giorgio Grandi wrote:I would love to do this, I though about it many time, but there are 2 problems

- to be paid in royalty means the model have to wait (not every time, but very often) up to 3-4 months for her scene to be released and her revenue calculated.
- 5% of model would have higher payout than now, but 95% of model will have a payout lowered up to 60% (30-40% on average)

it is not doable

Giorgio, I've grown to see you are essentially a decent guy. Your thoughtfulness on this just confirms it.

Yes he is...

bustylady wrote:Yes he is...

Good thinking from you also BustyLady...

Mister Ananas wrote:Customers only have so much money to spend on porn. If they’re getting charged $50 for a shitty 10 minute anal scene shot with an iPhone on a tripod, they're not going to have much left for anything else.

This is my main frustration - people unwilling to spend money on quality professional porn, but happy to pay for [spam] and similar amateur stuff. Maybe royalties isn't the way to do it, but I'm just trying to think how to turn those people's opinions round for everyone's benefit.

Giorgio Grandi wrote:5% of model would have higher payout than now, but 95% of model will have a payout lowered up to 60% (30-40% on average)

Unless I'm misreading, that sounds like 95% of scenes lose money, and it's the 5% that make profit which funds everything else - which is indeed very precarious!

I had the same thought, 95% lose money?

LP always paints the picture that they are barely making any money,
while at the same time have enough money to purchase DDF and bangbros and what knows what else

I mean, SOS was an asshole who didn't pay on time to the models
but did you look at the size of the house that they were filming their movies?

When I look at the TKT system, the whole thing is rigged to manipulate your emotions,
and DAP-addict and the like think is the most fair system ever, lol

It's hopeless.

oi mate what are those royalties about

magizi87 wrote:LP always paints the picture that they are barely making any money,
while at the same time have enough money to purchase DDF and bangbros and what knows what else

I mean, SOS was an asshole who didn't pay on time to the models
but did you look at the size of the house that they were filming their movies?

When I look at the TKT system, the whole thing is rigged to manipulate your emotions,
and DAP-addict and the like think is the most fair system ever, lol

It's hopeless.

Well, first of all, LP is a separate entity from the studios that produce the content on LP, so for every sale, there are two different entities making money and having to budget for two different business models. LP’s parent company bought those studios. Producers like Giorgio, Joachim, Florane etc. were not involved in that decision.

SOS is not exactly relevant here since he has not shot for LP in many years. He was just bad with money. It’s well-documented by now and I’m not going to go into it any further, but it has nothing to do with the ticket system.

We’re talking about profit margins. A good producer may receive $100,000 of gross revenue (I’m just using that figure as an example), but they will put $80,000 of it back into the business to shoot more content. Gross earnings have very little to do with profitability.

LP’s parent company bought those studios. Producers like Giorgio, Joachim, Florane etc. were not involved in that decision.

This was a little unclear on my part. I didn’t mean LP’s parent company bought Giorgio, Joachim, Florane etc., and to my knowledge they haven’t bought any of those productions. I meant that LP’s parent company bought the studios you mentioned (Private, DDF, etc) and the existing “AnalVids” producers had nothing to do with the transaction. They didn’t make the decision to buy them, contribute funds toward the purchase, or any of that.

Mister Ananas wrote:Using [spam] is like shoving a metal rod into your urethra with no lube. Unless you’re into that sort of thing.

I don’t think models understand how badly they’re going to fuck themselves by going all-in on this [spam] bullshit. Sure, it might be better for them in the short term, but it’s really only great for the top 1%, and it’s going to end up over-saturating the market to the point that the other 99% will be begging for work. Customers only have so much money to spend on porn. If they’re getting charged $50 for a shitty 10 minute anal scene shot with an iPhone on a tripod, they're not going to have much left for anything else.

For sure, there is some good content on [spam], but good luck finding it. OF might be the most user-hostile porn UI in Internet history.

OF already is over saturated. Hence why most girls you join will just bombard the subscriber with ads for other girls, multiple sales per day, etc. Yes, there are whales out there, but most people have a limited porn budget and can't cope with 300 bucks per month per girl they subscribe to (you need to spend that kind of dough if you want to keep engaged with them in DMS, see a few scenes ,etc). The top girls are making a killing right now, but eventually that model will burst. It is not a good value for the fan anymore as the "personal touch" is mostly gone. Most of the DMS are an assistant, management company, or an outright bot.

In addition, some of the bigger names in porn are buying licensing rights to their old scenes directly from their former producers. They then clip them out and send them out as paid content through DMs. So, we are now faced with girls producing less and less new content by just throwing old stuff out there.

It will burst at some point I think.

Furhter, one example.

I love May Thai and jumped on her OF when I found out she had one. First paid content I get sent is a NINETY SECOND video (it shows that in the details) for FIFTY DOLLARS. That is a hard no from me and quite frankly, I find it insulting.

I still love May Thai but that kind of pricing strategy has a short shelf life.

