Way back in 1999 when WLP's first model Ivy suggested we do a pie video I told her that first I wanted to research what people wanted to see. (This was after I told her she was nuts).

The other reason was that I came to WAM from a "participatory" viewpoint. Watching videos didn't do a thing for me. But I was curious as to what others wanted to see. I have done a lot of research over the years for a living and I wanted to treat WAM the same way if we were going to actually sell vids.

So I started randomly (not scientifically) asking WAM fans what they wanted to see. I found them initially on the UMD but many other places since. For 20 years I have continued to ask "what do you want to see" to many WAM fans to the point now where I have spoken with between 700 and 800 people about WAM (mostly from the last 10-15 years). More specifically pie/slime fans.

WAM videos are like ANY OTHER PRODUCT. And make no mistake about it.they should be treated like any other product assuming you wish to sell them.

Good WAM is difficult to produce. Script writing is difficult. Shooting is difficult. Editing properly is difficult. Good WAM models with good acting skills are tough to find. It's why many videos are just someone covering themselves with various substances. That's easy to do.but "easy" doesn't always sell.

What WAM fans want to see is all over the map. It's a niche to begin with and then gets more niche oriented the more you break it down.

So how do people know what to produce?

Research. Just like any other product.

The vast majority of WAM fans you will never see comment on the UMD. But I guarantee you they are here. It's similar to people who listen to radio stations. Most of their listeners never call into the station.

Many breakouts of WAM fans have been discussed over the years. I just want to focus
on one..Messy WAMi.e Pies and Slime.or both combined as the case may be.

I did take out the people who ONLY like nude WAM because as it turns out that's an entirely different subset.

There are many subsets I discovered but I have tried to focus it down a bit to the clothed pie and slime fans. The models are clothed, I can't guarantee the WAM viewers are.

So what you are about to read generally applies to those folks. It also only applies if you want to sell your "product." If you just do WAM and show it for the fun of it then by all means keep doing what YOU like and ignore all of the below. It's also combined with information that I received talked about WAM as well as asking questions about it. It doesn't meant that if you produce videos based on the information that they will sell any more or any less. It's just raw data.

I provide this as a PIEblic service. (Sorry had to do ONE bad pun). Feel free to ignore every bit of this if you wish. (I'm sure there will be many who disagree with the informationfeel free. Some will seem obvious, others not so much.

Here's what I found. (Your mileage may vary. Pies in the rear view mirror are closer than they appear).


The important things to those who purchase WAM videos. (The first 3 came up all the timethe rest in no particular order.

Physically attractive model (Yes this is subjective) But without that
physical attraction whatever it is to each individual, people are unlikely to purchase a video.

Reactions Reactions Reactions I was surprised with how often this keeps showing up. Apparently there is nothing worse than a model who just SITS or STANDS there with no reaction or even minimal reaction. Also not well liked is OVER reaction.
Models should also not repeat the same phrasing over and over again either. Actually never thought of that one until I started hearing it. As someone said "17 times of 'oh my hair is ruined' is a bit much."

And speaking of hair.styled hair and make up done properly. Classy look preferred. Interesting that the female WAMmers were even MORE specific about this including little details like outfits must match, jewelry should be worn etc.

Nice outfits including heels. Formal look, club look, party look, wedding look.
As popular as "nice" outfits was "sexy outfits." I expected more "cheerleader" stuff.
But it's all about "a look" that the viewer didn't think would normally get messy.

I can't prove this but I would think that it's based on those places are where most of us see dressed up womenthen toss in movies and TV.

Self WAMming is not particularly well liked. "Overdone" came up a lot. "Boring" came up a lot. The only exception was that if it can be contained within the context of the videoi.e..if it makes sense. And there are a number of people who PREFER self WAMming just not many.

Good pies and slime. No "watery" slime. No "thin" pies. I no longer see producers violating this "rule.". Only onthe occasional scene on TV. I think WAM producers have this one down to a literal science.

End the plastic pools. Most viewers hate them. (insert white plastic chair joke here)

Tatoos I'll give you the exact percentages on these. 21% like them. 51% do not and 28% are indifferent. I'm going to assume that small tatoos or ones that are covered up doesn't bother anyone.

Some like the models to be enjoying themselves.however most mentioned the humiliation factor and wanting the model to be able to pull that off even though they KNOW they are acting. The actual term for that from viewers part is "willing suspension of disbelief." In other wordsmake the viewers believe.

Anything that interrupts that believability is viewed as a negative. The exception is those that just care about the visual..i.e..as long as someone is getting messy, they don't care how. But his is a much smaller percentage of viewers.

No men in the video or even a man's voice. This came up a lot as well. (Obviously this applies only to those who like a female model). However, and this seems counter intuitive, a lot of people who don't like men in videos were ok with "couples" videos.

