Rentmen made newer and tougher rules for advertising providers

[+ KensingtonHomo]

3 minutes ago, coriolis888 said:

Actually, when a provider "hides" the "premium" photos and you must ask for the provider for the photos, many clients simply go to the next ad.  In short, the provider loses an unknown number of clients by blocking off premium photos.  

I'm sure some people just move on but I'm much more interested in what a provider says about themselves than their photos. The one rule I rarely break is that I won't meet without seeing a face pic. 

[Guest]

Just now, KensingtonHomo said:

I can see yours. I guess some providers are putting some as private. 

Whew! 😅 Thank goodness you can see them and don't have to pay another fee. Everybody does things differently , but that tactic isn't for me. I would spend too much time unlocking and responding to photo album requests. I use a reasonable amount of nudes, those that are interested will let it be known. 

[CuriousByNature]

Is there a reason why providers cannot move their profiles to Hunqz or another Europe-based site?  Perhaps RM operates as if it's the only viable option because nobody has challenged that characterization.

[BuffaloKyle]

17 hours ago, coriolis888 said:

Unless a client is willing to come up with $240 per year to give to rentmen, no review is allowed about the encounter between the client and the provider.  For the $240, a client is allowed to write reviews and watch some sort of animated video that are free on many world-wide sites. 

Where do you come up with $240? It's $9.95 a month for a premium membership or you can do $99.95 for a 12 month membership?

[+ azdr0710]

49 minutes ago, CuriousByNature said:

Is there a reason why providers cannot move their profiles to Hunqz or another Europe-based site?  Perhaps RM operates as if it's the only viable option because nobody has challenged that characterization.

would certainly be nice, but Hunqz et al are much oriented toward European providers and international destinations......North American-based clients looking for North American-based providers really only have Rentmen and not enough have even heard of Hunqz/Romeo.....

[+ azdr0710]

44 minutes ago, BuffaloKyle said:

Where do you come up with $240? It's $9.95 a month for a premium membership or you can do $99.95 for a 12 month membership?

RM is still charging $19.95/mo for new premium subscribers.....if members are lucky enough to have locked in a recurring auto-bill membership at the old $9.95, they should be grateful 😉........note to $9.95 members:  DON'T LET YOUR auto-bill payment get screwed up with an expiring card or similar card snafu at your end!!

[BuffaloKyle]

1 minute ago, azdr0710 said:

RM is still charging $19.95/mo for new premium subscribers.....if members are lucky enough to have locked in a recurring auto-bill membership at the old $9.95, they should be grateful 😉........note to $9.95 members:  DON'T LET YOUR auto-bill payment get screwed up with an expiring card or similar card snafu at your end!!

I just subscribed two or three days ago for a new membership and it charged me $9.95. 🤔

[+ azdr0710]

3 minutes ago, BuffaloKyle said:

I just subscribed two or three days ago for a new membership and it charged me $9.95. 🤔

lucky you.....just for fun and to check all the concerns in this thread, I went into rentmen in a different browser (as a non-member nobody)......clicked on a random grayed-out "premium" (flame logo) picture and it went directly to a sign-up page at $19.95/mo.......and, as mentioned above, there are no "dick pics" at @Vin_Marco's public pictures, despite Vin testing that a couple days ago (see upthread).....yup, another way for a monopoly like rentmen to rake it in.....

usually, of course, I'm auto-signed-in as a paying premium member in my usual browser and all the bells and whistles show up!.....

[Jarrod_Uncut]

3 hours ago, RamPoundAss said:

I’m going to disagree. I understand the frustration with “shoppers,” but guess what? Every business selling something has them. In the meantime, you’re asking someone to make a purchasing decision without being able to see the merchandise? Or paying for the privilege of shopping? No, I don’t think so. Clothed pictures are not the same. 
 

If you want to make money off your images, then OnlyFans and your own paid access gallery are fine. As you seem to be doing. But if you’re selling access to the real thing, I think you need to be prepared to show what the real thing looks like. Just my opinion. 

