Log in

View Full Version : Houston, Tx currently?



Pages : 1 [2]

BalletBaby
09-08-2007, 02:33 PM
It doesnt' he just kikes to etll how much fun hes has for $10 dnacers. whatevera

Star Player
09-08-2007, 02:45 PM
Ok, how the hell does that relate to HOUSTON, other than the fact that some girls in both towns may wear bikinis at work?::)


There is always potential for much more customer mileage in a bikinig club. Since the dances are only $10 in many ways the girls can make more money as custies fall into a zone which loosens the wallet. If Centerfolds were to become a club similar to Imperial Theatre in LA, I probably would go there more - my SC money would go further and I know the mileage would be good. Plus I would be so exicted to c all the sexy young bikini girls anxious to meet me and give me dances.

Frankly bikini clubs can improve dancer earnings opportunities and lessen the pressure guys seeking OTC may exert. In the $20 clubs in Houston, the average girls face a number of bad days or zero earnings days and lots of pressure from guys who don't buy dances who instead are just soliciting OTC.

In coaching a dancer, I would suggest really sexy outfits (like bikinis), spending more time at the customers table, and giving him some time to get a couple of drinks (loosen up) before soliciting dances, especially in a $20 dance club (find out what the customer is really after or about, not just some canned line like he is a widget on an assembly line). In a lot of $20 clubs I expect the dancer to sit with me cuddling, conversation before I will buy any dances. If she does not think I am interesting enough to talk to like a date for at least half hr, well then I don't think she is worth spending $20 on per dance. The really good ones know how to work this angle (soom so good EWG that I can not wait even 10 minutes to get dances with them somewhere more private). In a $10 club my expectations for "date time" may not be as stringent, especially if a free lunch is thown in.

In Houston, the girls have to be really competetive to get our money. I spend upwards of $1000 a month on strip clubbing (or related activities) and in a good month where my rare coin business has had good sales, multiples of that.

Star Player
09-08-2007, 02:46 PM
I guess I just love bikini clubs.

gingerlee
09-08-2007, 08:22 PM
In a lot of $20 clubs I expect the dancer to sit with me cuddling, conversation before I will buy any dances. If she does not think I am interesting enough to talk to like a date for at least half hr, well then I don't think she is worth spending $20 on per dance. The really good ones know how to work this angle (soom so good EWG that I can not wait even 10 minutes to get dances with them somewhere more private). In a $10 club my expectations for "date time" may not be as stringent, especially if a free lunch is thown in.


Half an hour of cuddling and talking for a $20 dance? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

And this is totally OT but could you please refrain from giving us advice on how to do our jobs unless we are asking for it? It's annoying as hell, and honestly your advice sucks. We don't care. Really, we don't.

/threadjack over.

PookaShell
09-08-2007, 09:25 PM
I just left Houston in May of this year, and was a clean dancer at a club that could get pretty dirty. I didn't make nearly as much as the other girls that were doing the nasty but I rarely made below $300, which to me is decent enough. Its a hard place to handle, emotionally, but financially its still an okay place if you can put up with it.

San antonio is latex/full bottoms and a pain in my ass. It is s-l-o-w here, and ALOT of out of town girls have come in for the summer for some reason. But hopefully it will pick up soon.

petitegirlxoxo
09-09-2007, 04:03 AM
full bottom and latex is starting to be inforced in most clubs around here too. emotional issues are tricky in this business for me too, but it's not as bad here as it is in new york and las vegas in my opinion anyways. but it could just be that i'm used to working in my hometown. Now is probably not the best time for those of you who are reading this thread and thinking about coming out here to work.

austinatalie
09-12-2007, 07:51 PM
In a lot of $20 clubs I expect the dancer to sit with me cuddling, conversation before I will buy any dances. If she does not think I am interesting enough to talk to like a date for at least half hr, well then I don't think she is worth spending $20 on per dance.

you want somebody to sit with you for 30 minutes before getting a $20 dance? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I'm glad I momentarily overlooked you being on my ignore list (and clicked 'view post')for that one...


