quote:

---

I just want to know if this would be worth pursuing or will it be too much of a hassle and a waste of time and money.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Pitt:
faceless foot sites are a dime a dozen, i would never pay for it even if the feet are the best on the planet, what good is great feet if they are attached to an ugly girl?

i don't look at other genres of fetish porn or whatever but it seems this is the only one where the girls regularly want to be unseen and anonymous, why is that?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TrentD3000:
patrick at sos is a pretty accurate answer the reality though is that there are so many and I mean many other factors that you cannot consider if you dont know if them. What you dont know that you dont know really applies. I can tell you some matter of fact KNOWNS clips stores aren't paying out, a very big clip store is going cam as clips are past their hey day, TUBES are murdering the game, good content face or no face always WILL MATTER, you have to figure out new methods and techniques/tools to make it happen i.e. delivery methods, social etc. many of the current top peeps in the foot game sitting on their thrones are not good business people and are winging it at and you will see the cracks of their biz as margins get slimmer, revenues drop and the foot world moves on. The reality is their little fiefdoms are only working cuz they worked not because they are good at much of it. Look at tit this way and ask yourself "if Steve Jobs got in the biz or market would they even survive as a super minority in the market they created"? I think we know the answer. Everyone get on my mailing list trentd3000@gmail.com its gunna matter very soon thnx;
TD

---

So you're saying you want everything free at any given moment. Someone has to put in the time and effort to produce, direct, model, and PAY...somewhere in the chain of the system. People don't realize how much work it takes to bring these clips, pics, etc to the table for the world. If you can get off to some cam girl giving you a 5 second toe peek in a barely lit bedroom have at it lol.
 

---

Posted by BareSoles84 (Member # 45910) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jon26:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Pitt:
faceless foot sites are a dime a dozen, i would never pay for it even if the feet are the best on the planet, what good is great feet if they are attached to an ugly girl?

i don't look at other genres of fetish porn or whatever but it seems this is the only one where the girls regularly want to be unseen and anonymous, why is that?

---

I told a woman if they see you modeling for a foot fetish site then they must have a thing for feet.

---

I concur with this. Like Michael P said, people post far more embarrassing and incriminating information and pictures about and of themselves all the time on social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, etc. These are the sites that a prospective employer would look at.

If they come across a few images of you on a foot forum showing your feet for fun, I would be more inclined to say they are on that site in the first place for a reason, meaning they likely have a penchant for feet themselves. Wu's and TMP aren't exactly sites that you stumble upon by accident without at least typing the word "feet" in your search engine. Heck, from what I've heard, not even all foot fetishists out there have even heard of places such as Wu's or TMP. If a random person that wasn't into female feet did somehow happen to stumble upon these sites by accident and then realized what they were, I highly doubt they would continue browse the site and perform extensive searches on it.

Even then, what is the shame in innocuously showing your feet? It's merely just feet, and I think people generally tend to find them more amusing than anything.
 

---

Posted by eff (Member # 11277) on :
 
I dont agree with the whole "faceless then its pointless" perspective. I dont really care at all what the girls face looks like when you're looking at footjobs.

As a matter of fact, the best ones come from just an average looking girl as opposed to a prissy, stuck up "beauty queen" who isnt really into it anyway.
Its a FOOT FETISH...not FACE FETISH. lol

Myndi Fox had one of the best footjob videos of all time and you never ever see her face in it.

If her feet are sexy and her skills are up to par then I really dont see the point in seeing the face at all.

Her voice and the words she's using are far more important. Sexy talk goes much further IMO.

And I seriously doubt you guys look at Mona Lisa's face when you see those pics of her high arches and sexy soles propped up.
 

---

Posted by BareSoles84 (Member # 45910) on :
 
Everyone has their own preferences, but for me personally, I like pretty girls with pretty feet, or pretty feet on pretty girls - however you want to look at it. Looking exclusively at a pair of feet without knowing who they belong to doesn't really do anything for me.

I do possess a female foot fetish, but not to the point where I will be attracted to anything with 10 toes and that as long as I find her feet nice, then that's good enough for me. In order for me to notice her feet, I have to find the girl overall to be attractive first in some capacity.
 

---

Posted by eff (Member # 11277) on :
 
Yeah but you should be able to spot a FEMALE foot without even having to look at the face.

