Guest viewing is limited

Universe Club (uc): Pros And Cons (and Info!)

Wwanderer

Kids, don't try this at home!
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
7,050
Reaction score
15,788
Personally, I think UC pricing is excessive and beyond most guys. There is lots of room for alternatives. You are talking about an arranged date, that may cost the guy 70,000 yen or MORE when it's said and done (membership, annual, setting). And going to a date/deai club can cost just 27,000 yen for everything in comparison. A date website, even if the guy pays for everything (dinner and hotel) can be 20,000 yen or LESS, for everything. Of course date cafes and date websites can have a lot of strikeouts, not just homeruns, though lots of free swings. Watched a Japanese guy using Tinder on the train last night, so guys know what's up now.

Not every guy is rich or clueless. Offer a good value and deal, they are sure to come. If not, social media and word of mouth can hurt. Guys are going to compare options.

This thread is spun off of one called “Online Date Club!” from which the quoted-in-full post above was taken. I am starting a new thread because this post is basically a reply to @Solong 's critique of UC (Universe Club) and doesn’t have much to do with Jennifer’s plans to start a new club (the topic of that other thread).

So, a few points:

1 - I agree that UC is in the upscale part of the Tokyo market (though not at the top) and that it is not a good choice for mongers whose budgets are well matched to typical DH or deai club or BP prices. However, the existence of less expensive options is not a valid critique of the existence of pricier ones. It would be like complaining about expensive high-end restaurants because there are places that offer lower yen-to-calorie ratios or saying that it is clueless to purchase an expensive car because there are much cheaper ones available which perform the same basic functions with the same basic technology etc. That is simply not how markets for other goods and services work; the cheapest option to achieve the basic goal does not “rule” and is not necessarily the best choice for everyone, or even for most people. Why should p4p be any different?

2 - It is not as simple as suggested in the quoted post to calculate the cost of going the UC route. The cost PER DATE of the annual membership fee depends on how many settings you take in a year; the larger the number you take, the less significant it is (obviously). Similarly, the cost PER DATE of the setting fee depends on how many times you end up seeing the woman you meet; it can also be quite a minor part of the total cost if you see her many times on some long term basis. However, the cost PER DATE for most other p4p options are fixed and do not average down to some lower level if you do more of them. This is not to claim that UC is not an expensive way to go; in most cases it is. But the comparison is not so simple or so extreme as the above analysis suggests unless you take only one setting per year and then never see the woman again. If you were to do that then yes, UC is probably not a good choice.

3 - The above price comparison also ignores the fact that a UC date/setting typically includes a whole evening or afternoon together…at least a few hours and often several, during which you can expect to enjoy some charming and fun female company. Admittedly (though a mystery to me), a lot of guys don’t value such experiences much or at all and only want sexual contact, but for those who do like spending time with our p4p dates in general, not just in bed, UC’s prices are not all that high. In other word, UC prices should be compared to spending, say, 5 hours with a DH/BP/agency/indie/deai escort to be apples-to-apples, so to speak.

4 - UC furnishes some valuable services beyond those that the cheaper options provide. It is supposed to minimize the time and effort required to arrange a date (though this often doesn’t work in practice in my experience). It provides *relatively* accurate information on your date, including club assessments of her “level”, accurate photos and videos (taken by the club in most cases but verified to be the woman you will meet in any case), and some other indicators of what sort of date she might be. There is *relatively* little tendency to exaggerate or hype the desirability of their female members compared to the other options/services guys might use. The selection is also *extremely* large, especially if your Japanese is good enough for dating purposes, around a 1000 women in Tokyo!

All of this said, I should be clear that I am not a total fan of or advocate for UC; it has definite shortcomings too. In fact, I have stopped using UC for the present, and I’ll say more about why in later posts. But it is not on account of their prices, and the goal of this post is to try to give a fair/balanced perspective on the cost issue which I think the quoted post above misrepresents.

-Ww
 
Keep in mind this is only my opinion. Others may disagree and be strong advocates for UC. Clearly they have been in business for a while and are doing some things right.

1) We somewhat agree on this point. UC is serving a more upscale market. I was not in anyway condemning them, but pointing out price points and comparing. The choice is up to the customer. What UC offers can totally work for some guys. But, let's be honest, it will not be for every guy.

2) Your response here is misleading. In most situations, UC will be the more expensive option, in the list of options that I gave by comparison.

For you to get a significant pricing discount requires that you use the service a lot. The extent of using the service so much, can mean your total yearly cost will still likely be huge and in the thousands of dollars. Only mongers wanting to spend that much would be comfortable with the expense.

The cost of platinum is 150,000 yen and by itself is equal to several date/deai cafe dates or dating website dates (including membership cost). Even if you take the cheapest option, at 50,000 yen, it doesn't mean the 1st woman you date will be a success and become a sugar-baby type situation. It can require selecting and paying setting fees for several women, until you find the right one. Even then, it's unknown how long the relationship will last, as she can choose to stop seeing you after only 2x to 3x.

For UC, the setting fee will always be an additional cost, in addition to the what you will actually pay the woman. In a date/deai cafe or dating website, the overhead/additional cost is very low. It means, that unless you are lucky and hit a sugar-baby situation right away, it can take several, dozens, or never for UC date costs to even out to comparable price levels.

Paying for Standard (lowest), will also put you at a disadvantage, in terms of which women and the quality of women that you can select. Consequently there is a built-in push to select the higher priced options. This limitation doesn't exist at a date/deai cafe or dating website. She can reject you, but there is no restriction on what level or quality of woman that you can contact or talk with.

If you are willing to spend the money, platinum or black (at UC) can undoubtedly get you high quality women. But at the 50,000 to 100,000 price point a guy can undoubtedly get high quality sugar-babies or escorts. To include 4 hour to 16 hour date/deai dates or escorts. Remember, many date/deai and escort women will give additional hours (as a discount) for such high prices.

3) In my opinion, here is your strongest argument and case for UC

It still requires a bit of tricky math, luck, and the UC guy being very aware of price points. For this to pay off, the guy will most likely have chose the standard option and gets lucky where the woman agrees to meet him repeatedly and directly. So, he pays 50,000 yen (membership and setting). Meets a pretty woman he likes. She agrees to keep seeing him. Therefore that original 50,000 yen payment gets averaged out over several dates. Let's say 10 dates before she stops seeing him. That's 5,000 yen extra per cost of each date (not including what he pays her, hotel, dinner). A date/deai cafe is offering comparable price points. Meaning 10 successful dates at the lowest UC pricing is still only equal to what you can get now at a date/deai cafe.

