Capitalism at its finest or thinly veiled transactional sex

Comments

• 

  badboyhere

  5 years ago

  Yeah somebody is getting the lions share of the costs plus a little profit for the organiser

  reply

  like

• 

  RHP User

  5 years ago

  Have heard they can be pains at parties

  reply

  like

• 

  SpicyKale

  5 years ago

  Setting up the expectation of something in return for a ridiculous outlay is a dangerous path to head down. The argument of attracting guys that are serious about the lifestyle is just complete bs. If you're that worried about the perceived behaviour of some singles, screen them first. OSS does it for the limited events they allow single guys get along to. Just make all entry prices the same, or at worst the same price for couples and singles. If you think of it in the opposite direction, we've seen free entry for single women... what's that saying and potentially setting them up for? I doubt we'd go along to an event that was charging that sort of money for guys because of the expectations that might have been set. I comes across as transactional and a bit of a turn off.

  reply

  like

• 

  sweetpussy4u

  5 years ago

  Capitalism at its finest let’s face it if your single and not necessarily that good with the ladies or gents or couples then you might consider paying that sort of coin for a reasonably good chance to participate. And if your a guy who really likes to watch then I’d imagine you would readily pay for it. I can understand clubs charging a little extra for single guys and limiting the numbers or they would be full of single guys but an event like that we’ll surely wouldn’t be to hard for the organisers to screen ahead of time

  reply

  like

• 

  Mask_007

  5 years ago

  Hi OP. Very nicely done. I do enjoy your point. I was the person that asked about, what is included in the value of $350. Free drinks for 2h? Drinks and food for 1h? Just the entry ticket? That starts to become a tipe of financial segregation. E form of exclusion of some sort. Is a interesting point made by you op. But I believe we should not be going to a party like with a sense of entitlement. I don't disagree with the fack of we as single male should pay a bit more, but let's be just and honest about, $350 was a bit too much. Perhaps we could find some middle ground.

  reply

  like

• 

  RHP User

  5 years ago

  If men didn’t think with their cocks it wouldn’t work would it ? Is it ethical ? Dunno. Sucker born every minute comes to mind. Puts a bit of pressure on the single women though, but maybe they like the fact that all the men have money to burn. Maybe they don’t. Whole scene sounds tacky and exploitative.

  reply

  like

• 

  deepestpurple

  5 years ago

  I wouldn't pay it but I assume they get the supply they're looking for at that price so why would they charge less? There are bigger rorts going around.

  reply

  like

• 

  aaenjoy

  5 years ago

  In our world of litigation, exclusion can bring legal pain, so I guess, single men are given a ‘choice’ if they seek to go along or not. If they don’t like the cost, they ‘choose’ not to go. We like that single men are limited in number or Excluded from attendance as we do not like getting swarmed upon by expectative men, all figuring, like the fellow who asked ‘what do i get out of this cost’. He should not expect anything except entry into a club where people enjoy sex, and if they ‘choose’ to include him, well bonus for him. Just because you pay for entry into a premises, does not mean one has the right to everything inside. Our advice to fellows like him, do not go along, your expectations of some ‘outcome / commodity’ in which private citizens go to enjoy sex of their choosing is beyond the scope of the club. In our view, your expectations are somewhat predatory and not welcome.

  reply

  like

• 

  megz85g

  5 years ago

  If it’s Monday night at WOW you’re talking about, they also limit the number of single guys allowed- so they must get them in.

  reply

  like

• 

  NewVicCpl

  5 years ago

  I don’t get the $350 single male entry price listed (which is absolutely ridiculous) as they don’t allow any single males to attend. They used to allow half a dozen single males to that party and not for the $350 advertised, then they made some rule changes that included no single males allowed and enforcing males must be with a female when upstairs.

  reply

  like

• 

  RHP User

  5 years ago

  That much of a difference is ridiculous, I can understand limiting numbers but to try and charge men more than women is straight up discrimination and greed, I’d never attend a party that was going to do that to people. It’s unfair on the single male and it’s unfair on everyone else there who’ll potentially have to deal with someone who has their expectations set way too high. Ms Phoenix.

  reply

  like

• 

  Mischeviouslad

  5 years ago

  The thing about opportunistic capitalism, or any other related sales issue is..... .... it is entirely optional. No one is forcing anyone.... woman, couple... or single man to open their wallet and attend. So the market will dictate their success or otherwise of their method. Don’t like it? Don’t support it. But there’s zero point complaining about the operations of a private business where your patronage is entirely at your discretion 😎

  reply

  like

• 

  Mask_007

  5 years ago

  As questions is not a crime, making assumptions is a extremely foolish move. If you are not sure, just ask. And is what i did. If man presence is unwanted just make the party for couples and single women only, like many, many others.

  reply

  like

• 

  RHP User

  5 years ago

  Is a guy who's just paid $350 to get in a successful go getter or a gullible fool ?

  reply

  like

• 

  RHP User

  5 years ago

  So is the $350 a kind of economical screening? Someone who can afford $350 is a better class of male?

  reply

  like