discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi FONDL,
Yes, I'm very much aware of that. Angels is thrilled all its close competitors got killed by the government. They sure as hell weren't pushing for more rules and regulations, tmk, but they didn't minding reaping the rewards. It was the fancy club, Solid Gold, that wanted to use the force of government to make money and eliminate competition. Probably Tootsies is of the same mind. Anyway, at The Trap the opinion was who cares what the fuck the government is doing on W. Dixie Hwy . . . they couldnn't see that, that would directly affect the heart and soul of their lovable club. It was just beyond their comprehension that closing the other little clubs would definitely hit hard and in ways that could be very unexpected (to them). From $5 lap (club specials) to now $25 lap with no special that I'm aware of. From girls that were burning hot and a lot fun to girls that are being fee'd to death and you'd rather pay them to stay dressed!
The Trap customers had a very poor understanding of economics and of social displacement. Those fantastic customers are pretty much history along with the fantastic management and dancers. The club is swimming in cash thanks to the government, and the dancers and customers get screwed. :( Dancers get far far fewer dances and fees have gone thru the ceiling plus there are brand new fees. Customers get ugly dancers who would have been relegated to the lesser clubs plus much higher prices.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi driver01,
Yeah, from what I hear it doesn't charge like a DIVE. That, low cost, is an even more important part of the charm for me. :) When there were a bunch of strip clubs along W. Dixie Hwy even a working class guy on very low income could hang out and have a lot fun. And, you could go frequently. Before they started charging a cover I would go to Angels about 4 or 5 or more times a week at night. Now it is packed and not only is there a cover they charge for parking! So you might get hit with $40 (not usually) just to enter the dive. Normally, I will get hit with $10 for the cover at night. But, that is just a good reason to cut back. It does add up over the year. And, when old management was there I had a VIP pass to avoid a lot of costs such as cover, etc. I made up for it by buying a lot of dances. They don't need me anymore. :(
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi David9999,
Very well said.
discussion comment
17 years ago
I went to the Mons when it was a dive. Had a blast. Some very hot dancers who seemed to be super sluts from heaven. One old dancer. I don't remember if there were fatties at that time--probably not. I felt like moving in next door and the prices were cheap even for a low income guy.
Interesting that they bar fatties. :)
discussion comment
17 years ago
With freedom, I believe here in Miami we could have what we had before. Small clubs that catered to certain tastes. The Traps\ catered to those that wanted super hot dancers that were happy campers. Those girls were something and Sky the bartender/manager took a lot of pride in the quality of the dancers. The profit was made not in dancer fees, but in catering to the customer! Cherries was another small club that catered to customers that loved super hot dancers---but expensive and actually worth it. I'd save to go there. Angels specialized in the low class whites with no money and propensity for violence. Again, customer needs were being met. There was also Lollipops and that was another menu. Damn stinking government gets involved and now the money is in financially raping the dancer with fees on top of fees. So Angels without all the competition can pretty charge the dancers maximum fees. Dancers make little and quality goes down the drain, but dancers are still fighting to pay the high dancer fees. Less competition and both dancer and customer get screwed big time while the club rakes in the money like no tomorrow. The Trap the same deal. Dancers pay big money and customers settle for whatever is offered. Kill/close clubs and yes this is the result that I would have expected. Does the owner give a fuck that the club is filled with dogs? No, all he cares about is charging high dancer fees. Government protects him from another business opening up next door and offering a better product at a better price. So customer gets stuck with high prices and low quality and dancers get stuck with obscene dance fees.
Shortage of hot babes willing to dance??? NO WAY JOSE here in Miami. Just kill the government bs and you'll get all different types of clubs including those that cater to customers that love super hot dancers.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi david120,
We have plenty of women that could be hot dancers here in Miami. Yes this city is probably the exception. So over here there shouldn't be a problem getting hot dancers, ***but there is thanks to government***.
When dancers are being hit with $160 house fee to work one shift at a $5 club that should tell you something. And, I've seen super hot dancers show and leave because there are too many ugly dancers showing. The uglies aren't minding these obscene fees because if they make just a little more than what they would at Burger King it is a winning deal for them. The attractive dancers generally think that given their looks and that they're going to go be groped and ogled that they should get some $$$. For them, prostitution makes more sense assuming they don't mind that line of work.