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Tina
09-12-2007, 08:43 PM
For those of you who never worked in Houston, the market there is more geared to time and company, versus table to table hustling. The DJ's even back the songs up if guys are tipping.

If a girl makes $400-$500, she most likely made it off of 2-3 customers. Girls don't hustle there. They sit. That is what the guys are used to. it's hard to sit for one song and go for the dances there.

If you can't find several guys a shift to spend $100-$200+ on you, you may go home with gas money.

BalletBaby
09-12-2007, 09:29 PM
The DJ's even back the songs up if guys are tipping.


I fucking HATED that. I worked with one DJ who would tell the guys to hurry up and not tip the last 10 seconds of a song. Everytime the DJ has to back the song up for a girl, it means all the girls giving lapdances spend extra time dancing. If they back up songs repeatedly you're starting to do dances for free.

miabella
09-12-2007, 10:47 PM
I fucking HATED that. I worked with one DJ who would tell the guys to hurry up and not tip the last 10 seconds of a song. Everytime the DJ has to back the song up for a girl, it means all the girls giving lapdances spend extra time dancing. If they back up songs repeatedly you're starting to do dances for free.

if the dj backed a song up more than a minute, that was a new damn song as far as i was concerned. guys didn't really care if all the songs sounded the same, for the most part.

austinatalie
09-13-2007, 12:19 AM
^^ as soon as i hear the song gets backed up, i stop dancing. To me, it means the song was over anyway.

GnBeret
09-14-2007, 12:47 AM
that was the major argument of the lawsuit, the clubs were not "grandfathered" so not sure what happens now. I think they have to at least allow the clubs a certain amount of time to operate to recover the cost of moving or something like that...I could be wrong...

Although it's possibile, albeit unlikely, that the clubs will decide to stop fighting the ordinance and agree to relocate by some specified date in the not too distant future in exchange for the city's allowing them to continue to operate in the interim while their future locations are being prepared, built, etc., they are several other (and, more likely) options still available for them to pursue. To begin with, whether the clubs were (or, if not, had a right to be) exempted (i.e., "grandfathered") from the changes made to the ordinance which literally resulted in their inability to comply with same immediately upon its taking effect, and whether the city's decision not to "grandfather" the existing clubs such that they can no longer continue to operate legally constitutes a 'taking' (i.e., for the most part, the government cannot 'take' your property - figuratively or literally - without paying you 'just compensation,' e.g., 'fair market value.' Although the issue of the clubs entitlement to being "grandfathered" in under the ordinance has, for all intents and purposes, effectively been decided, the 'taking' issue is still very much an open question. And, that being the case, it's quite likely that the city will agree to hold off on fully enforcing the ordinance across the board against all of the affected clubs in exchange for one of the clubs agreeing to immediately file and expeditiously pursue a taking claim in a 'test case' - 'cause should the city force all of the affected clubs to close and subsequently lose on the issue, it would be liable for the fair market value of each and every one of them as a 'going-concern,' i.e., as an up and running, fully licensed and legal business... and, in the case of clubs like Treasures, Gold Cup, etc., that equates to a whole Hell of lot more money than the city can afford to run the very real risk of being held to pay - especially across the board all at once. Regardless, though, the most likely option that the clubs will choose to pursue for the reasonably foreseeable future (12 - 18, and quite possibly even as much as 30 - 36 months or so) is to continue to play the 'cat and mouse' game of "ordinance doesn't apply if girls are in bikinis, etc., to hopefully buy themselves enough time by dragging the ultimate resolution of the whole mess out long enough for them to reach an agreement with the city (read: those who hold political/LE positions in city government/police department that come with enough power to substantially affect not only the laws under which the clubs have to operate but, equally, if not more importantly, the degree to which same are enforced regardless of their actual content) re the underlying cause of this entire mess, i.e., the $$ amount of the payoff that the clubs will have to agree to come up with in order for the city to "call the dogs off," so to speak. In this regard, to make a long story short, the Treasures debaucle of a couple years ago afforded the city an opportunity to get a detailed look at the actual amounts of monies flowing through the clubs and it turned out that it was significantly higher than the amounts the payoff recipients had previously been led to believe. And, that being the case, the amount the clubs would thereafter be required to pay was adjusted accordingly (assumedly - although may well have been more than accordingly to make up for the amounts the clubs had failed to pay prior to that time due to their success at concealing the amounts of their actual revenue streams from the city) - at which time the clubs promptly 'balked,' which effectively brings us full circle to the current state of affairs. IOW, the city, which has no real interest in shutting the clubs down, and the clubs, which have a litany of legitimate reasons for resisting any forced closure/relocation, have been abd currently still are engaged in a somewhat mutually-suicidal game of 'chicken,' which has gone way further and become much more 'public' than either ever anticipated, much less actually wanted it to go... that said, between the crackdown and the city's concommitant reduction in the payoff amounts, both have been hemoraging lots of blood on the floor for at good 6+ months now and, while there's no indication that either side's going to give in to other anywhere in the immediate future, I tend to believe we're closer to a settlement of the whole mess which will effectively result in a pre-Treasures raid 'status quo' than we are to the start of it - IOW, sometime between now and next fall one or both of them will come off their position and they'll agree on an amount acceptable to both... and after a short respite to clean things up with the public and adjust/change ordinances, etc., where necessary, everything will basically return to the way it was before the dispute occurred (hopefully!).

