TOURING vs. TRAVELING ESCORTS

[Amoco]

A few weeks ago I started a thread that dealt with the question of who should be responsible for transportation costs when an escort flies to a city to see a specific client at their request but then chooses to stay longer and see other clients. My position was that the client should pay if the trip was exclusively for them, but if the escort chose to conduct other business after successfully completing his commitment to the client, that he should also pay the transportation costs. It was clear from the diversity of responses that there wasn't any universally accepted protocol for this stuff, and there was no shortage of opinions on what would be considered appropriate.

 

Then I received Dave's annual newsletter in which he discusses the difference between a touring escort and a traveling escort. According to Dave:

 

A touring escort is one who identifies a city, plans a trip at their convenience, markets the trip and pays all of their own expenses while hoping to see as many clients as they're comfortable with.

 

A traveling escort, however, is different in the sense that they travel to a specific client's location, at the client's specific request. They are paid their fee, whatever tip the client chooses or doesn't choose to give, plus all expenses - including transportation costs. In addition, Dave goes on to say that the escort can choose to see other clients by traveling early or staying later than the contracted session, and as long as the escort successfully completes the session with the client who is paying their way, they are free to do whatever they choose, including conducting other business, on the original client's dime. Dave would describe the client who pays for everything as his "anchor client".

 

I strongly disagree with the definition Dave offers of a traveling escort and specifically object to these issues being presented as commonly agreed upon facts. Further, Dave's suggestion that the latter is a "win-win" for client and escort alike is disingenuous at best, and dishonest in it's suggestion that there aren't other ways of handling a traveling escort's expenses. To my mind, the anchor client is the original client who commits to an extended session so as to minimize the risk for escorts of traveling to a new city and waiting to book appointments, rather than the one who pays for the sorts total transportation expense. I certainly understand why escorts prefer it the way Dave describes, but I think it raises some important questions.

 

In reality, many people do choose to do this differently, and I offered my protocol (I pay travel if they're seeing me exclusively, they pay if they plan to see other clients), but there are many deviations on this same theme, including, but not limited to paying partial travel expenses. As I've looked into this and other similar situations, I can find no precedent for any professional situation in which Client A finances travel and the service provider sees others who do not participate in that expense. In fact, in the professional world that would be considered an ethical breach.

 

My point in raising this again is the memory of my ignorance about this stuff when I first started hiring, and the belief that many newbies and inexperienced clients often regard declarations such as these, from someone as august and iconic as Dave, as fact. There is, however, more than one way to do this stuff and I'd encourage anyone that is confused to ask someone on the Forum so that you can hear a mixture of different perspectives. Dave's opinion s exactly that - Dave's opinion, and though he is a gifted escort who clearly has the right to run his business any way he sees fit, everyone who considers bringing in a traveling escort should make themselves aware of the different options.

 

Lastly, I understand that there are plenty of clients who are comfortable paying travel expenses as long as the escort comes with a good attitude and doeys their job well. That's fine with me as everybody has to do what feels right to them. I just don't think that clients who view this differently should be seen as difficult or petty. I view escorts as competent adults who are certainly well paid and enjoy many of the bonuses associated with running their own small business. At times that includes accepting some minimal risk or a small investment in marketing in exchange for capitalizing on a new market.

[+ Gar1eth]

I'm not sure how upset I would be in your situation as I've frequently told escorts that I don't mind if they stay after we finish meeting either because I didnt mind or because I was thinking of it as an inducement for them to come visit me in the first place. In your case with your feelings about the situation maybe it would be best to discuss some kind of promotional pricing-or possibly you would only spring for 1/2 of the airfare.

 

Gman

[down_to_business]

A few weeks ago I started a thread that dealt with the question of who should be responsible for transportation costs when an escort flies to a city to see a specific client at their request but then chooses to stay longer and see other clients...

 

I strongly disagree with the definition Dave offers of a traveling escort and specifically object to these issues being presented as commonly agreed upon facts...

