Log in

View Full Version : That bitch is charging too much for dances!! The NERVE!!!



Pages : 1 [2] 3

brazilian
05-09-2007, 12:09 PM
Actually I think that's a pretty good idea. Money is so hit or miss there, it would help if yall could discourage alot of the travellers from invading. Hitting them in the wallet is about the only way.


As for Phx, I'm not so sure a stripper petition is the way to get the license thing started. I'm thinking if word spread too much too soon it just might backfire. I'm picturing clubowners getting wind and trying to stamp it out before it starts, and/or too many girls fearing the worst and either refusing to support it or fighting against it. I think you might have to sneak it in to make it work. And frankly, I can't see any city council member looking at that kind of $ and saying no. Maybe I'm incredibly naive but I think they'd have to approve it. Of course, I think to really make it work you'd have to get it publicized AFTER the proposal is made, to get the general public saying "hell yeah, tax those nasty strippers!!!" ;D

Oh I also forgot to mention the illegals who are able to work here, with licenses, and it seems there's more of them since the license thing started. Clubs seem more lax about checking ID on newhires now, they just check for the license. As far as I know, you currently don't have to provide proof of right to work in this country to get a license to strip in Phoenix. So you get the license with just some ID, and then only show the license to the club, and you're suddenly "allowed" to work illegally in the clubs here. That sucks. We ought to be required to provide proof of legal status as well, just like in Vegas.

When I got my license I had to show proof of legal status. I am a permanent resident with the right to work and study but I am Brazilian and we always get asked anyways. The other day I was on the DMV and a lot of people weren't being asked for proof of legal status. I guess it is because a lot of people of Mexican decent work on those places and they let their people slip in to get a driver license being an illegal. I guess the same happens with the stripper license.

Bridgette
05-09-2007, 01:46 PM
I guess it is because a lot of people of Mexican decent work on those places and they let their people slip in to get a driver license being an illegal. I guess the same happens with the stripper license.I'm inclined to believe this. I know some of the foreign girls who dance here are doing so perfectly legally. But I noticed a jump in the number of native spanish-speakers in the dressing room not long after the license law took affect.....

AlexxaHex
05-09-2007, 02:24 PM
What if the license fee increase made it so you didn't need to clubhop anymore??? Because that's the goal and the way I see it.


I don't necessarily believe that an extra license fee for each club will give me that much of an increase in earnings. If you could prove to me with numbers that this will actually work, or that club hopping is really that detrimental to your earnings, then I would stand behind you 100%.
I still think I would earn more picking and choosing my nights at various clubs, but I work best under those conditions. Maybe some dancers are happy being stuck at one club. But what happens when your manager tries to get you to have sex with him (or does any of the million other things that are in violation of respect and basic human dignity that they are so fond of trying to impose upon us), or the club gets raided or goes up in flames? I mean, there are other circumstances behind club hopping besides just being a wandering soul in search of the best market. When one club starts enacting some crazy rule or standard, I'd like the option to pick up my bag and leave without having to shell out several hundred just to have another job.

Again, you don't care. But you are one person. I'm just offering an opposing view because I know there are several GOOD dancers like myself who profit greatly from having a change of scenery.

I am all for your license increase, by the way. I would just be really hesitant to advocate staying at one club all the time. How do Atlanta dancers deal with that? What happens when you get licensed to work at one club and hate it in about two weeks?

Bridgette
05-09-2007, 03:13 PM
Blah, it seems like you are just a nay-sayer and that's it. Yeah I like switching clubs too, and I haaaaaaaaaaaaate being "stuck" in anything. But I see the way the clubhopping fucks up business around here, especially in summer, and I'll pay the price if it means cutting that shit down. Pay a little, gain alot.

There can be no proof with numbers that this will work; not possible to get numbers like that. It takes a little faith. If you could've seen what I saw the last few months you'd probably be agreeing with me wholeheartedly. I do know what I'm talking about; I'm not some twit who started this yesterday or washed-up old broad who's just pissed off about a little competition.

>>Edit to add: But let's just say for argument's sake that as a result of these things we see a decrease in girls in the clubs by 20%. And let's assume that the remaining girls will start making 20% more money. Seems reasonable, yes? So if you currently make, say $30k/yr as a stripper, a 20% increase would bring it up to $36k. That's an extra $6k/yr in your pocket - and that's a conservative number. Suddenly $300 or $600 or even $900 doesn't seem like such a big price to pay, does it? Shit, I'd pay $900 to make $6k all day long.

