Page 4 of 4
Re: Male Performers
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 5:38 am
by John Mason
If the so-called 'top' talent are only in it for the money, why don't they do gay films, it pays a lot more money and they're used to dealing with the prima donna attitudes.........
Re: Flavour of the month
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 8:21 am
by videokim
I agree with Roger on this one Rob, at present your backed by a big company which is great for you but one day you'll fall from grace when your product / style gets stale & then you'll be in the real world where you'll be dipping into your own deep pockets & not a backers. One of my films as been seen by nearly everyone in the U.K. but i've made jack shit on it so my R18's are being pulled as i'd rather burn them than give them away.
After 7yrs in this industry i've seen the big companies squeeze the smaller ones out on bully tatics so i say let them have it for now as fashions change & true adult producers wait around.
Most producers pay what they can afford & if backed can pay good fees, if fees are increased in the UK adult world this going to make the UK Pro scene even smaller than it is already as girls will out price themselves working for only a few large companies. People complain already that they see all the same faces in the Pro movies & raising fee's will only make it worse, you suggest raising prices but will you use these girl's work on a regular basis or drop them after one movie giving them false hopes of earning big money.
If you were out there on your own using your own cash things would be very different as most producers will tell you.
Last but not least is the guys who without their help would mean 'NO' films
unless we want solo/toys/girl-girl, why not increase their pay as they have the hardest job in porn full stop. I've done everything from gang-bangs,d.p,bukkakes etc but without these guys the action is just not the same.
As i know myself any actress can open their legs/mouths & go through the montions (just acting) but the guys do it for real & are the unsang heroes of porn.
Your films are doing well & i'm happy for you & wish you even greater sucess but please spare a thought for others before suggesting higher increases.
Re: 2006 - New Rates for Female Performers
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 11:48 am
by one eyed jack
Check out my latest update: Roxy Jezel and Tony DeSergio. Anyone who is anyone in this business knows that this ain't no bargain basement affair.
Which brings me to my point. Roxy ain't cheap and if you want a good shoot you should fork out the fair remunerations that is deserving of a scene. I have no problems paying girls their fee but what happened after that is a few girls came looking for fees in the 6 and 700 pound regions (without anal) like I was some new mug punter thats happened on the scene.
The rule of this industry is that once a fee is negotiated it can not be changed. If you book a premium model and bring in an average guy then your scene is devalued straightaway as you won't get the full potential out of the girl. Tony has been a secret weapon or tool in the box that I bring out on special occasions. He'll be the first to tell you I whinge like a bitch at his fees but to be honest, Tony DeSergio has demonstrated time and time again for me what a fucking brilliant performer he is and worth every goddamn penny. Roxy deserved the best that day and boy did I get a scene that was so blistering on the soft, the cable company asked to see the hard.
The reason we have set fees is precisely for that reason. 95% of the industry are just average performers and companies who buy in the product aren't paying any more money so the producer who sells their material will only lose money. Before Rude Britannia came along, no one was paying more than 1500 pounds for the rights to a 4 or 5 scene average movie. is it no wonder until producers started empowering themselves that this industry was turning over on cheaply produced amateur product?
If you are going to pay girls premium money then you have to get premium performing males in to do the job. Furthermore new performers have to earn this promotion in pay as you'll find if the performances arent up to par, no matter how well it is shot the whole product will fall down in the eyes of the end user.
I don't purport to hold all the right answers just merely speaking from experience.
I know exactly where you are coming from Kim as my roots started there also but I like to think I havent lost touch like some think I have and understand the pure pulling power of good amateur material. Without the success I've experienced in the past from this genre I wouldnt be around today.
Re: 2006 - New Rates for Female Performers
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 12:27 pm
by one eyed jack
Why is everyone getting into a tizz about this? The natural entry of new talent always invariably comes in through the amateur door first before signing up to a agency and many producers have been known to pay the guys and girls just as much and more (including myself) so I doubt this will change the staus quo as amateur producers see it.
Re: 2006 - New Rates for Female Performers
Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 11:12 pm
by marcusmaxius
Nice one Terry! yet again you prove to be a man of wisdom and a true professional. all our best mate
Re: 2006 - New Rates for Female Performers
Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 5:54 am
by videokim
True words Terry, if there ever was a union for industry you would be the man to run it.
kim
Re: 2006 - New Rates for Female Performers
Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 1:04 pm
by one eyed jack
Fiona Cooper has paid girls 4-500 pounds just for solo girl for years. I bet nobody can beat that....Then again, who would want to. Thats just an example...Sorry Phil