 

Lastly, I understand that there are plenty of clients who are comfortable paying travel expenses as long as the escort comes with a good attitude and doeys their job well. That's fine with me as everybody has to do what feels right to them. I just don't think that clients who view this differently should be seen as difficult or petty. I view escorts as competent adults who are certainly well paid and enjoy many of the bonuses associated with running their own small business..

 

Where to begin.

 

Don't worry about what Dave defines as the standard. I think the only thing that all of us can agree upon is that there is no standard in escorting period (i.e. the hours an overnight cover, when and how payment is to be made just to name two).

 

Sometimes I think that 90% of the identities on here belong to the same 5 escorts and that is why we constantly hear one-sided viewpoints of things (i.e. like its ok for escorts to stand up clients but not ok for clients to cancel on escorts, or why you are a no good cheap ass bastard if you aren't paying $400 an hour and tipping 50% of the fee for mediocre service at a bare minimum). Just learn to take all of the comments with a big dose of skepticism and don't let them get to you. You can occasionally find good nuggets of wisdom hidden between the propaganda.

 

For what its worth, I don't find you difficult or petty for having a different opinion of things. I wish more people would have the courage to speak up about their thoughts and ideas and promote good discussion.

[+ bigjoey]

I have been flying in escorts to Kansas City for about 20 years. In some cases, after the escort has spent the time with me, he has stayed a few more days for other clients. My view has been that the perk of seeing the other clients is a bonus for him and will make him want to come for another visit since it is more profitable for him. I feel this way because I initiated the contact and the trip.

 

Sorry, i fail to understand what difference it makes to me or anyone flying in an escort if he spends a few more days. It costs me nothing and only benefits the escort. I am happy for him. It is beyond my belief that something this petty is even worth discussing. If the extra days were costing even one cent to the original poster, then OK, you have a beef for the sum of one cent; but if there is no cost, you just need to move on to another hobby and not hire out-of-city men; just hire locally or you fly to some great city and hire the locals when you visit or get a partner and get married or just jack off more and buy a Jeff Stryker dildo if need be or fleshlight but stop flying in men.

[bigvalboy]

Where to begin.

 

Don't worry about what Dave defines as the standard. I think the only thing that all of us can agree upon is that there is no standard in escorting period (i.e. the hours an overnight cover, when and how payment is to be made just to name two).

 

Sometimes I think that 90% of the identities on here belong to the same 5 escorts and that is why we constantly hear one-sided viewpoints of things (i.e. like its ok for escorts to stand up clients but not ok for clients to cancel on escorts, or why you are a no good cheap ass bastard if you aren't paying $400 an hour and tipping 50% of the fee for mediocre service at a bare minimum). Just learn to take all of the comments with a big dose of skepticism and don't let them get to you. You can occasionally find good nuggets of wisdom hidden between the propaganda.

 

For what its worth, I don't find you difficult or petty for having a different opinion of things. I wish more people would have the courage to speak up about their thoughts and ideas and promote good discussion.

 

+1...

[namchebaz]

Further, Dave's suggestion that the latter is a "win-win" for client and escort alike is disingenuous at best, and dishonest in it's suggestion that there aren't other ways of handling a traveling escort's expenses. To my mind, the anchor client is the original client who commits to an extended session so as to minimize the risk for escorts of traveling to a new city and waiting to book appointments, rather than the one who pays for the sorts total transportation expense.

 

Amoco, since I explained my viewpoint the last time this topic was posted, I won't rehash it now. But whether we agree or not, it seems unfair to characterize Dave's newsletter comments as "disingenuous at best, and dishonest", around a disagreement over his own business model. It seems particularly harsh considering that he's not even a part of the conversation.

 

I do understand your concern for the confusion you see being created for those new to hiring who might conclude that Dave's model is the only model available. But I went back and read his newsletter and don't believe he was purporting to speak for the escort community in its entirety. Nor could he. I would reserve words like "dishonest" for a situation in which I believed the person was intentionally attempting to deceive. You may believe that's the case here. I don't.

