PPEcel
cope and seethe
-
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2018
- Posts
- 29,087
So far, the incel take on their initial decision to ban content was mainly focused on financially hurting whores.
But the actual backstory is far more complex and yet equally lifefuel. Let's start.
The money
It should come as no surprise that OnlyFans expanded rapidly throughout 2020 and continues to do so 2021, in no small part due to coronavirus lockdowns keeping simps and normalfags inside and lonely. OF had over $400 million in revenue in 2020, an increase of well over 100% from 2019.
In June 2021, Bloomberg broke a story quoting an internal company source as saying that OnlyFans management were in talks with private equity funds and other institutional investors to launch a new funding round that would propel its valuation above $1 billion. There are even rumours here in London's financial sector, where OF is headquartered, that they were considering an IPO. For financially-illiteratecels, an IPO — initial public offering — is a huge milestone for any company, giving early investors an exit strategy and giving management new financing opportunities.
The risks
Back in December 2020, Nicholas Kristof published a column in the New York Times titled "The Children of Pornhub", featuring a girl named Serena K. Fleites whose underage nudes were repeatedly uploaded onto the site. In essence, Kristof noted that poor or nonexistent moderation on Pornhub's part meant that videos of underage foids, sexually trafficked foids, and rape victims regularly ended up on the site; that Pornhub management was profiting off these videos.
View: https://twitter.com/nickkristof/status/1335774327682297856?lang=en
You can also read my incredibly popular thread about that here:
The column sparked an uproar. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada, where Pornhub's parent company Mindgeek is headquartered, promised to "look into it". U.S. Senators Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Maggie Hassan (D-NH) co-sponsored a bill that would make the nonconsensual sharing of nudes and rape videos a federal crime punishable by up to 5 years' imprisonment, though the bill later died in committee at the end of the 116th Congress.
But notably, MasterCard and Visa announced that they would join American Express and PayPal in stopping payment processing for Pornhub. As a result, Mindgeek removed well over two-thirds of all their videos on Pornhub; the only ones remaining are from verified uploaders. But none of those companies relented. In April 2021, MasterCard SVP John Verdeschi published a blog post that included enhanced requirements for merchants (as well as banks connecting those merchants to MasterCard) selling adult content. The requirements are onerous and include identity verification of performers and uploaders, content review, streamlined complaint resolution processes, et cetera.
Mindgeek isn't a public company, so I have no idea exactly how much of a financial hit Pornhub is taking, but it's probably massive.
If you put 2+2 together, the reason behind OnlyFans' content ban becomes clear. Potential investors are wary of OnlyFans' exposure to regulatory and compliance risks — i.e. the chance that their business model is hampered by financial institutions and regulatory agencies. In other words, they're concerned what happened to Pornhub could potentially happen to OnlyFans.
The foids
At this point, OF has two choices. They could mitigate said risks by hiring a small army of management and IT consultants to set up and develop a content review system, associated privacy safeguards, et cetera, and get some PR firm to lobby on their behalf and tell everyone how socially responsible they are as a corporation. That's expensive.
Or they could also just ban porn, which is what they initially decided they were going to do, but reversed course today. More likely than not, they also came to the realization that some of their whores would simply market part of their content on their competitors' sites, such as clips4sale or iwantclips.
Now, no matter what OF chooses to do, it's going to hit them in the wallet. More likely than not, they're going to pass those costs down to their simp customers and their content creator whores. Chances are, it's the lesser-known whores who will probably find these regulations most burdensome and onerous to comply with. This is indeed lifefuel.
Now, if only governments introduced legislation that would impose a consumption tax on pornographic subscriptions, that would be incredibly based:
Onlyfans is banning pornographic content in October
Roasties will have to find another platform for simps to support them. At least on camwhore sites they actually have to work for their money. This onlyfans shit where they post 1 picture a week and get $10,000/month infuriates me to no end.
incels.is
But the actual backstory is far more complex and yet equally lifefuel. Let's start.
