SA is advertising a 4:1 ratio so these figures are astounding.
Even feminist Toronto secretly yearns for patriarchal coin by its wide ratio.
Even feminist Toronto secretly yearns for patriarchal coin by its wide ratio.
Quote: (07-08-2018 02:16 AM)N°6 Wrote:
SA is advertising a 4:1 ratio so these figures are astounding.
Even feminist Toronto secretly yearns for patriarchal coin by its wide ratio.
Quote: (07-08-2018 04:04 AM)Markcrist Wrote:
I've mentioned things about ratios before. In London there is only 3000 slim/athletic white women between 18-22. These are the girls most sugar daddies are targeting. The main problem is the "online right now status". Only around 2 pages of them are online.
Now there are around 1125 sugar daddies in London that are paying for premium membership on SA. These guys "online right now status" seems to go right to the 12th page+.
So the ratio isn't really that favorable as its made out to be.
Now I didn't check the 18-25 slim, athletic, average sbs but I'm sure the ratios are still screwed for the sd in terms of last active.
Quote: (07-08-2018 11:16 AM)billyb Wrote:Right, and in addition to this, the numbers are misleading because they're counting all girls as opposed to just attractive ones. The typical hot blonde sorority girl, who was a dime a dozen on the site back in 2015, is now one in a million just like on any other dating site. I'm in one of the metro areas in that table, and after filtering out fat girls, women over 30, etc., by the time I'm on page 8 or 9 of the search results I'm looking at girls who haven't logged on in over a week, meaning for all intents and purposes they're no longer active on the site.
yeah now I think about it actually it's true that the numbers are very misleading.
you're comparing active SD's (premium) in a city with all SB's who have ever signed up. the majority of those SB's are inactive as evidenced by the number in online status. in my experience an SB who has not logged on in 1-2 weeks rarely responds to msgs and definitely if they haven't logged in after 4 weeks they're very likely to have quit the site.
so I'd be interested in the numbers of SB's from those cities who have logged in within 4 weeks e.g. 1 month, which would be a much better equivalent to the number of premium SD's (monthly renewal)
Quote: (07-08-2018 06:06 PM)Arcite Wrote:
Quote: (07-08-2018 11:16 AM)billyb Wrote:Right, and in addition to this, the numbers are misleading because they're counting all girls as opposed to just attractive ones. The typical hot blonde sorority girl, who was a dime a dozen on the site back in 2015, is now one in a million just like on any other dating site. I'm in one of the metro areas in that table, and after filtering out fat girls, women over 30, etc., by the time I'm on page 8 or 9 of the search results I'm looking at girls who haven't logged on in over a week, meaning for all intents and purposes they're no longer active on the site.
yeah now I think about it actually it's true that the numbers are very misleading.
you're comparing active SD's (premium) in a city with all SB's who have ever signed up. the majority of those SB's are inactive as evidenced by the number in online status. in my experience an SB who has not logged on in 1-2 weeks rarely responds to msgs and definitely if they haven't logged in after 4 weeks they're very likely to have quit the site.
so I'd be interested in the numbers of SB's from those cities who have logged in within 4 weeks e.g. 1 month, which would be a much better equivalent to the number of premium SD's (monthly renewal)
Quote: (07-08-2018 12:19 PM)bk19xsa Wrote:
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/wa...s.1326117/
Quote: (07-07-2018 08:59 PM)AznMarkZuckerberg Wrote:
Already here are the international numbers. Just did a bunch of random cities lemme know if you guys have cities you want me to check with my premium SB account. I actually couldn't find a lot of cities outside the US with significant numbers, but if you guys want me to check some lemme know and I'll post.
Quote: (07-10-2018 01:38 AM)AznMarkZuckerberg Wrote:
@bk I’ve used the law enforcement scare to great effect before I basically say I will pay for experiences that both of us participate in but direct exchange of money for sex is quid pro quo and illegal