I could be dead wrong, but I'm like 95% certain that if I was free to open a club that I could get super hot dancers and still make a profit. Not print money, but make a profit and get super hot dancers. When there were more clubs The Trap didn't have a problem getting super hot dancers nor did Cherries which also specialized in super hot. Clubs get killed/closed and dancer fees soar. Dancer quality has dropped assuming you like small and cute. Dancer prices for the customer has soared for--fake tits, tall, glamour. I wouldn't want that at cheap. There is no shortage of quality dancers here in Miami, if the government allowed more competition. Instead it is killing clubs or pushing the mega club like Tootsies. A bunch of customers think Tootsies is the greatest. Maybe if your wealthy . . .
So if I'm a stripclub owner like Angels and I've got a bunch of dancers desperate to pay $160 for a single shift, then why care if they are butt ugly. Worse over time you get customers that want that look. At Angels it has seemed like a battle between older white customers spending on the hotties and the black customers spending on the blubber butts. Right now, I would say the black customers are now winning because for some reason they suddenly seem to have cash to burn! Meanwhile white customers don't have much in the way of real options unless you consider Tootsies a real option. :(
I didn't proof read the above at all so it may be a little difficult reading.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi David9999,
In the black clubs it seems like there is a strong majority of black customers that prefer the fat ass. Perhaps among the Latins as well? (A couple of latin buddies have shown me they desire plenty of meat; disgusting, imo.) The white clubs--Tootsies? Solid Gold?-- are expensive and even there beauty standards seem warped. Fake breasts, taller, galmour look, etc. doesn't do a think for me. Even when they have the look that I love the price is just way out of my ball park.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Oh yes, on some other thread customers were wanting even fewer clubs because there supposedly is a shortage of attractive dancers. Brilliant. :( Almost as smart as saying we need fewer restaurants so they can serve better food.
discussion comment
17 years ago
BTW, it isn't just 1 new regulation. There are significant regulations to opening a new stripclub or even staying in business. When Angels falls for whatever reason that is the death of stripclubs on W. Dixie Hwy unless the laws are changed. People say big deal---you have The Trap or Tootsies or Black Gold. The reality is different clubs have different cultures. The Trap is pretty much worthless even though it is a small dive club (it was a super happy fun club). Tootsies is for the rich. Black Gold is a nice drive from me with plenty of police pull overs, which I'd rather avoid so my trips to that club would be low even if it had the right culture. When the other little clubs were allowed by the government each one had its own little culture. It was fantastic. Now, the clubs more and more dictate the rules because there isn't a free market any longer.
Anyway, it doesn't make much difference as the average stripclub customer is dumber than a doornail and couldn't realize how little variety is left. :( What a country.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi FONDL,
Yes, I did understand that you were being sarcastic. Yes, if we had a free market, which we DO NOT have. See, I would be willing to open a club tomorrow or sooner if it was like the old days were you just find a store front an open a club. Those days are long gone. I checked into it. I wanted to open a club next to Angels. W. Dixie Hwy was a fun strip of stripclubs, but thru police action, church move-ins, and other tactics only 1 remains and it BANKS cash bigtime! Anyway, when I inquired I learned that there was a new regulation that stripclubs couldn't be close to each other any longer unless grandfathered in. Checking the zoning there were no other locations for a stripclub and in fact she (government zoning expert) said they were trying to shut down Angels. (I already knew that, btw.) Also, churches kill the opportunity to put up a stripclub---therefore the Haitian churches have moved in to keep out future clubs. Very smart. Certain child business accomplish the same ends and that has been used also. Furthermore, the big clubs ala Solid Gold were caught in a scandal where they had paid big money not only to restrict future stripclubs, but close existing ones!
NO FREE MARKET, thus she has every right to demand further government interference, imo. If we aren't allowed to open a strip club featuring ugly dancers, then exisiting stripclubs need to burdened with additional requirements. I'd much rather see a free market and she definitely understands the concept---the problem is the government took those freedoms aways so it needs to add additional protections and rights to those that are getting screwed.
I hope you were able to understand what I typed above. :)
discussion comment
17 years ago
It was nice hearing her advocate the free market. :)
discussion comment
17 years ago
Yes, I think that is exactly her point. If a dancer is willing to pay to work, then she should be allowed the same freedoms as "attractive" dancers. It was nice hearing advocate the free market. :) Unfortunately, there is no free market for strip clubs. I wonder if the EEOC could twist some arms to get granny on stage?
And, it wouldn't surprise me if the was a demand for granny! GERONTOPHILIA rocks for some. :) And, for others if granny reduces her price she suddenly is looking a lot sweeter.