Hell, let's say we only make 10% more money. That's still $3k more per year for a $30k/yr stripper. Who wouldn't be willing to cough up $300 or $600 to make an extra $3k?

Remember I'm proposing these ideas for *myself* too. If *I* want to switch clubs then I'll just have to pay the price too. No sweat. But the price would mean a huge reduction in holiday and last-minute clubhoppers who really only serve to screw up business for the regular girls who work at a b or c club all the time. My club gets faaaaaaaaaarr too many chics who ONLY come around during slow times because they aren't making much at their regular clubs. I go in REGULARLY during slow times and see 10 or more new girls who NEVER work there, who just go there when it's slow. They don't work 2 or 3 clubs year-round, only when it's slow - they think that when business slows down it must be better at another club. HELLO! It's NOT. It's slow everywhere, so quit invading other clubs because you're just making it WORSE!!! This is the shit I want to cut down.

The girls who work 2 or 3 clubs year-round, well sorry, you'd have to pay. But at least your 2 or 3 clubs would suffer fewer influxes of "those" clubhoppers (and let's not forget the ones who NEVER dance except when they want some xmas money or something ::) ), so your business would be more protected and consistent too. Let's see - pay an extra $300/year in order to MAKE an extra $2-500/week (maybe more)? Yeah I'll do that!


Atlanta dancers "deal with it" by 1) realizing that they're making great money, alot more than they would elsewhere, 2) learning to thrive in whatever club they're in because there's money to be made in all of them, 3) not being spoiled little brats because THEY'RE MAKING GREAT MONEY. The horror stories of managers trying to fuck everyone and fucking with our money if we don't are mostly just stories. Yes I know it happens but it's NEVER happened to me so I have trouble believing it's that big an issue. Disliking the manager or DJ or whatever becomes way less of a problem when you're carrying more money home every night.


Finally, I don't care if some people don't agree with me. Something like this will NEVER have 100% support, even though it can and will benefit all of us. It requires some small sacrifices in order to gain a bigger benefit, but some people can never see past their own small issues to see the bigger picture and the bigger benefit it can provide not only to the group, but to THEM individually. So I say again. Whoever doesn't like it, could quit or work elsewhere. That's really the point.

And now I think the horse has been thoroughly beaten.

AlexxaHex
05-09-2007, 04:05 PM
I'm not just being a nay-sayer for the sake of having nothing better to argue about. This is a really interesting topic you brought up and yes, I agree there should be more control over the little gnats that fly in and out of the clubs offering extras or whatever else kind of shoddy service with no regard to your income. It bothers me too when I am dancing here in LA. Believe me, we get a ton of vagrants and casual strippers too and I would love to see something like that happen here also.

However, it would take a lot more than faith for me to give up the system I am comfortable with. Would I try it if I could go back to dancing the way I was if I didn't like it? Yes, of course. But that's not possible once you start enforcing laws and fees. You also said you hate being "stuck" in anything, so I know you can see where I'm coming from. I also see your perspective, but the whole thought of giving up that freedom scares me just on the hope that I might be making 20% more. The truth is that there is no guarantee that you'd make that much more if you eliminated club hopping...or any more money for that matter.

I DO think you will make more if you get the city license fee raised though. I just don't know if you are losing 10-20% by dancers club hopping. If that were PROBABLE then yes, I would totally agree with you.

Bridgette
05-09-2007, 05:47 PM
We are probably not losing 10 or 20% of our income to clubhoppers. I'd say we are probably losing around 15-20% to travellers, fly-by-night strippers, holiday girls, wannabes and clubhoppers combined. But the clubhopping reeeeeaaallly makes things hard when girls start working 2 clubs in the same DAY at the end of the month in July because the dumb bitches couldn't think past their noses and pay the damn rent the week before ::) Just as one example.

I do believe we are losing a significant % (significant enough to justify the per-club licensing expense) of our income in summer due to clubhoppers, and that's the time we can afford it least. If you haven't experienced the droughts we experience here in summer, you can't possibly understand. Money gets really short, resentment grows, attitudes sour, tempers flare, and the vibe gets all around shitty. The girls who work regular clubs year-round HATE seeing the clubhoppers start invading because they just make things worse all around.

I don't think anyone has a problem with the girls who work 2-3 clubs year-round but unfortunately in this city those girls are way in the minority of clubhoppers. Most of them stay at their "home" clubs most the year and only bounce around when business gets slow - exactly the worst time to do it. In the end I think we'd all prefer to spend a little extra money to keep them from doing that so much, because it would give us piece of mind and could very easily mean the difference between going home with no money or turning a little profit on the worst days. It's extremely disheartening to go in and work for nothing or next to nothing, and when we have to deal with that (often largely thanks to too many clubhopping girls) it is hard to keep your attitude from spiraling out of control, which only makes it even harder to make money. I'm speaking more in a general sense now, because when I go to work I manage to make money no matter what. Usually less in summer but still enough. But I see way too many girls struggling to scrape by when they shouldn't have to.