Multiple models were not preferred as often as I thought it would come up. Although a lot of viewers like the concept of one female messing up another female while staying "clean" herself. I thought that was rather interesting and it's something that I have mentioned to a number of producers.

"The implication of something more." Another one I had never thought about. That something "more" was sex related. When I dug a little deeper (pun intended) many people suggested clothed WAM videos that still had a "touch" of sexual content. Much like pieing women on the chest, below the waist, etcwhile rubbing it in.

No Music. This came up repeatedly. Viewed as a "distraction."

No tape visible holding up background. Yes they know they are buying a pie video.."stop reminding them of it" was an actual quote.

No replays. Virtually everyone has digital capability. If they want, they can do it themselves. Most look at it as "padding" videos to make them longer.

Not too many pies (believe it or not) (best numbers according to most were 10 pies and 2 or 3 slimings) Yes, there are some that would like 1000 pies and 10 buckets of gunge. The number was also referenced in terms of there being one model.

Good set up dialogue but not too long. You're not writing War and PIEce. (Your Tolstoy jokes go here).

No bare feet visible. (unless a specific foot fetish pie video obviously)
And "of course" nice heels are ok to show. Lots of people like heels but not bare feet apparently. It's possible I suppose that bare feet is another one of those."who dresses up , dolls up and then doesn't wear heels" thingy that breaks the "reality." Didn't really ask anyone about that.

No pies on floor or on table visible. (Unless you're doing a banquet skit or something similar) Again, maybe it breaks the "believability."

Get the "timing" right. If you're going to do scripting.practice it. Practice the timing of the script vs. the "splat". Bad timing takes away from the video.




How most break down messy WAM (Feel free to add)

Nude Vs. Non Nude.
Visual self Wam Vs. Scripted WAM
Regular clothes vs. nice clothes
Costumes vs. regular clothes
Plot vs. no plot.
Pies Real? Shaving cream? Shells? Colors?
Thrown vs. Hand smooshed
Slime Color? Thickness?
Single model vs. multiple models
Same model vs. new models
Males and Females



And finally..PRICE and LENGTH of videos. (This isn't based on WAM research, this is based on business reality no matter the product).

Price Price doesn't matter. "Perceived value" matters.

Length of video is mostly irrelevant. Perceived value" matters.

Everyone has a price point that they won't go beyond. But if a model
you always wanted to see obliterated with pastry is obliterated with pastry for only
sixty seconds, you will pay a larger amount to see it regardless of the fact it's only sixty seconds.

But if there's a model you don't even think is remotely attractive, you won't pay even a few dollars to see 20 minutes of her getting pied.

THAT is perceived value.

And that's pretty much what I (and others) have found. Hope it might be of value to you.

So there you go. WAM research and bit of pontificating. For those of you who closed their eyes while I was pontificating you can open them again. Of course if your eyes were closed I don't know how youoh.nevermind.

I'll be back later. I have to smoosh (pun intended) all the paragraphs together so Jayce can read this.

Robby

Not sure how you quote OP's message, but I would add 'Willing to get messy v uwiling to get messy' to how people view wam, (well I do, anyway, I prefer it when the models are happy to get messy, whether surprised or not.)

Its a good thorough analysis, but I'd add my old chestnut that wam is very much an add on fetish, so I would agree that people won't pay any amount of money if they don't find the model attractive, I also think that applies to their own personal fetishes, for example, it doesn't matter how beautiful the models are, I would never buy videos from certain well known producers because they never wear stockings, or they wear nie clothing, only to remove them before getting messy, how many times do you see threads with 'if only they were wearing x?
Although I personally have found new fetishes from producers like mostwam, ripped jeans with hosiery underneath, tights, and fully clothed games with punishment being a hidden vibrator being switched on, adding great reactions and a sexual element whilst leaving everything to the imagination to name just a few.

Thanks for listening, I'll shut up now

This holds true in most every regard. Movies, television, radio, internet polls. Well...maybe not polls. Polls (here at least) seem to the the one place where people can be bothered to click a multiple choice answer even when they refuse to elaborate by typing something out.

Wow!!!! With all the threads about what do people like, or producers asking about models this is an awesome tutorial! If there is a way to sticky this thing or if ever a post warranted a sticky, I think this is it.

Oh, nasty! I like it!

Since we have no idea how often you thought multiple models would be preferred, this ends up being very vague. Would you mind giving a rough percentage breakdown of these three groups:

a) people who prefer a solo model
b) people who prefer one model messing up another model (or more) but staying clean herself
c) people who prefer multiple models all getting messy

thanks!

Its like you interviewed just me! Correct on every aspect as far as my taste is concerned.

