Should Literotica have a blog feature for authors?

[Bramblethorn]

interesting figures if you check out worthofweb.com - the site is worth nearly $95 million and an estimated income of $46k PER DAY. So i doubt it is a hobby site.

There are plenty of "website valuer" sites out there. I tried four others and got estimates ranging from a high of $10.3 million to a low of just $281k (websiteoutlook.com for that last one).

None of them are reliable. They're not performing an expert, individual valuation of every website on the internet. They're just looking at a handful of very crude metrics, things like "total visitors per day", and then multiplying them by a magic number based on websites which don't have much in common with Literotica to get a wild-assed guess of how much it might be able to make if a whole bunch of assumptions hold up.

(And then probably inflating that number, because most of those "valuer" sites make their money by selling advice on how to monetise your own website, so obviously they want to raise your hopes about how much you could be making.)

They're a very unreliable way to value any website, but especially bad for something like Literotica, which is not a typical website. In particular, most of those valuations aren't taking into account the fact that Literotica is an adult site, which seriously limits its ability to get advertising revenue - many advertisers won't run ads on "unwholesome" sites.

Bottom line, it's a made-up number.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I have no idea - I am only reporting what the site says. If you want to put your fingers in your ears and go LALALA just because you dont want to hear it then that is your perogative. But lets say the figures are wildly inaccurate - and the site pulls in only 10% of the estimate - its still not a hobby site.

And what if it only pulls in 0.00001% of the estimate?

I think you underestimate just how wildly inaccurate random websites can be when they're trying to get your money.

 

[PastMaster]

Interestingly - i have spent a couple of hours looking around the forums - and I am noting a pattern.
Any time anyone criticises the site - for any reason - there is a mob of sycophants which shout them down with the same message.
Laurel and Manu work so hard - it's a privelledge for you to be here. It's free. and if you dont like it leave.

This is not so much a forum as a asslicking club.

Dont bother to reply to this - because I won't be checking back in, so i wont read it.

 

[gordo12]

Interestingly - i have spent a couple of hours looking around the forums - and I am noting a pattern.
Any time anyone criticises the site - for any reason - there is a mob of sycophants which shout them down with the same message.
Laurel and Manu work so hard - it's a privelledge for you to be here. It's free. and if you dont like it leave.

This is not so much a forum as a asslicking club.

Dont bother to reply to this - because I won't be checking back in, so i wont read it.

Good riddance!

 

[Voboy]

Interestingly - i have spent a couple of hours looking around the forums - and I am noting a pattern.
Any time anyone criticises the site - for any reason - there is a mob of sycophants which shout them down with the same message.
Laurel and Manu work so hard - it's a privelledge for you to be here. It's free. and if you dont like it leave.

This is not so much a forum as a asslicking club.

Dont bother to reply to this - because I won't be checking back in, so i wont read it.

Sorry you see it that way.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Dont bother to reply to this - because I won't be checking back in, so i wont read it.

And there goes another drive-by who's never heard of tribal loyalty. Some people just don't get clubs and societies and the way they work. Never mind, there'll be another one next week who might join in with a positive attitude, not a negative one.

Meanwhile, the site sails on, the crew are up in the rigging, and the sun is out. It's a fair wind and look, an albatross.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I find those amounts a bit hard to believe. Where's that income supposed to be coming from? I suspect suspect worthofweb is extrapolating dollars from traffic compared to other commercial sites, not taking into account that the users aren't charged here; and where's the advertising? I don't see any (other than some geriatric sites that probably don't function any more).

There are cam ads displayed at the top of stories, but I can't see them pulling in a fortune.

 

[KeithD]

I think that the value in Lit. is in its potential--the strength of the user volume. It may not make piles of cash now (although I do believe it must make enough to make running it profitable for Manu and Laurel), but I think it is worth millions in potential--that there would be/will be buyers shelling out big bucks to acquire it with plans to keep the users while beefing up the advertising revenues.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I have no idea - I am only reporting what the site says. If you want to put your fingers in your ears and go LALALA just because you dont want to hear it then that is your perogative. But lets say the figures are wildly inaccurate - and the site pulls in only 10% of the estimate - its still not a hobby site.

While I dislike the general hush-hush of Lit and would like to know more about how things work, I find the values that worthofweb website generates decent in some cases and wildly inaccurate in some others. I tested it with a few sites that I have some general idea of how much they are worth and yeah, you can't rely on those figures in my opinion. But I agree with you there: Whatever else it is, it is certainly not a hobby site

 

[Bramblethorn]

Interestingly - i have spent a couple of hours looking around the forums - and I am noting a pattern.
Any time anyone criticises the site - for any reason - there is a mob of sycophants which shout them down with the same message.
Laurel and Manu work so hard - it's a privelledge for you to be here. It's free. and if you dont like it leave.

