OnlyFans

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c932gpk2l1do

Interesting. I always assumed these Only Fans managers were fly-by-night types — it doesn’t seem all that fulfilling for graduate students! — but I didn’t know it was as bad as all this. In fact, I figured most of them were probably overseas anyway.

No one deserves to be threatened much less harassed and beaten. By no means do I condone any of that.

But there is a simple way to avoid this: don’t use agents.

They shouldn’t be using agents anyway. I’ve heard it said that this is no different to executives and their PAs, celebrities and their publicists, or athletes and their ghostwriters. There are plenty of situations in which one person allows another to speak on their behalf and it is totally legitimate. OnlyFans is no different.

Except it is different. When I get an email from someone’s PA, I don’t really care who wrote it as long as the information in it is accurate. The same with celebrity press releases or athlete autobiographies. We are interested in the story and its reliability, not the authorship.

But OnlyFans models are selling interaction with a specific person. When they use an agent, they are essentially lying to their customers. There should be no place at all for agents — including the “legitimate” ones.

^^ It is not really defendable to deceive customers, but the more popular models will reach the point where they have little option but to delegate aspects of their services out, either that or customers will be complaining about delays. If they could be transparent as to what is happening then at least customers would know where they stand & can take it or leave it.
Obviously the expected intimate interactions must always be with the models. Being open & honest is the key.

I agree.

But this is partly self-fulfilling. They hire the agency to help them get to 5000 subscribers and then say they need the agency because they couldn’t possibly interact with 5000 subscribers on a one-to-one basis.

Models who run the site themselves rarely get to that level. Is it because they aren’t “popular” or is it because they are honest?

Anyway, I agree that transparency is the key. A fair approach would be to have a free or low-subscription page which is openly advertised as being agency-run. They could use this to put out all their exclusive PPVs and spam. Then have a premium-priced page which promises genuine interaction.

After watching the BBC documentary Only Fans : Inside the Machine it comes as no surprise that there's exploitation from both sides. The selling point to the creators is to have independence, but so many of them become exploited & controlled or worse. A small percentage of the creators are making big money, the majority very little. It would seem that the company are not protecting their creators & are turning a blind eye to the 3rd party agents & managers exploitation because it is mainly down to this management that has made it into a money making machine. Large aspects of the business are unregulated.
Megan Rox featured briefly on this programme, but didn't have much to say.

(13-05-2026 10:37 )Camillas No.1 Fan Wrote:  I can also recommend Michelle Moist as well she is genuine as well

Her account posted whilst she was performing on Babestation one night, so make of that what you will.

I question if Kandi Kay is 100% genuine, I have had no end of problems with her.

Maxie Rhoades must be under new management.

Her spamming has gone from 0 to constant in the past week.

My personal favourites are the ones that breathlessly shout: “SELLING OUT FAST”!

How exactly does a short video “sell out”? Is the tape wearing out?

(16-06-2026 20:40 )Nottsguy87 Wrote:  Her account posted whilst she was performing on Babestation one night, so make of that what you will.

I don't do OF, so I'm not arguing either way, but that in itself might not mean anything.
I'd be very surprised if there wasn't a facility to set up posts beforehand and have them go out at pre-determined times.