I too miss Dana. I especially love the "No ifs, ands or Pie Butts" scene that she did for you. The dialogue and her humiliated reactions in this scene were absolutely perfect! I hope that your collaborations with Messygirl will lead to similar scenes and humiliated reactions. Can't wait to see what you come up with!

Robby, you've got a great post there and I find my preferences match what you found to be most prevalent. Great bit of research there! I wouldn't have imagined it was as hard as it is to make a good WAM video, but after reading your piece, I can see how it is. Love your work. And here, until I found UMD, I thought I was the only one turned on be seeing pretty women hit with pies!

I've been privy to Robby's research for a number of years now, and while decades of customer interaction (or just reading UMD posts) has taught me there's no such thing as a "one size fits all" model for WAM.... A lot of this stuff is accurate. Or, accurate in the sense of "will appeal to the widest swath of customers."

Do I have exceptions to almost every one of these rules? Yeah, in both the good ("I violated a bunch of these rules and STILL sold truckloads") and bad ("I covered all these bases but sales were blah") sense. But again, no "one size fits all."

That said, Robby's first 3 rules that came up all the time are telling: Basically, the secret is to find a ridiculously attractive model, styled perfectly, with amazing reactions. 100% agree! If you're lucky enough to capture lightning in a bottle (or at least hire her for a reasonable rate), then customers are more than willing to let a LOT of other stuff slide. It's the other 98% of the time when things get tricky.......

Robby. This is great - I'm floored that someone had the thought to collect this sort of information from a decently sized sample over a number of years.

The really interesting part, after just one read through, I feel that many of these conclusions you've shared describe my personal feelings regarding WAM rather accurately. I also wish you would share your Questionaire as I'd be willing to contribute to your efforts if you are so inclined.

Additionally I'll like to add a vote to including the "Willingness to get messy vs the Unwilingess to get messy" as another factor to consider as well, as I like both for different Reasons.

I personally love situations where women have intentionally placed themselves in circumstances where there is a strong possibility of them having to get messy or be messed up in general. (ie Messy Gameshows, Gunge Votes, Charity Events, Sorority Pie Throws or Egg Begs, etc.)

I also love situations where women find themselves in theses circumstances unintentionally or are somewhat reluctant at following through with getting messy or are surprised they are "about to be" or are "in fact" getting messed up. (ie Lost Bets, College Initiations, Last Day of Work/School Messings, etc.)

I'm sure I'll have additional thoughts, but that's all I've got for right now. *Thanks again for sharing this!

I still talk to Dana all the time. It's not that she's "grown out of it"...she just has other priorities these days. And yes, she's still adorable and goofy.

Robby

You have with the girl in your current icon, and I'm looking forward to that next video.

Since we have no idea how often you thought multiple models would be preferred, this ends up being very vague. Would you mind giving a rough percentage breakdown of these three groups:

a) people who prefer a solo model
b) people who prefer one model messing up another model (or more) but staying clean herself
c) people who prefer multiple models all getting messy


I was a "Vague" major. Minored in obfuscation. Til they caught me at it.

I would have to go back and dig and re sort a bunch of stuff in order to do that. If I have time this weekend...I'll see if I can do it.

My gut (and I have a big gut) feeling from just reading stuff all these years is that multiple models might still be above a solo model...just not as much as I thought it would be. Again, it's back to....is two or models doing bad WAM better than one model doing good WAM?

The "staying clean" thing is relatively new but comes up a lot. I'm going to bet if I dug a bit more deeply that belief might evolve into..."yeah..i like when one models stays clean but then in another video she gets her just desserts" too kind of thing.

Which will lead me to another post of a subject within WAM not discussed here previously.

....to be continued...

Robby

DJ

Yep...I was aware of that before I posted. But most people will just do what they have always done. Some will try and add some here and there but as I said...one of the problems is that it's much easier to say than to do.

And we haven't even talked about appealing to the psychological aspect of WAM/

Robby

Excellent reviews, Robby!
It's a pity that, even being so sensible conclusions, many people simply ignore all this and keeps doing things by their own way... making that many wammers finish not being contempled in their preferences.

I miss Ivy. I always found her the cuttiest and more elegant of WLP's cast.
It would be wonderful to see a remake of her videos being pied with the business suit and the black prom dress...

Would love to hear you expand and expound on that, either here or in another thread

Kelly and Cheryl I actually met through an AOL chat room back in the late 90's. That's a different story that will eventually be book length. We were doing "social media" before the term existed.

I had known both of them for quite a few years before I initially asked Kelly if she wanted to do a video because I honestly didn't think she would. But she responded with "do I get to act all humiliated and stuff?" And that....was that.

They were friends so Kelly asked if I could write Cheryl a part in the videos. I remember asking Kel..."um..shouldn't you ask Cheryl first?" So she did and Cheryl said "sure."