EDIT:
Let me ask you this, did you need to see Myndi Fox's face to appreciate her footjob video?
Did you ever wonder if it wasnt a female foot lol?
 

---

Posted by BareSoles84 (Member # 45910) on :
 
Of course I can, but the point has nothing to do with being able to discern female feet from male feet. Even with that being the case, it doesn't invariably mean I like or one likes seeing female feet without knowing who they belong to. I, like many others I'm certain, like pretty girls with pretty feet, not just exclusively pretty feet. As I mentioned, everyone has their own preferences though.

Well to be honest, I don't know who Myndi Fox is, and I'm actually not really into foot job clips.

Let me ask you this: If Herman Munster for instance was actually in fact a female and "she" had very nice, well kept feet, would you be down for some foot action?
 

---

Posted by NorcalfeetStudios (Member # 732) on :
 
This thread is really going off topic fast lol Herman Munster?
 

---

Posted by BareSoles84 (Member # 45910) on :
 
I don't think it has really digressed. Some people expressed that they would like to see the faces of the models in order for them to be interested in his prospective material, so the discussion evolved into a civilized discussion about preferring or not preferring faces. As long as it stays civilized, I don't see the harm in that.

Everyone has their own preference.
 

---

Posted by eff (Member # 11277) on :
 
Hahaha Ok, I'll go here with you:

Herman Munster,HELL NO!

Now Lily? If she has nice arches, nice wrinkles and overrall sexy feet then hell yes!

My point is I would pick Lily Munster over Marilyn Munster if the feet were sexier and her footjob skills were better.
Marilyn might look better in the face but we're not talking about faces here...this is all about foot fetish stuff.
Herman wouldnt even be in the equation because I can tell the difference between a male foot as opposed to a female foot.

 

---

Posted by eff (Member # 11277) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by BareSoles84:


Well to be honest, I don't know who Myndi Fox is

---

You have NO IDEA what you're missing!
 

---

Posted by Patrick (Member # 1169) on :
 
There was a site online some years ago that was "feet only." After a year or so the person came out and admitted to being a cross dresser and yeah, lots of dudes felt oh so dirty.

It's true that many times you can tell the difference, but the way the world is now, I'm sure some would slip thru the cracks. And yes, if they did themselves up that nicely, you still might not be able to tell when their face is shown.

Bruce Jenner footjobs for the loss!

I'd just rather see a female in addition to her feet because I also like the whole package. It's like when I see a pair of feet in public, I ALWAYS look up to see what the person looks like. Now, if I see a person before their feet, if she's not attractive to me, I'm not checking out to see if her feet are nice. If she's hot and her feet aren't, then that sucks. But I like average to above average on the entire package.

Patrick

P.S. As for Myndi Fox, I can imagine there are a lot of people on the internet now who have no clue who she is. She was quite the hit, but I think I still had dial up when I first discovered her.
 

---

Posted by BareSoles84 (Member # 45910) on :
 
Well articulated Patrick, my sentiments as well.

If I see a female and I don't find her attractive at least in some capacity, what her feet look like makes no difference to me. If what I see first is a nice pair of feet, I want to see who they belong to and if I don't find her attractive, then her possessing pretty feet is moot to me.

Fortunately, it's almost a certainty that pretty girls will tend to possess pretty feet. Average at the least. Of course, there's always exceptions, as even a broken clock is right twice a day, but in my experience you're more often than not, not disappointed when it comes to a pretty girl possessing nice feet.
 

---

Posted by eff (Member # 11277) on :
 
Well in my opinion, when you're looking for all that, you're looking for more than just a "foot fetish". When u say the terms ____ fetish it's because u focus or key in on a particular body part. Not that body part PLUS a pretty face. Saying u need face, eyes, smile etc, etc plus feet is not the same thing as a foot fetish IMO. That's actually an oxymoron. People with hand, hair and any other kind of fetish are mainly looking for that body part for sexual satisfaction. Of course any of us would want the whole package but I really wouldn't think it's required if u have a pair of extremely sexy feet.

If I see a 10 in the face but she's only a 4 as far as her feet but also see a woman who's face is a 4 but feet are a 10 I'm going for the feet that are a 10 if we're talking strictly sexual.
Looking for or "needing" to have a certain level of facial beauty for ur attraction to a woman's feet to kick in is the exact opposite of a foot fetish.

