:1orglaugh

Doug, I know your review site gives very worthy reviews... I was told which niche our sites were rather than placing them where I felt best.
You're choices were more for the review & the surfer than for the sale :thumbsup

Free porn??? they click porn & check a load of tubes :2 cents:

I agree that all the points that you have made about the review of content from a website should be taken into account. However, if a producer puts his heart & sole into their productions, it's not the main factor considering it could be a great scene, yet cant be enjoyed if it's been encoded low... as a positive note, why not encode your new footage or encode your older footage in higher rates? Then you would get the best of both worlds :thumbsup


What does it matter what you think!? You chat crap & obviously are a troll with a second name on GFY, and heres betting you own very lousy sites & content yourself! :2 cents:

Get that sig removed, its the ban hammer for you, considering all my models have always been paid! :)

1) negative
2) negative
3) encode the footage in a higher bit rate & ask for another review....

From past experience with RR. I would have thought Doug would be happy to get his team to review the website again.

For an advertising guru, you are a negative mother focker :2 cents:

Actually.. I know for a fact some of those companies don't know what they're doing by encoding to really high bit rates. They're just doing it because they "think" it should be done and because they see others doing it or because their video guys says it would be cool to do it... :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

There's a lot of reasons that conversion rates, retention etc has dropped over the last few years and one of them is because companies have moved to catering to those with high end systems instead of going after the mass consumer. This is just another example of that. The US has been the prime market for everyone. But with the shit that's gone down with credit over the last few years, there's just not as many buying porn or that can afford the internet connections or computer systems to actually buy it. Emerging markets is where the future will be and those guys just won't have the systems to play a lot of the vids.

I look at it this way... Porn is about volume. Youtube is a volume video provider. They cater the masses as porn should. They don't encode videos to high bit rates so that practically anyone can watch the vids. The rise of the tube site should prove this point to anyone. Porn surfers don't really give a shit about high quality porn. They want to be able to view a lot of it to find just the right ones to get themselves off. A very small percentage of the surfers care about quality so why put so much time, money and effort into catering to them... Deliver to the masses and everyone will make a lot more money again.

He didn't complain about the video quality. He was complaining that what was advertised was not what was delivered. Big difference. Porn surfers aren't going to buy a membership because you have HD video. If they have a choice between a couple sites then that might be a factor. Porn consumers buy memberships because a site has the video(s) that they're interested in watching. Beyond that, everything else is just a bonus.

Very well said!

Shouldn't you be cleaning spunk from that rancid ugly cheap bare back hookers cunt?

I bet it stinks in there :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

My friend, it was so good meeting you and getting to hang for a while! And I know - the streaming was a long time coming. It wasn't such a big deal in 2003. And in another eight to ten years, we'll need another retool.

Cheers! I was disappointed I didn't see you in London this past weekend. It would have been nice to chat in person. ;)

I agree that emerging markets are going to hold a lot of wealth in the years to come and that they will want and be happy with what we were happy with eight years ago as far as file sizes and video quality. That's not our market, though.

And YouTube now has HD vids available. Any thought that they've been serving up lower quality vids has more to do with the fact that they run a free site than them trying to serve the desires of the public. People don't want tube-quality content. They just love it because it's the best free content they can get and it's not a killer on bandwidth. It will be different in ten years. People will love and expect better quality tube vids. It's the natural progression of things.

The people we serve at Rabbits are those that want to pay for premium content. Show them tube grade (as long as it isn't really niche & hard to find) and they won't be satisfied.

You're right. It wasn't a out-and-out complaint about quality, but he did write and ask about the 1080. He knew what he was after and knew he wasn't getting it. People want quality. They recognize it. If they didn't, we wouldn't be in business.

Several posts have raised the point the Rabbit Reviews is a private company, but private companies have responsibilities to both the audience they claim to be offering fair reviews and to their sponsors who have the right to have their sites fairly accessed.

By using confusing, misleading and inaccurate rating system that distorts the results they misinform their clients.

For example defining video quality only in terms of bit rate and not the other numerous factors that effect visual quality.

The suspicion must be that this is done just to promote the few sponsors that appear on the first page of their website.

As your review does not present a truthful picture of our website we have stopped your affiliate account and ask your to remove the review of our site.