I don't think its falling, I think its changing.




I don't think its falling, I think its changing.




No, I don't fear that this industry is due to crumble. To be honest, I think it can only get better as more ideas get spread on how to maximize our success, along with superior technological advancements.
You get freeloaders who just want to see tits and ass. You get freeloaders who want to get off having had a request filled by a camgirl in free chat. You get freeloaders who are content to just sit and watch a camgirl do her free chat hustling. These will always be present in this industry for as long as things like free chat exists.1.) FREE CHAT NUDITY- I know this is too cliche but too much of it just attracts freeloaders & deters would-be-customers from spending in the first place
But this doesn't account for the masses who enjoy conversing with a camgirl and having her attention on account of the money he's paid up for a ton of reasons: companionship, someone to talk to, someone to indulge / explore in his fetish with, someone to order him around / order her around (dom / sub), financial domination, etc. Nothing beats the one on one interaction.
This is true, but if anything, a guy who downloads a clip from a camgirl who does her stuff may be more willing to pay out to have her fulfill his own personal requests on account of what he saw in the ripped clip. I'm not saying ripping is good, but it is an unfortunate product of our work which is almost inevitable. It's something we have to prepare ourselves for. However, guys come to camgirls for the exact reason that they WANT that interaction, and choose it over the masses of tube porn already out there for them to watch if they want to.2.) PRIVATE RECORDINGS- From previous customers who either record & save them for their personal possessions; thus they're not buying anymore future shows; and/or those which are being submitted to tube sites for free viewer ships by others. Either way we lose out.
If it already did replace the novelty of camgirls, we'd already all be completely out of business.
Not all men are like this, though. We can help remedy this by outlining our boundaries as much as possible. If a guy becomes obsessive or dwells constantly on meeting up with a camgirl or camgirls, it's his problem and he needs to deal with it and understand it's not gonna happen. But not all guys are like this and there's no reason for us to think this is on the rise, or will become the norm.3.) MEN'S ATTITUDES- Sometimes I feel like more men are becoming jaded b/c they realize that most likely their fantasies will not become realities. I think they feel cheated for spending money when all they get is failed attempts of meet-ups or "unrequitted love". YOU SHOULD READ LIVEJASMIN FORUMS FOR PROOF. (They advise each other to reduce their privates, testing camgirls to see if they're playing them, etc. THOSE MEN (CRYBABIES) ARE TRULY PATHETIC.
While this is true, the porn industry is still absolutely, brain-explodingly huge. It's hormones we are dealing with here: the power of sex. Unless it gets to the point that we can't afford any luxuries, I don't see this business crashing.4.) ECONOMY- with the financial uncertainties, fluctuating gas prices, unstable stock markets, unemployment, etc. I think people are spending mostly on necessities and not so much on leisure or luxuries too much anymore.
Oh..Those are my theories. Agreeing or disagreeing wouldn't change how I feel.





