My first STD

[Lunaseraphim]

You nailed it.

Whenever I see someone justify safety based on high rates, I'm a bit skeptical. Sure, some clients might save up for months to see a highly sought after SP once a year. That definitely happens. But I doubt that's representative of most clients who regularly pay close to the 500 $ rate.

More often, the people who can comfortably afford those rates are also the people who can afford to see multiple SPs. So, like you said, while higher prices may reduce the total number of potential clients, they don't necessarily reduce the size or connectivity of the sexual network in the way people assume.

Believing otherwise seems pretty delusional to me.

It's complicated I think. A lot of clients who see indies don't appear to be the type to book that many providers. Some people are wealthy and see 4 agency girls a week...

I think it just depends on the clients habits in my opinion and the clients who see many providers often won't shut up about it..

I don't really see why rates are even relevant here. Rates do often mean someone has a lower volume but not always. What I was trying to point out is that some people who work for agencies will see 5 to 10 clients per shift. That's a lot of volume compared to an indy who sees maybe 2 to 6 clients in total in a week.

The rates that somebody is willing to pay doesn't mean they are wealthier necessarily. I've met a lot of agency clients who don't see indies often and book girls from agencies all the time even if they could afford indy rates.

I'm just saying - be mindful of all this as a client because you're responsible too. But I don't want to hear from someone who doesn't know me that I'm rich enough to spend 300$ every week on a sti test lol like someone said above there's an incubation period so there's no point in getting tested that often.

 

[x5fq]

It's complicated I think. A lot of clients who see indies don't appear to be the type to book that many providers. Some people are wealthy and see 4 agency girls a week...

I think it just depends on the clients habits in my opinion and the clients who see many providers often won't shut up about it..

I don't really see why rates are even relevant here. Rates do often mean someone has a lower volume but not always. What I was trying to point out is that some people who work for agencies will see 5 to 10 clients per shift. That's a lot of volume compared to an indy who sees maybe 2 to 6 clients in total in a week.

The rates that somebody is willing to pay doesn't mean they are wealthier necessarily. I've met a lot of agency clients who don't see indies often and book girls from agencies all the time even if they could afford indy rates.

I'm just saying - be mindful of all this as a client because you're responsible too. But I don't want to hear from someone who doesn't know me that I'm rich enough to spend 300$ every week on a sti test lol like someone said above there's an incubation period so there's no point in getting tested that often.

I think we're actually closer on this than it might seem.

When I read comments suggesting that higher rates somehow imply lower risk, that's where I become skeptical too. A provider seeing fewer clients doesn't automatically mean a less connected network, and a higher price doesn't automatically tell us much about exposure risk.

That's why I've never found rates to be a particularly useful metric in this discussion. Risk depends on a lot more than price or even raw client volume alone.

 

[Lunaseraphim]

I think we're actually closer on this than it might seem.

When I read comments suggesting that higher rates somehow imply lower risk, that's where I become skeptical too. A provider seeing fewer clients doesn't automatically mean a less connected network, and a higher price doesn't automatically tell us much about exposure risk.

That's why I've never found rates to be a particularly useful metric in this discussion. Risk depends on a lot more than price or even raw client volume alone.

No of course they're not useful.. maybe you're right and client volume has nothing to do with it. But still. My point is just that you gotta be careful and get tested and calculate your risks