Right, and by all means I’m not thrilled about the decision. In fact, what had stopped me from removing all my nudes is: I try to think about how porn has done it for years: you go to a bookstore, browse DVDs, and you can see lots of dick and ass action on the back cover. Definitely gets the juices flowing. And online sites have put out free previews and such, and I even have that on my site as well: for members who sign up. They don’t even have to pay, just sign up and if they want the full versions, they can do the payment part.
 

But I’m just saying, if it is going to be the normal: there may be some silver lining to it, however it doesn’t sound like they’ve revealed that yet. I’ve been one to suggest to them in the past: maybe use our private gallery be a way to get paid either monetary or “points” towards the fee we pay for platinum boosts and memberships.

I stopped unlocking my private pics couple years ago, and recently just got rid of the whole gallery and put it all on the public: the ones I want to display, and then the others in premium.

I don’t mind people seeing the goods but, there’s just has to be a point and honest observation that: maybe some people don’t want to show all their goods for free. I’ve seen escorts, some who have even been hired side by side with me in 3som situations…with me who showed dick pics.

So it’s almost like: how is fair for the same guy to advertise no dick pics and get hired by the same client who saw mine for free? That’s not a question but rather: it’s a fact. It should be equal level playing field.

Of course I don’t know what providers may do in their private conservations, maybe they send out Dick pics over phone or whatever.

2 hours ago, Vin_Marco said:

You're correct... look what happened to M4RN when they no longer allowed nudes on an ESCORT ADVERTISING SITE. It was the beginning of their end and also the nail in their coffin ⚰️ 

I think with men4rent it was more than one thing though right? Like they took off rates, and raise their ad price exorbitantly (at one point $49.99 for 10 days platinum).

Then it seemed like scam clients were getting in and emailing us fake booking requests, and it just didn’t seem like they wanted to do much innovation from when they started since 2003 or whatever. It was sad to see them go, and they were getting me the most bookings of of the sites. But they voluntarily closed after the RentBoy raid. They could have still been around  today if they wanted to.

Edited October 1, 2023 by Jarrod_Uncut

[marylander1940]

19 hours ago, coriolis888 said:

Rentmen is the largest provider advertising site in the U.S. and Canada.

Most of us already know that Rentmen recently put in new rules that require a fee from non advertisers (clients) in order to send in a review about an experience with a hired provider.  The fee is $240 yearly to rentmen, not to a provider.  

This requirement of paying rentmen a fee to write a review does potential harm to clients and providers who use Rentmen because of the inability to warn other clients (via reviews) of good or bad experiences from a provider. 

Moreover, there are some providers with fake photos and other dishonest claims advertising their services on rentmen.  Unless a client is willing to come up with $240 per year to give to rentmen, no review is allowed about the encounter between the client and the provider.  For the $240, a client is allowed to write reviews and watch some sort of animated video that are free on many world-wide sites.  

Now we have a new strange requirement set up by rentmen.  I was advised by someone I know who advertises on rentmen that all advertisement photos that show any genitalia in the advertisement photos must be removed.   

Such a requirement is bound to have a negative effect on providers who pay rentmen to advertise on their site.    

Rentmen is making many negative rules for both their advertising clients and the readers of rentmen who pay to hire the providers paying rentmen.  

I realize everyone wants to make money, however, the changes made by rentmen seem like a one-way street in favor of only rentmen.  

If this disclosure has already been made elsewhere on the site, please excuse the repeat.  I cannot find any other mention of this travesty.  

it was a money grab plain and simple, specially considering they control the market.

I'm sure they'll come up with other ways to get more money, hopefully a competitor will emerge. 

[marylander1940]

1 minute ago, coriolis888 said:

Considering the inconsistencies already showing, it just shows that rentmen is a mess with its billing and operation at the moment.   All customers should be charged the same price when signing up for a same type membership.  

Give it time, those who are currently charged $9.95 will soon be raised to the $14.95 rate to equalize rentmen's billing process.  