Personally, I think an extra license fee to work 2 clubs year-round isn't such a bad deal, if it means keeping the fly-by-nighters from flying so much. It's not like you'd have to pay it more than once per year. And more importantly, Phoenix is not like LA or Vegas - there is fairly consistent money here most the time, if girls would just take their asses to work and WORK on a consistent basis (and if we could weed out some of the extra girls). We don't need to clubhop here.

AlexxaHex
05-09-2007, 06:32 PM
We don't need to clubhop here.

Ah. Perhaps you don't. I feel as though I do here in LA to maximize my earnings. I had no idea it wasn't like that in other parts of the country. I've never worked in Phx. but I do know what slow clubs are all about. I know about the viciousness, sour attitude and desperation. OMG do I know. If that could be reduced by getting rid of Flotsam and Jetsam, then hell yes, I'll pay $600 a year. It would probably mean having a better solidarity among the good dancers too, as we could hopefully all work together to keep them out and keep prices up. I worked in ONE club where the girls were like a family. Not surprisingly, it wasn't a high hustle club. The rest of the clubs I've been in basically have a "go fuck yourself" mentality when it comes to sticking together.

Perhaps there needs to be some better training for dancers too. I mean, with that licensing fee could come a well-written sales and protocol booklet of sorts that would help girls look and do their best - a manual if you will. Maybe the clubs can start distributing them or at least training their dancers better. There should totally be a sales training course you have to complete to get the license. I know that's a SUPER long shot, but we're not sure if any of this other stuff will happen either. If you want to start getting more structured, there should be better business training. Those girls who come in the very last few days of the month to pay their rent do not only have drug problems or whatever...I'm sure a lot of that is just a lack of financial education. Just a thought.

Lysondra
05-09-2007, 06:43 PM
Bridgette,

You're probably saying the best and smarted things to reform our industry back to the way of the hard workers and class and quality. I love your theories and calculations.

I just wish the city itself would listen. :/

evan_essence
05-09-2007, 08:55 PM
-any letter to the city council is probably not a good idea, the mayor and the city council have not proven to be fans of strip clubs in the past and I'm guessing you'd run the chance of this move backfiring on you in some way.To me, this is a valid concern. Sometimes it's better to leave sleeping dogs lie when it comes to involving government. And I don't say that out of some theoretical devotion to libertarianism. I say that because sometimes if you give city officials an idea, they may go farther with it than you hoped. It's not like, in the general public's eyes, strippers are a respectable lobbying force who can exert influence to ensure the nuances of such legislation are crafted precisely to be what's best for them.


This would result in a revenue increase of $438,000 per year - over 1000% increase in annual revenue. I'm thinking our city council members would vote for that allllllllll day long, and I betcha it would take more wheel-greasing than the clubs are willing to cough up to get some NOs on that.Well, that is an appealing number, even at half that calculation. And since it's not directly assessed against the clubs -- after all, it's the dancers who get to shell out for it -- the owners might not see it as anything they care about. They might even be thinking, better for the city to hit the dancers than come down directly on the clubs. And if it impacts dancers only when their current licenses expire, it's going to be a gradual transition anyway.

On the other hand, I will point out that there's a difference between the advantages to a politican of raising fees for city coffers and the advantages of taking a position on an issue that puts money into his own pocket. Yeah, a yes vote might mean $438,000 more for the city, but a no vote could mean a few thousand for the politician's personal benefit, er, I mean campaign fund. If you tack some sort of extra club regulation on this, I know you're going to stir the hornets from their nest.


Well, my first thought is to write an anonymous letter to a few city council members regarding the license fee increase. I think an effective letter would include facts and examples from (an)other area(s) where expensive licensing works for the city, as well as projections for increased revenue using current license numbers.I'm probably engaging in wishful thinking but it would be nice if you had a "white knight" on the council and let him/her propose this like it's their own idea, so that their incentive is to get credit for improving the city's finances without any pain to the average taxpayer. A white knight who's actually sympathetic to the real reason behind this proposal, could plausibly characterize it in terms that would gain public support, and wouldn't load it up like a Christmas tree with unwanted (no pun intended) extras. Or perhaps someone who's connected who could connect with someone on the council to pitch the idea.