Now, UC does have the advantage of being more convenient, because you choose and schedule the woman from the comfort of the Internet. You don't have to go to the cafe and negotiate/haggle over prices with any women. BUT, this advantage is offset by the limit of women and quality you can choose as a standard member. The date/deai cafe member has no such restriction. AND if the UC member has to pay setting fees again, because he wants a new woman or the woman stops seeing him, cost parity is lost. Meaning each time he pays the 20,000 yen setting fee to meet a woman, his per date costs is more expensive than what a date/deai cafe member is paying or dating website. To include low end/less expensive and direct p4p options.

4) Here, your point is a kind of mixed bag, which doesn't give UC the advantage.

UC options in choosing women is more for higher level members paying more. For example, Tinder and many dating sites also have thousands of women. It's more a matter of if that particular woman that you like will meet you. Depending on the date/deai cafe, they have photo albums or picture lists of many women too. Even if you have a limited option of women at the date/deai cafe, the attraction is much stronger when seeing a woman directly than simply looking at her picture on the Internet. Selecting from the Internet is almost always a gamble, versus the chemistry of a real life interaction.

You mentioning how arranging a date can be difficult, is a disadvantage, that only makes the other alternatives comparable. My original point and here too, is to be fair and honest. And part of the problem that I see in the monger market in Japan, is a disconnect of comparing what you are offering, versus trying to charge the maximum that you can get away with. Are you offering a good value?

UC's convenience of selecting women from off the Internet and the guarantee that the woman is real and will show up is very strong. However, this is offset by it's pricing, lack of anonymity for the guy (quasi interview), and what else is also available in the p4p market or the Internet. Which is best, is totally up to the individual.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Wwanderer
Before going back to the specific points discussed in the two posts above (which I will do later), maybe it would be useful/informative for me to simply summarize my own experiences with meeting women via UC:

I had a total of five settings between June 2013 and October 2014 or about one every 3 months on average.

All five were at either the Club's "gold" or "platinum" (middle two) levels. ("Standard" and "black" levels are the lowest and highest levels, respectively.) Four of the five are Japanese, and the other a Caucasian westerner. My Japanese is not (nearly) good enough to allow dating entirely or mostly in that language, so I selected women represented by UC to speak English well enough for dating purposes. This turned out to be true in all cases, but only very marginally in one case and minimally in another; communication in English was totally fine in the other three cases.

All five settings (first dates) went quite well in all respects; all were fun and included hotel time without any hesitation or awkwardness at all...indeed with enthusiasm and skill on the ladies' parts...and at least enthusiasm on mine! I'd rate the *least* satisfactory of the five in the good to very good range by the standards of p4p dates I've experienced by all other means.

The setting was my only/last date with just one of the five. A combination of work schedule incompatibility and language barrier (she was also the one with the least English ability) prevented me from seeing her again. I saw the other four women multiple times, at least a half dozen or so each, and am continuing to see two of them on an ongoing basis now, one of them quite frequently.

One of the five introduced me to the Tokyo happening bar scene, at which she is a regular, and got me into (and membership in) a few HBs despite my age, lack of Japanese and very sub-par appearance. She also introduced me to some other not so easily accessed (by gaijin...or anyone) parts of the Tokyo nightlife scene. We did some 3p scenes together as well, both FFM and MMF, which she set-up. To make the nature of the relationship clearer, I should also mention that our dates included much more conventional activities, like going to jazz clubs and out dancing.

Most importantly, one of the five has become a very significant and probably/hopefully permanent person in my life. We do not have a romantic connection, not at all to be clear, but it is something like a very good friendship with wonderful benefits at this point. Even if the "benefits" part ends some day, it seems likely to me that the close friendship and emotional intimacy will continue indefinitely. The sexual part of this connection has also included HBs and group scenes and assorted kinks, as well as more conventional activities (like going to movies).

The above, although anecdotal and personal, is probably the strongest endorsement I can give for UC (of which I am not a total fan by any means). To me making *either* of the two connections described in the previous two paragraphs *alone* would have been well worth *everything* that I have paid UC for all membership fees, setting fees etc. Moreover, I certainly have not experienced such a high "batting average" with any other way of finding p4p partners.

Of course, maybe I have just been lucky. I often am. Others might well not be so fortunate with UC dates, but I cannot help but be impressed by "the bottom line" based on the ones I've experienced.

-Ww
 
My experience with UC has largely mirrored Ww's - I've had five introduction dates over an 18-month period and continue to meet with three of the dates on a regular basis.

While all in costs for the initial setting are relatively high, I estimate around JPY 120,000 including dinner etc this does typically reflect a 5-6 hour date including hotel time, and the costs are much less on subsequent meetings.

Like Ww I don't want to suggest UC is without fault and I appreciate that it may not be the most cost effective option/best option/or affordable option for many, but I like that it gives me an opportunity to build a relationship with the date and overall it has worked well for me.
 
@Ww

1) What do you estimate your cost for 1 year to be?

Per your description, your initial cost to UC looks to be around 3,100 dollars (310,000) yen in just 1 year. This would be a platinum member with 5 settings (mixed gold and platinum women). This is NOT including the actual money paid to the women, hotels, dinner, etc...

This amount of money alone can buy a staggering amount of sex encounters in lower priced P4P, by itself. Around 10 to 12 sexual encounters, including hotel for a deai/date cafe woman or other.

According to what has been mentioned, you additionally paid 400 to 500 dollars (40,000 to 50,000 yen) per meeting (on average and more is possible), for the women. Add hotel and dinner to be around 150 to 200 dollars (15,000 to 20,000 yen).

Let's say 600 dollars (60,000 yen) per woman, per encounter. Half a dozen meetings, 6 X 4 (women) = 14,400 dollars (144,000 yen) + the 1 date/woman that was schedule incompatible = 15,000 dollars (150,000 yen). The UC cost + total for women = around 18,100 dollars (1,810,000 yen) a year.

The price point is important for several reasons. Because many men can't afford or would refuse to pay this much, and most definitely you should find a kinky sexual sugarbaby after paying that much. If a man is willing to pay 3,620 dollars (362,000 yen) per woman or around 600 dollars (60,000 yen) per 6 encounters, we can expect he should have a very good time or at some point find a sexually adventurous or compatible woman.