 

And I don't believe it's petty to raise this or any other differing point of view, controversial or not, on this forum. Your well-reasoned rationale for your position will help others think more clearly about this issue and arrive at their own conclusion. I do object to characterizing the opposing viewpoint in negative, polarizing terms.

[Becket]

Sometimes I fly into the city where an escort lives. We spend a couple days together and then he leaves. I stay a few more days and am on my own. Am I permitted to see other escorts once my "anchor" escort has left? The answer is, of course I am. So what's good for the goose......

 

cheers

[down_to_business]

Sometimes I fly into the city where an escort lives. We spend a couple days together and then he leaves. I stay a few more days and am on my own. Am I permitted to see other escorts once my "anchor" escort has left? The answer is, of course I am. So what's good for the goose......

 

cheers

 

Not if the escort pays for your airfare

[Amoco]

Really appreciate all the commentary, and just want to remind everybody that the point of the thread was to make sure that everybody knows that there are a variety of acceptable ways to manage these kinds of issues. As I said, if you're comfortable paying for the travel when the escort plans to see you and others, that's perfectly fine with me. I would like to respond to just a few of the legitimate issues raised by other posters.

 

- Tguy: the issue is not one of whether the escort just hangs and has some fun after the appointment. You mentioned that you can't imagine your employer having an issue with you extending your visit at no additional cost, but that's not the issue at hand. The question is what would your employer's position be if you travelled to Client A's city, provided services to client A, billed them for your travel and fees, and then, when done, went on to see Client B on Client A's travel dime? I can't speak for your company, but I can tell you that that would be considered unethical in other businesses (law, management consultation, etc.).

 

- Namchebaz: I agree that Dave never said that he was speaking for the entire community. He did, however, define traveling and touring escorts the way he did without suggesting other options or prefacing his commentary with "The way I do it is .....". As a result, I think it reads as a definitive and generally agreed upon perspective, especially when offered by someone like Dave, who is seen as an expert who teaches escorting to escorts - when you're a legend, people listen to you differently. Secondly, the part that seemed disingenuous to me was describing the situation where the traveling escort chooses to use Client A's travel money to see other clients as a "win-win" because the client gets to pick a convenient time for his session and the escort gets an opportunity to tour without travel expenses. You may not agree but I think this comment is self-serving, and I fail to see the client's "win" in that circumstance as he was always going to have his custom appointment and was always going to pay expenses. The true win-win would be either sharing the expenses or having the escort pay his own travel expenses if seeing other clients because that way EACH person in the contract gets something of value: the escort gets a client who guarantees an extended appointment that minimizes their risk, and the client gets a less expensive service by not having to cover travel - that's a win-win, whereas the other system is really a "push for clients and a win for escorts. Lastly, to clarify my point, I felt there was an inherent dishonesty as presenting these issues as 'the way it is' rather than saying that there are different perspectives and protocols to consider.

 

Big Joey: again, I'm fine with your perspective, but don't agree that it doesn't cost you anything. Simply put, it costs you the travel expense, which can certainly be considerable when escorts charge for travel time and pre and post flight time. To me, this is a business arrangement and each party brings value to the table. In the circumstance we're discussing, the client is providing something of value, too, and would be the opportunity to earn a fee and later to work a different area. My view is that clients shouldn't be shy about monetizing the value of what they bring. But I respect your right to do this differently.

 

- Becket: Your joke made me laugh, too! Not sure it's directly analogous,but it was funny....

 

All that said, I'm comfortable with everyone's different perspective and the whole point was to get different opinions out there.

[Dave]

Amoco,

I’ve sent you a PM.

Dave

[Amoco]

Dave...received your PM and responded.

