Hacker News Reader

Comment by skohan | Hacker News Reader

If anything I thought maybe it was a publicity stunt.

I could see why this might be your first thought, but I suspect this move might have hurt OF more than helping, simply because most of the people who formerly/currently call OF home have now lost any sense of stability.

Tho, as we’ve seen in the past, network effect will likely play a huge part in most of the content creators staying with OF. However I just can’t imagine the feeling of safety/permanence in platform choice will return for most of them.

I don't know if they have much to worry about. Where would those creators move? Is there any even remotely comparable platform in terms of user-base and pop-culture penetration? If you were worried about stability would you really feel better moving to some unknown upstart competitor?

Yeah, that’s why I brought up the network effect that OF brings.

I’m sure OF will be fine, I just hope they feel it a bit because this has to have shaken the foundations for a lot people who relied on them.

Creators have been doing this for years before OnlyFans and can continue to do it even if OnlyFans dies today. OnlyFans definitely made things a lot easier, especially for their audience, but I don't think we should paint creators like they're helpless without OF. It's not like Youtube where people have become dependent on it after almost 2 decades of use.

>> Where would those creators move?

Chaturbate has existed for time, existed through this; was the OnlyFans before OnlyFans, and continues to seem to thrive. Simple answer.

I know several creators (sex workers) who moved to other platforms (such as JustForFans) in anticipation of the ban and don’t plan on returning

Or maybe it helped OF, because they got to call out Mastercard / Visa and maybe negotiate a better deal out of it?

Since when does Mastercard / Visa care about minor backlash like this and why would they? Most of the hysteria died down pretty quickly, and it's not like people were going to boycott the biggest payment processors by far.

Antitrust is trending again, especially with tech, and the Visa/Mastercard duopoly has so far managed to escape the public's attention. Those two are no strangers to that world and that kind of publicity can actually hurt them long term.

I checked the FT link pasted in this thread, and the founder seems to claim that it was an issue strictly with the banks, not with the payment processors:

>“We’re already fully compliant with the new Mastercard rules, so that had no bearing on the decision,” he said.

https://www.ft.com/content/7b8ce71c-a87a-440e-9f3d-58069ca04...

At this point, I don't take any of the press releases at face value beyond the immediate effects they describe - all I know is they announced a future ban on adult content and then reversed course.

> “We’re already fully compliant with the new Mastercard rules, so that had no bearing on the decision,”

Reading between the lines, that could easily mean "We're already fully compliant with MC's rules but they still won't let the banks do business with us, so we needed to put publish pressure on MC"

Devin Nash explains the issue here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NURYbrDk7k

tldr: Financial transactions for porn suffer VERY high cashback rates so traditional payment operators do NOT like them because they become expensive to them VERY quickly.

They do viral marketing all the time. Go to any meme page and even some newspapers and you'll find "wow this mother who has an only fans is causing trouble at her school because other Dad's have been caught out!!! Dads! sign up here"

Watching people fall for their marketing is like being in a state of depression with the human race.

No it really does happen its just not so common among older people, I know people who got in trouble with their gf because they were caught subscribing to the OF of some other girl they both knew. Only half the appeal is random people selling nudes, the other half is the hot chick from your high school class selling them.

I'm not debating that it happens. But who's paying to have these articles published and promoted? PR dept of OnlyFans is your only answer.

I'm sure OF would be willing to pay for the right kind of coverage, but this sounds a bit nothingeverhappens. If something is interesting/amusing enough then it will get articles about it organically.

Telling your source of revenue that they're being removed from the platform, prompting many to seek other platforms, and absolutely destroying their confidence, is not a sane viral marketing move. I don't think they're that disconnected from reality.

This is like threatening to raise taxes to attract corporations.

Look at how many times youtube has pissed off creators. They have a monopoly and they know it.

OnlyFans will still be good money and still be able to attract new people willing to take their clothes off and cash in.

I think these are different.

Youtube content discovery is mostly through the algorithm. For OnlyFans, it seems to be mostly through outside promotion. If your ability find new members is all on you, I doubt it matters, as much, where you go.

It’s the next step after Ashly-Madison

Reply on news.ycombinator.com