At the price point of 600 dollars (60,000 yen) you also can get 4 to 8 hours time with lots of escorts, to include many deai/date cafe women.

1B) Per Hour, Per Date

UC setting fees might/can kind of balance out, if you spend more time per date with the UC woman, so that the rate is equal to or less than 100 dollars (10,000 yen) per hour. This compensates for the setting fee. This is also tricky, and a "depends" variable.

A guy pays a 30,000 yen setting fee, then pays 50,000 yen to the woman, with another 20,000 yen for the hotel and dinner. 100,000 yen (1,000 dollars). But if he spends 10 to 12 hours with her (10,000 yen/100 dollars per hour), for an overnight stay or long date, the p4p costs compared to other options begins to even out.

This is tricky, because your initial UC costs can be so high, that the costs compared to other P4P options may take an extremely long time to balance out; possibly never doing so. The more setting fees paid, meeting different women, the less likely it will balance out.

And at high price points, above 600 dollars (60,000 yen), many P4P women will give you a time discount too.

2) Alternatives

I believe it's only fair to mention alternatives to achieve the same goals. I've met lots of women from dating websites, language sites, and date/deai cafes that were willing to have adventurous sex and go to happening bars.

The costs were significantly lower, though hours spent finding such sexually adventurous women were much higher. And some guys don't have the time or patience going this route. There is also a kind of trade off, between PUA and P4P. PUA being less money/less expensive, but requiring more hours (finding and communicating). Where P4P being more money, but less hours (easier to schedule).

I mention this, as kinky or adventurous sex is possible going other routes too. UC isn't the only route to finding such women. The better a man is at conversations and seducing women, the more hours he is willing to chase after/approach women, or the more willing he is to buy them then the more likely he will get adventurous sex. So if we are looking at the whole picture, we can see the value in going each route.

On the flip, other guys might be more willing to invest time, to save money. That is going on multiple dates from dating websites or date/deai cafes.

Dating websites would be 1 out of 3 dates leading to sex, as a rule of thumb. With a strikeout cost (no sex date) at 75 dollars (7,500 yen), if guy paid for dinner and drinks. With a homerun (sex) date costing 200 dollars (20,000 yen), for dinner and all night hotel. So 350 dollars (35,000 yen), if guy paid everything. It can be a bit more or less, depending on date site membership cost (which is a price point factor too) or if the woman is helping pay on dates. The upside being no time limits. Kinky and adventurous sex possibly being more problematic, depending on the man and woman involved, who might be prudish and conservative, or hiding and lying about their true sexual nature.

Where with date/deai cafes, applying more money, increases the hours women may stay with you. At the 400 to 600 dollars (40,000 to 60,000 yen) price point can mean 3 to 8 hours, and a happening bar too. I've experimented with this, and it appears when a guy goes above 300 dollars (30,000 yen) at a date/deai cafe, different parameters appear to apply. But there are tricks to it, like setting what her standard price is per hour first, then going above it (above her expectations). And also willingness to leave and negotiate with multiple women.

3) The UC Advantage

The advantages I see with UC is: in saving TIME finding sexually adventurous women (possibly more so than standard P4P), less hassle (in theory), scheduling, and reliability.

These are advantages that can make it worthwhile for various/some guys, despite the disadvantage of it being very expensive.

When I mention UC, I'm not objecting to the concept, but pointing out the plus and minus of how it compares to other options. It's like a person comparing a Tesla P85D (electric car) to an BMW i8. I'm trying to look at what both have to offer, then compare a list of their features next to each other. Then you get or give a better picture of the value.
 
Last edited:
@Solong
I don't have your experience with deai's, in my limited experience it is quite optimistic to find a girl which settles for less then 10k/hour. I also have no experience at all with UC, but I think that both target quite different audience both in customers and girls. In my experience deai girls almost exclusively target for quick LH (or maybe not so quick, if you pay more). I can hardly imagine someone with that mindset to provide a nice date experience (and most escorts won't either). If you only look for the main act that of course doesn't matter.
I can definitely see the merits of UC, if you are able to bear the quite significant price tag. On the other hand, if your regular dates are the likes of kitty&friends, the price tag doesn't look so steep anymore. Wanderer can probably comment on this better, but I would expect the gold/platinum girls to be well educated and able to hold a conversation.
If your ideal evening starts with a visit to the opera followed by a nice bar before ending in a cozy place with your companion, good look in finding someone at a deai or dating website.
 
@Solong
I don't have your experience with deai's, in my limited experience it is quite optimistic to find a girl which settles for less then 10k/hour. I also have no experience at all with UC, but I think that both target quite different audience both in customers and girls. In my experience deai girls almost exclusively target for quick LH (or maybe not so quick, if you pay more). I can hardly imagine someone with that mindset to provide a nice date experience (and most escorts won't either). If you only look for the main act that of course doesn't matter.
I can definitely see the merits of UC, if you are able to bear the quite significant price tag. On the other hand, if your regular dates are the likes of kitty&friends, the price tag doesn't look so steep anymore. Wanderer can probably comment on this better, but I would expect the gold/platinum girls to be well educated and able to hold a conversation.
If your ideal evening starts with a visit to the opera followed by a nice bar before ending in a cozy place with your companion, good look in finding someone at a deai or dating website.

If your ideal evening starts with a visit to the opera followed by a nice bar before ending in a cozy place with your companion...

Deai/Date Cafe, "no", they are not sophisticated in that way. The idea here was sexual adventure and time. You can offer Deai/Date Cafe women more money than usual, their range is usually 15,000 to 30,000 yen. Usually guys want quickies or limited time. However, if done correctly, 60,000 yen will make the woman in the both eyes light up (anything above 40,000 yen). 60,000 yen for a 4 to 6 hour date, and go to a happening bar is possible. Deai/Dafe Cafe women can also give their LINE contact and do repeats, scheduling, or become sugar-babies.

100 dollars/10,000 yen per hour becomes more possible at the higher price point. Though they tend to chip at you by an hour. If you offer 60,000 yen, a lot of Deai/Date Cafe women will take you up on it. Definitely at 4 hours, then haggling about 5 or 6 hours, 5 hours more likely than 6. But the actual date may end up longer anyway. Depends on your skill of negotiation, and most definitely it can be done, as have done it. In fact, had women go below the 10,000 yen per hour rate, but that is luck and if they like you, or if you are a repeat customer, in addition to which woman and negotiation. The difference here though is a Deai/Date Cafe can be tough and require a lot of time jumping from woman to woman or different places for tough negotiations/haggling, where UC is much easier and comfortable.