The margins are getting tighter, sure, but then we are in a gloomy economic period. It's the same for any industry at present.But think about all the new girls. They may be trending upward as far as company revenue, but I think individual performer revenue is trending downward.
I actually did a fair amount of economic analysis when deciding whether to keep my independently hosted webcam, versus going with an 'umbrella' webcam host. From a 'costs' standpoint, bandwidth isn't free. Right now the 50% 'cut' taken by 'umbrella' webcam hosts from highly popular high earning webcam girls is being used to 'subsidize' the bandwidth costs the 'umbrella' webcam host incurs from the 'free' content provided by webcam girls who aren't as popular and/or earn far less. As more and more girls enter the webcam business while total webcam customer spending remains fairly stagnant, the bandwidth costs incurred by 'umbrella' webcam hosts will increase with every new webcam girl while revenues from their 50% 'cut' do not. And the trend toward HD video only aggravates the problem since it requires more bandwidth per girl per minute.
IMHO this situation has already cut into 'umbrella' webcam host profit margins to the point where some are teetering on the edge of financial distress. Thus it's highly likely that future 'umbrella' webcam hosts are going to have to start charging the equivalent of 'house fees' from all webcam girls in order to more fairly assess the cost of bandwidth they are using to 'advertise' themselves.
This would fundamentally change the industry since webcam girls who were unable to sell enough 'paid' content to cover the bandwidth cost associated with their 'free' ( advertising ) content would essentially be driven out. Imagine this in terms of specifics ... suppose the 'umbrella' webcam host imposed a new $5 an hour bandwidth charge that would start accumulating for every hour that a particular webcam girl is online. If she's online for 8 hours thus a $40 bandwidth charge, she would then need to sell $80 worth of 'paid' content during those 8 hours in order to just 'break even'. This would obviously spur some webcam girls to start offering 'enticing' content in order to increase the probability that their average hourly 'paid' content sales exceed their hourly bandwidth 'bill', and would also prompt other webcam girls whose average hourly 'paid' content sales is too low for continued webcam operation to remain profitable versus having to pay a bandwidth charge to advertise themselves to drop out of the industry.
IMHO if and when bandwidth charges enter into the equation, the eventual outcome for webcams is likely to be exactly the same as it is becoming for live club dancers. The 'top shelf' talent will still do well, appealing to a comparatively small base of well to do customers setting high 'standards'. The 'dirty girls' will also still do well, although they may have to offer more 'bang for the buck' in order to continue appealing to mostly middle class customers who increasingly expect to 'get their money's worth'. And other girls who are unable to offer 'top shelf' content quality, and who are also unwilling to offer the necessary 'bang for the buck', are likely to face declining earnings thus eventually dropping out of the industry.
^I fully admit I had to read that 3x to understand it (not due to your own lack of clarity but my own 'durr' haze of the morning) - and I agree + have not spent much time thinking about bandwidth $ at all... which would be useful to do given the trend towards HD
Well said.
Thanks for this - this was one of the most useful critiques of webcamming as an industry Ive seen in awhile. I appreciate it.
(please post here more often? jk)
(no Im not)



I don't cam .. Still a dancer but I think recession never hits alcohol tobacco or sex industry
interesting Mel
but don't u think since the use of the net is massive allover worldwide everyday it would already be customized and we d b billed as in the past was with phone usage? bcs of that I don't think bwdth will become the next virtual house fee
as far as Romanians Eastern eu Asians etc whereas they are amazing young hot and attractive their rooms are almost empty if they aren't fluent in English
the eye candy status lasts a while for them but then no rapport= no customer lasting relshp




I'm sorry but wtf!!!!! this isnt even close to correct..... do you know how much they hit us for in percentage???? even the ugliest biggest monster on cam averages over $10 an hour....on the average. they take anywhere from 50% - 70% from us.....if they only charged $5 an hour i would Die Laughing......the over pay by the top girls pays for the rest......if they really had an issue with over spending due to bandwidth then they would just start banning the lower earners....... The contracts we sign are seriously made so they can do what they want.
Then you have sites where no one is earning like RUDE.com and they will just reduce the quality to trash like RUde.com
thats how MFC has all those girls online.....they keep the quality at lowest earnable point they can.....right now i've watched enough rooms to see its a site wide problem ... And they are tryin to give it a boost with a false HD
I feel like im in the French Revolution!!!!!! "Sooooo Many heads sooooo little time!!"



Not adding real value here but if the industry was to "die for me" then that would be my cue to bow and politely exit the stage... CTFU But it is one of the reasons I try to keep different jobs going, just for that type of case scenario from any job I do. You just never know when you will have to adapt/evolve/ or just move on. *shrug*
" Be Positive, Patient, and Productive after all we are all Perfect Pretty Princesses" XOXO
No Negative Nancy or Drama Queens Please, Thanks xoxo
"I let my haters be my motivators..Now we can settle this like you got some class or we can get into some gangsta shit."
![]()