There have been lobbies supported by those in some of those professions to create, enforce and restrict licensing because it helps them keep competition down and maintain their perceived value. We really aren't much different, if at all. It can work for us too.Well yeah, but again, we're not respectable, so the average politician can't touch our causes without committing political suicide. As has already been said, it really has to be pitched as benefiting Mr. and Mrs. Uptight ... er I mean Upright Citizen to have a chance of getting anywhere.


Sorry this is so long.No way. I'm all warm and fuzzy about the way you think business. The wheels turning in your head are some of your most sensuous motions. I'm rooting for you. :thumbsup:

-Ev

Bridgette
05-10-2007, 03:23 AM
Well yeah, but again, we're not respectable, so the average politician can't touch our causes without committing political suicide. As has already been said, it really has to be pitched as benefiting Mr. and Mrs. Uptight ... er I mean Upright Citizen to have a chance of getting anywhere.Oh no nonononono! I KNOW that causing a stripper ruckus will more likely backfire on us, much like it did in CA. Which is why I was thinking of the anonymous letter. I was thinking perhaps if I/we could find which councilmember proposed the stripper licensing law in Phx in the first place, that might be a good place to start. It might be even better if that person were reading this thread LOL! I totally agree that if we try "lobbying" or starting a movement in the traditional sense the results will NOT be nice for us, so we have to do it quietly or not at all.

I was just using other licensed professions as examples of how they've often used this kind of regulation to control supply and maintain their perceived value. Just saying we could do the same, but much like those other professions, it would have to be sold to Joe Public on how it will "protect and serve" Mr/Ms Public. Projecting heavy city revenue increases to help pay for things like the new light-rail, roads, schools and such sounds to me like a great way to sell it - Mr/Ms Public get to benefit and don't have to pay for it :O But that part's the politicians' job - my/our job is just to convince the politician(s) that it's a good idea. Seems fairly easy to me - more money for the city, Joe Public loves that, more votes for politician, and all is right with the world ;D


And, if my business-thinking is my most sensuous motion then honey, you'd die of orgasm many times over if you hung out with me. Fiance says I think it too much HA ;D

LatinaRose
05-10-2007, 05:22 AM
If the city were to do something like you're saying B, Scottsdale would be fucked, completely flooded by all the girls who don't want to pay that!

DylanAngel
05-10-2007, 05:26 AM
Fiance says I think it too much HA ;D

Ladies and gentlemen: we have the understatement of the year!!!;D

You know I'm just joking with you Bridgette...give 'em hell girl. If anyone can bring around some stripper reform using sheer ballsiness, it'd be you.

Bridgette
05-10-2007, 05:31 AM
If the city were to do something like you're saying B, Scottsdale would be fucked, completely flooded by all the girls who don't want to pay that!Then let Snottsdale do it too. I don't and won't ever dance there, so I don't care either way. But I'm betting if Phx does it, Snottsdale wouldn't be far behind because they'd want in on the money train too ;)

Bridgette
05-10-2007, 05:34 AM
Ladies and gentlemen: we have the understatement of the year!!!;D


:-[
This thing says I have to type 5 characters to post. Here's more than that.

DylanAngel
05-10-2007, 05:44 AM
:-[
This thing says I have to type 5 characters to post. Here's more than that.

Oh Bridgette, don't be embarrassed!!! :'(

It was truly a testament to the fact that your brains are even bigger than your boobs!:D

Bridgette
05-10-2007, 07:01 PM
Hey now, I'm just a giant set of tits!!! Remember that :P

azdd
05-10-2007, 11:31 PM
Well after wading through this thread, and all of the optimism about city politicians wanting to jump on a higher fee bandwagon to raise more money, consider the law of unintended consequences....

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4790832.html

Aretha Franklin was right - THINK.

BrunetteGoddess
05-10-2007, 11:57 PM
"Why are not the excessive earnings of women strippers targeted for this slush fund?"

"Women want it both ways, they want to take off their clothes for money, make obscene
amounts of money doing this "job""


I love how this guy thinks dancer's money is "excessive" and "obscene"! If he ever had to do this job, he'd see we were being paid too little to deal with assholes like him!

Bridgette
05-11-2007, 12:13 AM
Well after wading through this thread, and all of the optimism about city politicians wanting to jump on a higher fee bandwagon to raise more money, consider the law of unintended consequences....



Aretha Franklin was right - THINK.You're just proving that it'll be easy to get City Council to raise our license fee. Which is what we need.

StrayStripper
05-11-2007, 11:00 AM
Hey B, we dancers at the place that misses you have an understanding to get $20 or more/song. The revolution will not be televised.