 

TGuy: I appreciate your different perspective but respectfully, disagree. In my personal experience, I scheduled an escort to come to town and agreed to pay his travel expenses. As soon as I did that, he posted an ad that looked just like all the other touring ads I've seen - in fact, that's how I figured it out. So in my situation, I was what Dave would call the "anchor client" and financed my session AND the other sessions by virtue of paying the airfare. Every single person in the mix got added value EXCEPT me, the original client who booked and paid for the travel. The escort got to have a touring experience without travel expenses, and the other clients got an escort experience that they wouldn't have had in their home city if I hadn't financed the travel. The only one who didn't get added value was me, the original hirer. I understand that that's OK with you - that is perfectly fine with me. It just doesn't seem fair and it's like no other profession I can think of.

[+ quoththeraven]

It feels like everyone here is talking past one another. My issue here is the basis for your policy. Escorting has a much higher last minute cancellation rate than other businesses under circumstances where it’s difficult to impossible to mitigate the cancellation, particularly while out of town. (Other businesses have fixed locations; that’s only true for an escort in his home territory.) If an escort is seeing new clients during his trip, he can’t count on – and is potentially at risk for – receiving the full anticipated payment until an appointment begins, and even then there is risk. See the recent discussion about the etiquette of ending early and about an anchor client who cancelled and left the escort scrambling. So those other clients you feel are not paying their fair share? Even if the escort has bookings, he doesn’t know if they’re going to pan out until he’s there. So you are asking him to take on more economic risk in a situation that is more economically risky for him than if he stayed home.

 

This doesn’t happen in everyday businesses. If a consultant, lawyer, accountant, or other professional travels to see a client, that person has every reason to expect to meet with the client, render services, and bill them. If a bill remains unpaid, it can be sent to collection or services can be interrupted, leverage an escort doesn’t have. If for some reason the professional arrives and the client is unavailable, the client would be billed for travel expenses anyway, and possibly time. Other than the risk of non-collection, the professional’s risk of not having travel expenses paid is close to zero.

 

In addition, the escort is shouldering the cost of lodging for the additional days he stays. Because of the need to have a room available for incalls, the fact that he might spend some time at a client’s location, whether it be his home or his hotel room, doesn’t help decrease these costs. He also shoulders the expense of any meals for which another client doesn’t pay.

 

In the everyday business world, the cost of travel benefiting more than one client would be prorated, either equally (in the corporate environment) or with regard to time (in the legal environment or any other that bills by the hour – yes, I’m aware of the comparison). Unlike, say, a lawyer, though, an escort doesn’t know for sure who’s going to follow through until the appointment commences. There are practical difficulties with arriving at a fair proration until the last appointment takes place, which suggests the weaknesses of this model. Moreover, the fairest proration would be based on how much time the escort spent with each client, which would result in some convoluted and confusing calculations.

 

Since none of the other clients are likely to be willing to kick in – the escort didn’t come to town with the specific intention of seeing them -- the escort is therefore on the hook for at least half of his travel expenses (assuming you’re amenable to that concession) plus all the risks attendant with escort appointments, which are particularly acute if he’s seeing a lot of new clients or this is his first trip to this location. This in itself might discourage him from coming at all under the terms you propose, as you’re asking him to shoulder even more risk instead of an arrangement that is no different in terms of economics than one that would be acceptable if he came to see you and went home. You’re acting as though this arrangement somehow takes advantage of you and is commercially unreasonable when it isn’t. That’s why some commenters, myself included, don’t understand your reasoning.

.

Finally, there are also opportunity costs, that is, the income the escort is foregoing by not staying home. I’m not sure exactly how this pans out; I’d love an escort’s take on this. This plus the other considerations may lead the escort to decline the arrangements you prefer (come and see only you or pay his own travel expenses if he seeks other clients) and stay home.

 

What you also aren’t considering is that if he develops business (or more business) in your area, he may travel there more often, possibly on someone else’s dime, and you can benefit from not having to pay his travel expenses because someone else has. Also, your assumption that you are expanding his territory may not be true. He may have visited your locale in the past on other’s dime. But this time you’re the client driving the bus, so to speak. See the discussion above of the practical impossibility of proration.

