TODAY'S E-BRIEF: ESCORT DOUBLE-CROSS

[happyguy2]

Hey Guys,

 

Did you read today's e-brief about an escort who invited another escort to tag-team a client with him, only to find out that the client had called his escort friend later to meet him alone?

 

1. I found Daddy's response to be fantastic! Perfect advice for anyone that underscored that Daddy is full of uncommon common sense. Change the situations, think of other kinds of disagreements we can have in our lives, and apply his advice - and many of our friendships will be saved from our own ineptness.

 

2. Here's a slight variation on this theme or bringing in another escort:

 

Not long ago, I was with a wonderful escort who is well reviewed here. I was on business in his town for a week, and from the start he told me he couldn't meet me for two of those days because he had a family commitment. So, on the night before the two day absence, I said that I was going to try the market and find someone else for each day. I asked him if he could recommend anyone.

 

I was flattered by his response: There is no way I want to lose you to anyone else. (He really had nothing to worry about, he is wonderful in every way and we "click". Nonetheless, he was so eager NOT to have me shop around, that he called me back not long after and said he would find the time to see me each day!

 

So, in this variation, the escort wanted to prevent another escort from taking over. Have any of you had similar experience? In a sense, they are both the same type of thinking - even though I agree with Daddy that there really is no double-cross. Jues wondered, have you clients or other escorts had similar experiences?

 

thanks

hg

[Guest RandyRon]

Totally agree with Daddy's response. I've had several threeways and one fourway with escorts and haven't noticed any conflicts yet. My regular escort in Chicago and I often ask another to join us. I can't imagine him getting offended if I would hire one of them separately. He knows I'll be back because we click. As a matter of fact, he's recommended a couple of escorts that he thinks I might like. I really don't see anything underhanded here. Both the escorts and the client are adults and have freedom of choice.

[Eric]

The part that Daddy overlooked is that - according to the story, the double-crossing escort promised the original escort that he would not see the client - and now has been doing so in spite of that promise. If he really did promise that when the original escort brought him into the party, then he is in the wrong for breaking his promise to his friend. (Were it not for that promise, I would agree with Daddy's assessment.)

[happyguy2]

I still think Daddy's advice is good. I took it that the promise was that the escort friend would not contact the client. (I hate it when escorts call us to set up a meeting), In this case the client called the escort ... and Daddy is right to suggest that its just not worth ruining a friendship over this.

 

hg

[JamesK840]

>The part that Daddy overlooked is that - according to the

>story, the double-crossing escort promised the original escort

>that he would not see the client - and now has been doing so

>in spite of that promise.

 

That's a promise that never should have been made, and certainly not asked for, which I assume the original escort did.

 

The original escort's feelings of entitlement and ownership are probably why the client was eager to look elsewhere, and all escorts need to remember that escorting is not a long term thing, especially for individual clients (though there are rare exceptions). As Daddy mentioned, if the client wanted to be 'married' he probably would be, half the point of hiring for many is variety. And I know nothing turns me off a regular escort faster then over-familiarity / expectations. I'm not a walking ATM and I'm horny on *my* schedule if *I'm* paying, so if an escort is is contacting me to ask about a get-together it better be because they enjoyed the last time so much they're offering a freebee, or at least a worthwhile special...

 

The saddest thing about 'entitled' escorts is they don't seem to realize that they are not in a career, that it is inherent in the business that as they age they will eventually be hired less and less, and if they don't save (and especially if they add in the early-ageing effects of drugs) they'll eventually end up not only with nothing, but with no prospects and no job experience, and thus, no options.

[Rod Hagen]

>nd I know nothing turns me off a

>regular escort faster then over-familiarity / expectations.

>I'm not a walking ATM and I'm horny on *my* schedule if *I'm*

>paying, so if an escort is is contacting me to ask about a

>get-together it better be because they enjoyed the last time

>so much they're offering a freebee, or at least a worthwhile

>special...