It is against the rules to ask for more. As you know, experienced strippers got game and we find ways to get it without a direct demand.

Susan Wayward
05-11-2007, 12:43 PM
Yeah -- one of your mgrs let it be known to one dancer that he had a reg complain . . . .it's fairly fucked that it's against the rules to charge more, but aren't you allowed to offer the "option" of a $20 dance? The option being that it won't suck?

StrayStripper
05-11-2007, 03:06 PM
Yeah -- one of your mgrs let it be known to one dancer that he had a reg complain . . . .it's fairly fucked that it's against the rules to charge more, but aren't you allowed to offer the "option" of a $20 dance? The option being that it won't suck?

Happy strippers ---> Great dances!

There is one manager in particular who always sides with customers.

miabella
05-11-2007, 03:55 PM
um, the five dollar tax directly hits clubowners (since it is applied to the cover charge, forcing all clubs in tx to have a mandatory cover charge they cannot get a penny of) and is thus not remotely the kind of fee increase you want cities to levy on titty bars.

even levying higher housefees on the girls won't recover the customer drink sales lost because a percentage of guys will not come in if it's not free anymore or as cheap as they'd like.

hardkandee
05-11-2007, 04:19 PM
Maybe we can get the fee's raised in vegas to....decrease the # of dancers comming in here for convention season...maybe local dancers pay $200 but out of town dancer have to pay $500 or something.....

I just wanted to add to this.^

My university charges 3 times more for out of state attendees than local kids, so I think the same could certainly be done with dancer licenses.

The license in Phoenix is $21? That's a joke. For a yearly license to perform you should pay more than a cheap house fee.

doc-catfish
05-11-2007, 05:10 PM
Anyone in the SC industry who thinks their local government would be willing to help them enact change for their benefit needs to read the parable about carrying a scorpion across the river...like over and over until it sinks into their brain.

http://allaboutfrogs.org/stories/scorpion.html
http://www.snopes.com/critters/malice/scorpion.htm

Enough said.

ExoticEngineer
05-11-2007, 05:19 PM
Does it disturb anyone else that since we can't seem to get club owners/managers to see that hiring any and all who apply hurts us, we should make it more expensive to work?
Dead horse, I know, but I'm sick like that.

Anyway, I am happily on the bandwagon for $20 dances. We've all talked about it before, and for as much as the dances have changed sine I started to now, the price should have changed right along with it. Are there other cities that have $10 dances? How many? Are we really that behind the times with the price of a good lap dance?

StrayStripper
05-11-2007, 05:30 PM
Are there other cities that have $10 dances? How many? Are we really that behind the times with the price of a good lap dance?

Atlanta is a the city of $10 dances. But the dances are no contact or very, very, very low, low, low contact. No friction, no titty slaps, no nothing. As Phx offers friction, dances should cost more.

LatinaRose
05-11-2007, 05:33 PM
^^I'm all for increasing the dance prices to $20 a song and raising VIP rates as well. Personally I'm against an increase in the license - I only work here when I visit. I don't want to pay that much for a license when I only use it a few months out of the year. I don't even have to get a license now and if Phx did it and Scottsdale didn't, that city is fucked. I know you don't care B b/c it wouldn't affect you, but I like Scottsdale and don't want it to become even harder to make money there. I guess I'm the kind of dancer you are bitching about, but I don't club hop and dancing is not only for women that do it all year round, nor will it ever be. There will always be girls that are visiting and want spending money or just need to grab some money real quick for a bill, etc. And I think that's okay. It is not okay for management to all let them work on the same night when the # number of dancers should have been capped 10 girls ago.

I agree with EE - we shouldn't make it harder or more expensive for us to work, the managers should care enough to not hire too many girls or cap the # of girls on each night. Or they should at least get us $20 a song!!!

And no EE, I don't think there are any other major cities that have $10 dances as the norm. Maybe on day shift or a special night a week or in a tiny little place that doesn't have many customers.

ETA: Just saw SS's post. Our $10 dances are not like ATL at all, except for Babes. The dances given in the rest of the city are definitely worth $20, esp with the increase in grinding/friction in the last few years.

mollyzmoon
05-11-2007, 05:59 PM
Montreal: 'non contact' dances $8 song.

Full contact (boob/ butt touching I mean) $10 a song. Canadian.

I work at a Quebec club an hour and a half away from Montreal where the dances are $20. We get an inumerable amount of Montreal dancers on the weekends because of the price difference.