GnBeret
09-14-2007, 12:48 AM
that was the major argument of the lawsuit, the clubs were not "grandfathered" so not sure what happens now. I think they have to at least allow the clubs a certain amount of time to operate to recover the cost of moving or something like that...I could be wrong...

Although it's possibile, albeit unlikely, that the clubs will decide to stop fighting the ordinance and agree to relocate by some specified date in the not too distant future in exchange for the city's allowing them to continue to operate in the interim while their future locations are being prepared, built, etc., they are several other (and, more likely) options still available for them to pursue. To begin with, whether the clubs were (or, if not, had a right to be) exempted (i.e., "grandfathered") from the changes made to the ordinance which literally resulted in their inability to comply with same immediately upon its taking effect, and whether the city's decision not to "grandfather" the existing clubs such that they can no longer continue to operate legally constitutes a 'taking' (i.e., for the most part, the government cannot 'take' your property - figuratively or literally - without paying you 'just compensation,' e.g., 'fair market value.' Although the issue of the clubs entitlement to being "grandfathered" in under the ordinance has, for all intents and purposes, effectively been decided, the 'taking' issue is still very much an open question. And, that being the case, it's quite likely that the city will agree to hold off on fully enforcing the ordinance across the board against all of the affected clubs in exchange for one of the clubs agreeing to immediately file and expeditiously pursue a taking claim in a 'test case' - 'cause should the city force all of the affected clubs to close and subsequently lose on the issue, it would be liable for the fair market value of each and every one of them as a 'going-concern,' i.e., as an up and running, fully licensed and legal business... and, in the case of clubs like Treasures, Gold Cup, etc., that equates to a whole Hell of lot more money than the city can afford to run the very real risk of being held to pay - especially across the board all at once. Regardless, though, the most likely option that the clubs will choose to pursue for the reasonably foreseeable future (12 - 18, and quite possibly even as much as 30 - 36 months or so) is to continue to play the 'cat and mouse' game of "ordinance doesn't apply if girls are in bikinis, etc., to hopefully buy themselves enough time by dragging the ultimate resolution of the whole mess out long enough for them to reach an agreement with the city (read: those who hold political/LE positions in city government/police department that come with enough power to substantially affect not only the laws under which the clubs have to operate but, equally, if not more importantly, the degree to which same are enforced regardless of their actual content) re the underlying cause of this entire mess, i.e., the $$ amount of the payoff that the clubs will have to agree to come up with in order for the city to "call the dogs off," so to speak. In this regard, to make a long story short, the Treasures debaucle of a couple years ago afforded the city an opportunity to get a detailed look at the actual amounts of monies flowing through the clubs and it turned out that it was significantly higher than the amounts the payoff recipients had previously been led to believe. And, that being the case, the amount the clubs would thereafter be required to pay was adjusted accordingly (assumedly - although may well have been more than accordingly to make up for the amounts the clubs had failed to pay prior to that time due to their success at concealing the amounts of their actual revenue streams from the city) - at which time the clubs promptly 'balked,' which effectively brings us full circle to the current state of affairs. IOW, the city, which has no real interest in shutting the clubs down, and the clubs, which have a litany of legitimate reasons for resisting any forced closure/relocation, have been abd currently still are engaged in a somewhat mutually-suicidal game of 'chicken,' which has gone way further and become much more 'public' than either ever anticipated, much less actually wanted it to go... that said, between the crackdown and the city's concommitant reduction in the payoff amounts, both have been hemoraging lots of blood on the floor for at good 6+ months now and, while there's no indication that either side's going to give in to other anywhere in the immediate future, I tend to believe we're closer to a settlement of the whole mess which will effectively result in a pre-Treasures raid 'status quo' than we are to the start of it - IOW, sometime between now and next fall one or both of them will come off their position and they'll agree on an amount acceptable to both... and after a short respite to clean things up with the public and adjust/change ordinances, etc., where necessary, everything will basically return to the way it was before the dispute occurred (hopefully!).

