Has Grooby ever considered...

[Infern0]

So Grooby has got a whole bunch of sites under their network, and some people would be subscribed to multiple sites of theirs

However, if you wanted access to MANY of their sites, say 4+, you would be spending a LOT on porn

I usually will have memberships to a couple of grooby sites, say Canada-Tgirl and Shemale.xxx

But sometimes you will see a shoot on another of their sites, but man, i can't justify spending like $150 p/m on porn especially if i only want a couple of shoots

So how about this, what if you have a subscription to one grooby site, then you could buy scenes from any other grooby site for a one off fee.

So say you HAVE to have a membership, so say you are a member of canada-tgirl, but you want one scene from shemale.xxx, you could perhaps buy it for $5

I mean to be honest, there should be some sort of multipack deal anyway (unless there's one i don't know about) Bangbros offer like 30 sites for $7.95 so grooby ain't exactly cheap anyway when it comes to porn sites

I just think this would make them more money and be fairer on customers who otherwise might piss off or whatever and try find the shoot for free

[saifan]

Take a look at Grooby's VOD site. It's pretty much what you are proposing they offer.

[lordworm]

Why would anyone dislike this post? It's a good idea for the customer that every site have a buy scene option, that way you don't have to pay for scenes you don't watch. Of course, I'm not sure the company will make money that way then.

As for Grooby VOD, they don't put up scenes from the sites in there directly, it's only the DVDs Grooby actually releases as DVDs and it works through the hotmovies.com network.

[saifan]

Look again: grooby.com/vod

On my phone do apologies if that isn't the exact link.

[GroobySteven]

http://grooby.com/vod/

Will answer the rest later.

[broncofan]

Couldn't you have just suggested an idea without implying that you're being treated unfairly? You could have said, "Has Grooby ever considered offering video on demand for current customers?"

Sorry to say but the title and sub-title just sound like a giant bitch. So, you pay for a service and as a customer you can purchase any bundle of goods out there, in conjunction with or to the exclusion of all others. That doesn't mean you have all of this power based simply on the threat of with-holding your business. It's laughable. Like some primadonna walking into a restaurant and demanding the best table or he'll take his business down the street.

[broncofan]

Why would anyone dislike this post? .
Thanks for the reminder.

[GroobySteven]

Actually, I was about to start my reply with what Broncofan stated.

Why are you implying that we're being "unfair". We offer a number of products at a price and we deliver them. You have the choice of what you want to buy. You don't go into a restaurant, order a steak and then pout because it's unfair that you didn't get a taste of the lobster because you didn't want to buy the whole lobster dinner?

Most people either rotate the sites that they want, or wait until the special offers come up (although for some of the sites they can be once a year or less) or if you take a look at http://www.grooby.com/tickets/ this is really the best way to get what you want, at a cheaper price.

Grooby never claims to be "cheap" but there are no other sites offering what we offer, for this price and our prices are based on the budgets we need to get the content. If we lowered the prices, we'd have to lower the amount of content. Bangbros isn't a fair comparison, look at other companies doing very niche products - or even within our niche, where we have very few competitors who can come close to matching what we do.

As far as your point about providing scenes on an "a la carte" basis. This has been something we've been working on for years but unable to find a good enough platform to release it on. Because of the way billing (and especially adult billing works) as well as how to deliver the content, it's proven very difficult to implement. Ideally we want an Itunes type system that allows a user to buy items for a set dollar amount, from .99c to $4.99 depending on a age/type of scene. We couldn't effectively bill for those small amounts so would have to bill collectively, and that's one of the issues.

We are working with a company right now which may have this resolved and we're looking into whether the cost of operating something like this (which would run over $50-$100k a year minimum) would have enough sales to justify it.

[bigkid69]

I just think this would make them more money and be fairer on customers who otherwise might piss off or whatever and try find the shoot for free


I didn't think the OP was whining, and he never said HE was being treated unfairly. Why jump down his throat when he brought up a legitimate question? Which was then answered.

[GroobySteven]

I didn't think the OP was whining, and he never said HE was being treated unfairly. Why jump down his throat when he brought up a legitimate question? Which was then answered.


If you subject line includes "fairness for customers?" and your text has "be fairer on customers who otherwise might piss off " as well as complaints about the price, then the implication is that it's unfair or that we cheat people, which couldn't be farther from the truth.
I think the OP was aware that this would create a more dynamic argument - but I don't see it as helping put his points across.

[broncofan]

I didn't think the OP was whining, and he never said HE was being treated unfairly. Why jump down his throat when he brought up a legitimate question? Which was then answered.
His title and sub-title say, "Has Grooby ever considered fairness for their customers?" You don't have to have a degree in English to infer that he thinks he's being treated unfairly.

I am not in any way associated with any business so that's why I'm not being diplomatic if I think it's unreasonable. It's not reasonable to suggest that people try to get porn for free because they're not getting the deal they want by paying.

Unfairness is being offered one thing, making a purchase and getting something else entirely. Or it's being charged all sorts of surcharges you weren't warned about. It's not failing to get the deal you wanted.