I also come across plenty of Montreal customers (up on business, etc) who bitch to me about our $20 prices. They think $20 is ridiculous (for me to grind, and let them touch my breasts and ass). They always try to bargain me down, and I laugh as I walk away.

It is ridiculous that the prices are that low in some major cities. What is a lapdance worth?

Bridgette
05-11-2007, 08:24 PM
Doooooods. Customers and other nay-sayers: get it through yall's heads. The idea is not to ask City Council to pass this law to help us out. DUH how f'in stupid do you think I am? The IDEA is to anonymously suggest this fee hike aka sin tax as a voter-friendly way to generate lots of additional annual revenue for the city. FFS. City Council members historically LOVE such sin taxes.

As for you girls who are against this, saying the clubs should cap the girls. That will never EVER happen. The ONLY way to effect any sort of "cap" on girls is to make it harder for them to enter the business in the first place, ala expensive licensing. Otherwise we're forever going to be stuck with too-cheap dances and ever-increasing numbers of girls. I don't give a shit if a few girls who only work 2-3 times a year don't like it - frankly they are part of the ones we need to keep out. This is a damn business, not a charity. If some chics need some quick cash here and there maybe they ought to figure out another way to make it. This is our livelihood we are talking about, and they are playing with.


And EE, HELL YES we are that behind the times here re: lapdance prices.

Richard_Head
05-11-2007, 08:28 PM
City Council members historically LOVE such sin taxes.Almost as much as they love closing down strip clubs.

Bridgette
05-11-2007, 08:30 PM
Almost as much as they love closing down strip clubs. ::) This is not Houston. 'Nuff said.

miabella
05-11-2007, 08:35 PM
the timing of the attempts to close down houston clubs at the same time as the proposed mandatory cover charge for all texas clubs (of which houston ones are 1/4-1/3, depending on how you dice the numbers) is pretty interesting.

Richard_Head
05-11-2007, 08:43 PM
It just seems to me that if the market is just too flooded with girls, eventually the market will correct itself. Survival of the fittest as they say. Bringing the city into it just seems like asking for trouble.

Bridgette
05-12-2007, 03:53 AM
It just seems to me that if the market is just too flooded with girls, eventually the market will correct itself. as they say.Wishful thinking. I for one have been hoping for this elusive market correction for years (and I know I am faaaaaarr from alone in that). It ain't gonna happen. Mainstream media makes it more appealing to be a stripper everyday; clubowners hire more and more girls everyday because each new girl is more money for them; shitty economy makes more women in straight jobs more desperate and willing to "lower" to our level, etc etc etc. What has been and is continuing to happen, is that the girls overall learn to accept ever-decreasing amounts for take-home pay, because "it's still better than ____ job" - also new girls have nothing to compare to, so they just accept it. Where does it stop? When do we say "EEEEE-fucking-nuff! We aren't putting up with this crap anymore"??

Personally, I am not happy with working twice as hard for the same money I used to make. Especially when I look at the tipout list and see that, according to that, I made 2-4 times the money the other girls did that day. That is just shitty. Even more especially when I consider inflation, and realize that even the same money is effectively LESS than what I used to make, so I'm essentially working twice as hard for LESS. Noooo, not happy with that at all. None of the other girls are happy with it either, believe me.

Something needs to be done. No one ever gets anywhere or accomplishes anything by being afraid to try. I have lived my entire life that way and I'm not about to stop now.

Only way we've got a chance is to quietly get regulation making it much more difficult to be a stripper. Suing the clubs isn't going to work. Unionizing isn't going to work. Trying to band together isn't going to work. Rallying or lobbying isn't going to work. Just waiting and hoping isn't going to work. Complaining isn't going to work.

But making the cost of entry in this business expensive CAN work. I have seen it with my own two eyes.

I know many people are afraid of what the city might do. I think the chances of the city doing something crazy like trying to shut us all down are extremely low at best (this isn't Houston and no one is suggesting we raise a public effort - THAT would be most likely to cause us trouble). I think the potential gain for us girls is worth the risk. I think the risk is low enough to make it worth a try.

StrayStripper
05-12-2007, 06:13 AM
Only way we've got a chance is to quietly get regulation making it much more difficult to be a stripper.

There are too many girls who are not stripper material and yet are still hired. It just kills me.

Bridgette
05-12-2007, 06:18 AM
^Yes ma'am, but tougher regulation will cut down on that alot. Because marginal girls will be less inclined/able to pay the fee. Believe me, that problem over here is waaaaaaayy worse than over there.

