[QUOTE=abby]
We have shot several models with breasts like that.
[/QUOTE]
Didja have 'em mounted? 
[QUOTE=sqweels]
Didja have 'em mounted?
[/QUOTE]
No, he did it himself.
Rimshot!
I’m pretty sure most of the views on the sites you listed come from other places. In particular adultadworld is a site that hosts ads. Anyone who is looking for porn (or, pretty much anything, really) is seeing porn banners. They’re hosted by adultadworld. So the advertisement site gets 10 times the traffic as a subscription site. I’m not surprisesd.
Also, I agree with you about why abby will not be appearing on the cover of Forbes any time soon. The thing is, none of the internet porn providers will. What’s a non-niche porn site? youporn hosts short videos. I’d be willing to bet that most of their traffic isn’t people browsing the vast youporn archives but rather people linked to one of their videos from a message board. Similarly rapidshare is quite high on the list of companies, and they are a hosting service for files. I have no idea how big a percentage of their total traffic is porn related, but I would wager it’s quite high. The sites you’re talking about aren’t providers at all. They just link to free porn on other sites.
[QUOTE=Tenebras]
Now this is a weirdly shaped boob…
erichollen.com/blackbeard/The%20Compleat%20Playboy/BCFs/195606_Gloria_Walker_CF.jpg
[/QUOTE]
I think it might just be the angle? I know that sometimes mine look different when I’m in a lying or reclining position. Maybe it would look different if she were sitting or standing.
[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase]
Rimshot!
[/QUOTE]
I’m pretty sure abby doesn’t feature that sort of content.
[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase]
If you go to alexa.com and look at the top 100 sites for the U.S., you’ll find Youporn at #25, Adultfriendfinder at #33, Redtube at #36, XTube at #63, Pornhub at #72, and Adultadworld at #95. I didn’t check too closely into them, but they all look to be general agglomeration sites, not tied into a particular niche or style or name. Even the smallest is ten times the size of abbywinters. And there must be hundreds more ahead of her.
[/QUOTE]
Again, most of those sites rely on ad (and lead generation) revenue, while abby’s site is subscription driven. While they have similar product, they don’t share business models, so the alexa rankings mean little. It’s like comparing network television movie showings to pay per view movies.
[QUOTE=abby]
(* I putting the word ‘fetish’ in quotes, cos lately it has come to mean leather and whips and stuff, but really it’s more generic than that).
[/QUOTE]
Gee, THANKS, abby. Thanks to you I now have to think that, as a guy who likes pictures of women who are attractive in a normal way–may I say, to steal Hef’s false claim, ones who look like “the girl next door,” in an Ozzish way–I’m some sort of fetishist with niche tastes. On the other hand, it makes me seem dangerous, doesn’t it? 
In Hef’s defense, back in the day the ideal woman was, er, plusher than she is today. By the 30th anniversary (IIRC, Bebe Buell, the mother of Liv Tyler, and a woman who makes her daughter LOOK like she inherited WAY too many of Steve Tyler’s genes) Playboy was already making fun of sketches Leroi Neiman made at Cannes in the early '60s of models sashaying down the beach, muffintopping out of every seam of their bikinis.
You young’uns don’t remember it, but there was a time when NOBODY worked out. Road & Track had a picture I can’t find of the 2XL Froilan Gonzalez(?), a F1 driver of the 50s, and the caption, “I remember when the drivers were fat and the tires were skinny.” A local station is showing reruns of the old “Buck Rogers” series with Gil Gerard and he was shown climbing out of a bath and, though no actor alive would show publicly that thick a layer of fat (or hair, for that matter) except as a joke, I had to explain to my kids that back then he was thought of as having a GOOD physique. And the starlets were skinny and breastless and I assume that was thanks to cocaine and bulemia.
And it takes till page 3 for someone to snicker that the link in the OP invites us to “Download the Large size” 
[QUOTE=Ronald C. Semone]
The ones I remember the girls wearing in 1952 (it’s a long story about why I can be so precise about the date) were styled like a man’s dress shirt and made of a very think white material, probably cotton, so shear that the girl’s bra underneath the blouse was clearly visible. It as considered in poor taste to stare.
[/QUOTE]
I had one around 1980. It was a hand me down. It was very sheer cotton with slightly less transparent stripes woven in. The fabric was lighter in weight than broad cloth.
