IS ADULT FRIENDFINDER IN ITS DEATH THROES?

Aerikvon's Death Throes by AerikVon:

Having returned to Adult FriendFinder (AFF), part of FriendFinder Networks, about three weeks ago after my ban, I'm starting to believe that the site is now in its death throes.

Though the blogs I follow cannot be regarded as representative of blogland, my list of followed blogs cover a lot of bloggers who actually blog as opposed to posting photos of porn without text or posting hook-me-ups. Before my ban, my guess is that I would have received on average about a hundred alerts each day. Given I haven't submitted a blog post since my return and my blog posts, which would have perhaps attracted on average about 25 comments, and given I don't submit too many comments nowadays, I should now expect about 50 alerts per day. But the number of alerts I receive are no more than about 20 each day. That is a significant decrease in the number of alerts I'm now receiving from what I used to receive.

My observation is that bloggers (at least those I follow) are blogging less and even no longer blogging. My followed feed is now a trickle. And looking at the new feed, I'm getting the impression that there are significantly fewer porn-only and hook-me-up blog posts.

I also get the impression from the tone of the postings is that more bloggers are being critical of the site. And I'm not just thinking of bloggers who used to be critical but also bloggers who weren't particularly critical of the site before my ban.

The recent move to nudge standard members to upgrade to paying gold or at least use points to enjoy certain features that used to be enjoyed for free seems to be a tipping point for many bloggers. My impression is that standard members aren't tempted to pay and upgrade. In fact, I know of a few bloggers who were gold and have decided to let their membership lapse to standard.

AFF's latest move to monetise (or at least pointisise) seems to be failing. My guess that it's failing because the site doesn't offer a good enough 'product' to tempt standard members to pay and upgrade.

AFF doesn't seem to be seriously making any efforts to improve the site for its members, and it hasn't ever since Jon Buckheit got rid of Andrew Conru. Since Andrew's 'departure', the site has rapidly gone downhill towards the gutter of becoming Craigslist on steroids. And by the way, I'm not an apologist of Andrew. He had his faults, a man in a hurry, but at the very least he made himself known to members, particularly bloggers, and listened to concerns, both something that Jon Buckheit doesn't do. But I know whose side I'm on. Andrew all the way. And that realistically is the only choice in town.

One concern that's been repeatedly relayed to AFF for a long time is the arbitrary denial of blog posts, comments and replies by so-called Tier 1. AFF has done nothing to address this problem. Its latest offering from the mouths of Jon Buckheit and Ali R is that members can request a second review by a different Tier 1 reviewer. This offering isn't that different to what is already on offer. Bloggers, if their posts were denied, could always ask for their posts to be re-reviewed and quite often this second review would be undertaken by a different Tier 1 reviewer. Basically, AFF's proposed solution is that bloggers can ask for a second review of any denied comments and replies to be re-reviewed. The proposal is not such a big deal.

And just to show how unserious the offer is from AFF, the site hasn't implemented its proposal, something which isn't difficult to implement. But AFF, something slightly more difficult to implement, has quickly introduced a range of measures for standard members to either pay money or use their points to carry on using existing features. This says everything about how Jon Buckheit's AFF operates.

It won't surprise me that AFF will start monetising or pointising blogging. It's that desperate. It's clear that AFF isn't making much money, admittedly it never has been that good at making money. But what AFF is doing now is the last throw of the dice. Or maybe, Jon Buckheit is trashing the site so he doesn't have to pay out so much compensation if and hopefully when he loses that court case to Andrew.

I get very little pleasure at writing this blog post because I want AFF and, in particular, AFF's blogland, to still be around if and when Andrew wins that court case. And if and when that happens, the blogging party can start, but it needs bloggers still to be around to have a party with!

Hercules, in his Death Throes, Hurling Lichas into the Sea:

Comments

  1. I mean, I'm not on the site, but I talk with bloggers and non bloggers alike through email and most are just over it. They're done with the nickel and diming the customers out of existence. And, who can blame them?

    I think you misunderstand the court case a bit. This is not about how much money Jon has to pay, it's about how much money Andrew has to pay to get it back.

    If Jon's trashing the site to spite Andrew, he's spiting himself too because the undivested shares of stock that Andrew is trying to buy are going to be worth less than they are now.

    Personally, I believe this is a misguided and hilariously tone deaf attempt to make the company more profitable in order to sell it out from underneath Andrew's nose.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for putting me right about the court case. But I'm presuming (perhaps wrongly) that the judge could rule that Jon 'stole' the site from Andrew and that he should pay compensation to Andrew.

      Delete
    2. Kind of, I mean you're dumbing down the language a bit in what you're saying. Let me precisely put, here, what Andrew is asking for:

      A judgement saying that Jon breached the contract of the Call Option agreement and it continues to be enforceable and Jon has to sell him the shares as stated in that contract.

      He has also asked for compensatory damages for breaching the contract and breaching of the duty of good faith and fair dealing.

      IF Andrew were to be awarded these, and that's a big if, it won't be based on the worth of the company. Compensatory damages are more punitive and based on the severity of the wrong.

      Delete
    3. I take your point. But if Jon trashes the site, then, surely that is a legal wrong (a tort as we say say here).
      I do dumb down sometimes for rhetorical and even metaphorical effect.

      Delete
    4. Legally speaking, trashing the site is a subjective opinion, Jon can argue that he was making changes to make the site more profitable and he made the wrong decision.

      Delete
    5. Again I take your point. But if the site loses significant value - I'm not sure whether the company is listed with shares being traded, then Jon may be judged by the consequences of his actions regardless of motive. I'm no lawyer so I don't know.

      Delete
    6. I mean, it's possible. I'm going on a general knowledge of the law. I'm no lawyer, either.