Date website, "yes", women can easily be that sophisticated, or at least pretend to be. Definitely, matching women will go to the opera with you, but sex and sexual honesty is however the problem. With a date website, sex is more a matter of percentage of women dated. So sex on, 1 out of 3 dates, is more likely. But this also depends on the skill of the guy, who might have a worse strikeout percentage. With UC, you don't have to worry about such high strikeout percentages, and it's more guaranteed and reliable, though of course at a price.
 
Last edited:
@Solong - I don't think that we actually disagree much on the objective facts and not even all that much on the subjective judgements, so this post is *mostly* an elaboration on some of the main issues than it is a rebuttal or debate on your points.

Perhaps the key point, already implicit in the discussion above but worth making explicit, is that UC is a "sugar dating" site and not an escort/prostitution agency/site. If you haven't done (a good deal of both), it may be hard to recognize how fundamentally different the two can be. Not that they have zero similarity or nothing in common, but trying to compare costs of the two is definitely an apples-to-oranges sort of ambiguity imo.

With that in mind, let me say something about "the four points" discussed in the OP and your subsequent posts:

1 - Overall price point or market level.

Your numbers seem about right, so yes, we are talking about guys who are able and willing to spend thousands or tens of thousands of US$ per year. This is pretty much a requirement for serious sugar dating in general. For example, a fairly low monthly Sugar Baby "allowance" is US$2000/month (typically involving meeting once per week or so), and women looking for and getting US$3000-5000/month are common. See the Seeking Arrangement website to get an idea. In this context, the UC membership and setting fees are a significant but modest factor in the overall cost. Although these numbers may seem very high to some, they are not out of line with what many men spend on a wide variety of major hobby/leisure activities (boating, golf, luxury travel, fine dining, collecting art or wines or endless other things etc). It is hard to say exactly because it depends on so many other factors, but if your annual income isn''t above US$100,000 (US$200,000 might be a more comfortable minimum), neither UC nor any real sugar dating in general is probably right for you. I know quite a few women who are UC female members, and from what they tell me, the guys they meet through UC are often well/way above these minimum levels.

2 - Per Hour, Per Date

As mentioned in posts above, this often does work out to something like US$100/hour, but it can also be MUCH less. In my sugar dating experience, a typical date might be 4-6 hours (again as mentioned above), but there have also been many occasions on which I have had sugar dates lasting much longer - overnight or through a weekend or involving extended travel together. On a couple of occasions, SBs have even moved in with me for periods of months. And in all these cases the total time we spend together is not linked to the amount of support or allowance I provide in any simple or direct way. In a good sugar relationship, it is just like conventional dating; you spend time together to the extent that your mutual schedules and desires to be together permit. Sugar dating is not an "on the clock" activity, and that is not a useful way of thinking about it.

Your analyses have also mentioned the costs of dinner, activities, hotels etc. Imo these cannot be considered a cost of UC dating; they are costs of *any* sort of dating and are there however you met your date. Similarly, the allowance/support you provide to your date (whether on a per meeting/date or per month basis or whatever) has nothing particular to do with UC. It is a cost of *sugar* dating and do not depend on how you met her.

3 - Lengths of dates and date activities

This is basically redundant, but UC dating is sugar dating, and sugar dating is a form of dating. I would not consider myself to be dating a woman in any normal sense of the word if our meetings were limited entirely or mostly to having sex during short stays in hotel rooms or wherever. The other things a SB and I do together and the time together that they take are integral parts of the relationship. If I don't enjoy her company out of bed, then indeed I'd be better off with some form of simple prostitution and could do so for much less money. If you are only enjoy a woman's company when you are inside of her or if that is the only thing you are willing to purchase from her, then indeed neither sugar dating nor UC are for you. In my personal case, not every sugar date includes sex at any point even though the relationship does...again just like conventional dating for most people.

4 - Other UC services and advantages

You mention saving time (or TIME), and this is quite important imo as well. I wish that UC did it more effectively! In general (in many many contexts) I think people who are trying to be frugal or cost effective often vastly underestimate or simply ignore the cost of their own time. How much time does one put into searching for the best price on a new color TV or whatever? Is the "bargain" price really worth the time and effort/attention it took to find it? Note that it is a lot easier to get more money than to get more time in one's life!

Aside from time, UC does offer a lot of help in picking a date that will suit the male customer. They provide far more information on possible dates, including relatively objective information based on the opinion of the club staff and "ratings", not unlike Amazon customer star evaluations, from other male members who have met her etc than is available from profiles on other online dating (sugar and otherwise) websites. The staff will even suggest specific women if they get to know you and have a sense of the kind of women you'd like to meet.

UC also has a point system (a Japanese business after all!), promotions, special deals and so forth.

-Ww
 
A more general point is that the whole approach to evaluating UC and other options from a strictly or mostly cost effectiveness point of view is misguided and misses the point. This is not, imo, the right way to think about leisure and luxury indulgences...or hobbies in general. It spoils the fun which is the whole point of the activity.

For example, I have a friend who has a rather nice/fancy power boat that he vastly enjoys driving around lakes and such on nice summer days for no particular purpose (at least no practical purpose like needing to get from point A to point B). If he started thinking in detail about the cost per hour or mile traveled and how it might be minimized by going a bit slower or about whether or not he could have had nearly the same fun with a smaller and cheaper boat or ..., it would make the whole thing much less fun. It is not that he does, could or should totally ignore the cost, but all he need ask is if he can afford it and if he has enough fun that he afterwards feels happy and comfortable that he has gotten his money's worth...that he feels satisfied that he spent his money the way he did. I think that this is a much better and more sensible way to think about a hobby or personal indulgence.

-Ww
 
And one more point on UC costs - it is interesting to consider how all of this looks from the female member's side of the table (or bed). Let me call them SBs, although that is not a UC term. When a platinum level, let's say, UC SB gets an invitation to a setting, she KNOWS a few things that she does not know when she meets a guy via almost any other mechanism:

The SB KNOWS that he is able and willing to pay at least ¥80,000/year for membership, ¥50,000 just to meet her, whatever fee she has specified to spend hotel time with her, which might be another ¥50,000 say, plus the costs of a nice dinner and a hotel room. Assuming he takes 4 setting per year, this means that she KNOWS that he is spending something in the neighborhood of ¥140,000 or more (depending on the restaurant and hotel costs) on their first date.

