NEWS: Thailandladyboy.com Relaunched!

[Ecstatic]

OK, the official relaunch date is tomorrow (Tuesday Dec 06), but I just can't keep this under my hat any longer: we are relaunching www.thailandladyboy.com ! New design, new girls, new features, all original, all Thai girls, weekly updates.

If you like Thai ladyboys, this site is for you. ALL ORIGINAL content, shot on location in Bangkok and Pattaya, of girls not found anywhere else online. HOT ladyboy solo shoots, SIZZLING XXX hardcore, EXCITING videos, UNIQUE model profiles: it's all here, with a new site design and weekly updates (YES, WEEKLY: I'll be posting FOUR new photosets every week).

I'm the new webmaster and creative director for Thailandladyboy.com and promise to take this site to the next level and beyond. You won't find this content anywhere else--no recycled photos here! And we aim to make the Thailand experience come alive for you by providing detailed model profiles and background info, as well as info about Thailand itself. But mostly it will be about hot girls doing the things you love!

This is my first venture into TS porn online (other than as a happy consumer) and I'm excited to get this underway. There's a wealth of content from the site's original launch in 2004, but the new look, features and higher quality take it to the next level. Check it out!

Here's a few samples to whet your appetite:

[Ecstatic]

So I finally get to run a shameless self-promotional plug myself!

[Ecstatic]

:D

[Ecstatic]

8)

[Quinn]

Congrats on your new venture and good luck.

-Quinn

[Ecstatic]

And one more to tantalize....

[GroobySteven]

Ecstatic,
Don't want to turn this into an argument, there's enough business and content for everyone but a few points;
Your showing images in 800x600 and 640x480 (wtf?) - most viewers are demanding much higher quality 1024x768 would seem much better.

Your 2257 compliance is woefully incorrect. Please check and amend this, email me direct if you need guidance on it (my main guidance is unless you know for sure you have id on a specific model - remove her).

My main concern, or issue is a $29.95 memebrship fee? You claim you're showing 4 new girls a week and I'm sure the size of the content is smaller than existing sites like ladyboy-ladyboy.com and Asian-TS.com
Why would someone want to come to this site at $29.95 when they can join those larger pre-existing sites at $24.95 and in the case of ladyboy-ladyboy get 6-7 sets a week?

I wish you all the luck but if you really want to make a go of this and ensure you're legally sound, then please investigate the legal aspects closer as well as trying to look for how to get competitive.
You can get me at admin@grooby.com
seanchai

[Ecstatic]

Congrats on your new venture and good luck.

-Quinn
Hey, thanks Quinn!

[Ecstatic]

Ecstatic,
Don't want to turn this into an argument, there's enough business and content for everyone but a few points;
Your showing images in 800x600 and 640x480 (wtf?) - most viewers are demanding much higher quality 1024x768 would seem much better.
I'll drop you an email to avoid too much discussion here, but since you've raised these points on the forum directly, I feel compelled to respond in part here.

Yes, I agree, and newer content will be in larger format. I'm not the site owner or photographer (at least not yet), so I need to work with what we have to start and build. It will grow.


Your 2257 compliance is woefully incorrect. Please check and amend this, email me direct if you need guidance on it (my main guidance is unless you know for sure you have id on a specific model - remove her).
Not sure what you see here; the 2257 is standard, and the site owner has all the model information on hand (again, I'm acting as webmaster and designer, not as owner).


My main concern, or issue is a $29.95 memebrship fee? You claim you're showing 4 new girls a week and I'm sure the size of the content is smaller than existing sites like ladyboy-ladyboy.com and Asian-TS.com
Why would someone want to come to this site at $29.95 when they can join those larger pre-existing sites at $24.95 and in the case of ladyboy-ladyboy get 6-7 sets a week?
Well, good on you for promoting ladyboy-ladyboy as soon as I put this post up! You know I respect your work and always have, but come on, man. Give a fellow a chance and don't undercut right away! Anyway, there is a lot of content up already, and there will be fresh content every week. Frank puts up four sets a week. As for the price, we have to see what the market bears. If the feedback indicates more membership at a lower rate, then again that's the site owner's call, but I'll bring it up to him.