There's a porn star named Ms. Cleo...she looks like she's been smacked in the face with a bag of nickels but her ass is out of this world! Really huge ass and she bounces it with the best of em. She's famous with ass men because of her one "asset" (pun intended lol) that booty!

This is why I brought up Mona Lisa... Shes attractive but she's also up there in age but If u ask me would I spend the night with Mona Lisa, OR a younger looking beauty who's feet are only a 6 I'm taking Mona Lisa every day of the week.

And I'm sorry but I really feel bad for anyone who can't differentiate between a man and a woman's feet and could be so easily duped or fooled. If u need reassurance then u probably should leave those feet alone. Just my .02

[ June 10, 2015, 06:47 PM: Message edited by: eff ]
 

---

Posted by eff (Member # 11277) on :
 
Oops. Double post
 

---

Posted by goodguyneighbor (Member # 2824) on :
 
It's no doubt true that all some people need to see is 10 toes, presumably female, but I believe the majority of enthusiasts like to see a pretty face to go along with the feet.

Probably why poses with feet and face visible are the most popular angles. Also explains why the hotter the girl, the better her feet tend to be rated, and why female celebrity feet are so wildly popular.

Who the feet belong to makes all the difference in the world to me, but everyone has their own standards and preferences.

cbf
 

---

Posted by NorcalfeetStudios (Member # 732) on :
 
I concur, gotta see the face for sure...it makes an average pair of feet seem so much better.
 

---

Posted by Patrick (Member # 1169) on :
 
Just because the fetish is for the feet, it doesn't mean that your liking has to derived ONLY from the feet themselves. If this were true, then foot fetishists would be turned on by feet of whatever sex, feet of family members, or any other taboo subject I care not to get into here. There is a bigger picture.

I bet you hands down that some of the people you see in the People of Wal-Mart site happen to have some feet, sporting nice pedicures. Saying that ugly, straight up hideous women are incapable of having pretty feet would be wrong. Just like saying a total knockout can't have ugly feet would be. As much as I want to know the female the feet belong to looks, I've seen quite a few head turners out there with feet that, quite frankly, look like male feet or are just busted!

I have no desire to do this idea and it's totally against the policy of this forum, but I bet you if there were photos randomly stuck on this forum of some cross dressers, transsexuals, etc. that were feet only, there would be people on this board complimenting them. As a matter of fact, since this is the "internet," I'm sure it has happened.

Patrick
 

---

Posted by NorcalfeetStudios (Member # 732) on :
 

quote:

---

As a matter of fact, since this is the "internet," I'm sure it has happened.

---

I KNOW it's already happened and I was cringing and laughing at the same time as people blew their wads without even realizing it. The phrase "Finkle & Einhorn" from Ace Ventura comes to mind while using a plunger on your face.
 

---

Posted by BareSoles84 (Member # 45910) on :
 
GGN also makes a very good point that I hadn't considered.

The staggering popularity of celebrity feet is a testament to how much of a factor face and image plays for many foot enthusiasts; having the propensity to rate average looking feet higher on their favorite celebrity than what they otherwise would if they were the same feet on your everyday, average looking woman. Wikifeet provides a good example of this.

Also, I've noticed that in threads with images posted, occasionally when you click on the image (depending on the image host, imagevenue does this for instance), the number of times that particular image has been clicked on and viewed is displayed underneath the image. The image(s) that show the feet/soles with the girl's face also visible tend to have overwhelmingly more views than the images that just exclusively show her feet. I don't think that's an accident.

As I've stated and others have echoed, we all have our own personal preferences and tastes. There's no right or wrong way to enjoy feet, it's whatever suits you. We all have different standards and expectations; some higher than others, some lower than others.

Like Patrick also stated, if the logic of "it's called foot fetish not face fetish, so you're supposed to exclusively like feet" is applied, then theoretically, the gender of the feet shouldn't matter, who they belong to shouldn't matter, etc. In fact, I actually believe this is a common misconception regarding foot fetish to individuals who don't possess one and don't understand what it entails, and possibly why some find it so idiosyncratic and "weird". They presume that having a foot fetish means that you just like/get off on feet in general. Male or female, pretty or ugly, etc.

Obviously, that isn't the case and there is a much bigger picture.
 