She also KNOWS (or can reasonably assume) that he will want to see her again if the date goes well since he has made this large investment in meeting her and since seeing her again will cost him only about a third of what meeting a different/new platinum level UC SB would (assuming that she keeps her fee at the same ¥50,000 level and even less if she drops it a bit).

In addition the SB KNOWS (or can reasonably assume) that she is going to meet a man who is not on too tight a dating budget, who is not going to freak out if she wants a glass (or bottle) of champagne with dinner on some of their dates, who can afford to buy her quite nice gifts occasionally, who can enjoy some of the city's more expensive entertainments with her, who might well be able to help her with any financial difficulties she might face if she forms an ongoing relationship with him. Etc.

Although not tied directly to UC costs, she also KNOWS that he is serious enough about sugar dating and safe/sane enough to meet that he was willing to have his real identity verified by the UC staff.

Now, as a guy considering using UC vs other options, you might think that you do not need to care about these things. Why should you worry about how the UC system looks to the female members? To answer this question, consider for a moment the attitude and effort and priority and enthusiasm you are likely to find in your UC date/SB compared to that she would have if you met her through a BP ad or OKC or a deai cafe or whatever. Definitely worth thinking about for a few minutes...

-Ww
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muku1

I am not an opera fan, not at all! :p

But yes, some of the gold and platinum level UC SBs are sophisticated in the ways you suggest, but many others are not so much particularly. However and even better, there is usually enough information in the UC profiles to allow you to figure out if her interests, personality, style, sexual openness, education, tastes in food, ability to drink etc etc match your preferences or not. So you can decide if you want to date a sensual gymnast or an art intellectual critic or a sweet/innocent college girl or a bohemian libertine or ..., any of which might be gold or platinum. There are many possible reasons for the levels the Club assigns to the women.

-Ww
 
A more general point is that the whole approach to evaluating UC and other options from a strictly or mostly cost effectiveness point of view is misguided and misses the point. This is not, imo, the right way to think about leisure and luxury indulgences...or hobbies in general. It spoils the fun which is the whole point of the activity.

For example, I have a friend who has a rather nice/fancy power boat that he vastly enjoys driving around lakes and such on nice summer days for no particular purpose (at least no practical purpose like needing to get from point A to point B). If he started thinking in detail about the cost per hour or mile traveled and how it might be minimized by going a bit slower or about whether or not he could have had nearly the same fun with a smaller and cheaper boat or ..., it would make the whole thing much less fun. It is not that he does, could or should totally ignore the cost, but all he need ask is if he can afford it and if he has enough fun that he afterwards feels happy and comfortable that he has gotten his money's worth...that he feels satisfied that he spent his money the way he did. I think that this is a much better and more sensible way to think about a hobby or personal indulgence.

-Ww

Cost is important and has a major impact on our lives, and finance impacts what other things we can do. There are many ways to spend 20,000 dollars (2,000,000 yen). Is not your time, money, person, and/or penis valuable too?

For many of us, if we know how to achieve the same goal more cost effectively or efficiently, most would take that route. Comparing one way with another, is how we find "short cuts", ascertain the value of something, or confirm if it's worth it. [emoji6]

You might be possibly overlooking that some people enjoy finding shortcuts, alternatives, or solving puzzles. That getting the best deal possible on the boat, is almost or as gratifying as owning and driving the boat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wwanderer
@Solong -
3 - Lengths of dates and date activities

This is basically redundant, but UC dating is sugar dating, and sugar dating is a form of dating. I would not consider myself to be dating a woman in any normal sense of the word if our meetings were limited entirely or mostly to having sex during short stays in hotel rooms or wherever. The other things a SB and I do together and the time together that they take are integral parts of the relationship. If I don't enjoy her company out of bed, then indeed I'd be better off with some form of simple prostitution and could do so for much less money. If you are only enjoy a woman's company when you are inside of her or if that is the only thing you are willing to purchase from her, then indeed neither sugar dating nor UC are for you. In my personal case, not every sugar date includes sex at any point even though the relationship does...again just like conventional dating for most people.

4 - Other UC services and advantages

You mention saving time (or TIME), and this is quite important imo as well. I wish that UC did it more effectively! In general (in many many contexts) I think people who are trying to be frugal or cost effective often vastly underestimate or simply ignore the cost of their own time. How much time does one put into searching for the best price on a new color TV or whatever? Is the "bargain" price really worth the time and effort/attention it took to find it? Note that it is a lot easier to get more money than to get more time in one's life!

Aside from time, UC does offer a lot of help in picking a date that will suit the male customer. They provide far more information on possible dates, including relatively objective information based on the opinion of the club staff and "ratings", not unlike Amazon customer star evaluations, from other male members who have met her etc than is available from profiles on other online dating (sugar and otherwise) websites. The staff will even suggest specific women if they get to know you and have a sense of the kind of women you'd like to meet.

UC also has a point system (a Japanese business after all!), promotions, special deals and so forth.

-Ww

3- Dating Website

The issue here is if you put UC in the context of dating and compare to other dating websites, that brings back the money and time issues.

Why can't Tinder or whatever not provide the same (let's not ignore the elephant in the room)?

Of course some strong counters and advantages of UC are saving time, reliable sexual encounters, no fakes or no-shows, and more predictable sexually adventurous women. Indeed, these are all strong advantages for UC, but can only be understood through comparing.

So then, the very FAIR question is how much is that advantage worth?

I'm not afraid to say that, and of course many guys will have different opinions on what that cost should be.

Even calling it dating is controversial, as many and myself don't consider it dating if money is being exchanged for sex. I know some will disagree, but some of these reasons are questionable, such as a business not wanting a certain label or a person wanting to more deeply embrace a GFE and performance. Though I understand sugar-babies blur the line greatly.

It should be understood that the very fact it's P4P will alter the experience for some guys and make it less enjoyable. She does X, because I paid Y. While for other guys, monetary control makes them feel better, not worse. We should acknowledge this psychological difference.

Can you also find a sexually adventurous and sexually reliable woman using other sites or methods?

I know the answer is yes, but you will pay for it in TIME. So then that creates the battle of how much is your time worth vs money spent?

4- Time VS Money (NP4P VS P4P)

By bringing up the issue and making comparisons, it helps everyone to be more informed, and gives guys greater choice (like do both).

As you mentioned, guys need to quantify what their time is worth too, (and I think) plus decide if X is emotionally satisfying. It's why I bring it up. Don't go blindly down 1 path, but understand why you are going down X path. If I were to use UC, I would want to feel it was the best decision for me, to include the high costs involved.

