Would an agency let go a girl if she's never or rarely booked?
- Thread starter Skym
- Start date
I worked for both an incall and outcall, I do not know of anyone in which this happened too personally, but I have colleagues who switched agencies if they did not receive the many clients or no clients, or if their friends work elsewhere. I'm sure it's happened, but the ones I know who left usually do on their own accord.
That's funny i was asking myself the same question a few days ago. I mean, is there a cost associated with having a girl in the roster? I'm not sure there is.
There's the cost of the pictures but it shouldn't be too high, maybe the cost of renting the incalls but my guess is they're renting them anyway.
On the other hand having a lot of girls on the website gives some credibility to the agency even when they're only working a few days a month.
I'm thinking the main reason to let a girl go would be when she when she can damage an agency reputation but besides that i'm not sure there's a financial reason to do it, but maybe i'm missing something
There's the cost of the pictures but it shouldn't be too high, maybe the cost of renting the incalls but my guess is they're renting them anyway.
On the other hand having a lot of girls on the website gives some credibility to the agency even when they're only working a few days a month.
I'm thinking the main reason to let a girl go would be when she when she can damage an agency reputation but besides that i'm not sure there's a financial reason to do it, but maybe i'm missing something
The answer is YES. This is a business, after all. When there’s no revenue coming in you replace your employee with someone else who’ll bring in revenue. By the way any girl would be foolish or naive to stay with an agency that doesn’t bring her any money. Just like any actress whose agent doesn’t bring her any good roles or work. You dump that agent & hope things will improve with a new agent.
That's the whole question, technically i wonder if there's a need to "replace" someone rarely booked, is there a cost associated to it?
Waste of time & the stress of having to deal with unhappy clients maybe. But usually if the girl isn’t making any money she’ll go & try her luck elsewhere.
for what it's worth.. the situation can be the agency does not pay for the photos, the girl does.
Then again, what's more relevant for an agency
1. having a big roster even if some girls aren't often available or rarely booked with a minimal cost and the risk to have to handle unhappy customers.
2. having a smaller roster and no cost
My guess(again, no data to support that) would be option 1 but i could be wrong
Similar threads