      Delete
    7. And lawyers often don't know the law. Sometimes they're just hired mercenaries representing their rich clients.

      Delete
    8. There's a certain prominent dimwit on trial whose lawyers I believe that applies to well.

      Delete
    9. Lawyers must love that orange dimwit!

      Delete
    10. I can't imagine why they would. He's proven time and again that he doesn't pay his bills, some of his lawyers are being jailed and charged with crimes in connection to him.

      I don't understand why anyone would gamble that big.

      Delete
    11. I bet you he has to pay his lawyer's bills. Lawyers normally like to be paid upfront.

      Delete
  2. I agree with all of this.

    The site is in a quandary. Clearly its finances are bad, so it doesn't have the resources to play the long game and transform the site into a less cheesy one that more women will be comfortable frequenting.

    And I suppose I shouldn't assume my values are the same as the general public. I think taking away the dick photos from the home page would make it friendlier, but I've had people strenuously argue against that, saying they WANT to see genitals everywhere. 🤷🏻‍♀️

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think it matters, I think they need to change it because of the current political climate.

      The more front facing nudity the site has, the more open they are to scrutiny in becoming categorized as a "porn site".

      Now, think about what some states are doing to porn sites, requiring id. Sure, the people in those states can just get a VPN and watch their porn without the id.

      But, a dating site? How functional is a dating site if you can't list what state you're in without showing id due to the laws of the state.

      Delete
    2. I think it's very important, in fact crucial, for AFF to make the site women-friendly.
      JN's 'interview' with Jon where the latter is appealing to the better nature of men isn't good enough in countering the abuse that women receive on the site.
      I only ever got abused on AFF if I criticised Trump or argued that climate change is an existential problem, but I never got abuse because of my gender.

      Delete
  3. Amen, brother. Also, the 'promised' review of reviewers yet to happen.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Riffing on Python per Spam, Spam, Spam, "No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can think of a couple of people in AFF who need restin'!

      Delete
    2. Yes, if you don't count the outsourced. If do, at least five.

      Delete
    3. If Tier 1 staff are to be included, then I can think of at least ten people to be rested!

      Delete
  5. I can attest to all the members both gold and standard who are leaving the site due to what is happening there as of late. Like Deb, I get a lot of off site messages in regards to it all. It would be a crying shame if there was no Blog Land at all as that was the best part of the site itself. One I used to enjoy the most before being exiled. I think though it is a sinking ship and I am glad I am not there now to go down with it..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess, like the band playing on the sinking Titanic, I'll be going down with the site. I hope a film is made of it and Leonardo DiCaprio will be cast to play me!

      Delete
    2. lol. Loved Leonardo in Titanic.

      Delete
    3. I'm sure you'll love him in the Adult FriendFinder film!

      Delete
    4. Oh yes I sure would. Thanks for reminding me though as my next post is about a film being made at the moment about another Adult site..

      Delete
    5. Now you have me thinking about which female would play me? LMFAO!!!!!! Especially since the Titanic hit an iceberg in Canadian Atlantic ocean waters which led to the sinking of it.. Food for thought there...lol. Not Celine Dion though singing
      My Heart Will Go On" please..LMFAO!!!!!!!!

      Delete
    6. I suggest the redhead actress, Jessica Chastain, to play you.

      Delete
    7. I must chime in that Susan Sarandon would kill the role as Joy. Fiery with a lot of spunk. I'm thinking of her in Bull Durham specifically.

      Delete
    8. Susan Sarandon would be perfect casting. Who should play yourself and JN?

      Delete
    9. Me? Melissa McCarthy hands down. Lots of jokes and physical comedy with some range as a more emotional/dramatic actress.

      JN? Hmm..I have to think about that one more.

      Delete
    10. perhaps Scarlett Johansson could play JN as she starred in the 'Lost in Translation' film set in Tokyo.

      Delete
    11. Spammed, I’ve been sent to your spam folder. Or, I didn’t press publish on the computer before I walked away. (Sitting in Dr office now)

      Delete
    12. Nothing is in my spam folder unless there's a delay moving spam there.

      Delete
    13. Okay, I must have forgotten to hit publish. My bad.

      I said, do we really want to have a white actress play an Asian woman in todays world?

      Delete
    14. Or we can go English and cast Gemma Chan.

      Delete
    15. Accept no substitutes; she plays herself.

      Delete
    16. That will help keep the film within budget!

      Delete
    17. Great answer, great answer

      Why do I suddenly feel like I'm on Family Feud? (Bow may not get this but I suspect Saul will)

      Delete
    18. You're right, I don't get the reference.

      Delete
    19. It's a game show here in the states. Families against other families. Top answers on the board. They ask 100 people a question. The families have to guess what the top answers were.

      Delete
    20. We have that show though it's called Family Fortunes.

      Delete
    21. Which segues to best game show answer ever, "In the ass." www.snopes.com/fact-check/up-the-butt-bob/ with video.

      Delete
    22. Susan Sarandon is perfect Deb.Loved Bull Durham.

      Delete
    23. In the Ass sounds an interesting show!

      Delete
    24. Who'd play me?? Man, that's a tough question. Yanno, even a Latina actress could pull off playing me, since people have come up to me speaking in Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, as well as Tagalog. 😂

      Now who? 🤔

      Delete
    25. She'd have to be a polyglot actress.

      Delete
    26. I'm now on the phone to Ali Wong's agent!

      Delete
  6. I decided to work with Jon and Ali in hopes that there will be a site left when Andrew comes back. I'm not a fan of the direction the site's going, either. I hope they'll reverse some ill-advised decisions, sooner rather than later.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I too hope the site survives the decisions of the current regime.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

I AM YET ANOTHER AFF EXILE HERE

DEAR JON