I have criticised aspects of the site more than once (in particular, I've talked plenty of times about the failings of the category system) and that hasn't been my experience.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I have criticised aspects of the site more than once (in particular, I've talked plenty of times about the failings of the category system) and that hasn't been my experience.

The drive-bys seem to expect some kind of special treatment, not realising they're the fiftieth person with the same grievance in the last year (which usually turns out to be a moan based on their grammar, their punctuation, lack thereof, and stories getting knocked back because of it).

 

[lovecraft68]

Interestingly - i have spent a couple of hours looking around the forums - and I am noting a pattern.
Any time anyone criticises the site - for any reason - there is a mob of sycophants which shout them down with the same message.
Laurel and Manu work so hard - it's a privelledge for you to be here. It's free. and if you dont like it leave.

This is not so much a forum as a asslicking club.

Dont bother to reply to this - because I won't be checking back in, so i wont read it.

To an extent you're not wrong.

 

[lovecraft68]

There are cam ads displayed at the top of stories, but I can't see them pulling in a fortune.

This is another topic that resurfaces from time to time as in how much does the site make? They have the toy stores, the cam ads. Some of the porn site link are defunct, but others aren't. Whatever they make, its a fraction of what they could. They're about as ambitious as they are professional as in how they run the site.

I have a mercenary mentality, I see a way to make money and I'm on it, and it drives me crazy when I see someone sitting on something that could be truly lucrative and have a Meh, attitude.

I could monetize the shit out of this site, and by doing so try to figure out a way to get something for the authors out of it.

Maybe if I can ever hit the power ball, I'll make Laurel and insane offer because what the hell, I'll need something to do in my retirement.

 

[KeithD]

Interestingly - i have spent a couple of hours looking around the forums - and I am noting a pattern.
Any time anyone criticises the site - for any reason - there is a mob of sycophants which shout them down with the same message.
Laurel and Manu work so hard - it's a privelledge for you to be here. It's free. and if you dont like it leave.

This is not so much a forum as a asslicking club.

Dont bother to reply to this - because I won't be checking back in, so i wont read it.

I won't quibble with this either. It's pretty close to my experience with trying to be involved and in pointing to broken bits and lack of connection here. The response went to the nasty and the petty. I have just gone to "oh well" to that, though.

 

[SimonDoom]

When I read about all the speculation about what Laurel and Manu are doing and what motivates them, or what the finances of this site are, I'm reminded of the scene in The Departed where Leo DiCaprio's character Billy is interviewing with the Captain of the Boston Police Department's undercover division, who asks Billy, "Do you know what we do here?"

Billy says, "I think so."

Whereupon Mark Whalberg's obnoxious Sergeant Dignam interjects with something like, "Woah. Let's say you have NO IDEA and leave it there. No idea. If you knew what we do, we wouldn't be good at what we do. We would be cunts. Are you calling us cunts?"

I think what B said above is right. You could make whatever guess you want about this site's finances and you could be off by so many orders of magnitude that your guess is worth nothing at all. Same thing with speculating about why they do what they do, unless they tell us. My impression is they hold the inner workings of this place close to vest, possibly for good reasons (I don't know).

 

[Bramblethorn]

This is another topic that resurfaces from time to time as in how much does the site make? They have the toy stores, the cam ads. Some of the porn site link are defunct, but others aren't. Whatever they make, its a fraction of what they could.

I expect you're right there. Same time, though... as you know, I have some of my stories up on SW. Once in a long while somebody puts money in the hat, but I know there's a lot more I could be doing to market those. If I ran a Twitter account to promote that stuff, and went around forums plugging it, I could turn my one-or-two sales a year into... three or four? Maybe more? Sky's the limit ;-)

But you also know I'm an overthinker. I have a day job and a freelance job based on overthinking stuff. If I started doing that with the SW stuff too, it'd start feeling like a third job. As things are, every time somebody buys one of my books there it's like a compliment out of nowhere. If I was focussing on making that happen, it'd turn into "why aren't more people buying?"

For my own good I need to keep some space in my life that's not about optimising the numbers, something that's just a hobby. I decided my stories are going to be part of that space. I do take an interest in how story stats work, because I always love to know how stuff works, but I don't set out to maximise my score. If I did that, I'd be second-guessing myself every time I wrote something the readers might not like. Same for the stuff on SW, people can buy it or not but I don't work to sell it.