Maybe I wasn't clear. I was talking about the 'umbrella' webcam host instituting a new $5 an hour charge for bandwidth that would be charged every hour the webcam girl is signed on ( irregarless of whether that webcam girl was attracting paying customers during those hours or not ) that would basically cover the bandwidth costs of the webcam girl's 'free' video stream ... a new bandwidth charge that would be deducted from the webcam girl's account IN ADDITION TO the 'umbrella' webcam host's 50% 'cut' of customer money the webcam girl receives for 'paid' performances.they take anywhere from 50% - 70% from us.....if they only charged $5 an hour i would Die Laughing......
Regarding your other point, indeed MFC is most likely struggling with insufficient revenues relative to the amount of bandwidth they are sourcing for both 'paid' and 'free' webcam video streams ... and MFC has chosen to 'cheese' the video quality to cut bandwidth related operating expenses overall. As was pointed out, it probably won't be long before their lower bandwidth lower quality video streams will render their 'product' unsalable ... due to increasing levels of HD video streaming being offered by other webcam hosting services. But every increase in 'industry standard' video quality makes bandwidth charges a more significant share of the webcam hosting services' overall cost of doing business. Adding more webcam girls and sourcing more 'free' video streams for those new girls, without also picking up more revenues via more customers actually paying for more 'private' shows, is a formula for economic disaster where the webcam hosting service is concerned. When that situation is realized / admitted, direct bandwidth charges to the webcam girls from the webcam hosting services are likely to quickly follow.
ummm .. no ! Voice phone service costs were never 'capacity limited', but webcam video bandwidth costs certainly are. And the onset of HD video only makes the bandwidth cost issue MORE of a factor.but don't u think since the use of the net is massive allover worldwide everyday it would already be customized and we d b billed as in the past was with phone usage?
Where 'large' bandwidth users are concerned, monthly bandwidth costs are a function of how much internet backbone bandwidth connection the 'large' user chooses to 'rent'. Wider / higher bandwidth means 'renting' more T1 / T3 / OC3 / DS3 etc. lines ( each of which provides X bandwidth and costs Y dollars per month ) to connect their video servers to the internet backbone. Because I was webmistress of my own website for a while I became much more familiar than I ever really wanted to be with such internet bandwidth cost issues. Obviously webcam girls using an 'umbrella' webcam host have never seen direct bandwidth bills, but the 'umbrella' webcam hosts certainly do every month ... and the webcam girls soon might !
~
Last edited by Melonie; 10-01-2011 at 01:24 PM.



As an eastern eu girl I second this. + most of these girls work from physical studios here. There they work for like 15 sites at once for the minimum per minute fee. They focus on quantity not quality. They simply cannot provide great service for that many sites. And mostly they don't even chat/talk, there is an operator there, who handles everything and tells them what to do or say. Guys want to talk to US, they don't like this operator thingie if they notice it.
So these girls are no real competitiors imho. Or they are if we are hunting for the broke-ass guys, who has no requirements, just wanna shoot their loads the fastest and cheapest way on ANYTHING.
I don't have time to read all of the responses right now, but this is a real downer of a post. The world can end in 2012, or we can all still be here making the best of what we have. The way I see it is I have been camming since 2008, the economy has been shit pretty much the last few years anyways. Regardless of how the economy seems to be, and considering the fact I haven't cammed at all really on a regular basis anyways because of my ex, now that I AM back on a regular basis, I did just as good this week since he has been gone, as I did when I first started on MFC. I think part of it has to do with the fact that I did push myself, to make a goal of at least $100 a night, I even made $300 the other night, I don't think camming is going anywhere. Not unless the government shuts it down, or it becomes illegal. Guys love sex, guys love women, guys love naked women, guys love the interaction they have with a beautiful woman, even if it is just online. We are being seen all over the world. For every freeloader out there, there is another guy making good money, and wanting to spoil us, and get themselves off and they do. I am pretty stoked at how well I did, and I only want to keep it positive, and work hard. I believe if we start thinking what if this, and what if that, life is going to pass us by, when instead we can just focus on our goals, and make our money. Life should be about being happy, and being able to work independently, and camming gives us that luxury. The day I see MFC with ZERO traffic, is the day I will be concerned. In the meantime, have fun and make money, and best of all keep it positive! Life is too short to dwell on the negative.
On that note thank you to the girls in the chat that was started, it has also kept me motivated, and on point, and I think I needed that. I think it's good if we just all support each other, and help out. Anything can happen in life. We aren't promised tomorrow. Let's embrace what we do have, and use that to our advantage.
![]()