And, I'm sure there are some disabled folks who'd like to get on stage. Wheelchairs can be sexy! ;)
discussion comment
17 years ago
The last cute young dancer ***without tats*** that I saw I didn't want to let her go----partly because I was afraid she was headed straight to a tat shop.
discussion comment
17 years ago
How in the world do you manage to avoid them? A tat free dancer must either cost an arm and leg or be a blubber butt or older. That's probably the ticket: older.
The last cute young dancer that I saw I didn't want to let her go----partly because I was afraid she was headed straight to a tat shop.
discussion comment
17 years ago
It does seem complex.
I think "equality" of women may have hurt the stripclubs. More women seeing nothing wrong with casual sex or selling sex means that escorting becomes an attractive option. Especially, if stripclub customers are really after sex, first and foremost. Why go through the public display and abuse when you can make more money in less time just doing BJs or FS. Disease fears don't seem to impress most people . . .
Some may think a dancer makes more money, but I don't believe that is usually the case and I think the dancer generally works harder.
discussion comment
17 years ago
Excellent points chandler and well said.
discussion comment
17 years ago
"If you're a tit man and just want huge woggly waggliness in giant descending mamms, no matter what kind of wiggly belly or cheezy thighs accompany them, then you'll probably not mind current 'dancer' quality."
I think a good number of customers are happier. They love blubber. A few have said it isn't that they love blubber it is that good looking women are too good for them. :)
discussion comment
17 years ago
Hi Book Guy,
I think the argument is absence indicates a higher level of self-respect for oneself.
It is funny one of the reasons I disliked the tats besides the self-mutilation angle was that those sporting them were in many casing advertising their criminal ties. I've seen little video segments on the Japanese gangsters who wear their tats as if they were police badges. Interesting and seemingly stupid that criminals would wish to advertise themselves--especially in so permanent a manner.
discussion comment
17 years ago
I didn't know and of course still don't, that are health risks with getting a tattoo. Interesting reading @ http://www.av1611.org/tattoos/health.html . Of course, just cause it is print doesn't mean it is true.
discussion comment
17 years ago
"Evidence indicates that it is the mere presence of the tattoo, not its artistic content, that correlates with certain diagnoses. Thus, any tattoo can be viewed as a warning sign that should alert the practicing physician to look for underlying psychiatric conditions."
(Raspa, Robert F. and John Cusack 1990, Psychiatric Implications of Tattoos, American Family Physician. 41: p. 1483)
http://www.av1611.org/tattoos/rebel.html
discussion comment
17 years ago
Oops, wrong thread. :)
discussion comment
17 years ago
"Evidence indicates that it is the mere presence of the tattoo, not its artistic content, that correlates with certain diagnoses. Thus, any tattoo can be viewed as a warning sign that should alert the practicing physician to look for underlying psychiatric conditions."
(Raspa, Robert F. and John Cusack 1990, Psychiatric Implications of Tattoos, American Family Physician. 41: p. 1483)
http://www.av1611.org/tattoos/rebel.html
discussion comment
17 years ago
"Throughout history tattoos have symbolized rebellion. There’s nothing normal about a tattoo. A tattoo screams of unabashed rebellion and deviancy.
Every tattoo book, and every article, I researched, both old and new, openly affirmed the deliberate rebellion symbolized by the tattoo. Book after book, article after article, sung the same song – tattoos are open rebellion. It’s worth noting – all the following quotes are from pro tattoo books."
http://www.av1611.org/tattoos/rebel.html
Hmmm . . . I didn't consider it rebellion generally. Especially with women it seemed like a form of makeup. I think I'd almost rather have the girls wearing tats than makeup! :)
Not only that, but I thought there were cultures were tats were even required.
discussion comment
17 years ago
"She simply asked if I mind if she sits at my table. I immediately told her I didn't want any dances. She told me she didn't ask that question."
I dislike it when I get that response. Here I'm trying to be nice and it is unlikely she just wants to sit and talk. And, I just don't want to waste her time. Seems like *generally* it is the old guilt trip ploy. There are dancers who like to circulate and I guess that does seem rude to them when they receive answer to a question they might not even of asked. Also, it seems like these type dancers generally fall into the looks are pretty much worthless or shallow belief system. The question I get asked is wouldn't I rather have a nice intelligent average looking dancer or a hot super bitch? Super hot bitch to go please. :)
discussion comment
17 years ago
Seems like it, but then it could just be my distaste for tattoos.