 

Disclaimer

 

In the interest of full disclosure: I received the same newsletter as you did, and I’m a current client of Dave’s. (Not something I wanted to state in black and white here, in part because I didn’t want to be viewed as his shill, but there we are.) Dave and I have never discussed this topic in any form, I am not writing this at his or anyone else’s request or with the input of anyone else (all assumptions made here are my own based on what I’ve read on the forum and elsewhere), and the opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone. Furthermore, Dave and I don’t see eye to eye on everything, including the topic of escorting and best practices.

 

I should also disclose that the first time I hired Dave, I did so when he was in NYC for a few days on the dime of another client. I would be less likely and less able to hire if I had to bring an escort here on my own dime.

 

I hope people here know me well enough to know that I mean what I say and I say what I mean. It’s up to the rest of you to decide if or how my affiliation with Dave affects my thoughts on the matter.

 

I also agree with Namchebaz that what Dave described in his newsletter is neither dishonest (addressed above) nor disingenuous, and that Dave was expressing his personal opinion and business model, not laying down the law for the industry or explaining general industry practice. He nowhere claims or implies as much.

 

If you had concerns about the way he expressed himself, you should have gone to him first and not to the forum. After that would have been a more appropriate time to hash this out again in public. It’s also kind of unfair to evaluate what someone wrote without including the passage you’re writing about so everyone else can see it.

 

Conclusion

 

In closing, you should continue to make only those arrangements that you’re comfortable with, but it would be better to say your doing so because that’s what you prefer and are comfortable with, not because the other way is dishonest or the reasons for it disingenuous. However, by airing this in public – twice – you may have killed this option. Be prepared to have fewer escorts visit you (and no, I’m not anticipating what Dave might do or has said, just saying you may be lessening the odds).

 

Escorts, if I have made any incorrect assumptions, or if there’s additional information, such as on opportunity costs, you can provide that might be helpful here, please explain.

[+ SundayZip]

I support Amoco's position 100%. I would not agree to pay round trip airfare for an escort if he plans to see other clients while in town. Others seem to be ok with this which is wonderful for them. But I personally would not be ok with it and hope that the "experts" do not state, or even imply, that this should be standard practice for all.

 

I agree that there is no precedent in the business world where Client A finances travel and then the service provider works for others who do not participate in the travel expense. My job, for a lot of years, involved hiring consultants from all over the country and approving their travel expenses. A consultant who profited from working for other clients while we paid their expenses would have been dropped faster than you can blink. It would have been considered highly unethical unless there was a common understanding up front. And even then, that would be a rare exception. It is an entirely different thing if the consultant enjoys some extra leisure time while they're in town (seeing the sites, visiting family, etc.). But as soon as they start working for other clients, they've crossed the ethical line.

 

That said, the escorting business does not necessarily parallel the rest of the business world. So be it. But given the lack of standard practices, I appreciate it when posters like Amoco raise these protocol questions and generate good, respectful discussion. I do not appreciate it when others reply by calling the OP "petty" or telling him to "just jack off more."

[+ bigjoey]

I apologize for telling Amoco to "jack off more"; that was an attempt at humor.

[Steven_Draker]

This topic can be rehearsed till the end of times ... which reminds me that some people have an

http://radbusinessassociation.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/agenda1.jpg here.

[+ SundayZip]

QT, I understand how the scenarios that you describe put all the risk of financial loss on the escort, but those scenarios do not reflect my reality. The last time a paid for an escort's travel, we spent a weekend together in a third city. I paid for his round-trip airfare when I made the flight reservations. His reservation was, of course, in his name and he had his ticket in-hand well before our weekend together. I used my credit card to reserve 2 adjacent hotel rooms, one in his name and one in mine (I'm more comfortable when we both have our own space). He had his hotel reservation confirmation in-hand prior to the weekend. I suppose I could have been a no-show, but given that we trusted each other and that I had already paid for airfare, I think he was pretty confident that I'd follow through.