The money
It should come as no surprise that OnlyFans expanded rapidly throughout 2020 and continues to do so 2021, in no small part due to coronavirus lockdowns keeping simps and normalfags inside and lonely. OF had over $400 million in revenue in 2020, an increase of well over 100% from 2019.
In June 2021, Bloomberg broke a story quoting an internal company source as saying that OnlyFans management were in talks with private equity funds and other institutional investors to launch a new funding round that would propel its valuation above $1 billion. There are even rumours here in London's financial sector, where OF is headquartered, that they were considering an IPO. For financially-illiteratecels, an IPO — initial public offering — is a huge milestone for any company, giving early investors an exit strategy and giving management new financing opportunities.
The risks
Back in December 2020, Nicholas Kristof published a column in the New York Times titled "The Children of Pornhub", featuring a girl named Serena K. Fleites whose underage nudes were repeatedly uploaded onto the site. In essence, Kristof noted that poor or nonexistent moderation on Pornhub's part meant that videos of underage foids, sexually trafficked foids, and rape victims regularly ended up on the site; that Pornhub management was profiting off these videos.
View: https://twitter.com/nickkristof/status/1335774327682297856?lang=en
You can also read my incredibly popular thread about that here:
New York Times: A 14-year-old femoid sent her nudes to a Chad, and it ended up on Pornhub (Coomers GTFIH)
At 14, Serena K. Fleites was an A student in Bakersfield, Calif., who had never made out with a boy. But in the eighth grade she developed a crush on a boy a year older, and he asked her to take a naked video of herself. She sent it to him, and this changed her life. He asked for another, then...
incels.is
The column sparked an uproar. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada, where Pornhub's parent company Mindgeek is headquartered, promised to "look into it". U.S. Senators Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Maggie Hassan (D-NH) co-sponsored a bill that would make the nonconsensual sharing of nudes and rape videos a federal crime punishable by up to 5 years' imprisonment, though the bill later died in committee at the end of the 116th Congress.
But notably, MasterCard and Visa announced that they would join American Express and PayPal in stopping payment processing for Pornhub. As a result, Mindgeek removed well over two-thirds of all their videos on Pornhub; the only ones remaining are from verified uploaders. But none of those companies relented. In April 2021, MasterCard SVP John Verdeschi published a blog post that included enhanced requirements for merchants (as well as banks connecting those merchants to MasterCard) selling adult content. The requirements are onerous and include identity verification of performers and uploaders, content review, streamlined complaint resolution processes, et cetera.
Mindgeek isn't a public company, so I have no idea exactly how much of a financial hit Pornhub is taking, but it's probably massive.
If you put 2+2 together, the reason behind OnlyFans' content ban becomes clear. Potential investors are wary of OnlyFans' exposure to regulatory and compliance risks — i.e. the chance that their business model is hampered by financial institutions and regulatory agencies. In other words, they're concerned what happened to Pornhub could potentially happen to OnlyFans.
The foids
At this point, OF has two choices. They could mitigate said risks by hiring a small army of management and IT consultants to set up and develop a content review system, associated privacy safeguards, et cetera, and get some PR firm to lobby on their behalf and tell everyone how socially responsible they are as a corporation. That's expensive.
Or they could also just ban porn, which is what they initially decided they were going to do, but reversed course today. More likely than not, they also came to the realization that some of their whores would simply market part of their content on their competitors' sites, such as clips4sale or iwantclips.
Now, no matter what OF chooses to do, it's going to hit them in the wallet. More likely than not, they're going to pass those costs down to their simp customers and their content creator whores. Chances are, it's the lesser-known whores who will probably find these regulations most burdensome and onerous to comply with. This is indeed lifefuel.
Now, if only governments introduced legislation that would impose a consumption tax on pornographic subscriptions, that would be incredibly based:
Onlyfans subscriptions should be taxed
As millions of assorted simps and soyboys contribute to this degeneracy, the least the state could do is to siphon some revenue out of it. Levy a Pigouvian tax; charge each whore a flat rate of say, $5 (£3.6/€4.2) per subscriber-month. People might think it's ridiculous, but most of us are...
incels.is