---

Posted by eff (Member # 11277) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patrick:
Just because the fetish is for the feet, it doesn't mean that your liking has to derived ONLY from the feet themselves. If this were true, then foot fetishists would be turned on by feet of whatever sex, feet of family members, or any other taboo subject I care not to get into here. There is a bigger picture.

Patrick

---

Ahhh but see that was one of my points. You SHOULD be able to distinguish between male and female feet from the jump, without even having to see the face. I've NEVER had that problem.
Most of you responding to this have sites of your own and in your sites you display feet AND faces so thats obviously your preference, but how many other number of websites have been popular WITHOUT showing all models faces OR having models that were not so glamorous/just "average looking"??

This was my point about Mona Lisa. (which nobody seems to want to touch) Do most of you think she's a knockout as far as facial beauty? Would you pick a beauty queen with "OK" feet over Mona Lisa??? I sure wouldnt.
Patrick, IMO most of your models on your site are not on the level of Adams site (feetfair) when it comes to facial beauty but the quality of the feet is right there on par with his models so you guys are neck and neck and I wouldnt pick his site over yours because its all about the FOOT FETISH.
Some of you are putting far too much value on something that I personally dont think matters all that much.

Now dont get me wrong, would you PREFER to have a perfect ten from head to toe?? Hell Yeah!!
You'd be a fool not to. But to act like its a requirement, when most of these foot models are not your typical "beauty queens" anyway is absurd.

When this whole internet foot fetish thing really kicked off, most of the popular models were either average looking, or you couldnt see their faces. Kim from KimsKastle was cute, Bellecita was kinda "tomboyish" but had her sexiness to her, Myndi Fox rarely showed her face at all, the model from www.footalicious.com NEVER showed her face (and she gave some A+ footjobs) footpixies.com still to this day has women whose faces we never see...Lexi was about the only exception from back in the day. All were decent in their own way, but the focus was never, ever, EVER on the facial beauty of these women. Always on the feet.

This is why the footfetish scene is getting watered down with women who are not really into foot fetish stuff nowadays because you're getting away from what made it popular in the first place which was a woman's feet.

Most of these barbie doll models dont give a fuck about your attraction to their feet and are just doing it to make a buck and they get away with it because they have a pretty smile or cute dimples..etc..etc.

If you get back to women who are genuinely INTO it that have sexy feet and stop looking for the stereotypical beauty queen and trying to MAKE them into it, the quality of the material will be much better IMO.
Bellecita nor Kim (Kimskastle) look like Jennifer Aniston or Halle Berry but I guarantee you that if you're looking for some foot fetish material, you wont have to guess or hope that they know what they're doing.

And you also have to keep in mind that there is an anonymity that goes along with foot fetish stuff that a lot of women like. They dont HAVE to show their faces because the focus is on the feet so dont take that away from them. Like I said, if you need help distinguishing between male or female feet, and just HAVE to see the face to tell the difference, then you probably shouldnt even deal in the first place.
And then people wonder why most of the foot fetish material features women who seem like they're faking or are not into feet.

Most of the women that I see that do the best foot fetish stuff dont fit into that criteria of mainstream beauty, but they shouldnt have to for foot fetish material.
And yes, I'm sure we're going to have to just agree to disagree but like I said before, thats just my .02
 

---

Posted by eff (Member # 11277) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by BareSoles84:

Like Patrick also stated, if the logic of "it's called foot fetish not face fetish, so you're supposed to exclusively like feet" is applied, then theoretically, the gender of the feet shouldn't matter, who they belong to shouldn't matter, etc. In fact, I actually believe this is a common misconception regarding foot fetish to individuals who don't possess one and don't understand what it entails, and possibly why some find it so idiosyncratic and "weird". They presume that having a foot fetish means that you just like/get off on feet in general. Male or female, pretty or ugly, etc.

Obviously, that isn't the case and there is a much bigger picture.

---

Nope. This doesnt work because if you're heterosexual then what you like (fetishes and all) would automatically be on the opposite sex.
Theres no attraction to any body part of the same sex as yourself.

If I like asses would I have to SPECIFY that I'm talking about a woman's ass and not a mans?

I'm a straight male so the answer should be automatic. This also goes back to what I said about you SHOULD be able to tell the difference between a man/woman's feet without even seeing the face.
 

---

Posted by BareSoles84 (Member # 45910) on :
 
That's an interesting counterpoint.