 

Not to fall back on my former ways here in the message center, but you really are a prick. It goes without saying, and yet it's been said too much, that it's inappropriate for escorts to contact clients seeking business, or for anyother reason. From the clients perspective: Don't call us, we'll call you. We got it. No Shit. It's over. I know that many escorts still do, they shouldn't. They probably don't read this board, or don't take sage advise well. Beating this fucking dead horse accomplishes nothing, but giving yourself a pat on the back about how you've made the right decision by foregoing escorts for the streets and craisgslist. Good for you.

 

And you're stuff, below, about saving money and doing drugs (cliche'), what the heck is that apropos of? Just taking several more opportunities to dis us. Who crapped in your bloody mary this morning?

[ErikMcAlister]

Not to be cynical, but I have to make one minor adjustment to your post.

 

 

>2. Here's a slight variation on this theme or bringing in

>another escort:

>

> Not long ago, I was with a wonderful escort who is well

>reviewed here. I was on business in his town for a week, and

>from the start he told me he couldn't meet me for two of those

>days because he had a family commitment. So, on the night

>before the two day absence, I said that I was going to try the

>market and find someone else for each day. I asked him if he

>could recommend anyone.

>

> I was flattered by his response: There is no way I want to

>lose you to anyone else.

 

That may have been what was SAID, but what he really meant was:

"There is no way I want to lose youR MONEY to anyone else."

 

Yes, I genuinely enjoy the time I spend with clients, but, let's not be completely ridiculous & forget the nature of the transaction. Undying devotion from someone met just a day or two prior???

 

> So, in this variation, the escort wanted to prevent

>another escort from taking over. H

 

He wanted to maximize his earning potential.

[JT Brooklyn]

IMHO..It must be Great to have Escorts arguing over your Wallet! Unfortunately it hasn't and won't happen with me! BUT it is an interesting Topic...LOL :+

[Guest]

I found James K's posting highly relevant to the issue brought up by the original poster (and subsequent posters). I find it very bizarre that you're criticizing a poster when you're the one using profanity. What's inappropriate is the use of profanity, not the sharing of one's opinion. If you disagree with James K, explain your reasons like a rational human being. If you believe escorts should espouse a sense of entitlement and spend money as fast as they earn it, please enlighted us with your sage opinions.

When you use 4-letter words, however, you merely look like an unstable hot-head (or drug-user), not like a clever guy. I'm sure it doesn't help your business.

[happyguy2]

You are not cynical, I believe that you are absolutely right. He really didn't want to part with the earning potential. He just found a nice way to say it!

 

hg

[Zippy]

I, personally, would still be pissed at this so called "friend" for taking the client and not telling me about it. If he was a real friend, he would have at least mentioned that the client had contacted him and possibly asked for his permission to see him.

[Zippy]

>The saddest thing about 'entitled' escorts is they don't seem

>to realize that they are not in a career, that it is inherent

>in the business that as they age they will eventually be hired

>less and less, and if they don't save (and especially if they

>add in the early-ageing effects of drugs) they'll eventually

>end up not only with nothing, but with no prospects and no job

>experience, and thus, no options.

 

 

They can always move to Mexico.....

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40504-2005Apr9.html

[happyguy2]

I understand how you could be pissed, but I still think Daddy is giving good advice: resolve it, save the friendship and go out together. We all make mistakes!

 

hg

[Rod Hagen]

> If you believe escorts should espouse a sense of

>entitlement and spend money as fast as they earn it,

 

Of course they shouldn't. We know they shouldn't. I know I shouldn't. I don't. Most don't. Some do. That sucks. This is covered territory. At this point it pretty much goes without saying, right?

 

What will be accomplished by rehashing the drug-addicted and fiscally-irresponsible escort clichés (often true, but more often probably false) except for the masturbatory rush of once again disparaging us? Probably not much more than using profanity, i.e. jack squat.

 

(I added the P.S. in the edit)

P.S. I disagree with JK, that doesn't mean I support the escort's silly message.

 

Daddy's response was perfect. Everytime we agree to a threesome, which is fun fun fun, we run the risk of losing that client to the other escort. He should acknowledge that or stop threesoming. He's probably new, and I agree with many of you that he should just relax.

 

p.p.s. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to call a client I haven't seen in years to score some $$ for more heroin and a double set of silk sheets.

[marc anthony]

Swimming against the current and respectfully disagree

 

I agree that hopefully a friendship will not be lost out of this situation.