Giorgio Grandi wrote:I would love to do this, I though about it many time, but there are 2 problems

- to be paid in royalty means the model have to wait (not every time, but very often) up to 3-4 months for her scene to be released and her revenue calculated.
- 5% of model would have higher payout than now, but 95% of model will have a payout lowered up to 60% (30-40% on average)

it is not doable

And to add to the wait time, most women in the sex industry have the money spent in their minds before they even get it. Its an instant gratification business model for the performers. To have them wait months for a payment from scene sales would require a radical departure from how they think . It sounds nice but I think the vast majority would take the grand on scene day versus MAYBE getting more 5 months down the road with the risk of getting less.

Models should use paid scenes to build their name and fanbase, and then build their own "royalties' by doing web cams, paid video calls, customs, [spam], etc.

As much as I love May Thai, I am not joining her [spam] (or any other model). $50 for a 90 second iphone clip IS insulting, and greedy to the extreme. Why pay $50 for that when there are countless high resolution photo sets, 4K, and VR professionally shot scenes showing every intimate nook and cranny of my favourite Thai beauty? I just don't understand the appeal of OF at all.

For me, OF seems like the biggest con job going. Guys, you are NOT in a relationship with these girls. All you are is an income stream. I suppose some enjoy the fantasy of the OF 'relationship' with a model, but I'd rather lose myself edging to a professionally shot studio scene than the amateur level fake reality of OF.

Regarding royalties: I feel established models should be paid royalties. A set fee for a scene + royalties that kick in if the scene sells well. Much like the Hollywood model for established/popular stars receive.

CanadianCouple wrote:Furhter, one example.

I love May Thai and jumped on her OF when I found out she had one. First paid content I get sent is a NINETY SECOND video (it shows that in the details) for FIFTY DOLLARS. That is a hard no from me and quite frankly, I find it insulting.

I still love May Thai but that kind of pricing strategy has a short shelf life.

I think if studios do contract for multiple scenes it would better for models to return to shoot here
explanation - let's say 5 and each scene has some price x(each scene fees the same) and then after some point of time they get paid the royalties (y) for these scenes combined
as GIO said (x < y ) - in most cases
so going for a hybrid system is good that is a mix of fees and royalties would be a good approach
however, for a recurring model opting for a yearly contract might be good in my opinion

magizi87 wrote:When I look at the TKT system, the whole thing is rigged to manipulate your emotions,
and DAP-addict and the like think is the most fair system ever, lol

You are misquoting me, maybe on purpose.
Anyway, I always called the TKT system fair because it passes studios investment for the scene directly to the user. It puts the user in a position of understanding that what he asks for to be produced has its price. For example a 1on1 anal scene costs less tickets than a 7on1 DAP scene, because shooting DAP involves a higher fee for the girl and booking 7 studs for the studio means to pay 7 studs fees and not only 1. Get it now why I call it a fair system?
And I hope its clear that it is not only about performer fees ofc because studio has a lot of recurring base costs like studio/apparentment rent, payroll of cameraman, MU, driver, assistant etc. Thus in my 1on1 anal vs. 7on1 DAP example price difference is about 50% only, i.e. 8 TKT vs. 4 TKT.

Now gonzo has the fairest TKT price system because they passed all minor differences directly to the user, i.e. an US model flown in is of course more expensive than a local Czech model. Or a wet scene is ofc more expensive than a dry scene etc.
Other core LP/AV studios have flattened out the TKT prices meanwhile. Thus also making it less educative for users. First to start this trend was Joachim @ IV. Florane @ N&F basically copied this model, which charges the same for DP or DAP usually, even if the girls fee is much higher for DAP of course. GIO is somewhere in the middle.

Now, magizi, I never said recent TKT price rises were fair! That's a completely other discussion. Pinning it down on easiest example of 1on1 anal: Usual TKT price here rose from 2,8/3,0 TKT to 4,5 TKT recently at GIO - this within just over 1 year! While at gonzo 1on1 TKT prices during the same 1 year didnt change and are still 3,1-3,6 TKT. Of course there is something strange here.
At gonzo Rebecca Volpetti & Mike Chapman are of course more expensive than Chanel Kiss & Potro. That's good old gonzo TKT pricing fairness, while @ GIO ticket prices got more streamlined.
This said, also at GIO a German or French porn girl costs usually 0,5 TKT more in a 1on1 than a Russian or Spanish porn girl because their anal fees just differ.

davebowman wrote:I've been wondering if adding in some kind of royalty payment to the models once a scene recovers its costs and moves into profit might be a good thing for everyone?

It seems the big issue at the moment is persuading people to pay for porn...

Now for OP: Some good questions, but I am afraid most porn consumers simply dont care about the girls they enjoy. Most are looking for fun for free. And only quality and a sense of loyalty, creating a community like here via LP forum can make a part of porn users actually pay for their commodity product.