[BuffaloKyle]

6 minutes ago, coriolis888 said:

Considering the inconsistencies already showing, it just shows that rentmen is a mess with its billing and operation at the moment.   All customers should be charged the same price when signing up for a same type membership.  

Give it time, those who are currently charged $9.95 will soon be raised to the higher rate to equalize rentmen's billing process.  

Maybe they gave me a discount to get me to sign up again. I would subscribe only once every 3 or 4 months as I don't need a nonstop premium membership. But after they raised the price I hadn't subscribed since.

[dbar123]

2 hours ago, azdr0710 said:

RM is still charging $19.95/mo for new premium subscribers.....if members are lucky enough to have locked in a recurring auto-bill membership at the old $9.95, they should be grateful 😉........note to $9.95 members:  DON'T LET YOUR auto-bill payment get screwed up with an expiring card or similar card snafu at your end!!

For the grandfathered $9.95 a month that I was paying, I was suddenly barred from viewing videos or semiprivate photos. The $9.95 no longer seemed worth it so I canceled my membership.

The positive side of these changes is that as a US client I can now see the text of reviews left by others without a vpn if I use the phone app. All of the dimensions show up in metric but I’ve learned to cope with that

Edited October 1, 2023 by dbar123

[wsc]

Wouldn't it be wonderful if either or both of the following happened as a result of RM's arrogance?

• A national gay publication (like the Advocate) brought back something like their old Pink Pages for escort ads, city by city.
• We see a resurgence in hustler bars nationwide, where you can both see and speak with prospects on either side of the transaction.

Would love to chat more but I have other windmills to tilt with. Now where the hell is Sancho?

 

BTW, I sometimes the miss the old ways of the old days. My doctor would tell me it's age-related.

[+ KensingtonHomo]

52 minutes ago, wsc said:

Wouldn't it be wonderful if either or both of the following happened as a result of RM's arrogance?

• A national gay publication (like the Advocate) brought back something like their old Pink Pages for escort ads, city by city.
• We see a resurgence in hustler bars nationwide, where you can both see and speak with prospects on either side of the transaction.

Sadly, the anti-trafficking laws (which do nothing for people being trafficked) ensure that no US-based publication will do escort ads as long as they're in effect. 

[Jarrod_Uncut]

1 hour ago, wsc said:

Wouldn't it be wonderful if either or both of the following happened as a result of RM's arrogance?

• A national gay publication (like the Advocate) brought back something like their old Pink Pages for escort ads, city by city.
• We see a resurgence in hustler bars nationwide, where you can both see and speak with prospects on either side of the transaction.

Would love to chat more but I have other windmills to tilt with. Now where the hell is Sancho?

 

BTW, I sometimes the miss the old ways of the old days. My doctor would tell me it's age-related.

Hmm, nostalgic for sure but: I doubt it. I wasn’t really “in the industry” during those days, but I used to like reading hot spots in Miami and seeing the escort/masseur pages. I used to think nothing of it at the time, but didn’t cross my mind that I’d actually be doing it some day. 
 

Plus I don’t want to go backwards. These days we have better screening, deposits, etc. 
 

As for RentMen: I think they deserve some grace. They’ve done a lot for us. They are the first M4M site to ever come out with “client profiles” (actually adam4adam/gay.com did before that but…as far as designated escort sites goes). They’ve also done things for me that other sites wouldn’t, and I feel they have done way more than what RentBoy used to do (anybody recall having to place ads in other cities and paying extra $20 to do so?) 

Overall, I’ve also had my concerns with the platform. Namely what I’ve mentioned earlier. 

[MikeH10]

that's when the decline often begins - a site/platform begins making a series of user-hostile changes with no discernible value to its audience, and seems to instead be motivated by financial or business interests. see: facebook, okcupid, tumblr, twitter, Adobe products (looking at your Premier)...

[nate_sf]

6 hours ago, CuriousByNature said:

Is there a reason why providers cannot move their profiles to Hunqz or another Europe-based site?  Perhaps RM operates as if it's the only viable option because nobody has challenged that characterization.

I tried Hunqz, and yes in theory it would be an alternative. The user interface is ok, not great but not terrible. But how do you get people to migrate there? When I had a profile there it was crickets...