But with every decision that a person feels is right for them, someone else may think differently. Nature has always loved diversity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wwanderer
Yes. WALDT (We All Like Different Things). I don't really get how orgs like UC are controversial at all, or considered overpriced. If you don't want to pay for it, fine. That doesn't mean it's a bad value for everybody.
 
Cost is important and has a major impact on our lives, and finance impacts what other things we can do. There are many ways to spend 20,000 dollars (2,000,000 yen). Is not your time, money, person, and/or penis valuable too?

What is valuable to me differs in different contexts. Sometimes it is cost effectiveness, and sometimes it is something else. In the context of sugar dating it is fun/enjoyment/pleasure. And for me and many others, penny pinching or even thinking about cost effectiveness detracts from it. There are lots of other contexts in which it is a distraction in my opinion. Just to pick a completely different one, compare taking your kids to Disneyland while concentrating on whether or not there would be a cheaper way to make them equally happy versus concentrating on their unbridled joy.

I am reminded of an occasion a couple of decades ago, when I listened to a team of engineers present the technical plans for a very challenging project to the CEO of a corporation considering funding/undertaking it. The presentation repeatedly emphasized ways in which their approach, choices of technology, clever design trade-offs etc would save money make the project affordable for the corporation. After considering it for some time, the CEO declined the proposal. When asked why by the head of the engineering team, he said "Your team has its eyes fixed on cost effectiveness, not success. It makes no difference how much it will cost us if we succeed and no difference how much money we save if we fail. I want engineers who don't give a damn about cost but are determined to succeed whatever it takes." Btw, this was a VERY big and successful company at that time and is even more so now. This event made a big impression on me, and I concluded that cost effectiveness is not only not the best or only criteria (figure of merit) in some situations; it can actually be a counter-productive one in some.

For many of us, if we know how to achieve the same goal more cost effectively or efficiently, most would take that route. Comparing one way with another, is how we find "short cuts", ascertain the value of something, or confirm if it's worth it. [emoji6]

Here I question if it is really EXACTLY THE SAME goal in most cases. It is rare (though not completely unknown) that there is no trade-off at all on the goal/outcome to save money. In the present context, suppose one route let's me meet a certain type of woman (or even the very same individual woman) by spending a lot of money and having an enjoyable time going out with four other women. Another route costs less, say ten times less, but entails going out with 20 different women and having an unpleasant time with 5 of them and a mediocre time with another 8. Have I really achieved the same goal in both cases...not in my opinion.

You might be possibly overlooking that some people enjoy finding shortcuts, alternatives, or solving puzzles. That getting the best deal possible on the boat, is almost or as gratifying as owning and driving the boat.

This is a very good and fair point, and I accept it. I too know such people...they get a thrill out of hunting and finding bargains as an activity in itself. It is as though they have absorbed into their core psychology the Ted Turner maxim, "Life is a game, and money is how we keep score." I don't get it. It seems about as fun and entertaining as accounting or reading corporate balance sheets to me, but that's ok. WALDT! UC is a poor fit to this group; I agree.

-Ww
 
  • Like
Reactions: just4fun
The issue here is if you put UC in the context of dating and compare to other dating websites, that brings back the money and time issues.

Why can't Tinder or whatever not provide the same (let's not ignore the elephant in the room)?

I don't understand what you are saying here at all. Meeting women via Tinder is VERY different from meeting them through UC in MANY ways, from the information on which you select your date to the chance that you will actually have a date with her to her likely attitude toward you going into the date (see my post above about how UC dates look to the female members) to how far in advance you can plan and prepare for and enjoy anticipating the date to...

This is not to say that I see no advantages to Tinder but just that I have no idea in what sense you think it provides the same thing that UC does.

By bringing up the issue and making comparisons, it helps everyone to be more informed, and gives guys greater choice (like do both).

I have no quarrel with comparisons, only with the idea that cost effectiveness is the only or best basis for the comparison. And I definitely agree that it is good and fun to try many approaches in order to figure out which ones you most enjoy. Personally I have met women for both p4p and np4p in just about every way that I've ever had the opportunity to try. UC, but by no means only UC, has worked very well and satisfactorily for me.

Nevertheless, I have stopped using UC, and I hope to get on to the reasons soon...to the "and Cons" part of this thread (from my perspective).

-Ww
 
  • Like
Reactions: just4fun
@Solong - Just to show how reasonable and what a good sport I am, here's an attempt to make a fair (apples-to-apples) comparison of UC to AM (one of TAG's favorite Tokyo agencies...perhaps the single most popular one) and on YOUR terms, i.e., cost effectiveness and regarding UC dates as simple p4p prostitution in the same sense AM's services are:

Having looked through the AM gallery, I'd say that the typical AM escort would be rated at the Gold level by UC...and this may be generous. I invite other UC members or former members to say whether or not they agree with my assessment on this point.

As it turns out, very conveniently, AM offers something it calls a "Dinner/Entertainment Course" that fairly closely resembles a typical UC date. It is priced at ¥65,000. For details see

http://www.asianmystique.com/dinner_entertainmet.html

Then let's assume that the average personal private time fee set by the UC Gold level female members is ¥50,000 for each and every time you see them. Again, I invite other UC members and former members to correct me if they think this isn't a good typical number.

So, let's assume that a guy joins UC at the Gold level (annual membership of ¥50,000 for the first year) and takes N settings during the year (meets N Gold level UC female members), each at a setting fee of ¥30,000. He sees these N women for a total of D dates, including both the first dates and any subsequent ones.

The average cost per date for UC during that year is then (50,000+30,000xN+50,000xD)/D or 50,000+(50,000+30,000xN)/D

So, for example, if N=3 and D=10 (10 total dates involving 3 different UC women), the cost per date is ¥64,000...just slightly less than the cost of AM "Dinner/Entertainment Course" dates.

If instead we considered N=5 and D=25 (roughly two dates per month), the cost per date is only ¥58,000...roughly 10% cheaper than AM.

If the guy goes for variety and takes N=10 but D=15 (meeting a lot of UC women but seeing most of them only once), then the cost per date is a bit over ¥73,000, above the AM cost by a little over 10%.

My conclusion is that UC pricing is competitive with AM pricing for the same "product", apples-to-apples; UC is less expensive for more active mongers and more expensive for less active ones.