Paying out royalties to the girls would work only with a minority of pretty well established girls because it would mean studios had first to change their mentality. Girls would have to accept a lower base fee with some added royalty %. The whole process of counting would drive scenes prices up again, thus making porn even more expensive for users.
If at all, I'd rather go for a flat rate additional payment for girls promoting their scenes very successfully on their social networks. Still better and easier is just a re-booking for more scenes once their old scene batch sold fine. Its a natural self-regulating biz model. Who sells fine - also thanks to girls social network promotion - gets re-booked.
And users have to understand that only by supporting their girls they get them re-booked and thus more scenes with them.

There isn't enough porn work out there for most porn girls, thus the more active they join studios PR the better, the more versatility they offer, the better, the more they invest into their looks and anal-friendlyness, the better.

Studios on the other hand take already a hell of a risk booking unknown or rookie girls because users demand 'fresh meat' all the time. Its not as easy as porn fans think to finance a place shooting 20-50 porn scenes per month!

@dap-addict one thing you forgot to mention is you own the scene forever in this system unlike subscription-based sites

The simple and most effective answer to this question is, "No".

I think Giorgio has explained it very well already.

dap-addict wrote: ...I always called the TKT system fair because it passes studios investment for the scene directly to the user. It puts the user in a position of understanding that what he asks for to be produced has its price. For example a 1on1 anal scene costs less tickets than a 7on1 DAP scene, because shooting DAP involves a higher fee for the girl and booking 7 studs for the studio means to pay 7 studs fees and not only 1. Get it now why I call it a fair system?

Yeah, I understand that you believe this is how it works, but that's probably not it.
If this were to be true, a 3 on 1 scene, would never, ever, be priced similarly to a 10 on 1 scene.

For example, if hypotactically, (as in, I'm making these numbers up) the men get paid $400 and the women get paid $2,000;
a 3 on 1 scene, operational cost for actors would be: $2,000 + $400+ $400+ $400 = $3,200
a 10 on 1 scene, would be: $,2,000 + $400+ $400+ $400+ $400+ $400+ $400+ $400+ $400+ $400+ $400 = $6,000

If we ratio these results, the tkt cost of a 10 on 1 scene, should be almost twice of a 3 on 1 scene (6000/3200)
and this is assuming models get paid the same amount of money, regardless of how many men they have to fuck,
which sounds very unlikely because, probably, the woman gets paid higher, otherwise why would she agree to do something,
that is much harder if there is no extra incentive and there are probably additional cost like more STD testing and whatnot,
so, the production cost of a 10 on 1 scene is probably much higher than my estimation.

But still in reality, a 10 on 1 scene isn't priced 100% more than other scenes,
the price differences regardless of content is around 2 tkt
between 7 and 9 tkt, which is about a 30% difference.

And that doesn't seem reflect your belief of what the TKT system is.

What I believe is that the reason they offer so many different packages to obtain TKT,
with different monetary values for TKT, is precisely to confuse you,
in order that when you make a purchase, you don't fully understand
the value of the transaction.

They also place multiple prices for the same item.
to make it look like, the TKT are the "cheap" option.

It's the bargain per say. That's why I say is emotionally manipulative,
because they can increase the price of stuff, by 100%,
and people still buy it, they're hooked, hopelessly.

lol

On 10 on 1, one male performer will get 200$
On 3 on 1 the same model will get 300$
One 1 on 1 he will get 400$
Problem solved

Studs get payed the same no matter how many of them fuck in a scene.

10on1 was always much more expensive than 3on1. But not 100% more, rather 70%. Take this for example: https://pornbox.com/application/watch-page/32047 (3on1 = 3,9tkt) - https://pornbox.com/application/watch-page/32083 (10on1 = 6,6tkt).
I always took this as a way to not make 10on1 scenes too expensive.
This some of your reasoning may reflect true marketing issues, indeed. This said TKT prices still do plus-minus reflect studio investments in a scene and are thus still a fair user payment model.

Royalty implies some kind of participation of the government through legislation and laws. Which is unlikely to be a good influence on porn. Because politicians usually looks for ways to harm porn, rather than do something good for it.

Profit-sharing is probably a better word for it. Because it's a business model that various companies are free to implement on their own.

But even this is unlikely to happen in a good way. Because people who own businesses usually want to pay the least they can to those who work for them and keep the rest for themselves. They don't pay any more than they have to.

Why would you pay more, when you can pay less and still have more or less the same business?

Perhaps a good way to get around this problem of conflict of interest between porn-stars and their employers and the government is to establish a direct relationship between porn-stars and porn-viewers. Even on a platform such as this website, they can set up a way for porn-viewers donate some money to porn-stars performing at this website. These would be like tips for porn-stars from fans who like their performances. It would be similar to strip-teasers getting tips or cam ladies getting tips from their viewers.

This way fans can pay directly to porn-stars on top of what these ladies and guys get paid from their employers. And there wouldn't be any middle-men taking a cut for themselves, except perhaps to pay for the operation of the donation set up.

101mike101 wrote:But even this is unlikely to happen in a good way. Because people who own businesses usually want to pay the least they can to those who work for them and keep the rest for themselves. They don't pay any more than they have to.

Why would you pay more, when you can pay less and still have more or less the same business?

Yeah :/

This is really, the root of all evil, lol.