[Lazarus]

What about Friendboy.pro? 

[maninsoma]

I checked out Hunqz last night.  I think there are fewer than 10 providers in the San Francisco area.  Most of them also advertise on Rentmen, and the one I'd never seen before didn't appeal to me.  If more providers move their ads to Hunqz and cancel their Rentmen ads, I'm sure the clients will follow.  I don't know anything about Hunqz, but Rentmen's demise (or, at least, the loss of their monopoly of the market in the US) wouldn't be a bad thing as far as I am concerned.

[+ BOZO T CLOWN]

Sorry to be the ant at the picnic, but Rentmen.com raising its membership price is neither greed nor a cash grab. It is called free enterprise. This is how capitalism works. Rentmen.com is a private company. It is in business to make $$$. It is not a charity. Rentmen can charge whatever it wants, and the consumer has the option to pay or not.  If you are so outraged at the membership price, open up your own rival company offering the same services with a lower monthly membership. See how that works out. Good luck!

Paying $19.95 per month to have access to Premium photos, unlimited videos, etc. in addition to Rentmen.com's basic services doesn't seem to be an inordinate amount, especially when one considers the the price for the services of an escort these days is $300+ per hour. So to those who are in the "hiring business", who are offended at the idea of having to pay $240 for a year's subscription to Rentmen.com, should do without it. Or, in the alternative, have one less escort session next year. That will pay for 12 months of Rentmen.com, and you will have $$ left over for a nice dinner and cotton candy for dessert.

And for those escorts clutching their pearls at Rentmen.com's policies, here's a thought: A few years ago, Bozo was paying $150 - $200 for your services. Your prices have since doubled. Where is the real greed and cash grab? And please don't whine and kvetch about your expenses going up. Do you think Rentmen.com's expenses have remained the same all this time?

BoZo

 

Edited October 2, 2023 by BOZO T CLOWN

[mike carey]

Agree, @BOZO T CLOWN, and as others have noted, $240 a year (in monthly instalments) is not the only option. Paying for six months or a year in one go is usually cheaper. I paid $AU159 for a year rather than the alternative of $AU19.95 a month. Even if their pricing is a dog's breakfast of inconsistent offers you can look at the options you have at any point in time. Of course, choosing not to pay is one of those options.

[+ DrownedBoy]

Their annual revenue is 15 million. Not exactly a FAANG. And they're not publicly traded.

Unfortunately,  the only way competition is possible is if some court ruling legalized U.S. prostitution.  There's 0% chance SCOTUS will do that.

It's already been pointed out that the U.S. is using RM to crack down on visiting providers. They're already getting a fire lit under their ass. Making a competing platform would be too financially risky.

The shutdown of RB mainly backfired on the Feds. The judge herself said it was unwarranted , the NYT accused Homeland Security of homophobia, and the agent who leveled the case is now in private practice. However, the political climate has changed, and that creates a chilling affect. Everyone knows that they're going after transsexuals only as a door into returning to the legal gay bashing of the past.

I'd start looking for an alternative just to be safe. If MAGAites started attacking RM publicly in this political climate,  the company might end up shutting down.

[marylander1940]

Awful!

Now escorts besides having to explain potential clients their location, engage in endless texting over other things, etc, they'll have to text their x rated pics to most potential clients.... What about those whose biggest asset are their private pics? 

Bad move! 

[SometimesBi]

21 hours ago, nate_sf said:

If this change sticks, it will require providers to develop yet another workaround. Providers in the US already have to do that with their fees. Some have their fees in an autoresponse in their instant messages. In my case I have a stand-alone web page with my rates that I point clients to

I just saw a clever workaround last week. Don't remember who, or how I even stumbled on their profile (possibly a link from a forum here)...

But basically, they created a hashtag with their rate, i.e. #200anhour 

If providers use their own flavor of this (not sharing the same hashtags) might be harder for such tags to be detected/removed. For example: #200hr, #hr200, #a200hour, even #twohundredhour 😁