Dirty Ernie
05-12-2007, 11:09 AM
The market, itself, will never correct this situation to the goal Bridg is after. She wants to restrict the supply side to the point where those on the supply side can begin to regulate what the market is offering ( better looking dancers, more money and no extras). A market flooded with too many strippers leads to even lower prices, less money, or more "bang for the buck" because the demand side has so many choices. This may lead to the market being balanced by dancers leaving (the good ones) or more custies/johns entering the market now that the available commodity has changed (extras).

I think the idea of whiteknighting an ordinance to benefit the industry, from the dancer's aspect, disguised as a sin tax is devilishly brilliant but fraught with unknown or unintended consequences.

Good luck, tho, B

ExoticEngineer
05-12-2007, 11:22 AM
Ugh, it hurts my head to think about it too much. What I do know is my stripper shelf life would last much longer if I didn't have to be in combat with the extra's girls, who out number the non at msot of the clubs I have been to, and the HUGE SWARM OF STUPID STRIPPERS! Ack!

It's killing my income, my drive and my joy for this job. Yes, at one point I really did enjoy my job.

So B, make some magic happen woman! ;D

suzieK
05-12-2007, 12:07 PM
How much of the $10 do the clubs take an AZ??? All of it???In the city of industry, there is no volume....and the dances are $20 but you only take $10 of it after house payout and tipout.

Bridgette
05-12-2007, 03:52 PM
How much of the $10 do the clubs take an AZ??? All of it???In the city of industry, there is no volume....and the dances are $20 but you only take $10 of it after house payout and tipout.Right now, after my payouts I go home with around $8 of each $10 dance I do.



And EE, to answer your question from your previous post, yes it does irritate me that clubowners run things the way they do. It's an extremely short-sighted way to manage because oversupplying the market can only cause problems no one wants. Customers get pissed off and leave when there are too many girls pestering them constantly for dances. Desperation sets in and too many girls start providing way too much for a "dance", and that further drives away stripclub customers who come in to buy drinks, dances and party, and attracts johns who are only interested in some kind of sex. As we've seen in Houston, that shit is just BEGGING for trouble. I'd rather see some regulation to control this before it gets totally out of hand.


*runs off to do some research*

ExoticEngineer
05-12-2007, 04:23 PM
*THIS JUST IN*

My adorable little club, which I love, even though it has rampant extra's going on, informed me that I will no longer be able to keep a custy in the VIP for an extended amount of time unless 1. He checks me out for the time 2. he buys a bottle of Champagne after a certain amount of time AND 3. I pay $20 for every hour I spend with said customer in the VIP. This in NOT the CR and that 20 is on top of the $10 I pay every night to use the damn VIP room.

WTF is wrong with people?!?!?!? You hire WAY too many girls! HALF of them have no reason to be on that stage, you keep rasing our fees and changing our rules and turning your head to all the PROSTITUTION going on!

*breath*

I'm so not happy. :(

evan_essence
05-12-2007, 11:37 PM
I know many people are afraid of what the city might do.Ya know, my initial concerns over that point are lessening as I realize that: 1) the situation you describe is so shitty now that it's going to drive out you and dancers like you if nothing is done, so how could even a bad result be much worse, and 2) creating a situation in which the city is dependant on strippers for an estimated $200,000 to $400,000 a year in revenues is good incentive for officials NOT to shut the clubs down. Under that scenario, they are far more likely to turn a blind eye to minor problems or soften any enforcement. In effect, this proposal establishes a legal system of bribing the city.

Given the potential for higher dance prices and fewer extras, is it any wonder that some of the objections posted here are coming from customers?

-Ev

Bridgette
05-13-2007, 12:00 AM
is it any wonder that some of the objections posted here are coming from customers?Nope. Because like I said several posts ago, they're afraid they might have to *god forbid* start paying the long-established national standard price here. This idea threatens their ability to continue demanding higher and higher contact for HALF PRICE, so *of course* they don't like it.

As for some of the girls not liking it either, well of course. This isn't going to be helpful to those who are either marginal earners or fly-by-nighters and they don't like it. As I've said a few times now, I don't care, and neither do the majority of us who work here. We *want* those girls out. Those of us who depend on this business for our livelihood are interested in protecting our livelihoods first and foremost. If that comes at the expense of some who only like to dance occasionally or whatever, fine - I'm sure they aren't thinking of *our* well-being when they invade our clubs at the worst possible times ::) We invest our time, energy and money into this year-round, so I reckon we deserve the benefits more than the holiday girls and clubhoppers. Thankyouverymuch!

dollyrocker
05-13-2007, 07:47 AM
There are too many girls who are not stripper material and yet are still hired. It just kills me.