However, one element I think you're not considering is that in our collective society and to the average person, asses are a body part that are considered an "acceptable" body part to be attracted to on the opposite sex (or whichever sex you're attracted to) and are recognized as being within the "norm". Asses, breasts, genitalia, etc.

Feet to most people, are precisely that: feet. Male or female, it's all one in the same to them. They're usually found humorous because of the stigmas that are commonly associated with them and being that they are something "different" to take an interest in. I believe that only foot enthusiasts would be able to accurately differentiate between a male and a female foot, being that it's an included area of interest to them. To the average person who has no added or enhanced interest in feet, someone's feet are merely someone's feet, regardless of who they belong to.

This is why I do believe that this is a common misconception when it comes to foot fetish to individuals who don't possess one. If you tell someone you're into "feet", it's not unfathomable to presume they may interpret that as meaning that you simply get off on feet in general, and that all you need to see is exclusively a pair of feet and that is enough to get you excited and aroused. This could potentially be a factor in why it's sometimes perceived as being so idiosyncratic and "weird".

Obviously, the members on this site are only interested in female feet, and even so, having a female foot fetish doesn't invariably mean that you are attracted to any woman that possesses 10 toes.

The average person with no interest in feet, I believe would not automatically know this.

A clip of famous foot fetishist Andrew Derosier during an interview on 98Rock TV that helps delineate the point I'm attempting to make. He briefly sucks the hostess's toes at the end, and as a warning, the host shows his feet mid interview. However, the dialogue exchanged helps reinforce my point, as mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKE8XBKV2Mg

[ June 11, 2015, 08:39 PM: Message edited by: BareSoles84 ]
 

---

Posted by eff (Member # 11277) on :
 
How the fetish may be "perceived" is irrelevant because you and I both know we're talking about female feet.
You only need to appeal to men with foot fetishes so who cares what the "mainstream" thinks?
Unless you're trying to appeal to that particular audience (for the $$$) and in that case, you should just be a straight up photographer.

See WE should be able to distinguish male and female feet over anyone else because its our main focus. You start getting into other things, like how pretty the models hair is, then any and everybody jumps on the bandwagon which is why so many women who are not even into it (dont know how to pose, move, give footjobs, etc) get involved.

Like I said, nobody wants a "dog", but at the same time, is the face REALLY the focus?? You've moved the focus over from a womans feet to something that can be found in any issue of Sports Illustrated or Victoria's Secret magazine and in this day and age where everybody has a phone camera or digital camera, you basically water down the product.

[ June 11, 2015, 05:07 PM: Message edited by: eff ]
 

---

Posted by Patrick (Member # 1169) on :
 
I hate to break it to you, but I think a lot of these models from back in the day are being highly romanticized. Knowing a number of them personally, it was their husband/boyfriend who was the machine. The woman did it for her man, not all of us. That hasn't really changed. Now they just get paid more because people now use the Internet to make a buck on all facets of sexuality. And plus, why aren't all these models from a few years ago around? Quite a few aren't with that man anymore. There are exceptions, but don't think all these women were all about making us happy to be foot guys. Lol.

As for my models vs Feet Fair, that's a fair point. Adam hires pro models whereas I ask my friends to take part. I like the girl next door aspect. That's my thing. I do grab a "real model" every now and again, but for me it's much more fun to share this experience with someone "less into it" for the money than a pro model usually is. I know my models are not all hits with everyone, but if I found them to be ugly, I would have never asked. If I had a female friend who was just not pretty or let's say, well below average, and she had sexy feet, I wouldn't ask. I wouldn't even just shoot her feet.

I understand that many male feet are easy to spot. I'm just saying I think if you were given feet only photos of countless women (mix of ugly and pretty) and dudes (both natural and done up as a cross dresser would - like the Asian ones from Thailand) you'd get some wrong. But that could also happen with full body too. I'm not denying that fact. I just think it helps to know the whole package.

Not arguing either. Kinda like the point and counterpoint discussion. Good points on both sides honestly.

Patrick
 

---

Posted by Fiona McFee (Member # 39121) on :
 
So... back to the original question whether you can make money doing a c4s site without showing faces... yes, just not a lot.

I've been out of the game for quite a while but every once in a while I dip my toe (pun intended) back in and shoot a video and post it. I don't show my face, and I always sell clips. Not a ton, but I've got regulars who buy anything I put up there and new people sometimes find me and buy practically my entire catalog.

