Dynamics of more regular client-escort relationships.
If you’ve been a client of escorts for any length of time, you will probably end up with a regular companion (or possibly more than one regular escort). Every successful escort is also more than likely to have their core group of regular clients as well.
Maintaining this connection should be enjoyable, fulfilling and highly desirable for both parties, it can also be a huge challenge. This article starts an exploration of the topic of ‘regulars’.
So who chooses to make it a ‘regular’ situation?
Perhaps the general thinking is that it is the client. The client makes a ‘first-booking’ decision, finding an escort that works for them in whatever way is important, and then continues over time to make further repeat, and ultimately regular bookings with this preferred companion.
I think however that astute escorts should also (and do also) play perhaps the major role in this dynamic, effectively choosing the clients that they would ‘like’ as regulars and then making it appealing for these clients to ‘stick’ in a regular booking relationship for as long as it lasts. The dynamic is a mutual one.
We can’t all be regulars! There is maths involved in availability.
Many clients make multiple bookings. For escorts, winning these new clients (in the marketing sense) can be hard work, and the idea of developing a cohort of established, regular and financially valuable clients makes a sensible part of any business strategy. So a successful escort, attracting clients and making the volume of bookings that they want, may ultimately have a quantity of regular clients that makes sense for their individual business model.
These regulars can be ‘chosen’ at random, as the end result of clients choosing, of their own accord, who they want to ‘repeat book’. Alternatively, an escort can play a role in choosing the ‘type of client’ that they want as one of their regulars. After all we can all only have so many regulars, so it makes sense for all involved to participate actively in this ‘choice’. An escort should maximise her business for the best possible fit and results, and ‘choose’ the clients that best make this happen for them.
How do we choose each other as regulars?
Perhaps I am not as good a client as I think, but my experience is that there is rarely any incentive offered by most escorts to ‘hold’ regular clients – at least from my observation and discussions. I am not talking about special deals, discount-pricing or ‘frequent flyer’ type arrangements, I am simply talking about classical ‘client relationship’ hooks. Special communication, notification of availability and desire to ‘catch-up’, small signs of appreciation, ideas for future bookings and any extra dose of incentive, matched to the escorts individuality, that will hold the attention of a client they would like as a regular over the competing forces in the industry that may ‘drag them away’.
(Update note (April 2018): this is not really true for me anymore. I have some regulars who go to great effort to understand me, be kind to me, and work together on our booking plans. It isn’t about discounts or special-deals, it just about each of us making the other feel special. So I am hooked of course and hopefully they don’t mind me as a client. I guess the editorial note here, is that this takes some time – for example the time since I first wrote this article more than a year ago.)
After all, holding a regular and reliable client makes business sense – it is by definition generally more reliable, safer, easier (if the selection is right) and hopefully more mutually enjoyable.
So why does this fail so often?
I’m still getting my head around this and there is clearly no single reason. The obvious reasons include clients and escorts retiring or changing their habits, desires or any other aspect of their ‘way of operating’. Financial situations change, successful escorts may ‘price themselves’ out of a former regular’s financial capacity or other financial details may change. People grow apart, or things do not ‘improve’, even in the unusual client-escort relationship world, relationship dynamics happen.
There is also the whole industry force of ‘swapping’ – the client finds a new favorite or the reverse happens and the escort has a new, preferred group of regular clientèle. The group of forces that perhaps intrigue me more, are even more subversive, sub-conscious and oh so human. I’m calling these reasons for the failure of regular ‘client-escort’ relationships … The Test!
So what is The Test?
We all know something about clients ‘choosing’ particular escorts for the first time and also the screening and other reverse ‘selection’ or perhaps more appropriately ‘approval’ processes that escorts use in varying ways. Far less discussion exists around what happens in terms of ‘additional filtering and selection’ in later dates. I have come, for simplicity’s sake, to call this The Test.
It can be anything. It is also generally administered by both the escort and the client (usually very differently and at different times), but it is almost always to ‘test’ that there is a regular relationship and it is most likely not even a conscious act. A client may ask for a favour, expect more time, something to be said, a special thank-you or just be surprisingly obnoxious (probably without realizing it) hoping to not be ‘rejected’ … a test that happens in many relationships. What the client is looking for, is some sign from the escort that they have a ‘special’ relationship, that their connection can survive the occasional ‘bump in the road’. Unfortunately, all to often, they can’t.
If the client, doesn’t get a sign, or worse yet a degradation in the relationship, it is likely that there won’t be many more bookings. This isn’t restricted to clients. Escorts may also ‘test a client’, to see if they are ‘above others’ in the mind of the client and similar unusual behaviours may be sub-consciously conducted to see ‘will my regular still re-book’ and therefore is our relationship more special and durable than others. These are self-destructive human actions that happen all the time and more often than not end the regular relationship – especially if they persist over time.
It is strange that we don’t do ‘deliberately positive’ reinforcements more often, maybe we are hard-wired to test our friends, lovers and even paid or paying partners. I think the study of this alone would be interesting work, but as usual the psychology or sociology of sex-work is almost as taboo in society’s thinking as the act, and I certainly don’t have any hard evidence to base any of this on.
So what does it all mean?
Don’t ask me, I can’t work all this complexity out. The only thing I know is that my success rate for the ‘testing dynamic’ isn’t that great. I’ve lost regular companions because we ‘tested’ each other out, before I even knew that this was a thing or that I had this self-destructive thing within me.
I survived another ‘test’, where I am ashamed to say, I was the one doing the testing (not deliberately of course), but now that I look backwards, I can see that she was a very special person to have survived what I regretfully and sub-consciously ‘tested’ her with. It probably made our connection weaker, but now that I am aware of my physiological weakness here, I am increasingly determined to use positive relationship building rather than accidentally stress-testing connections to see if they hold. It’s a work in progress, I have my issues and neediness that made me a client in the first place still being resolved. I always try and improve, be better, but it is a journey that includes the occasional backward step.
In other cases, I hope that I can see this coming and also recognise if an escort is ‘testing me’, rather than just the situation where we are not compatible as regulars.
Sorry no profound answers here, but hopefully something for you to consider in your own journey. Comments and feedback as always most welcome. Plus I hold no anger, only sadness, with any of my endings and wish everyone I have come into contact with on this journey only the best upon their own.
Xx SP 8 March 2017 (article updated 6 May 2017 and again 17 April 2018).