So I rewrote the scripts for Kelly to include Cheryl.

Kelly also participated in two "ShePiesTheGuy" videos. Unfortunately one where she got pied also is lost forever due to a cam shutting down without our knowledge just as we began the shoot.

I haven't seen Cheryl in years but I still see Kel once in a while via social media.

Robby

I've always gotten the impression that most producers make the kind of videos they want to see. Anglefan makes girls act grossed out and stick their tongue out, Lenny had the cigarette holders, Rich makes himself a part of the script, etc.

You're obviously an exception to that... it's cool that you've put so much thought into your audience.

Yeah, you realize that wasn't my intention to go, "Look at me, the dude getting in the way of your jerk-off material!!" Anymore than Anglefan Ken plans for his models to look visibly disgusted during his shoots. (But that's a whole other topic....)

When I started, I was making the videos I wanted to see, yes. But that meant they were primarily plot-driven, similar to the old TV shows I grew up on. (Some of which we're not allowed to talk about anymore, but again, whole other topic....)

SO.... I wrote scripts where the model was actually interacting WITH someone. Just like literally every single sitcom/movie/TV show/comedy. Not playing a deaf mute while getting hit with pies. Not talking to herself in an "empty" room (where the sounds of another person are clearly audible). Not responding to whispering off-camera. Not being shocked at a random hairy arm appearing every 10 seconds or so.

And for better or worse, the cheap/easy/only solution at the time was for ME to be the other person. Believe me, if I'd known a few random hot girls who were reliable and would work for free (and had pie-smashing skills), I would've used THEM instead! But I didn't at the time (or at any point since). And so, I leaned into the idea that the male voice you heard... and the hairy arm you saw... actually BELONGED to a person. TBH it seemed a LOT less creepy that way too. The scenes with deaf-mute model and hairy-arm pies? Never did much for me.

And surprise! Those scenes sold very well. So I kept doing it. Even when I did 2-girl shoots and could safely stay off camera, the models would still want to interact with me during the shoot. (Especially Jill. Mainly just to drag me into the pies. But still.) Sometimes I cut out the exchanges, sometimes I didn't. Honestly, it didn't make a lick of difference in terms of sales or customer response.

Some years ago, Robby gave me this exact data, and the "No men in the video or even a man's voice" popped out. I immediately thought, "SHIT! I've been doing this all wrong!" Then he asked if he could show some of my vids to his same focus group that inspired the original results. I think they were shown one of the more popular Carrie videos. They, of course, immediately hated my mere presence. Now I'm thinking, "And this is one of my best-selling videos! Imagine if I'd edited out every trace of myself! This thing could've sold 2000 copies!"

SO. Since then, I've made a concentrated effort to stay off-camera as much as possible, unless it's to rope in the male WAM fans. (AKA I walk on camera to immediately get pied/slimed by model.) I don't edit out my voice, which is probably still a big negative, BUT it just doesn't work when the model is talking to dead air, so I let that go. But otherwise, I'm off-camera... Not so much in the unedited RAW clips, obviously, but definitely the edits. (We're talking layer masks and pixelation here. Even a "mud monster" in the Wonder Woman clip!)

And you'll be happy to know, the end result of scrubbing me out is.... Lower sales. ESPECIALLY those edits.
Interestingly, RAW clip sales are UP, despite me still being all over those. My only conclusion is the bulk of WAMmers still hate any hint of a dude in their jerk-off material (unless it's a dick in her mouth, I guess).... but they've got a TON of options to choose from. The guys who like to see models interacting in a normal fashion with a normal dude, who occasionally shows on camera? I'm (sadly) one of their only options.

Sorry! I really tried!
Side note: If we're talking cakes, those are 100% "I just want to see that."

Another one of the possibilities.
Models who interact with the camera audience, vs those who don't.

Ah......welllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.....that's an entirely different kettle of pie.

It's something that we talked to a number of customers about over the years before we
stopped shooting but our models just didn't feel comfy pulling it off.........so to speak.

Personally, I think done right, it's a moneymaker. Arguably the next best thing
to "in person" WAM. The inherent problem is for ADDITIONAL sales purposes
beyond the "custom" aspect of it, how do you "personalize" multiple people watching
and still keep it...........personal?

Robby

We have stayed in touch. She moved out West so we talk via social media a few times a year.
She looks fabulous.

I actually did think about seeing if I could get Dana and Ivy back (20 years later) but like most "reunions" of TV shows....I would be afraid they would turn out to be disappointing.

Robby

If "I follow my dreams" I'll be doing WAM production and alcohol induction in Costa Rica.

What about Miche and Chele? How are they doing?

Both doing the mom thing.

Good for them! I second (or is it third or fourth by now?) the 20 year reunion with anyone who would jump on board, though.