miabella
09-14-2007, 01:06 AM
huh. you know, i honestly never considered the possibility that the clubs were skimping on their payoff monies. i guess i'm the optimist when it comes to human nature, although the way you put it, it seems like we all should have presumed that from the start...

WiseGuy_TX
09-14-2007, 05:35 AM
....a 'taking' (i.e., for the most part, the government cannot 'take' your property - figuratively or literally - without paying you 'just compensation,' e.g., 'fair market value.' .......

.....(assumedly - although may well have been more than accordingly to make up for the amounts the clubs had failed to pay prior to that time due to their success at concealing the amounts of their actual revenue streams from the city)

.....I tend to believe we're closer to a settlement of the whole mess which will effectively result in a pre-Treasures raid 'status quo' than we are to the start of it - IOW, sometime between now and next fall one or both of them will come off their position and they'll agree on an amount acceptable to both......interesting concept. Governmental extortion through eminent domain.

gingerlee
09-14-2007, 09:21 AM
GnBeret, you probably have some great points, but those were the longest paragraphs I have seen in a while. I can't sit there and read them, and I'm a patient person. It will probably be better received if you edit them so they make more sense.

ascifilullaby
09-14-2007, 04:54 PM
Well it seems to me money has gone down in Houston because the customers who pay attention to the news (typically those with higher dispensable income) have been going to strip club less and less because of the fear of raids and whatnot, because the people who I guess... aren't the type to watch/read the news are still coming in, but they are not the spenders.
At my club it's still pretty easy for me to make $500+ any Friday or Saturday in the 6-7 hours I'm at work, but weekdays have been VERY slow and I've had a few $150-300 nights when a few months ago it was also pretty easy for me to pull $400+ nearly every weekday night.
That's been the same for everyone at my club apparently, as every weeknight I see a lot of girls sitting around at the bar, or in the dressing room, complaining about only making $50 that night after tipout, more and more of them getting drunk in frustration, and more and more extras girls coming from other clubs where the money was even worse.

miabella
09-14-2007, 05:44 PM
GnBeret's post is basically that stripclubs and cops are like the IRS and dancers claiming to make 2k per night.

the cops have found out that *some* stripclubs bring in waaay more money than they were paying bribes on, and now they want the same kind of percentage from all the clubs, even if the smaller ones don't secretly earn more than they've been claiming to earn.

just like the IRS wants more taxes from all dancers in a club because *some* claimed to make 2k a night and not pay enough tax on it.

Star Player
09-15-2007, 12:21 PM
I have found it business as usual here at the Houston clubs. Lately, I have been enjoying Treasures and Centerfolds. The Ritz is another of my favorites.

WiseGuy_TX
09-15-2007, 07:57 PM
...while it may seem business as usual, rumor is, Treasures was visited yesterday by TABC and several public intoxication tickets were issued.

423texas
09-15-2007, 08:31 PM
...while it may seem business as usual, rumor is, Treasures was visited yesterday by TABC and several public intoxication tickets were issued.