I wish you all the luck but if you really want to make a go of this and ensure you're legally sound, then please investigate the legal aspects closer as well as trying to look for how to get competitive.
You can get me at admin@grooby.com
seanchai
Thanks for wishing me luck. I don't see where you're coming from with the legal aspects, but I'll write you at admin@grooby.com and I do appreciate any comments you have.

[hillbilly]

wow ecstatic congratulations on your new venture that's fantastic.

i hope you make it everything you want it to be and more.

to seanchai's point well the yum family could use some work as far as just information architecture and usability. hopefully you have taken on some of these issues into consideration.

u gotta start somewhere. ain't nobody rolling out 20 sets to start and i'm sure you are committed to the long haul.

[hillbilly]

oh yeah btw cute girls!

[Ecstatic]

Hey hillbilly, thanks for the positive comments. To be fair, seanchai makes valid points, and I respect his opinion. I want to feature larger photos and will work towards that end. I don't see a problem with the 2257 regs, although that's the site owner's direct concern and he tells me he's all set in that regard.

But thanks for the comments on architecture and usability. I have striven for that and hope that I've addressed those issues. We're looking to add a forum, to expand on the Thailand information, to enhance every model's set where possible with personal profile info, and to offer multiple viewing options: easy links from any image in a set to any other image, slideshow feature, multiple sets of some very hot models, etc.

Oh, thanks for the comments on the girls. One of the key features of the site is that this is all original detail, with most models having not appeared previously on any other site. We are looking at 4 sets/week, 18 sets/month, plus there's already a large inventory of photosets and videos from last year (though I think we've stepped up the quality significantly).

[la2bkk]

Good luck with the new venture. There's definitely competition out there, but that (hopefully) should make for a better product for us end users. And thanks for the two pics of Nancy... she's something else.

[Ecstatic]

Thanks again to seanchai for so quickly posting some valid comments and good advice. A few notes:

1. Price - the $29.95 is the old monthly subscription rate from last year. To tell the truth, I wasn't even thinking about the price because that's only specified on the ccbill subscription page, not on the site itself. Here's the scoop: we're offering one month subscriptions at $19.95 (recurring) and $21.95 (non-recurring), and 3 month subscriptions at $49.95. The new prices are already in place on the signup page. Sorry for any confusion. We definitely want to offer a competitive price and give you the best value for the dollar that we can.

2. 2257 compliance: I just spoke with the site owner to confirm what I had posted, and yes indeed, everything is in line and covered. He has model releases, signatures, all necessary contact information, and every model is at least 18 years of age at time of photographing. Thanks for pointing this out, seanchai.

[GroobySteven]

My consultancy invoice is in the mail.

Not sure if you got my email yet about the other 2257 compliances but follow them and you should be ok.
This is something every adult webmaster should be aware of although sadly many aren't, the compliance is punitive and seems pointless but it's one of the things they want to get us on!
seanchaii

[Ecstatic]

Yes, I got your email. Thanks for the notes. I'll review them with the site owner and make changes as necessary.

[Ecstatic]

Thanks, Mega! I thought you'd like those skinny girls with small titties! Personally I go for the slender girls with nice (but realistic looking and feeling) titties, but we have a ton on the site and more to come of the type you like.

I hope I can get down to NYC soon and catch up at a party or something.

[dreamer]

way to go Ecstatic!! ---layin the surprise on all of us -you rock!! ----I like all the pics I see in this thread ---but dayum -there's just soooooomething extra attractive about that second one --hmmmm ---what could it beeeee?

[LG]

Good luck with the site Ecstatic.

