Thread closed by O.P. No more replies, please.

[N13]

I think this thread is about clients that want to be topped, are told they will be and then aren't because the 'provider' is unable. Not clients that want to top.

[+ Avalon]

I think this thread is about clients that want to be topped, are told they will be and then aren't because the 'provider' is unable. Not clients that want to top.

 

Thanks for the correction.

[RandyC]

Happened to me and even though he was very attentive and we both got off it I really wanted to get fucked so the session was a bit of a let down. For that reason alone i would not hire him again.

[wolfgangdc]

I have this mental image of a frowning Client standing beside a bed, arms folded and alternating his unblinking gaze from an Escort, covered in sweat, masturbating a semi-erect cock with growing desperation, over to an unmarked white envelope laying on a nightstand. Eyes moving back and forth between the two.

 

I have a hard time putting myself in that situation.

 

This is the funniest thing I've ever read on this forum

 

But realistically, I don't think any guy wants to have half given to him, and then hold out the other half. You're just putting an unnecessary amount of pressure on the situation when it's supposed to be fun and relaxing.

 

Also, as other people have said paid by time

[N13]

Why does almost everyone miss the point? The job was not fulfilled. Why should it be paid for?

[+ Keith30309]

My preferences are different from everyone else's so I'm not sure there is a single right answer to this question - what is important to me is not to the original poster and vice versus.

 

I enjoy seeing a companion get hard but I'm more interested in seeing him mentally and emotionally engaged with me. I'm not looking for a muscled automaton with 9 rock-hard inches... I'm looking for a human being who has some level of empathy and depth of soul and who really wants to be with me. Frankly, I suspect this is more challenging than just getting hard. That's just me and I wouldn't assert anyone else should feel this way - I think it's quite alright to have whatever expectations you want to communicate in advance.

On those occasions where I've spent time with someone who is very ably going thru the motions with a steel-rod-cock and blank stare off into space I didn't leave with a particularly pleasant feeling about the encounter.

 

(From a purely pragmatic standpoint I would think that a cash penalty for failure of the brain to release the hormones allowing the dialation of the arteries to the corpora cavernosa might be counter-productive... but that's a guess. Gladiator movies work better for me.)

[+ othermanc]

Del.

[MikeyGMin]

Why does almost everyone miss the point? The job was not fulfilled. Why should it be paid for?

I don't think anyone is missing that point. And I think almost everyone agrees that if you're disappointed by the encounter you don't rehire. Where we disagree is whether the client has the "right" to withhold some of the payment because a guy couldn't get it up. I don't think so, and if someone does unilaterally deduct money, I think that gives the escort the "right" to beat his ass.

[+ othermanc]

Del.

[MikeyGMin]

Your right. I would never not live up to my word and try to pay the escort less than we agreed on. I was contemplating offering an agreement: if an escort wasn't able to do what he implied in his ad there would be a mutually agreed upon rate adjustment. I have abandoned that idea completely and have gone back to "hope the escort will be able to fulfil his implied promise..." and if he doesn't then don't rehire. His only obligation is to stay for the allotted time we contracted for, no?

LOL. I think you're quite clear on how you want to proceed and have a reasonable approach. Don't mind us. We're just beating a dead horse.

[Pulgasari1991]

Why does almost everyone miss the point? The job was not fulfilled. Why should it be paid for?

One should very clearly define the "job" before the encounter, even better any special conditions, if he has such worries; whether something seems obvious or not.

Else, "paid by time" should go by default; it's the easiest way to sort out things, and one'd still be always able to communicate before the encounter.

 

In my guess:

if a session blatantly ends up being a failure to various degrees due to the provider's fault, it could be worth for the client to expose his opinion and ask for a reasonably reduced rate.

Mind that the provider is hardly being rewarded for agreeing with that, since that customer isn't probably going to hire him a second time anyway. But still, I believe that many good providers value their common sense and would settle (but I want to stress that I'm considering a blatant failure there, and I really have no idea how often that occurs).

I wouldn't anyway rely on the provider making the first move, though.

 

Beside, badbehavers are going to badbehave anyway: one can make all the agreements he wants and then just get straight up robbed.

That is to say, that in an unruled environment, everybody is pretty much on his own and there are no hard guarantees for anybody; therefore, I guess you aren't talking about proper rules, but rather you are asking something which to me sounds along the lines of "Why would someone not just follow (my idea of) common sense, without having to specificly agree on that before meeting?".

Why not just exposing such worries beforehand, in the first place?

[njr47]

Not sure I agree with MikeyGMin that we're beating a dead horse. Using another slang phrase, I don't have a dog in this hunt. I never bottom so it's sort of irrelevant if an escort doesn't get hard----though I would much prefer he would. But my guess is that if I were a bottom, I might think differently since I would be hiring a man because he advertises himself as a capable cocksman, who would be able to give me pleasure. What if the provider specifically states that he is always able to successfully top (and there are escorts who do this)? Does this "false advertising" allow a client to at least contemplate a lesser payment if the advertised top cannot properly perform? And I don't put much stock in the argument that "we are only paying for his time and companionship." All of us know this is a legal fiction designed to protect the site and the providers.

[Michael Paul]

I had a client who had a penile implant... he told me during our initial discussion. He was a lot of fun. He could fuck forever and never get soft. The fun thing about the implant was he could make it nice and hard for fucking or softer for sucking. It was so cool watching him pump up to his desired fullness....Have any of you ever had an experience with a guy that had an implant and would it bother you?