As OJenni said it's not failing it's changing and as with any business you adapt or you become obsolete. You learn how to make the change work for you. I cam but rarely most of my money is made in phone sex on a site people say is dead. Well bank account looks alive. When internet porn took of people said it would kill phone sex. It didn't. Did a lot of phone sex companies fail? Yes. Did many PSO's quit? Yes Can you still bank as a PSO hell yeah?
I think it will be the same with camming. Cream rises. Those who can thrive in the downtime will flourish in the good times. Yes free nudity will kill your business if you only market yourself as another set of tits and ass. It's about guys wanting you. You have to take a desire for tits and ass and turn it into a NEED for YOU. So that the customer isn't satisfied with just some free vids. No he HAS to see YOU.
As to age, I'm 38 and damn if I don't keep getting hotter.It's all about how you take care of yourself, most people put me at ten years younger. Do I work to look good, you better believe it. The industry is here to stay in some form another, whether or not we stay in it or profit from it is up to us.
I actually believe that there is a giant leap forward for camming that is just around the corner. Virtual reality is moving ever closer to mainstream. Pretty soon guys will be able to wear a wristband or headgear...something...that will make them feel like they are being touched and feel like when they slide it in they are really sliding it in. Sensory overload...but the camgirls will provide the link to reality and the personal touch. We are 50 years away from artificial camgirls, so go ahead and plan your careers because we will be ok.
I stripped for 8 years. I didn't do the off the menu stuff, so I had to keep moving from new club to new club and actually flew to Vegas every week for the last year just because it was easier than my hometown at that point. But stripping is still here and it always will be. Times do change, but they go up as well as down. It's like real estate and the stock market.
I believe the best thing is to live in the here and now, and take advantage of new opportunities and technology as they arise. STDs will guarantee that camming sticks around. It's safer than real sex...and pretty soon it will be hard to distinguish between the two. That will be a whole different discussion about people losing touch with each other, lol.
My 6.5 cents. Sorry, I tend to ramble.
Sophia





^^^ Sophia, I'm actually in complete agreement with you point about improving 'virtual reality' technology leading to a very lucrative future market in perhaps a 10 year time frame. However, that does not cancel out the fact that the higher the 'quality' of the 'virtual reality' experience, beginning with today's HD, the more bandwidth will be required to achieve it ... and bandwidth isn't free.
Not meaning to be a deliberate pessimist, but you're skipping over the distinct possibility that the webcam host sites that make the present camming business model possible may themselves 'go away' due to lack of profitability. You're also skipping over the arguable fact that the 'free' bandwidth you are relying on in order to make that $100 worth of 'paid' webcam sales is actually costing your webcam host $40 to provide ... while your webcam host is only receiving a $50 'cut' from your 'paid' webcam sales with which to pay for that bandwidth on top of paying for streaming video servers, technical personnel, accounting personnel etc.I did just as good this week since he has been gone, as I did when I first started on MFC. I think part of it has to do with the fact that I did push myself, to make a goal of at least $100 a night, I even made $300 the other night, I don't think camming is going anywhere. Not unless the government shuts it down, or it becomes illegal.
Or put another way, while you yourself may be earning as much money from camming in 2011 as you did in 2008, your webcam host clearly is not. So the real question is what your webcam host will decide to do about this situation in 2012. MFC management has arguably already made the decision that they will not / cannot upgrade video stream quality because they cannot afford to pay for the necessary additional bandwidth. It remains to be seen how that decision will affect MFC's future profitability ... and your own webcam earnings potential ... as more and more competing webcam sites DO upgrade towards HD.
Trying to make my original point clear, upgrading toward HD is going to force some sort of change in the webcam business model because the associated bandwidth costs cannot simply be 'eaten' by the webcam hosts. In order for those webcam hosts to remain profitable in a HD environment, the webcam hosts must find some way to cover their bandwidth costs ... which are essentially the same for both 'free' and 'paid' video streams. One way to do this would be to start charging every webcam girl for the bandwidth costs associated with her 'free' video stream ... such that the webcam host could still 'break even' on costs regardless of whether the particular webcam girl was making high sales of 'paid' content. In terms of business model, this would be similar to upscale clubs charging a high 'house fee'.
Another way to do this would be for the webcam hosts to 'pre-screen' new ( and potentially existing ) webcam girls for their 'paid' content sales potential, and reject new webcam girls ( and/or 'kick out' existing webcam girls ) whose appearance, show content etc. would tend to indicate that their probable ( or actual ) rate of 'paid' content sales versus time spent on 'free' content is too low for the webcam host to afford providing bandwidth to said girls. In terms of business model, this would be similar to clubs being increasingly selective in terms of the attributes of new dancers they will 'hire'.
But no matter how the HD situation actually comes down, one fact is inescapable. Webcam hosts can no longer afford to provide a 'free' video stream for every girl who wants to try her luck with camming ... any more than clubowners can no longer afford to allow any girl who wants to try her luck at exotic dancing to take the stage.
~
Last edited by Melonie; 10-02-2011 at 07:00 AM.