I have no idea who L&M are outside this site, what they do for a living, whether they live in a mansion or in mom's basement. But if they don't depend on Lit as a source of income, I could understand it if they'd decided that monetising it wasn't their idea of fun and they weren't going to push that side of things beyond what it takes to make the site pay for itself.

They're about as ambitious as they are professional as in how they run the site.

We don't know what we don't see, though.

If somebody judged my ambition by my author profile on Lit, they might conclude I was dead or comatose. I haven't posted a new story since 2021. But that's because Lit isn't all of my life, and the other things have been taking priority lately.

I think what B said above is right. You could make whatever guess you want about this site's finances and you could be off by so many orders of magnitude that your guess is worth nothing at all. Same thing with speculating about why they do what they do, unless they tell us. My impression is they hold the inner workings of this place close to vest, possibly for good reasons (I don't know).

I have no idea whether it's a consideration for L&M, but one of the anti-porn movement's favourite tactics for attacking adult sites is to go after their revenue. If I was running a site like this I wouldn't be keen to paint a target on myself by making that information public.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

When I read about all the speculation about what Laurel and Manu are doing and what motivates them, or what the finances of this site are, I'm reminded of the scene in The Departed where Leo DiCaprio's character Billy is interviewing with the Captain of the Boston Police Department's undercover division, who asks Billy, "Do you know what we do here?"

Billy says, "I think so."

Whereupon Mark Whalberg's obnoxious Sergeant Dignam interjects with something like, "Woah. Let's say you have NO IDEA and leave it there. No idea. If you knew what we do, we wouldn't be good at what we do. We would be cunts. Are you calling us cunts?"

I think what B said above is right. You could make whatever guess you want about this site's finances and you could be off by so many orders of magnitude that your guess is worth nothing at all. Same thing with speculating about why they do what they do, unless they tell us. My impression is they hold the inner workings of this place close to vest, possibly for good reasons (I don't know).

While you are right that no one among us knows, or can even hope for an educated guess about how lucrative Lit is ( although even if it's not, is kinda obvious that it could be, judging by the traffic alone), I think it is also logical to resort to some deductions about human nature. If Lit was basically a hobby that doesn't bring real profit for the owners, I am pretty sure Laurel and Manu would be in our faces, pointing it out whenever we moan and complain about ratings, about delays, queues and so on. If for no other reason then to make us shut up by presenting facts that they are doing it in their spare time for miniscule profit. I can guarantee that if such fact was known, many would stop complaining, and this "Let's defend Laurel and Manu" attitude would be much more justified. Hell, I think there would be many more of us who would step in and defend the place we like despite some flaws, if we knew it was being maintained by sheer goodwill.
So that makes me conclude that their silence about everything concerning Lit is because there are things better left hidden. I am just making a guess here, of course, but it does make sense. Hypothetically speaking, if we knew that Lit makes decent to good money we would demand more story moderators, some benefits for the authors and so on.

Having all this in mind, that is why I can't truly understand the ferocity that you express sometimes in defending them.
By your logic, we are wrong because we are attacking them blindly, yet somehow you are not wrong in defending them while being equally blind. I feel our position is way more justified, as some more transparency would resolve these things easily and most of the times when we moan, that is exactly what we are asking for.
You yourself have said many times that you would like some more transparency on Lit, but why on earth would they ever bring more transparency if you are never complaining about it and more than that, you are defending them against those who do complain.

 

[yowser]

What I took from Simon's post is that it is often fruitless (or worse) to speculate abut Lit rules and operation without much in the way of real data. I also think it often pointless to guess other's intentions, it is too easy to be wrong on multiple levels.

There are certainly ways that this site could be improved, but if I were the owners, I am not sure I would want to be involved in the endless discussions that would occur if I regularly engaged in conversation with this crew of posters.

We are in the mom-and-pop store - be nice if there was a suggestion box and some way to say 'add another aisle' or please clean up the mess on the one at the end, and can't you do something to keep the idiots out? But we are still in a corner store.

Many of us like it that way, quirks and all, it serves our needs. There are a great many more dismal and grasping and calculating social media sites out there with far more troubling problems than rule inconsistencies and category choices. I'm content to let them run it as they see fit.

 

[gordo12]

So that makes me conclude that their silence about everything concerning Lit is because there are things better left hidden. I am just making a guess here, of course, but it does make sense. Hypothetically speaking,

I've always put it down to the fact that in a group this large SOMEONE will always disagree with what they do. And the arguments start. Silence is golden as they say.