[bigkid69]

I read what he wrote, I took it as a legitimate question. Maybe his phrasing was off in the subject line, but what he brought forth in the post, to me didn't seem like he was bitching.

[GroobySteven]

I read what he wrote, I took it as a legitimate question. Maybe his phrasing was off in the subject line, but what he brought forth in the post, to me didn't seem like he was bitching.

But now you're being a little kid and derailing the post. Everything has been said, thanks.

[bigkid69]

But now you're being a little kid and derailing the post. Everything has been said, thanks.

Shit, I'm sorry, please forgive me.

[broncofan]

I read what he wrote, I took it as a legitimate question. Maybe his phrasing was off in the subject line, but what he brought forth in the post, to me didn't seem like he was bitching.
I did say that I thought his title and sub-title sounded like a bitch. I thought it colored the rest of the post.

I guess I sort of try to think about it like a proprietor would. You want to offer the best product to the most people, and you will offer volume discounts if it's attractive for all parties. I don't really see how anyone could be responsive to demands from individual parties when there are multiple tastes and circumstances to consider. I've seen a dozen or more posts like this and I've always been struck by how unreasonable and detached from reality they are.

I don't really see how you think maybe his phrasing was off. Go up to management at a business in your local area and ask them if they've ever considered fairness for their customers. What are they going to say? "Yeah, we've thought about it".

[Infern0]

His title and sub-title say, "Has Grooby ever considered fairness for their customers?" You don't have to have a degree in English to infer that he thinks he's being treated unfairly.

I am not in any way associated with any business so that's why I'm not being diplomatic if I think it's unreasonable. It's not reasonable to suggest that people try to get porn for free because they're not getting the deal they want by paying.

Unfairness is being offered one thing, making a purchase and getting something else entirely. Or it's being charged all sorts of surcharges you weren't warned about. It's not failing to get the deal you wanted.

Actually, i don't think i'm being unfairly, and i said i pretty much always have one or two subscriptions.

Also you will notice the question mark after the line "fairness for customers"

I'm not saying "this would be fair" i'm saying "would this be fair?" hence the "?"

Of course Grooby can do what they want, it's their material, but at the end of the day they are providing a customer service, and any business in customer service should look at ways to A) keep their customers happy and B) increase profits

i think this idea would do both, offering this service to SUBSCRBERS only means you are giving extra incentive to sign up or keep subscribed, while selling shoots at i'm saying a reasonable and profitable price for grooby

And to this dude directly

broncofan

1. Perhaps you do need that degree because you did infer wrong

2. What do you mean it's not "reasonable" firstly I wasn't threatening to do that at all, but it is a legitimatize problem for the porn industry, failure to recognize that is dangerous imo.

some of you need to be sure about what people are saying before charging in, because I feel all I did was make a suggestion.

[Infern0]

I did say that I thought his title and sub-title sounded like a bitch. I thought it colored the rest of the post.

I guess I sort of try to think about it like a proprietor would. You want to offer the best product to the most people, and you will offer volume discounts if it's attractive for all parties. I don't really see how anyone could be responsive to demands from individual parties when there are multiple tastes and circumstances to consider. I've seen a dozen or more posts like this and I've always been struck by how unreasonable and detached from reality they are.

I don't really see how you think maybe his phrasing was off. Go up to management at a business in your local area and ask them if they've ever considered fairness for their customers. What are they going to say? "Yeah, we've thought about it".

It was in two different line ya' dummy

if i'd wanted to ask it as a question i'd have put it in one line wouldn't I.

cool off, man

[GroobySteven]

It was in two different line ya' dummy

if i'd wanted to ask it as a question i'd have put it in one line wouldn't I.

cool off, man


You used a question mark "fairness for customers?"

Whatever you intended to mean, you communicated that it was unfair or question the fairness of it. :geek:

[broncofan]

Maybe your suggestions were good. As for what you said, I think I read it correctly. I could only read what was on my screen. You're right that the tone of the rest of your post does sound lighter and more suggestive.

When you say, "has x considered fairness for their customers"?, you are implying they have not. It's not something most people have to consider as it's an intuitive thing. As you are a customer, you would be included in the group mentioned.

Theft is a problem, but I don't think people steal because they are not getting a good deal. They steal because they don't want to pay for a good or service and don't care how much money went into making it. Anyhow, since I read your entire post I did notice the uneven tone of it, with part being conciliatory and part having a different sound to it. Most people were swayed by the nicer parts. Whatever.

[GroobySteven]

You also posted a link to a pirate site ... which I removed, that wasn't exactly cool either.

[Infern0]

You also posted a link to a pirate site ... which I removed, that wasn't exactly cool either.

i love the way you phrase that, makes it sound like i was blatantly trying to advertise a site, when the reality was i just mentioned it in my post in a valid way. Nice way of putting it, kudos.

[GroobySteven]

i love the way you phrase that, makes it sound like i was blatantly trying to advertise a site, when the reality was i just mentioned it in my post in a valid way. Nice way of putting it, kudos.

You linked to it and suggested that the content could be found there. It was blatant. Enough with the false outrage, you were quite aware what you were posting both in terms of the implications and the links.

Your question (or statement) has been answered.

[Gillian]

... and breathe