Wow-Melanie thank you for such insightful information.
Cam sites can downgrade the quality in the free area & then offer the HD in paid chat as a solution. Also as an incentive for the guys to take us private.
I wonder why they just dont Buy the servers?
And if bandwith & servers are such an issue then how come tubesites have not gone under due to them? I know the conversion rate into sales is crappy on those tube sites. Considering most cam site are the actual owners of those tube sites too...
Skype offers free HD camming for free, how do they pay for those servers?
Since people can c2c with iphones and such, I do hope a pay model of guys being able to c2c with their fav sexy cam girl through their phones soon.
Cam companies are getting competitive over cam girls I see it on the boards over on xbiz. How they all jump on every thread about camming and trying to get models to sign up iwth them.
Love this discussion.
Smooches,
Sam
Bandwidth isn't free...but neither is the computer I am typing on...and prices have dropped through the floor on those. The original brick cel phones gave me $1500 monthly phone bills (O_O), but now I get all I can eat for $88 a month.
Nothing is free...but mass consumption has a way of leveling out the playing field. What starts as a luxury always ends up as a basic item...and the price point tends to follow along.
Just a thought.
Young girls often think this and it's simply not true. A woman who takes care of herself in her 40s can compete with the girls half her age because she still looks good but more importantly, she has the experience and skill to sell.
When I quit dancing I was twice the age of some of my co-workers and I still danced circles around them all, speaking of SALES. I remained a great seller where ever I went right up to the end. But being a top earner in 2009 was WAY less $ than being a top earner in 1995. So no honey, it isn't age that causes us "old broads" to see a decline. It is economic and industry changes which render the business less profitable for the individuals. Too many girls flood the market, customers spend less or stop coming entirely, girls do way too much for free or cheap, customers expect more for nothing, etc. THAT is why we see declines. Not because we grew up and lost our babyfat.
I personally am one of the oldest chics in my niche and I'm also one of the top chics. In fact, if you break it down to the very specific niches I cater to most and sell the best in, I am THE oldest of all the "top" girls, and I have no problem competing. In fact I charge about the highest REGULAR rate for my live time and have no problem selling it, and have been one of the top chics on niteflirt consistently since shortly after I started there. Age has nothing to do with it; if it did, all those girls half my age or who were still on training wheels when I was on 7" heels wouldn't be looking to me for advice on how to make money in this biz.
I get emails daily from chics far younger than me wanting advice, when in theory they should be magically making oodles of cash while I languish on the sidelines, right? LOL
As for where this industry is going, I agree with much of what's been said here. It is changing already and will go much the same way stripping has: the owners will continue to profit while the individuals will find their earnings potential decline over time. Not to say that savvy cammers can't still maintain earnings - they certainly can - they will just have to adapt and work smarter for it. This will mean educating ourselves, taking some risks, and finding ways to set ourselves apart from the sea of cammers out there.