 

[SimonDoom]

Having all this in mind, that is why I can't truly understand the ferocity that you express sometimes in defending them.
By your logic, we are wrong because we are attacking them blindly, yet somehow you are not wrong in defending them while being equally blind. I feel our position is way more justified, as some more transparency would resolve these things easily and most of the times when we moan, that is exactly what we are asking for.
You yourself have said many times that you would like some more transparency on Lit, but why on earth would they ever bring more transparency if you are never complaining about it and more than that, you are defending them against those who do complain.

I don't see myself as "defending" Laurel and Manu. I also take issue with the description of my attitude as one of "ferocity."

My basic view is this: This is a free site, from whose services I derive great enjoyment, and for which I pay absolutely nothing. I feel free to offer criticism and suggestions for change, which I have done for over six years. I also feel, however, that the burden of proof is on me, and on others advocating change, to show that change is necessary.

That's a tough burden to meet, because the truth is we have no idea what the objective concerns are for Laurel and Manu. We don't know their finances, we don't know their time and staffing constraints, we don't know the truth about reader habits and behaviors, and we don't know much of anything, unless they tell us, and they don't tell us a lot.

People have been clamoring for more transparency, and on some issues I've requested more transparency (better explanation of content regulation -- which, to their credit, they HAVE improved). But it's not difficult to understand that there may be many issues on which the site understandingly does NOT want to be transparent. To give one obvious example, there are good reasons not to explain the sweep process. So I cut them slack on that. They don't have to tell me, and it's easy for me to imagine that they have good reasons for that.

What I have little patience with is people who come charging into this forum demanding change and accusing the site of bad faith and wrongdoing when almost all the time a) they don't know all the facts, b) they're mostly just demanding something that works for them personally, and often (wrongfully) assuming that every other author is just like they are (I think the reality is the vast majority of authors don't care about these things at all), and c) they completely fail to take into account the interests of readers, site traffic, and the economic interests of the site owners. The site owners are entitled to run this site for a profit, if that's what they want.

I don't "defend" Laurel and Manu. I don't know their situation and, unless they openly explain why they do what they do, which they don't do a lot, I don't know what motivates them or what their circumstances are. My response to most of the complaints made here, especially the ones that are on the shrill side, is: you haven't met your burden of proof. You don't know. And without information, you don't have a strong case for change. It's your burden to prove the need for change, not mine to oppose it.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I've just realized how similar to religion these discussions are

Anyway, I just wanted to make it clear that I certainly do not approve of the OP attitude in all this. I only chimed in when some generalizations about "People who complain" were made.

 

[SimonDoom]

I've just realized how similar to religion these discussions are

Anyway, I just wanted to make it clear that I certainly do not approve of the OP attitude in all this. I only chimed in when some generalizations about "People who complain" were made.

Fair enough, but if you ever start to think that this forum is getting heated and unreasonable, just wander over to the pile of excrement that is the Politics Board, and you'll realize, we've got it pretty good here.

 

[ElectricBlue]

What I have little patience with is people who come charging into this forum demanding change and accusing the site of bad faith and wrongdoing when almost all the time a) they don't know all the facts, b) they're mostly just demanding something that works for them personally, and often (wrongfully) assuming that every other author is just like they are (I think the reality is the vast majority of authors don't care about these things at all), and c) they completely fail to take into account the interests of readers, site traffic, and the economic interests of the site owners. The site owners are entitled to run this site for a profit, if that's what they want.

And, generally speaking, because their grammar is crap, and they're moaning they can't get a story posted, and look at all the other stories that get through, blah blah blah.

Or they've driven hard and fast over the under age line and again, got knocked back.

I'd say a good eighty percent of the drive-through posters are in one of those two groups, while the other twenty percent are in fact adults, and do go on to sensible conversations.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Fair enough, but if you ever start to think that this forum is getting heated and unreasonable, just wander over to the pile of excrement that is the Politics Board, and you'll realize, we've got it pretty good here.

I believe you there. Talking politics in real life is bad enough, but talking politics over internet? You have to be a serious masochist to do that

 

[Bramblethorn]

While you are right that no one among us knows, or can even hope for an educated guess about how lucrative Lit is ( although even if it's not, is kinda obvious that it could be, judging by the traffic alone), I think it is also logical to resort to some deductions about human nature. If Lit was basically a hobby that doesn't bring real profit for the owners, I am pretty sure Laurel and Manu would be in our faces, pointing it out whenever we moan and complain about ratings, about delays, queues and so on.

If they did that every time one of us complained, they'd have no time left for anything else.