I’ve been watching body styles and photography change, breasts swell, pubic hair appear, then disappear via razor or waxing, when I came upon this: http :// erichollen.com/blackbeard/The%20Compleat%20Playboy/BCFs/197305_Anulka_Dziubinska_CF.jpg
I thought I was pleased to see actual pubic hair on the women, but now I’m not so sure. It certainly gave me a moment of pause…
Edited to add that it must have been bleached. Other pictures of her on the web show more normal looking pubic hair.
[QUOTE=Savannah]
I’ve been watching body styles and photography change, breasts swell, pubic hair appear, then disappear via razor or waxing, when I came upon this: http :// erichollen.com/blackbeard/The%20Compleat%20Playboy/BCFs/197305_Anulka_Dziubinska_CF.jpg
I thought I was pleased to see actual pubic hair on the women, but now I’m not so sure. It certainly gave me a moment of pause…
[/QUOTE]
THAT’s pubic hair? For a sec, I thought it was airbrushed out. Believe me, if that gives you pause, you don’t want to get anywhere near a real bush. There’s a lot more hair out there. (And yes, there are some of us bringing back the au naturel look.)
[QUOTE=Freudian Slit]
THAT’s pubic hair? For a sec, I thought it was airbrushed out. Believe me, if that gives you pause, you don’t want to get anywhere near a real bush. There’s a lot more hair out there. (And yes, there are some of us bringing back the au naturel look.)
[/QUOTE]
Oh, no, don’t get me wrong–I enjoy seeing actual pubic hair. I like actual pubic hair. I think it’s much sexier than than shaved or landing strips or whatever. I have actual pubic hair myself. I’m pro-hair.
It was the colour and texture of the hair in the photo that threw me for a moment–I’d never seen anything so white in all my life, and I’ve glanced at my fair share of nekkid ladies, before and especially since the advent of the web.
[QUOTE=Savannah]
I’ve been watching body styles and photography change, breasts swell, pubic hair appear, then disappear via razor or waxing, when I came upon this: http :// erichollen.com/blackbeard/The%20Compleat%20Playboy/BCFs/197305_Anulka_Dziubinska_CF.jpg
[/QUOTE]
It is quite decorative, isn’t it?
Here she is with what seems to me, more ‘normal’ pubic hair. http: // w webhorror.com
She’s still blonde, but not that white-blonde.
You know what I like about her? Her strengths (from her playmate data card): I’m always willing to learn, and I’m easy-going.
Sounds like a winning combination to me, no matter what hairstyle she sports.
[QUOTE=WhyNot]
Breast implants will increase the size of the breast mass, but they don’t enlarge the nipple or areola. What you end up with is an oddly small looking nip on a big boob.
[/QUOTE]
Not true, at least in my case. My nipples & areolae used to be small – now they seem huge. I really do not like the nipple effect. I wish I had an “oddly small looking nip on a big boob.”
[QUOTE=tesseract]
Not true, at least in my case. My nipples & areolae used to be small – now they seem huge. I really do not like the nipple effect. I wish I had an “oddly small looking nip on a big boob.”
[/QUOTE]
Weird. Have you gained weight, been pregnant or nursed? (Take those all as rhetorical questions, if you like.) Those things *have *increased the size of my nipples/areolas over the years. But I’m at a complete loss at to why stretching the skin of the breast should affect the size of the nipples. Unless you had your implants put in when you were young and your nipples just hadn’t reached their full size yet.
[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase]
No, he did it himself.
Rimshot!
[/QUOTE]
She, dude.
[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase]
That’s an article about the magazine, not about the Internet. You can’t compare markets across media. If the broad market magazines are doing worse, then the niche market magazines are probably doing even more poorly.
The Internet results are easy to check at Alexa.com. (Well, not easy. The graphs keep refusing to change whenever I try to get different views. Rankings are easy to check, though.)
Playboy.com rank 1265
daily reach per million last six months, about 800
Penthouse.com rank 2339
Abbywinters.com rank 7786
daily reach per million last six months, about 100
Abbywinters ranked in the 10,000s the last week and the 12,000s for the most recent day. Quick, order up another threesome! 
[/QUOTE]
If you told me that Playboy and Penthouse had bloated cost structures an order of magnitude greater than Abby’s I wouldn’t be at all surprised. One of the advantages of niche is that it sells itself by being what it is. Mainstream means competing with, well, the mainstream. That means spending a lot to get and keep audience share.
AKA, size doesn’t matter?
[QUOTE=WhyNot]
But I’m at a complete loss at to why stretching the skin of the breast should affect the size of the nipples.
[/QUOTE]
Really? I think it seems like the obvious result. Try this simple experiment: Step 1) Draw a face on a balloon. Step 2) Blow up the balloon. Step 3) See what I mean?