[Amoco]

Want to thank everybody again for the thoughtful commentary and support - both privately and publicly. The diversity of opinions are all out there and at this point, I'm not sure that I have anything to add to the analysis provided. The point was never to create a 'vote', but rather, to encourage clients and escorts alike to share their opinions in a reasonable and respectful way. And again, please remember that my opinion is just that - my opinion, and I strongly support everyone's right to handle this stuff the way that makes sense for them.

 

BigJoey:

No worries, thanks for the apology.

 

-Steven:

Your post is a bit cryptic as I'm not entirely clear who it was directed to, but I assume you were suggesting that I have an agenda in bringing this stuff up. The truth is that I thought about that for a long time and this is my best response...Louis Brandeis once said that "Light is the best disinfectant". I agree with that statement and would suggest that the Forum has struggled over time to be a platform for clients to openly discuss complicated issues related to the lack of standards and generally agreed upon protocols within the industry. In my opinion, escorts themselves have traditionally set the agenda and and created the rules, as inconsistent as they might be.

 

If I have an agenda, it is to give voice to alternative perspectives and to empower other clients by making them aware of different options and to encourage them to take a position without fear of retribution or being run out of town. For years, escorts have discussed 'difficult' clients, bad breath, high cancellation rates, time wasters, etc. Recently, however, clients are beginning to step up in greater numbers and taking risks by asking provocative questions. If you just look at recent client posts, you'll note that several different guys - some of whom rarely post - have begun to raise controversial issues related to misleading and dishonest ads, escorts canceling appointments in response to better opportunities, and the whole question of what can reasonably expected when hiring someone.

 

I think that this represents an evolution in the escort world, and though shaking up the status quo is often uncomfortable, I personally think that anything that results in greater general awareness, is a good thing for both clients and escorts. My hope would be that as standards get discussed and solidified that the markets will elevate the escorts that do things the right way, and will expedite the disappearance of the guys whose purpose is to take advantage of clients. In cases where there are legitimate differences of opinions, the dialogue provides an opportunity for clients to make a personal decision that's right for them.

 

So, in conclusion, if you were directing your point to me, I guess I have to embrace it. Doesn't everybody who posts have an agenda?

 

As always, I appreciate your thoughts and always get a kick out of your pithy commentary.

[Steven_Draker]

http://www.companyofmen.org/showthread.php?102303-Help-with-what-s-appropriate-when-flying-an-escort-in

 

http://www.companyofmen.org/showthread.php?102419-UPDATE-on-question-related-to-who-pays-the-airfare-when-an-escort-travels

 

http://www.companyofmen.org/showthread.php?102884-TOURING-vs-TRAVELING-ESCORTS

 

 

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/540/667/795.gif

[Okliehomo]

While the horse above, indeed, appears to be dead, I am bored at work, so here goes.

 

Lo these many years, I have only done overnites. I state upfront that I pay $blah and "all expenses of course". Which includes airfare, meals, taxi, hotel. To me, that is my cost of the visit. I agree to pay that upfront and from my perspective, it is part of their fee. In real business, it's Cost of Goods Sold. In my business, it's Cost of Ass Eaten.

 

So, I have never cared if they stayed longer. When I am done, I am done and the ticket is theirs to do with what they will. Fly back home, or change it to fly to another city and another client. I couldn't care less. I have had guys post on their websites travel schedule that they are coming to OKC and that doesn't bother me, either.

 

Every escort has their way of doing business and every client does, too.

 

And I pithy the fool that tries to find anything normal about any of this.

[+ Funguy]

Sometimes it might be a lot more fun for the client to travel TO the escort - the travel costs, hotel, etc. are the same and the client can get to see another city. I do realize that often work schedules can interfere with this type of arrangement but if the client can do it, this will eliminate all of the ill feelings generated in some cases. The same expense is still borne by the client but there is no more advantage to the escort, all is clear, no misunderstandings, etc. and the CLIENT gets to see a "new" city.

