egafd.com

It is certainly true that Sullivan, Raymond, Desmond, and others, made more of their wealth from property, publishing, and hype, than from producing hard core porn.

Until the arrival of the video machine, there were only magazines, and while some might consider "publishers" to be "pornographers" because of the content, their success shows that "entrepreneur/publisher" is a more accurate description.

The man Sutcliffe, behind Fiona Cooper, has been going since the videotape era, but may have had to give some back to the taxman after conviction.

Someone else said "it's the distributors" who make all the money, and hit the nail on the head. It is as a distributor, through the massive chain of licensed shops he built up, that Sullivan can realistically be linked with the British porn production industry. What he deserves credit for is recognising that a limited company makes a much less sleazy defendant. He ought to take his empire public now, for two reasons.

Firstly, to give credibility to, and take some credit for, the hard-won legitimacy of hardcore pornography in Britain. It is still beset by uncertainty, and will probably always remain so, but the USA, Germany, Spain, and The Netherlands, all have public companies with interests in this sector.

Secondly, to avoid any accusations of dominant market share in the legitimate distribution of R18 DVDs. An EU competition investigation would be unpleasant.

For some reason, no one has mentioned Internet porn, which has made several British millionaires whose names are unknown to anyone but the company in America that hosts their site, God, and the taxman. Oh, and possibly their spouse.

And if we go back to Sullivan, and the other magazine publishers, it would be a sin to ignore how much money they (and BT) made from 0898 (now 0900) numbers and sex chatlines. They are the real precursors of Internet porn.

Several more millionaires emerged from the scam-infested waters of the "Instant Access" dialers that probably added an instant 50% to the monthly profits of the first generation of porn webmasters who relied only on credit card memberships.

Judging by the success of Amsterdam's webcam powerhouse, Interclimax, there will always be a premium market for one-to-one Internet sex, and the appeal of such live interactivity will remain a distinct advantage over recorded DVDs.

Producers in the UK are thus being squeezed at either end. Distributors are already seen to be driving prices down and calling the shots. Yet individual producers find it difficult to make any real impact on the Internet - they rarely have the scope, through their own websites, to deal directly with enough consumers to establish any relationship with them. Often, they see the Internet as a threat (piracy) or a distraction from their main method of distribution. Usually, they settle for cautiously using their own site to sell mail order DVDs and moaning about the cost of bandwidth that their free samples incur.

This psychological outlook is the real barrier to more producers achieving wealth through porn.

IPTV will soon start to figure as a distribution medium alongside DVD sales via distributors, and the less-than-satisfactory situation that exists for UK mail order, as well as broadband streaming and downloading.

But the business model that British producers adopt towards it should be looked at dispassionately. My own view is that Britain's strange development regarding hardcore porn calls for a unique response to the opportunity of IPTV.

Two practical things are necessary. First, a collective recognition that producers have separate interests from distributors - interests that may be better served by co-operation than competition under certain circumstances.

And second, that British producers need to look at their own situation in the context of the industry internationally. Lose the egos for long enough to face up to the facts. (Of course, it's not you I'm referring to, it's the others)

In every industry, and porn is no exception, a new distribution medium brings risks and opportunities. If it is true that few British producers are millionaires (and I have no doubt it is - but neither are they skint), then they are also less wedded to existing media and their value chains.


The IBC 2005 (Broadcasting Industry) conference being held at the RAI in Amsterdam from 6th to 13th September might be a place from which British producers can gain some perspective.

IPTV creates opportunities for new "broadcasters" at a price far below that of a satellite TV operation.

If a few leading producers felt like visiting this event (nothing to do with me whatever), or just coming to Amsterdam during that period, maybe something interesting could emerge from a meeting.

It is certainly true that Sullivan, Raymond, Desmond, and others, made more of their wealth from property, publishing, and hype, than from producing hard core porn.

Until the arrival of the video machine, there were only magazines, and while some might consider "publishers" to be "pornographers" because of the content, their success shows that "entrepreneur/publisher" is a more accurate description.

The man Sutcliffe, behind Fiona Cooper, has been going since the videotape era, but may have had to give some of it back to the taxman after his conviction(s).

Someone else said "it's the distributors" who make all the money, and hit the nail on the head. It is as a distributor, through the massive chain of licensed shops he built up, that Sullivan can realistically be linked with the modern British porn production industry. What he deserves credit for is recognising that a limited company makes a much less sleazy defendant. He ought to take his empire public now, for two reasons.

Firstly, to give credibility to, and take some credit for, the hard-won legitimacy of hardcore pornography in Britain. It is still beset by uncertainty, and will probably always remain so, but the USA, Germany, Spain, and The Netherlands, all have public companies with interests in this sector.

Secondly, to avoid any accusations of dominant market share in the legitimate distribution of R18 DVDs. An EU competition investigation would be unpleasant.

For some reason, no one has mentioned Internet porn, which has made several British millionaires whose names are unknown to anyone but the company in America that hosts their site, God, and the taxman. Oh, and possibly their spouse.

And if we go back to Sullivan, and the other magazine publishers, it would be a sin to ignore how much money they (and BT) made from 0898 (now 0900) numbers and sex chatlines. They are the real precursors of Internet porn.

Several more millionaires emerged from the scam-infested waters of the "Instant Access" dialers that probably added an instant 50% to the monthly recurring profits of the first generation of porn webmasters who relied only on credit card memberships.

Judging by the success of Amsterdam's webcam powerhouse, Interclimax, there will always be a premium market for one-to-one Internet sex, and the appeal of such live interactivity will remain a distinct advantage over recorded DVDs.

Producers in the UK are thus being squeezed at either end. Distributors are already seen to be driving prices down and calling the shots. Yet individual producers find it difficult to make any real impact on the Internet - they rarely have the scope, through their own websites, to deal directly with enough consumers to establish any relationship with them. Often, they see the Internet as a threat (piracy) or a distraction from their main method of distribution. Usually, they settle for cautiously using their own site to sell mail order DVDs and moaning about the cost of bandwidth that their free samples incur.

This psychological outlook is the real barrier to more producers achieving wealth through porn.

IPTV will soon start to figure as a distribution medium alongside DVD sales via distributors, and the less-than-satisfactory situation that exists for legal UK mail order, as well as broadband streaming and downloading.

But the business model that British producers adopt towards it should be examined dispassionately. My own view is that Britain's strange development regarding hardcore porn calls for a unique response to the opportunity of IPTV.

Two practical things are necessary. First, a collective recognition that producers have separate interests from distributors - interests that may be better served by co-operation than competition under certain circumstances.

And second, that British producers need to look at their own situation in the context of the industry internationally. Lose the egos for long enough to face up to the facts. (Of course, it's not you I'm referring to, it's the others)

In every industry, and porn is no exception, a new distribution medium brings risks and opportunities. If it is true that few British producers are millionaires (and I have no doubt it is - but neither are they skint), then they are also less wedded to existing media and their value chains.


The IBC 2005 (Broadcasting Industry) conference being held at the RAI in Amsterdam from 6th to 13th September might be a place from which British producers can gain some perspective.

IPTV creates opportunities for new "broadcasters" at a price far below that of a satellite TV operation.

If a few leading producers felt like visiting this event (nothing to do with me whatever - www.ibc.org ), or just coming to Amsterdam during that period, maybe something interesting could emerge from a meeting.