Skype offers free HD camming for free, how do they pay for those servers?
I'm glad that you brought up Skype ... from
(snip)"Skype has published a detailed explanation of the causes of last week’s massive outage for the Internet telephony service. The root cause: a cluster of servers became overloaded, causing congestion and capacity problems that were exacerbated by a bug in the latest version of Skype’s Windows software client.
As a result, the problems rippled through Skype’s peer-to-peer infrastructure, taking out many of the supernodes that are key to the smooth operation of Skype’s network. A supernode acts like a directory,helping to establish connections between Skype clients and creating local clusters typically of several hundred peer nodes.
“Although Skype staff responded quickly to disable the overloaded servers and to eliminate client requests to them, a significant number of supernodes had already failed,” writes Skype’s CIO Lars Rabbe. “Once a supernode has failed, even when restarted, it takes some time to become available as a resource to the P2P network again. As a result, the P2P network was left with 25–30% fewer supernodes than normal. This caused a disproportionate load on the remaining available supernodes.”"(snip)
... so the basic answer to your question is that Skype could afford to offer HD video streams for 'free' because they were willing to accept the risk of a 'crash' when their network overloaded. However, many major Skype clients ( i.e. Facebook ) were not so ambivalent about such 'crashes'.
As a result of the recent 'crashes' and ensuing complaints from major clients, Skype is now scrambling to add additional bandwidth capability and additional servers ... at a very significant cost. See . Ultimately the costs associated with those additional investments by Skype will have to be passed on to end users by one means or another.
In terms of a particular 'item', such as a computer, yes it's possible to greatly increase performance and lower the price at the same time via improved technology and/or massive production volumes. But in the case of G3/G4 cell phones and HD internet video, the limiting factor was / is the available network infrastructure. Arguably, the cell phone network was upgraded to G3/G4 capability because a limited number of gov't franchised / legally protected from competition cell phone network providers could justify making a huge long term investment in improving cell phone network infrastructure on the basis of ongoing 'government guaranteed' future business levels / profits / protection from new competition.Bandwidth isn't free...but neither is the computer I am typing on...and prices have dropped through the floor on those. The original brick cel phones gave me $1500 monthly phone bills (O_O), but now I get all I can eat for $88 a month.
Nothing is free...but mass consumption has a way of leveling out the playing field. What starts as a luxury always ends up as a basic item...and the price point tends to follow along.
Where similar investments in improving internet infrastructure are concerned, no such limited franchises or gov't guarantees against independent competitors exists. Therefore expensive improvements in internet infrastructure by particular companies / organizations must be undertaken on the basis of shorter term returns on their investment, as well as the risk of independent competition affecting future business levels / profitability. Apples and Oranges. If the company / organization spends too much upgrading internet bandwidth / infrastructure, their network functions wonderfully right up to the point where they go bankrupt from debt service costs. If the company / organization spends too little upgrading internet bandwidth / infrastructure, their network experiences increasingly frequent problems and/or the 'quality' suffers ... which can also lead to bankruptcy due to gradual loss of dissatisfied customers.
There are only two ways for a particular company / organization to avoid these two extremes ... with the first being establishing a limit / stopping growth in bandwidth and server demand so that existing infrastructure / bandwidth capability isn't overtaxed. In the specific case of HD video streaming, which by definition requires more bandwidth, that translates into fewer video streams. Where webcams are concerned, this would be achieved by 'pre-screening' would-be webcam girls and / or 'kicking out' existing webcam girls whose average sales rates for 'paid' video streams falls below some minimum acceptable level.
The second way is to obtain some sort of cell phone provider-esque 'guarantee' that any large investment to improve internet bandwidth / infrastructure can be paid for without depending on increased future sales levels / profit levels / lack of competition. Where webcams are concerned, this would be achieved by establishing new hourly bandwidth charges for every girl operating a webcam ... charges that are independent of her actual 'paid' webcam sales ... that effectively transfers part of the 'loss risk' associated with large infrastructure / bandwidth improvement costs off of the company / organization and onto the webcam girls.
~
Last edited by Melonie; 10-02-2011 at 05:50 PM.
Melonie, first let me compliment you on one of the most cogent and coherent posts I have seen anywhere in a long time. Very refreshing.
Verizon offers "to the door" true fiberoptic internet with FIOS, and they are rolling it out nationally. Fiberoptic appears to offer unlimited bandwidth at negligible cost as far as infrastructure, such that companies offering it at this time throughout North America are able to do so at prices very similar to standard cable/internet. Given its increasing popularity, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that the concerns of budgeting for expansion versus service to current clients have already been somehow addressed and judged to be manageable? A google search offers a number of other companies that specifically offer businesses true fiber optic hookup as compared to fiberoptically enhanced coaxial cables.