Now granted, I've been on C4S for a long time - a really long time. My store number is 5476 - store numbers are 6 digits now. Like Patrick said, I started because I met a foot guy who wanted to start a store, but I liked it and wound up doing it on my own. I really just did this as a hobby, not to make a living. In my view, it was fun, allowed me to be an exhibitionist in an anonymous way, protecting me from future employers, family, etc. from knowing, and I get to make a few bucks doing it.

When C4S got really flooded with footgirls, it got much harder to compete as a 'no face' store. If you're not expecting to make a lot of money, I say go for it and see what happens - what's the worst that can happen, you get some extra footjobs?
 

---

Posted by Jon26 (Member # 48134) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fiona McFee:
So... back to the original question whether you can make money doing a c4s site without showing faces... yes, just not a lot.

I've been out of the game for quite a while but every once in a while I dip my toe (pun intended) back in and shoot a video and post it. I don't show my face, and I always sell clips. Not a ton, but I've got regulars who buy anything I put up there and new people sometimes find me and buy practically my entire catalog.


Now granted, I've been on C4S for a long time - a really long time. My store number is 5476 - store numbers are 6 digits now. Like Patrick said, I started because I met a foot guy who wanted to start a store, but I liked it and wound up doing it on my own. I really just did this as a hobby, not to make a living. In my view, it was fun, allowed me to be an exhibitionist in an anonymous way, protecting me from future employers, family, etc. from knowing, and I get to make a few bucks doing it.

When C4S got really flooded with footgirls, it got much harder to compete as a 'no face' store. If you're not expecting to make a lot of money, I say go for it and see what happens - what's the worst that can happen, you get some extra footjobs?

---

quote:

---

they aren't "cool" if they're ashamed to be one of us as she clearly was [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fiona McFee:
You're paid as an independent contractor so you're responsible for the taxes on your payouts. If you've made more than $600 in a calendar year, at the end of the year you'll get a tax form from them - I'd suggest setting aside a third of what you make for taxes.

If you have any expenses related to the 'business' like camera or lighting equipment, you can use those as tax deductions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jon26:
I wasn't planning on making a lot of money. I want to do it as a hobby and because I know a woman who is interested. I talked to her yesterday and found out she doesn't want her face shown because of her ex. She said her ex had a foot fetish and she is afraid he will find the clip store. She told me he was embarrassed about his foot fetish.

I may go ahead and open a clip store. I already have a lot of different footjob videos made with her so I have enough content.

---

quote:

---

disagree from what i've seen the most successful clip stores show the face

---

quote:

---

maybe lix vixen but he FJ skills were one in a million

---

The fact that you brought her up kinda proves my point...You didnt need to see her face to know what was up. And her feet are not "all that" (they ARE pretty though) but her main thing was her footjob skills.

But coming from a guy who has dated a LOT of women in the past (please dont take it as bragging because thats not what I'm doing) but some of the most 'average looking' women will have the best feet and/or best footjob skills! Now "some" very attractive women are up there with them but just FROM MY EXPERIENCE I've seen that the average girl has tried more and willing to still try more.
Those watered down pretty face models dont seem to be as willing to jump into a fetish as quickly...the girl next door look will get you by in the foot fetish scene. Knowing that, then the face isnt even that important if it comes down to her not being comfortable with it...lix vixen has those pretty feet, great footjob skills and sexy voice! Nobody gave a damn about her face lol
Matter of fact, showing her face just might be why she aint around now.

Its some crazy ass people out here nowadays, so if they're not comfortable with it, who cares? I sure wouldnt. Even though I seem to be in the minority (at least on this forum).

All I can say to you is that IF you can get her to show her face then, cool! Thats a plus for everybody involved because everybody loves to see a pretty face.
Will you make more if she does? probably.
Is it going to turn everybody away if she DOESNT show her face? I doubt it.

Your profit may be less but if she wont model because you insist on showing her face then you've got no site/no audience in the first place so you're back to square one...so maybe find a few that will show faces to offset her. *shrugs*
IDK but if her feet look sexy and/or footjob skills are good, you've got me as a fan and I'm sure I wouldnt be the only one. Like the other poster said, maybe get her to wear a disuise or something lol.
 

---

Posted by some25 (Member # 48921) on :
 
Does anyone know what happened to lix vixen?! looks like she's also closed her clip store!
 

---