 

BUT... I think the responses on this board are heavily skewed because most of the participants are clients.

 

I would bet if there were such a thing as an escort board, the majority of escorts would find fault in the behavior of the one "who promised."

 

To the escort, the client is the livelihood. And I am sure, most of them are pretty interested in keeping theirs happy and close.

 

I think an appropriate analogy to Daddy, who is in the internet business, is this. Let's say that Daddy felt bad for a fellow webmaster on a competing escort site, and told him... you know what, I will put up a link to your site on mine. And in return, the guy said, thanks so much... and I promise in return I won't steal your advertisers. Then Campus Escorts discovers that they get better advertising bang for their buck at the new site, and stop advertising here to advertise there. I am SURE, that though there is no breach of business ethics in this situation, Daddy would NOT be pleased.

 

Like I said, there are always two perspectives to many issues. And on this one, this board is guilty, IMO, of only considering one.

 

Yes, it is within the right of the client and the 2nd escort to make a date outside of the original one. BUT, if in fact the 2nd escort made a promise to the first that he wouldn't, he really shouldn't be surprised if that does cost him a friendship. We are talking livelihood here.

[marc anthony]

RE: Swimming against the current and respectfully disagree

 

After re-reading some of the other posts, I see that a couple of posters did consider another perspective... so I apologize if my post made it sound like I was the only one who felt this way.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

Never mix business with friendship if you can't spare...

 

one of them.

 

Daddy gave sound grown-up advice for the circumstances.

 

It seems escort A generously thought of his friend, Escort B, to satisfy his clent's request for 3-way and only for that reason. As part of the deal Escort A asked Escort B for a promise that he should not have asked. Escort B gave a promise that he should not have given. (The devil is in the details.) Now presumably the client has sought Escort B out for business and Escort A is pissed with Escort B.

 

Now here is one rub why it was a bad promise asked and given? If Escort B declines the client's request then the client will ask why? If the client is persistent then here isn't a good answer except for the truth. I doubt the client would be happy with that and with Escort A. In that circumstance would A be pissed more? How would the friendship fare then?

 

If B lies, then B is asked to compromise himself and injure his image with this client. This may or may not have wider implications depending on what the client does with it.

 

Actions have consequences. A and B need to get together to decide if they are friends that happen to be in the same business and separate the two or if they are competitors.

[Guest zipperzone]

>What's inappropriate is the

>use of profanity,

 

Get real - if he thinks the guy is a prick, he has the right to express his opinion.

 

And by the way - "prick" is hardly a four letter word - actually it has 5 letters - but that's neither here nor there.

 

Are you such a goody two shoes that your tender ears are offended by such a mild expression? Guess you don't watch much TV or go to the movies these days!

[Guest zipperzone]

RE: Never mix business with friendship if you can't spare...

 

>one of them.

>

>Daddy gave sound grown-up advice for the circumstances.

>

>It seems escort A generously thought of his friend, Escort B,

>to satisfy his clent's request for 3-way and only for that

>reason. As part of the deal Escort A asked Escort B for a

>promise that he should not have asked. Escort B gave a promise

>that he should not have given. (The devil is in the details.)

>Now presumably the client has sought Escort B out for business

>and Escort A is pissed with Escort B.

 

I think it really quite simple.

 

If escort "B" approached the client suggesting they get together, that's stealing escort "A"s business and is a no no.

 

If the client approached escort "B" suggesting they get together, that's OK. I think it falls under the category of free trade. Well not quite free, but you get my drift.......

[Bilbo]

RE: Swimming against the current and respectfully disagree

 

After my dearly departed fourth husband (six years, now Maverick and I are at 6.5!) died and left me with a home cleaning business, I tried to keep the business going at the same speed. Which meant that I had to hire someone to help me clean. I hired a man who had had a better job, and seemed to find this one a bit demeaning, but he was good at it and I didn't think he'd last long enough with his attitude to truely bug me too much. However, he made me promise I wouldn't tell anyone that he worked for me and was afraid that we might have a client whom he knew. We did. And after one cleaning visit to their home, the client called me and quit my list, saying that he was going to be hiring the other guy instead. This after the other guy had promised me he wouldn't be taking my customers away, especially not for a job he was embarassed about.