WiseGuy_Tx, You are right on top of things.

These days I spend more time and money in Centerfolds than Treasures,

Does the above count as a bust? Does vice come in with hoods like a swat team, or is it more laid back?

Do you know if it was dancers, customers or both that were cited for PI?

Thanks!

AngelinaHouston
09-15-2007, 10:31 PM
Although it's possibile, albeit unlikely, that the clubs will decide to stop fighting the ordinance and agree to relocate by some specified date in the not too distant future in exchange for the city's allowing them to continue to operate in the interim while their future locations are being prepared, built, etc., they are several other (and, more likely) options still available for them to pursue. To begin with, whether the clubs were (or, if not, had a right to be) exempted (i.e., "grandfathered") from the changes made to the ordinance which literally resulted in their inability to comply with same immediately upon its taking effect, and whether the city's decision not to "grandfather" the existing clubs such that they can no longer continue to operate legally constitutes a 'taking' (i.e., for the most part, the government cannot 'take' your property - figuratively or literally - without paying you 'just compensation,' e.g., 'fair market value.' Although the issue of the clubs entitlement to being "grandfathered" in under the ordinance has, for all intents and purposes, effectively been decided, the 'taking' issue is still very much an open question. And, that being the case, it's quite likely that the city will agree to hold off on fully enforcing the ordinance across the board against all of the affected clubs in exchange for one of the clubs agreeing to immediately file and expeditiously pursue a taking claim in a 'test case' - 'cause should the city force all of the affected clubs to close and subsequently lose on the issue, it would be liable for the fair market value of each and every one of them as a 'going-concern,' i.e., as an up and running, fully licensed and legal business... and, in the case of clubs like Treasures, Gold Cup, etc., that equates to a whole Hell of lot more money than the city can afford to run the very real risk of being held to pay - especially across the board all at once. Regardless, though, the most likely option that the clubs will choose to pursue for the reasonably foreseeable future (12 - 18, and quite possibly even as much as 30 - 36 months or so) is to continue to play the 'cat and mouse' game of "ordinance doesn't apply if girls are in bikinis, etc., to hopefully buy themselves enough time by dragging the ultimate resolution of the whole mess out long enough for them to reach an agreement with the city (read: those who hold political/LE positions in city government/police department that come with enough power to substantially affect not only the laws under which the clubs have to operate but, equally, if not more importantly, the degree to which same are enforced regardless of their actual content) re the underlying cause of this entire mess, i.e., the $$ amount of the payoff that the clubs will have to agree to come up with in order for the city to "call the dogs off," so to speak. In this regard, to make a long story short, the Treasures debaucle of a couple years ago afforded the city an opportunity to get a detailed look at the actual amounts of monies flowing through the clubs and it turned out that it was significantly higher than the amounts the payoff recipients had previously been led to believe. And, that being the case, the amount the clubs would thereafter be required to pay was adjusted accordingly (assumedly - although may well have been more than accordingly to make up for the amounts the clubs had failed to pay prior to that time due to their success at concealing the amounts of their actual revenue streams from the city) - at which time the clubs promptly 'balked,' which effectively brings us full circle to the current state of affairs. IOW, the city, which has no real interest in shutting the clubs down, and the clubs, which have a litany of legitimate reasons for resisting any forced closure/relocation, have been abd currently still are engaged in a somewhat mutually-suicidal game of 'chicken,' which has gone way further and become much more 'public' than either ever anticipated, much less actually wanted it to go... that said, between the crackdown and the city's concommitant reduction in the payoff amounts, both have been hemoraging lots of blood on the floor for at good 6+ months now and, while there's no indication that either side's going to give in to other anywhere in the immediate future, I tend to believe we're closer to a settlement of the whole mess which will effectively result in a pre-Treasures raid 'status quo' than we are to the start of it - IOW, sometime between now and next fall one or both of them will come off their position and they'll agree on an amount acceptable to both... and after a short respite to clean things up with the public and adjust/change ordinances, etc., where necessary, everything will basically return to the way it was before the dispute occurred (hopefully!).