Tell me about it! I made a long post in this thread regarding this. In a nutshell, lower tier clubs in PHX are particularly flooded with them. Greedy management just wants the damn house fees I guess.

For example, the main club I'm hired at, despite saying they want to up their dancer quality, recently hired a bald chick who wears no makeup and has bones popping out everywhere. :'( She grosses the customers out, and took home like, $7.00 a shift. Needless to say she already quit. But theres plenty of other nasties in town that don't. I don't claim to be the spitting image of perfection, but man, I'd love nothing more than to NOT see chicks like that on stage! Sure, they make me look even better, but they have to be driving some customers away. And I hate when they come up to me to whine about not making $, grrrrr!

Richard_Head
05-13-2007, 08:48 AM
Given the potential for higher dance prices and fewer extras, is it any wonder that some of the objections posted here are coming from customers?I haven't seen many objections here, just words of caution to be careful about what you wish for. Sure there would fewer girls to compete against and you'd make more money per dance but my guess is that the outcome would also lead to the following: fewer customers, higher house fees, more contact, harder sales and an awakened city hall. While it is certainly understandable to want to make more money for the services provided (who doesn't want that?) it just seems a bit naive to me to think that you can completely change the dynamic that has existed for years and not realize that there could be some negative consequences to that change as well.

Bridgette
05-13-2007, 12:53 PM
And maybe it's a little too negative to think it's impossible to make things better than they are now. Because it flat sucks now.

MissK
05-13-2007, 01:59 PM
Looks like the only clubs here that are actually ok with $20 dances are the nude clubs. And I say $20 is no where enough for FULL nudity >:( ! ESPECIALLY with high mileage here? Not uh, I don't think so.

MissK

Richard_Head
05-13-2007, 04:17 PM
And maybe it's a little too negative to think it's impossible to make things better than they are now. Because it flat sucks now.Knock yourself out, I think you'll be swimming up stream though. I think most of the problems mentioned involve shitty management more than anything. Address that and you'd have a better chance at changing things for the better. I think you'd be better off gaining some investors and starting your own club, I'm serious about that too, hell I'd go.


Looks like the only clubs here that are actually ok with $20 dances are the nude clubs. And I say $20 is no where enough for FULL nudity >:( ! ESPECIALLY with high mileage here? Not uh, I don't think so.

MissKActually there are $20 dances offered at Babe's, Bourbon Street, Sonny's & Christies Cabaret to name just a few (granted, all of them do also offer $10 dances). And where can I get one of these high mileage $20 full nude dances that you speak of?

doc-catfish
05-13-2007, 05:34 PM
Ya know, my initial concerns over that point are lessening as I realize that: 1) the situation you describe is so shitty now that it's going to drive out you and dancers like you if nothing is done, so how could even a bad result be much worse, and 2) creating a situation in which the city is dependant on strippers for an estimated $200,000 to $400,000 a year in revenues is good incentive for officials NOT to shut the clubs down. Under that scenario, they are far more likely to turn a blind eye to minor problems or soften any enforcement. In effect, this proposal establishes a legal system of bribing the city.
What you're forgetting is that we still live in a time where a public official, even one deep down supports, or at has no problem with SOB's can't be on the record of publicly supporting them. Even going so much to suggest that taxes raised from them being OPEN could help fund the city coffers is too out of bounds for a lot of voters to accept.

And I'm sorry, but to a large city like Phoenix, $200-400K in revenue is a drop in the bucket. They could probably raise the hotel ocuupancy tax out there an extra 50 cents per room and make WAY more than that.

As far as raising dance prices, well...the market ought to regulate that. Set the price too high and customers won't buy. Set it too low and dancers won't want to work for it. I don't know exactly what the market dynamics are out there, but if you have a city where clubs are charging half of "long-established national standard price", and the clubs are flooded with girls, even girls coming from areas with higher priced dances like LA and Vegas, well I think that speaks volumes. But move it up if you wish. Yes, there are going to be some unhappy parties whose feelings get hurt. But business shouldn't be about feelings, it should be about mathematics. 20x10 and 10x20 equals the same thing right?

I do not get why some people to think that the government, an entity that belongs to everyone and feeds off everyone's tax dollars, should intercede on their behalf and enact regulation that would give them preferential treatment over someone else for no other reason than their own economic self interest. Whatever happened to voting with your feet?

All I can say is, that as long as most SC's are under the ownership of dubious individuals who are mired in other nefarious activities, and as long as it is convenient for public officials to use SOB's as their whipping boy every time they need an issue to run on, this thread is all wishful thinking.