[down_to_business]

To me the point of this whole controversy is being missed. It's not about whether or not an escort has the right to see other clients when someone flies them into another city or whether or not you agree that they should or shouldn't be allowed to do that. I personally wouldn't mind whether or not the escort decided to stay and change his own prepaid ticket I bought him-- I wouldn't even need to know.

 

What would bother me, however, and what is at the heart of this controversy is whether or not (as stupid as you may or may not think the stipulation is) as part of our contract I negotiated the terms of only seeing me and the escort agreed to this. Again- it is not a term I would negotiate personally, but that again is besides the point. The client contracted and the escort agreed. If the escort thought that the client demands were outrageous or unacceptable, he should have refused the appointment. It is totally disingenuous to accept a clients terms as part of your agreement and then not uphold your part of that agreement. So I can see why the client was upset even if it was not something that might have upset me. If it was something we agreed upon and the escort didn't honor his part of the agreement, then it would most definitely bother me. Terms of a contract or agreement are terms of an agreement, and both parties should honor the agreements they make no matter how insignificant others think of those terms are (i.e. services, rates, time, and YES, even travel arrangements). This is not an agenda- this is simply adhering to the agreements we make and we shouldn't make agreements we have no intention of honoring.

[+ quoththeraven]

To me the point of this whole controversy is being missed. It's not about whether or not an escort has the right to see other clients when someone flies them into another city or whether or not you agree that they should or shouldn't be allowed to do that. I personally wouldn't mind whether or not the escort decided to stay and change his own prepaid ticket I bought him-- I wouldn't even need to know.

 

What would bother me, however, and what is at the heart of this controversy is whether or not (as stupid as you may or may not think the stipulation is) as part of our contract I negotiated the terms of only seeing me and the escort agreed to this. Again- it is not a term I would negotiate personally, but that again is besides the point. The client contracted and the escort agreed. If the escort thought that the client demands were outrageous or unacceptable, he should have refused the appointment. It is totally disingenuous to accept a clients terms as part of your agreement and then not uphold your part of that agreement. So I can see why the client was upset even if it was not something that might have upset me. If it was something we agreed upon and the escort didn't honor his part of the agreement, then it would most definitely bother me. Terms of a contract or agreement are terms of an agreement, and both parties should honor the agreements they make no matter how insignificant others think of those terms are (i.e. services, rates, time, and YES, even travel arrangements). This is not an agenda- this is simply adhering to the agreements we make and we shouldn't make agreements we have no intention of honoring.

 

What you describe was the subject of a prior thread started by OP. As I read it (I could be wrong, but I don't think I am), this thread was meant to be more conceptual and philosophical in nature. It had nothing to do with specific arrangements with specific escorts.

 

As I recall, everyone in the prior thread agreed the escort should have lived up to his agreement.

[Juan Vancouver]

I would not agree to pay round trip airfare for an escort if he plans to see other clients while in town. Others seem to be ok with this which is wonderful for them. But I personally would not be ok with it and hope that the "experts" do not state, or even imply, that this should be standard practice for all.

 

What "the experts" (both seasoned clients and escorts) have agreed upon is that there's many ways to do business and many perfectly valid ways to look at this situation. What is not ok is calling the client who doesn't want to pay for others petty, or the client who is comfortable with it, a doormat, or the escort who will want absolute control of his schedule a gold digger or the escort who will chime in to pay to visit his client desperate.

 

Make up your mind about what you feel comfortable with. Communicate clearly with every prospective client or escort and if you are a match, by all means make a deal. And... let others conduct their business in whatever way they feel like.

 

For some this is an intimate transaction with two human beings, for some others it's a hot purveying or sex acts, for some others it's some sort of relationship surrogacy... all are perfectly okay. The trick is to find our match. No match? Move on. You'll find one.

 

I agree that there is no precedent in the business world where Client A finances travel and then the service provider works for others who do not participate in the travel expense.