But guys, if you really want to become competitive, think about lowering your subcription prices.

And wouldn't it be cool if someone could offer a cable or satellite channel starring t-girls? You might want to look at that.

[dreamer]

And ya gotta have movie clips!!! --heheh

[Ecstatic]

Good luck with the site Ecstatic.

But guys, if you really want to become competitive, think about lowering your subcription prices.

And wouldn't it be cool if someone could offer a cable or satellite channel starring t-girls? You might want to look at that.
Thanks, LG. We have lowered our prices: $21.95/month nonrecurring; $19.95/month recurring; and $49.95/3 months recurring.

[Ecstatic]

And ya gotta have movie clips!!! --heheh
Thanks for the kind words, dreamer. Yeah, Dokthong is very hot. We have several sets of her, solo and hardcore, coming your way. And yes, movie clips! We have a bunch of clips from last year already on the site, and more coming very soon.

[Lobo]

Ecstatic,
Don't want to turn this into an argument, there's enough business and content for everyone but a few points;
Your showing images in 800x600 and 640x480 (wtf?) - most viewers are demanding much higher quality 1024x768 would seem much better.

Your 2257 compliance is woefully incorrect. Please check and amend this, email me direct if you need guidance on it (my main guidance is unless you know for sure you have id on a specific model - remove her).

My main concern, or issue is a $29.95 memebrship fee? You claim you're showing 4 new girls a week and I'm sure the size of the content is smaller than existing sites like ladyboy-ladyboy.com and Asian-TS.com
Why would someone want to come to this site at $29.95 when they can join those larger pre-existing sites at $24.95 and in the case of ladyboy-ladyboy get 6-7 sets a week?

I wish you all the luck but if you really want to make a go of this and ensure you're legally sound, then please investigate the legal aspects closer as well as trying to look for how to get competitive.
You can get me at admin@grooby.com
seanchai

I'n going to have to disagree with Sean on this one. I like the smaller scans that Ecstatic posted as oppsed to the second pic Sean posted (nancygom084.jpg). Here's why:
The second pic Sean posted isn't practical. Yes it's highly detailed which is great, but I can't see the girls face and cock at the same time, the pic is TOO BIG vertically to fit the entire image on my screen. When viewing this pic I have to look at her face or her cock, can't see both at the same time which to me is a waste of fuckin' time. You might as well post a close up pic of a face or a close up of a cock separately because you can't see them both at the same time on your screen if the pic is sized too large. Horizontally these large pics are great (if the girl is lying down the the first pic Sean posted), the whole thing can be viewed on you screen in one piece, those are fine. But the second one doesn't because she's standing up, vertically it doesn't fit on my screen. I have to scroll up or to view it in two sections, her upper body or her lower body, can't see the whole thing at once.
This is one of the reasons why I don't like a lot of grooby's recent picture sets. Too many huge pics where you can't see the girls entire body (face and cock together) in one pic. Everything is so big you have to view a pic in sections, fuck that shit. There are already pics of close ups for people that want to see a detailed face or cock pic, why ruin an entire set by making every pic too huge to view properly?
I would like to see the grooby sites do what some straight sites do, that's offer the pics in two different sizes. Suze.net does this, offers every pic in a large scan or something a bit smaller.
Ecstatics pics are the perfect size vertically to fit a screen.

[Ecstatic]

Great point, Lobo. What do others think? I personally like to see the entire pic on one page, and I usually set my monitor to 1152x864, which is a compromise between 1024x768 and 1280x960 (too small for my old eyes).

Obviously it would be more work to offer two sizes, but if there's a demand then it would make sense to offer 800x600 and 1024x768 versions. I'd love to get feedback on this.

BTW, only our older sets are set at the smaller 640x480; resizing up from the existing size always distorts the image quality and we do want to deliver these as well. But our intention is to move to larger sizes: at least 800x600 and maybe 1024x768. Bigger than that gets really big, making for more bandwidth, much slower download, and more difficult viewing (anyone using a Barco 30" monitor set at 1920x1440 pixels?!).