Ok, simple English will suffice..... and use paragraphs!

AngelinaHouston
09-15-2007, 10:34 PM
There is always potential for much more customer mileage in a bikinig club. Since the dances are only $10 in many ways the girls can make more money as custies fall into a zone which loosens the wallet. If Centerfolds were to become a club similar to Imperial Theatre in LA, I probably would go there more - my SC money would go further and I know the mileage would be good. Plus I would be so exicted to c all the sexy young bikini girls anxious to meet me and give me dances.

Frankly bikini clubs can improve dancer earnings opportunities and lessen the pressure guys seeking OTC may exert. In the $20 clubs in Houston, the average girls face a number of bad days or zero earnings days and lots of pressure from guys who don't buy dances who instead are just soliciting OTC.

In coaching a dancer, I would suggest really sexy outfits (like bikinis), spending more time at the customers table, and giving him some time to get a couple of drinks (loosen up) before soliciting dances, especially in a $20 dance club (find out what the customer is really after or about, not just some canned line like he is a widget on an assembly line). In a lot of $20 clubs I expect the dancer to sit with me cuddling, conversation before I will buy any dances. If she does not think I am interesting enough to talk to like a date for at least half hr, well then I don't think she is worth spending $20 on per dance. The really good ones know how to work this angle (soom so good EWG that I can not wait even 10 minutes to get dances with them somewhere more private). In a $10 club my expectations for "date time" may not be as stringent, especially if a free lunch is thown in.

In Houston, the girls have to be really competetive to get our money. I spend upwards of $1000 a month on strip clubbing (or related activities) and in a good month where my rare coin business has had good sales, multiples of that.

Why is it that customers always feel like they have to brag about how much money they have or have spent? As if they expect us to jump thourgh a ring of fire or something for it. If it's not in our hands.... it means nothing.

What you fail to realize is that we do not want to work twice as hard for the same money. My body gets beat up enough with the dances I give. You think I want to kill myself for some jerkoff who brags on spending $1000 a month???

miabella
09-15-2007, 10:35 PM
i posted a 'short version' of Gnberet's post up above.

although my synopsis only covers the bits that are relevant to dancers specifically.

423texas
09-17-2007, 08:05 PM
FWIW:

Today I had lunch with a friend who owns a little SC.

He said that other than the dancers wearing full bottoms and latex, nothing has changed.

I asked him if these "Bikini bars" are covered under SOB restrictions. He said not in his opinion, and he is even considering opening up a Spanish BYOB Bikini bar which he called a "PapaGuayo" type of place.

AAMOF he thought that the SCs were lucky in that they are continuing to operate under the "Bikini bar" loophole. The XXX Video stores and All Nude clubs are not so lucky and he thought they would start to be closed down soon.

StrayStripper
09-22-2007, 05:38 PM
*sigh*

Houston strippers arrested.

BalletBaby
09-22-2007, 06:55 PM
Wait, so what were they arrested for?

Corgan
11-29-2007, 12:31 AM
sorry to revive an old thread but really, why were they arrested?

BalletBaby
11-29-2007, 12:38 AM
The most it says in the article is "for violating statutes governing sexually oriented businesses" and "misdemeanor charges".

Corgan
11-29-2007, 01:02 AM
^ maybe not having thier licence displayed??

WiseGuy_TX
11-29-2007, 06:50 AM
...same shit Corgan. Seems like every club in town has a few girls with no license, license not displayed, breaking 3 foot rule, doing some kind of extra, getting drunk, etc... Cops could give speeding tickets all day long since we all speed and they could arrest girls all day long over stupid ordinance infractions. Corgan, you're past posts suggest you've been wanting to leave Beaumont for some time. Go for it. Things will be OK.

Corgan
11-29-2007, 07:07 AM
^ it's just that i'm not an airdancer. at all.

i don't want to get arrested for giving a normal lapdance.

BalletBaby
11-29-2007, 11:15 AM
It's rumored that if you wear pasties and full-backs there is no three foot rule. Anyone know if this is true?