^^^ thanks for the vote of confidence !
As to the future impact of true fiber optic connectivity, yes it will eventually lower 'unit costs' for bandwidth. I also assume that improved router and server technology will also lower future 'unit costs' in those areas. But right now it's not available outside of major US cities for the most part.
There's also the matter of 'order of magnitude' of relative bandwidth requirements for standard definition streaming video versus HD video ... which is on the order of 8:1 ( 4-8 megs versus 300k- 1.2 megs ). Even if true fiber optic connectivity and improved router / server performance cut these 'unit costs' in half in the near term, you're still looking at an actual cost per HD video stream that is 4 times as high. This will undoubtedly change for the better as internet backbone and true fiber optic connectivity infrastructure are improved in the future. But this will take some amount of time and will also require some amount of financial 'justification' ... which is a difficult 'sell' right now given that banks don't want to make risky loans and that consumer discretionary spending is down due to the poor economy.
So in the immediate future, the 'umbrella' webcam hosts face a multiple 'whammy'. First, their existing bandwidth / servers etc. are what they are, with a finite total bandwidth capability. Second, as 'straight' jobs remain difficult to find, and as exotic dancer earnings are down, more and more girls are trying webcam ... with each additional webcam girl's 'free' video stream consuming another chunk of that finite total bandwidth capability. Third, customer demand is pushing for HD ( or at least some imitation of HD ), which causes every existing webcam girl's 'free' video stream to consume a larger chunk of that finite total bandwidth capability. Fourth, the present 'umbrella' webcam host business model ... where adding additional webcam girls may not actually increase webcam host revenues via a 50% 'cut' of total 'paid' content purchases only, but it WILL increase the webcam host's bandwidth bills regardless of whether total 'paid' content purchases increase or not ... puts them in a worse position re profitability thus less likely to be able to obtain affordable financing to upgrade servers and increase bandwidth connectivity.
I would also add that this issue isn't confined strictly to webcams either. Netflix, tube site, and other streaming video 'end users' ( a.k.a. paying customers ) are now facing new bandwidth limits and/or surcharges from their ISP's as 'out of control' increasing bandwidth demands are raising the ISP's monthly bandwidth costs and pressuring them to improve server / bandwidth connectivity as well, for which the ISP's have not been receiving increased revenues. Same problem - but at the other end !
Here is some high placed 'industry' commentary from the 'past' on this aspect ... from
(snip)"BT's John Petter says that the "free ride" is over for popular streaming services like the BBC's iPlayer and that they need to pay up for "developing very profitable business models" by using BT's pipes.
It all sounds depressingly familiar. AT&T boss Ed Whitacre—the new head of General Motors—leveled the same charges at popular websites like Google back in 2005:
How do you think [websites] are going to get to customers? Through a broadband pipe. Cable companies have them. We have them. Now what they would like to do is use my pipes free, but I ain't going to let them do that because we have spent this capital and we have to have a return on it. So there's going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they're using. Why should they be allowed to use my pipes?
AT&T never got around to charging websites for access to its customers, due in large part to a public outcry, the start of the "network neutrality" war, and interest from the Federal Communications Commission. But the idea never died in the ISP community, and Petter now says "that the quid pro quo of payment from content owners might be guarantees of picture quality," according to the Financial Times."(snip)
The point about the above comments is that the demand / bandwidth consumption requirements of HD are now forcing the AT&T's, BT's, AlterNets etc. to again invest in increasing the size of their broadband internet backbone 'pipes' from city to city / state to state / country to country, as well as increasing the bandwidth connectivity to individual companies / organizations / individuals i.e. 'umbrella' webcam hosts, webcam girls, and webcam customers. However, this time, AT&T, BT et al, are determined that they're going to get a return on their massive investment. Obviously the source of the additional revenue needed to provide a return on their massive investment must be the aforementioned individual companies / organizations / individuals.
Hopefully the following are also more easily understood ...
^^^ which racks up increased bandwidth bills for the webcam host providing that free video stream, but no additional revenue to pay for that bandwidth since the webcam host gets zero dollars in revenue from free chats. And the more time a average webcam customer spends soaking up free chat versus buying 'paid' stream, the worse the economics gets for the webcam host.You get freeloaders who are content to just sit and watch a camgirl do her free chat hustling
^^^ is also racking up increased bandwidth bills for the webcam host, but no additional revenue to pay for that bandwidth since the webcam host gets zero dollars in revenue from recorded clipsa guy who downloads a clip from a camgirl
~
Last edited by Melonie; 10-03-2011 at 09:44 AM.