 

There is no reason you would know this, but actually this model is perfectly common in the Entertainment Industry. Sometimes actors, models, musicians, photographers are flown to a city and given all expenses to stay in town for the duration of a project. If the schedule allows for it, it is perfectly common and acceptable for the actor to go to auditions in the visiting city, meet with other directors, take jobs, do interviews, do commercials. As long as it doesn't interfere with the main project's schedule, it is commonly agreed that he/she can do whatever the fuck he wants with his time.

 

No production company will tell the actor they should chime in because they got another gig in town. For the production company the end game was having the actor in town, available, well fed, well rested and performing well.

 

I do not appreciate it when others reply by calling the OP "petty" or telling him to "just jack off more."

 

Agreed. Or disingenuous, nor dishonest.

 

If I don't like how others live, I should just shut up.

 

It's perfectly valid and encouraged to come here to say "I like things done this way, and I like these fetishes and activities."

 

What I find objectionable is when anyone comes here to say "I like things done like this and if you don't you are _____".

 

One genuinely promotes dialogue. The other makes intelligent people (and arguments) run for the hills.

[+ FreshFluff]

I agree with Amoco that "anchor client must pay all travel expenses" and "escort pays all expenses" should not be the only possible standards. In reality, what each escort get will depend on what they can negotiate.

 

I think something has been overlooked so far: As it stands, the cost of being an anchor client is high. As a result, a client has to be interested in hiring a particular escort to serve fly that escort out; there are many other potentiai clients who are interested but aren't willing to pay two-way travel costs site unseen. While elite escorts can attract such ardent clients, your average escort cannot, which means he won't travel much unless he is willing to foot the entire bill (what Dave called "touring"). (Yes, most non-anchor clients will be unwilling to share travel costs, but a few will.) By lowering the cost of being an anchor client, travel cost sharing will allow more escorts to travel than would otherwise be able to do so, opening up new markets for many escorts.. So just as one could frame the single anchor client system as a win for clients, one could argue that travel cost sharing may be a win for escorts.

 

As QTR mentioned, sharing travel costs can lead to increased risk for the escort, just as the single anchor arrangements creates risk for the client. The escort can mitigate that risk by collecting travel costs from all of the anchor clients in advance. That would create logistical difficulties compared to collecting from a single anchor client. But the advantage of being able to travel (for escorts who may not have been able to do so otherwise) may be worth the cost for some escorts.

 

However, I do not believe that Dave's statement, as quoted in Amoco's post, was dishonest at all. Framing the "standard practice" in a way that suits your business is part of marketing. That's what Dave, and a gazillion other companies and small businesses have done, and there's nothing wrong with it IMO. I think that Dave's teaching and his "legendary" reputation affects newbies' opinions less than Amoco thinks they do. FWIW, Dave and I have neither spoken nor PM'd.

[Amoco]

Insightful and helpful comments from both Juan and Freshfluff - thank you.

 

I do just want to clarify one thing: I think it's important to understand my comments about being disingenuous and dishonest in the sentence that I used as they were not offered as general statements, but rather, attached to very specific issues. The complete sentence below:

 

"Dave's suggestion that the latter (traveling escort getting anchor client to pay expenses) is a "win-win" for escorts and clients alike is disingenuous at best, and dishonest in in the suggestion that there aren't other ways of handling the escort's expenses."

 

That's very different than calling Dave a liar. In fact, it attaches those attributes to very specific deeds and implies that they were used manipulatively within a marketing piece. In addition, Dave is iconic and does teach escorting to escorts - simply put, when he speaks, people listen. If he had merely said "The way I choose to define these terms is.....", I would have still disagreed, but I would not have thought it intellectually dishonest. Dave knows there are other opinions out there on this stuff and I think he has a responsibility to the community to, at least, acknowledge that.

 

And for the record, you will recall from my earlier review and comments on the Forum that I think Dave is an extraordinary escort with unique skills that few, in my experience, share. That said, we disagree about some stuff, too.

 

And again, the entire point of my post was to educate people to the multitude of approaches that exist within the escort world and to make clear that just because a prominent escort does it his way that there might be alternative options to consider, as well.