Katrine
11-29-2007, 07:25 PM
Ladies, there might still be hope for Houston after all!

http://www.aspd.net/showthread.php?threadid=297226

It sounds like some opportunities are popping up. If the aspd biggestpiecesofshitscumbagsasseaters are unhappy...Kat is VERY, VERY happy!!

Although this one thread doesn't nec. mean its going to be easy money or light contact in Htown, I do know several people in oil who are doing very well right now. Could be an opportunity!

BalletBaby
11-29-2007, 07:37 PM
Ladies, there might still be hope for Houston after all!

http://www.aspd.net/showthread.php?threadid=297226

It sounds like some opportunities are popping up. If the aspd biggestpiecesofshitscumbagsasseaters are unhappy...Kat is VERY, VERY happy!!

Although this one thread doesn't nec. mean its going to be easy money or light contact in Htown, I do know several people in oil who are doing very well right now. Could be an opportunity!

That makes two of us ;D

WiseGuy_TX
11-29-2007, 07:46 PM
It's rumored that if you wear pasties and full-backs there is no three foot rule. Anyone know if this is true?...absolutely not true. If you are an entertainer as defined by the ordinance in an SOB as defined by the ordinance then the 3 foot rule applies as defined by the ordinance. If a club is not an SOB as defined by the ordinance and you are not entertaining as defined by the ordinance and you are wearing opaque pasties/bottoms then the 3 foot rule does not apply.... hence like a Bikini bar ....hence like a Hooters restaurant. The fact that some clubs are letting girls work unlicensed if they wear pasties/bottoms does nothing to protect them from vice.

BalletBaby
11-29-2007, 07:50 PM
Ahhhhh gotcha. A bikini bar is not an SOB, which means the rule wouldn't apply. Makes sense now.

lizlizliz
11-29-2007, 10:13 PM
Ladies, there might still be hope for Houston after all!

http://www.aspd.net/showthread.php?threadid=297226

It sounds like some opportunities are popping up. If the aspd biggestpiecesofshitscumbagsasseaters are unhappy...Kat is VERY, VERY happy!!

Although this one thread doesn't nec. mean its going to be easy money or light contact in Htown, I do know several people in oil who are doing very well right now. Could be an opportunity!

i read that thread and it just about made me sick.

granted, i've been tossing my cookies all day, but still. gross.

Corgan
11-29-2007, 11:15 PM
oil = the reason i don't want to move to austin yet.

Melonie
11-30-2007, 07:06 PM
there's a lot of truth in one of the more rational ASPDers comments ...

"As to where all the talent went? I think it's all been mopped up by the traders. The girls are on sugar daddy's payroll now for $10k a month. And as for the new talent? Well they don't even have a chance to get to be dancers, b/c the traders are picking them up early at the nightclubs and putting them on retainers too. "

I used to love to dance in Houston a few years ago, before LE started getting serious. To some degree I agree with this guy's theory that a lot of the 'class act' big money action has now moved out of the clubs and into 'private venues'. As this ASPD guy also pointed out, guys getting million dollar Christmas bonuses don't need to take risks with 'unfamiliar' dancers in 'middle class' strip clubs.

Katrine
12-01-2007, 09:03 AM
Houston used to be good money, with all of the travellers and oil people. It was always high contact, but relatively safe. Then the 3 foot laws came in and clubs started building those super-dark back corners and VIP area. Mind you, no bouncer or host patrolled the areas, and there was no price differential for the dances. All the custy had to do was pay for VIP membership or buy a bottle.

It completely facilitated prostitution in the clubs. Then the "executive retreats" started to pop up with Vegas-style bright lights, attracting the men to come in. Some of these places look JUST like stripclubs too!

Oh, add recession and Enron scandal to the equation, and Houston became a craphole. I think things might be getting better. Unfortunately, the LE threat is pretty scary for quality girls who have serious career aspirations.

Dammit, why didn't some oil tycoon snatch me up when I was dancing? LOL, I'm so stubborn I probably wouldn't have accepted, dumbass me!

Nameless
12-04-2007, 09:14 AM
breaking the 3 feet rule


sorry to revive an old thread but really, why were they arrested?