[Bigguy]

I think the best way to do this is when showing the gallery with thumbnail images is to have a little text or button next to each thumbnail that says small, medium and large. Give them a choice, go for three resolutions and then everybody is happy.

Well except for you maybe if you have to do each gallery over 3x, but that isn't too bad with a little programming.

[Ecstatic]

Thanks for the extra work, bigguy. ;)

It's not much extra work as far as programming the galleries goes; it's the extra work in saving multiple versions of all the photos. I think I'd rather do just medium and large. (Wait: if there's only two sizes, one of them logically can't be medium, can it?)

[gaiseric]

Ecstatic, best of luck with the new site. You've got some gorgeous girls there.
As you and I know, you can never have too many Asian girls :D :D

[Ecstatic]

Ain't that the truth! And we have girls you won't see anywhere else.

Thanks, gaiseric.

[Bigguy]

It's not much extra work as far as programming the galleries goes; it's the extra work in saving multiple versions of all the photos. I think I'd rather do just medium and large. (Wait: if there's only two sizes, one of them logically can't be medium, can it?)

There are programs that can re-size photos right off the server but you could run into a CPU usage problem and the logo on the pictures would change size also. Saving multiple versions would use up more hard drive space but that usually isn't that big of a problem these days. It would take a little more time to create and ftping the files though.

Instead of medium and large, maybe regular and super-size. :lol:

[Ecstatic]

Yeah, I know about those programs. However, maybe I'm anal (no comments! wrong word in this forum, I know!), but I prefer to control the quality of the photo myself in Photoshop rather than accept the results of an on-the-fly program. Still waiting to see what's best, though. What's your opinion? I get the desire for bigger is better, yet I also agree with Lobo that once an image is bigger than the monitor setting, it becomes almost useless.

[Bigguy]

I'm thinking 800x600 for the medium sized horizontal pictures and maybe 480x640 or 600x800 for the medium vertical pictures. I think most people run 800x600 or larger for their desktop. (I personally use 1152x864)

For the large ones I think 1600x1200 & 1200x1600 would be big enough. I don't think too maybe people run higher than that unless they have something like a 21" wide screen monitor.

I agree that Photoshop or similar program would be best for the resize, shouldn't be too much work with batch programming.

[Ecstatic]

Not a problem, simply time consuming. But if it will bring in the customers to offer two sizes, it's well worth considering. 1600x1200 is huge; I would never view an image that large on my PC. Like you, I use 1152x864.

[BeardedOne]

I think I'd rather do just medium and large. (Wait: if there's only two sizes, one of them logically can't be medium, can it?)

You've never worked in pizza, have you? And do you really think there's anyone that would fess up to asking for "small" condoms? :lol:

I once asked a waitron what the size difference was betwixt their medium and large and they said "The medium is six slices and the large is eight slices". I asked them to bring me their biggest pie, sliced into six, and to charge me for the medium. They stared at me, in stunned silence, until drops of blood formed on their forehead and I mercifully said "Nevermind, I'll have a large instead".

I do so love to play with their minds. :twisted:

BTW, congratulations on your venture and yes, I am insanely jealous. :P

Now you know we really gotta do that pizza. :D

[Ecstatic]

The pizza's on you, the beer's on me!

Reminds of this old one: "How many slices is your large pizza?"

"Eight."

"Can you cut it in six? No way I can eat eight slices."

Thanks for the congrats. There's a ton of work to do, but it is fun!

[BeardedOne]

The pizza's on you, the beer's on me!

Can do. :) Next time I'm in your neighborhood I'll send you an advance ping.

Do they accept Imperial scrip in your neck o' the woods? :wink:

[Ecstatic]

My banker prefers gold bullion. ;)

Definitely ping me, and drop you a tracert to my location.