Do you (anyone) see any flaws in this calculation or my conclusion?

To be clear, this is not how I look at it and is not (for me) a useful or interesting calculation, but it is a fair analysis by the pure p4p cost effectiveness perspective as far as I can see.

-Ww
 
  • Like
Reactions: NormalGuy
Ww makes a very valid point in tems of hobbies and indulgences and whether "cost effectiveness" is really an appropriate measure. I have several hobbies that I am sure would rapidly loose their appeal if I fixated on the cost of them.

But so that everyone has the full picture, here are my costs from a fourth date with a UC lady tonight...

Early drinks and light dinner - ¥16,146 (I consumed most of the drinks)
Hotel - ¥ 5,800
Compensation - ¥40,000
Membership fee - spread across dates

So a little over ¥60,000 for a four hour date.

Expensive? Of course. But I would argue not excessively so for drinks, dinner, good conversation and hotel fun.
 
Despite all of the advantages of UC that I have discussed above, I haven't taken a setting with/from them since October of last year (10/2014) and have no plans to do so in the foreseeable future. Why?

There are actually quite a few different reasons, but three stand out as particularly important for me. I'll describe the first of the three in this post and the other two in later ones.

The first reason is that UC treats its female members badly and disrespectfully. The more experience I had with UC and the more UC female members I met (some via settings and some I knew met completely separately from UC), the more I became aware of the problems, and the less comfortable I became with the Club.

For starters the UC system itself is biased against the female members in many ways. They are basically treated as merchandise to be "sold" to the male members and are not on a remotely equal footing with the male members as one might expect of a *dating* club. Most fundamentally the men "shop" the women's profiles and get a tremendous amount of information about them on which to base their choices - photos, videos, extensive data provided by the women themselves and evaluations by the Club staff and (indirectly) by other male members. By contrast, a woman receives only the barest tidbits of information about a male member who would like to meet her - usually something like approximate age, nationality, general occupation and sometimes a little extra bio info from the Club (e.g., he owns a business and is quite wealthy). The female members do not see photos of the male members in advance of meeting them. This asymmetry makes UC function much more like an escort agency than a dating club, imo. Moreover, the female members don't even have access to their own profiles! They don't know what photos are used in their profiles or what is said about them or how they are rated in various ways. Etc.

Furthermore and far worse, the Club staff often treat individual women disrespectfully, dishonestly and/or unfairly. I don't think that I should go into too much detail about individual cases, but I now know of a fair number of situations and interactions between the club and some of its individual female members that I would characterize in that way. Incidents range from "forgetting" to remove a female member's profile for months despite her repeated requests to do so or making catty negative comments about individual female members at the mild end to pressuring female members for sexual services in return for promises of being promoted to male members for more settings at the extreme end. Other incidents include accepting completely unsupported and implausible accusations by a male member against a female member resulting in having her membership revoked, revealing the real name of a female member to male members without her permission, and strong promotion of some female members over others for reasons that appear to be personal or biased. Etc.

I should make it clear that many/most, but not all, of this objectionable behavior by the UC staff was associated with individuals who are no longer employed by UC.

The reason that UC can get away with treating female members in this way is that it has a vast surplus of them relative to the demand from male members...who are, after all, the ones who provide the club with its income and profits. Many female members have only a couple of settings per year or less, and even the few busiest of them apparently have no more than a few per month on average. Thus the Club has little incentive to keep its female members happy or well served. It is an extreme buyers' market, and the women are the product...with the Club acting as a seller or market broker. So, it is Economics 101...

Now of course all of the above, the bias against and poor/unethical treatment of the women involved, is common in the conventional commercial sex world, and if we were talking about an escort agency, it would hardly be worth mentioning. However, UC styles itself as a *dating* club, even if a sugar (enjou chose) one, and it is a (sugar) dating service that I and many of us want. The longer I used UC the more I came to feel that it is merely a members-only escort agency disguised as a dating club. And if I am going to see escorts (as I used to do very frequently and still do occasionally), I'd prefer to do business with indies over agencies.

That's my first major UC "con", fwiiw.

-Ww
 
The second major reason that I am no longer using UC's services is that they modified those services recently (late last spring or early this summer, don't recall exactly when) in a way that makes them VERY much less appealing and useful for both male and female members but which is better for the Club (except for any business they might lose as a result).

Namely, prior to the change a UC female member set her desired support/allowance for including hotel time in a setting (first date), and this information was included discreetly in her profile. This worked wonderfully well for both the male and female members. The guys could select their dates based on definite knowledge of how much they would need to spend and go to meet his date comfortably prepared to do so. The female member could go to meet the guy in confidence that he would be providing her with what she requested in terms of financial sugar. Neither person needed to stress or worry about the money aspect, and best of all, it could just be ignored (beyond discreet hand over of an envelope at some point of the evening) and thus allow the date to have a quite natural and non-commercial feel to it.

The change in UC services seems small on the surface; the Club merely no longer takes this information from the female members nor conveys it to the male members (according to their announcement of the change...having not had a date since the change, I don't know from personal experience). However, this small change makes a huge difference to the experience of a setting for both people. Now the guy is being asked to risk his money (the fees the club collects) on the hope/possibility that he can strike a deal with her, that her financial support goal is within his budget. And she is being asked to commit her time and effort (often hours of preparation) and the associated opportunity cost (using "free time" that is so rare in the lives of many Tokyo-ites) on the hope/possibility that his budget will be adequate to cover her financial requirements. Even worse, the quality and atmosphere of the whole date can easily be ruined by the necessarily adversarial nature of a financial negotiation. You either dicker a lot, which can easily create bad feelings, or one person simply agrees to the other person's offer/request, which can easily cause resentments and poison the potential sugar relationship before it gets started.

Now while I can easily imagine that this change was a legal necessity for UC, that does not alter the fact that the Club gets to keep its fees (membership and setting fees) even if the two people cannot agree on financial terms or if the process of reaching the agreement prevents them from having a good time and establishing a long term relationship. Indeed, it is to the Club's financial advantage if the date fails! It means that the guy will likely come back for a setting with a different woman instead of continuing to see the one he has just met, and the Club will get to collect another setting fee from him.

As far as I am aware, UC has not reduced its fees at all despite greatly reducing the value/utility of its services.

In other words I no longer see UC services as worth what the Club is charging.

That is my second major UC "con".

-Ww
 
@Ww

I'm not a supporter of UC, but understand them as a business, so find your 2 objections a bit questionable.