So, is my moral to not do this kind of thing with the kind of people who are embarrassed to be doing escorting in the first place?

Or, did I want to say that it was all right for me to get upset at him since I hadn't known him as a friend first?

Or, is it that after having treated me that way I wouldn't have wanted him for a friend, anyway?

Or am I just too high from the good jazz at the Houston HooBoy gathering yesterday afternoon followed by Bernadette Peters singing with the Houston Symphoney yesterday evening to even really have a point?

 

And, yes, Prick, you won't make as much money as you get older, but it is still a career which can be at least part time. Hell, look at the copy of the latest Unzipped - pure Daddy, though a bit young for it. Daddies are in and are going to be getting even more that way.

[Zippy]

RE: Never mix business with friendship if you can't spare...

 

It would have been all fine and good if Escort B had talked to Escort A and said "Look, the client asked me to see him. Is that OK with you?" If Escort A is really a friend, he would say yes. But, for Escort B to just do it without telling Escort A would certainly cause hard feelings.... and not the good kinda "hard feelings".

[Guy Fawkes]

RE: Swimming against the current and respectfully disagree

 

>I think an appropriate analogy to Daddy, who is in the

>internet business, is this. Let's say that Daddy felt bad for

>a fellow webmaster on a competing escort site, and told him...

>you know what, I will put up a link to your site on mine. And

>in return, the guy said, thanks so much... and I promise in

>return I won't steal your advertisers. Then Campus Escorts

>discovers that they get better advertising bang for their buck

>at the new site, and stop advertising here to advertise there.

> I am SURE, that though there is no breach of business ethics

>in this situation, Daddy would NOT be pleased.

 

First, I won't extract such a promise from the other webmaster. 2nd if he got the advertiser, I'd be pleasant about it, because then I can find out what they did that was better and the resulting information would improve my business.

 

I will often throw business to other businesses because they are a better match for the customer The net result is that I will on occassion lose a customer, but rarely forever.

 

I often will get a call from a former customer, or from another business that asks "Whats the best way to do this?" and when that happens it's a win-win situation.

[JamesK840]

RE: TODAY'S E-BRIEF: ESCORT WIGGENS

 

>>nd I know nothing turns me off a

>>regular escort faster then over-familiarity / expectations.

>>I'm not a walking ATM and I'm horny on *my* schedule if

>*I'm*

>>paying, so if an escort is is contacting me to ask about a

>>get-together it better be because they enjoyed the last time

>>so much they're offering a freebee, or at least a worthwhile

>>special...

>

>Not to fall back on my former ways here in the message center,

>but you really are a prick. It goes without saying, and yet

>it's been said too much, that it's inappropriate for escorts

>to contact clients seeking business, or for anyother reason.

>From the clients perspective: Don't call us, we'll call you.

>We got it. No Shit. It's over. I know that many escorts

>still do, they shouldn't. They probably don't read this

>board, or don't take sage advise well. Beating this fucking

>dead horse accomplishes nothing, but giving yourself a pat on

>the back about how you've made the right decision by foregoing

>escorts for the streets and craisgslist. Good for you.

>

>And you're stuff, below, about saving money and doing drugs

>(cliche'), what the heck is that apropos of? Just taking

>several more opportunities to dis us. Who crapped in your

>bloody mary this morning?

 

Wow, looked away for a while and then come back to that. I'm sorry if you found what I wrote preachy, obvious and patronizing. I suppose I can see how you would take it that way, but who the hell said I was writing to *you*?

 

Truth be told, I was writing with one of my 'lower caste' boy #### (you seem to reserve 'escort' for yourself, should I call him a boy #### instead?). I was not writing as a letter to him really, but as a way flesh out my thoughts on the matter, and writing it helped me come to a conclusion I'd been avoiding. That it seemed relevant to the discussion at hand and that a lurker or beginner who hasn't been reading this board for 5+ years might find the smallest spec of use in it also encouraged me to post it.

 

But I forgot to ask your permission before wasting your valuable time by posting into your personal forum, and for that I beg your forgiveness.