New models are in for a shock! I know when I started I thought wow easy money.. IS IT HELL! I am lucky in that I am attractive and have a good physique anyway from sports that I play but has money ever fell in my lap.. NO! I have spent hours and hours on thinking about strategies, marketing and endless social media. I do ok but I'm still learning and aspiring to be better. I make ok money but not amazing and nothing like some ladies here although trust me I would love too and will one day.
Those girls you talk about they aren't all going to stick. I wonder how many would sit in a dead chat room for hours like most of us have and not give up? Look at phone sex and even texting sites people still pay and use those when camming is available. I guess it's like everything work hard and see rewards.
I got sucked into all the negative chat here last summer and lost all motivation I know better now it's what you make of it!


Camming will exist forever .. it's just only some performers will make the money to be worth it same with sites. Being in this industry in the future will require much more attention than it does now with promoting, twitters, dealing with recordings.

I am so glad I came across this, it is SO INTERESTING to see how models felt five years ago about the future of camming, which is now.
And, the verdict is that it's the same now as it was then, same issues, same complaints, same "flood" of new girls. But let's face it, out of all the people that sign up, what percentage do you think dedicates themselves to it consistently/long term? And for every girl that leaves, those guys will just move on to someone else. (Because, let's face it, the world is a horny place, and people love their sex)
I think the mistake most people make is thinking it's easy money. There is NO such thing as easy money, however, as far as I'm concerned anyway, my earning potential in this industry is HUGE compared to anywhere else I've worked in my life. No I won't divulge my age, but let's just say I've spent years hustling in "real world" jobs and... I am consistently underpaid/undervalued/overworked. Seriously, let's talk about demeaning jobs. No where else in life could I be paid by-the-minute to set my own hours, my own rate, my own schedule and do and say what I want to, all the while sitting in my bed. (Sometimes I wonder about the life experience (age) of girls asking the money questions, and feeling discouraged. And I don't mean that offensively, I just think that years irl may give you a different perspective)
I left my SOUL CRUSHING HELL of an office job, and decided I could earn more working from home and be happier while I was at it. I did a lot of research and started with things like tutoring ESL on-line, and freelancing jobs through sites like upwork. And, I can tell you those sites suffer the exact same issues. Lots o' people willing to work for pennies. PENNIES. People expecting everything for nothing. (40 hours of data entry for $5 anyone? No, not per/hr... $5 TOTAL). The trick is to produce quality, and build a name for yourself, and that takes time. And working for yourself does not result in a steady paycheck week to week, but it does free you from the daily slag. Will you be a millionare? Nope, not likely, but I can tell you I earn much more on average now then I ever have before. Is it consistent? Nope, but I also used to own a shop, and some days rocked and some days didn't. That's the life of being your own boss, just because you put in the hours doesn't mean you'll get paid consistently for all of them, but your building a name, and if you don't put forth the time/effort/dedication, your name is going to be shitty.
Here's the thing to remember, those worried about it now, and those reading this and worrying about their futures five more years from now.
SEX IS THE OLDEST INDUSTRY IN HUMAN HISTORY. It shall never die, only evolve. You just gotta get in there, work it, and evolve with it.
Bookmarks