Note- Less so with the 2nd, as you appear to be making a justifiable personal value assessment. How much is UC services worth (for you)?

1- The men are paying a very large amount of money for the service. They are investing much more than the woman. UC is trying to satisfy their paying customers.

No woman is paying near or above 20,000 dollars (2,000,000 yen) a year. In fact, that's what she can be making off the service and more. And clearly there are women that will be unreasonably greedy, asking for outrageous and unrealistic amounts of money, if they can get away with it.

You might not know the back story involved of the women, who SOME could possibly be catty, brats, con-artists, egotistical, greediness, feel overly entitled, or simply claiming to be victims to PLAY men and their emotions.

I've seen and experienced female con-artists that will tell you the sadist victim stories ever heard, but are really cold ice heart women, to play guys for fools and in hopes of getting more money. A man should take what he hears with a grain of salt, especially when there is money involved. Male or female.

2- Legal Requirements

My understanding is that a negotiation or statement of payment for sex, by users ON their site, causes them legal issues. Such discussions have to be offsite.

You can talk about dinner, hotels, long term relationships, etc... As UC has categories, you would have to expect what the woman will ask for is aligned with her category. A platinum will ask for more than a standard.

And if a guy is comfortable with spending all this money, the issue sounds odd. So, she wants X money? It sounds more like a fear of women that will greedily ask for more money than the guy can afford, then leave when she doesn't get her way. If so, this is what the women are doing, not UC.

3- She's doing it for money

No matter how good of an actor she is, she is mainly or partially there for the money. This is the downside/nature of P4P exchanges. Convenience and reliability comes at a price.

In NP4P or PUA, when you meet a sexually adventurous woman off of say Tinder (going back to an earlier question you asked me) or say AFF, she is doing it more because that IS her sexual nature. She has embraced her sexuality or is particularly into the guy and their relationship, and does not want money in exchange, but wants: him, his love, and/or commitment instead. This is a huge difference.

If a P4P or sugar-baby truly likes you, she will stop asking for money, but that is extremely rare and possibly more to do with her thinking she can get more from you as a wife or you automatically and financially taking care of her (giving X money and gifts = to previous payment without her asking).

We mustn't forget P4P is a business, for the women and the companies involved. And UC must operate as a business to maintain profit margins and stay in business. If UC has introduced a long term sexually adventurous sugar-baby, then it has completed its mission, problems with expense is more a customer issue.

That's why, if a man is buying sexually adventurous women of high acting skills, he must not forget it's a show. Like paying for a movie. It's entertainment, it's fantasy, and when it's over then we must go back to the real world. Nothing wrong with a good movie or good P4P woman, but we must enjoy it for what it is.
 
Last edited:
1- The men are paying a very large amount of money for the service. They are investing much more than the woman. UC is trying to satisfy their paying customers.

Yes, as I noted in my post, the asymmetry in the way UC treats its male and female members is due to market forces. If they had multitudes of male customers wanting settings but way too few female members to provide them all, then it would be the other way around. Just supply and demand. But in reality it is a "buyers' market".

However, the fact that there is a reason for it does not mean that the asymmetry is without consequence.

2- Legal Requirements

My understanding is that a negotiation or statement of payment for sex, by users ON their site, causes them legal issues. Such discussions have to be offsite.

Again yes and again my post on this issue acknowledged that there is a reason, a legal motivation, but once again the reason does not negate or avoid the consequences of the change in policy.

It is hard to avoid wondering why this legal issue became an issue for UC only recently. They certainly ignored it for quite a few years. Perhaps they had some warning from or problems with LE, but I have no idea...just speculating.

And if a guy is comfortable with spending all this money, the issue sounds odd. So, she wants X money? It sounds more like a fear of women that will greedily ask for more money than the guy can afford, then leave when she doesn't get her way.

In this context it is worth mentioning that the fee for hotel time set by UC female members (when these were provided by the Club) varied over a HUGE range. While typical numbers were 4-6 ma'en, amounts outside this range are/were common, and the lowest/highest I ever noticed were *zero*/¥200,000! In the new system, the couple could easily meet and discover that they are waaaaay far apart in their expectations.

3- She's doing it for money

No matter how good of an actor she is, she is mainly or partially there for the money. This is the downside/nature of P4P exchanges.

That's why, if a man is buying sexually adventurous women of high acting skills, he must not forget it's a show. Like paying for a movie. It's entertainment, it's fantasy, and when it's over then we must go back to the real world. Nothing wrong with a good movie or good P4P woman, but we must enjoy it for what it is.

From my very considerable experience in the sugar bowl, now over 8 years of it on SA and even more on an informal (not net based) basis, what you say is often correct but not nearly as universally or absolutely so as you appear to think. There is in fact vast diversity with sugar relationships ranging from those very close to ordinary prostitution in the thinnest of disguises to those that are hardly distinguishable from conventional romances and including lots of complex and unconventional variations in between. Moreover the connections between the financial and sexual components of sugar relationships are a lot more varied, complicated and often indirect than you seem to imagine. Indeed they are about as varied as you will encounter in conventional dating situations (which of course also have both components).

But in any case, this is a thread about UC, not about sugar dating in general, and there is already at least one extensive TAG thread about how sugar dating differs from other forms of p4p, if at all. I hope to avoid going off on that tangent here and now.

-Ww
 
Last edited:
The third and final major reason that I stopped using UC's services is that there is now a superior alternative for my (Tokyo sugar) purposes, namely SeekingArrangement (SA). SA's website is https://www.seekingarrangement.com/ and there is a two year old thread on TAG at http://www.tokyoadultguide.com/threads/seekingarrangement-in-tokyo.6481/ which gives a bunch of info on SA and its services. I don't want to repeat that discussion now/here but just to note that the situation has changed considerably in the last two years in terms of UC vs SA as a way of finding one kind of sugar dating partner.

The change is basically the rapid growth of in the number of a certain type of active Tokyo-based SBs with profiles on SA. Specifically, SA now has at least as good a selection of Western SBs with native or good conversational fluency in English as UC, probably better. Moreover, many (perhaps most) such women who have UC profiles also have SA ones...sometimes using exactly the same screen name, but many such SBs on SA do not have UC profiles. And, of course, it is much cheaper to contact SBs via SA than it is through UC (a cost effective approach @Solong !). Moreover, SA treats male and female members rather symmetrically, as is appropriate for a *dating* site. Indeed, SBs on SA have the same sort of information on SDs as the SDs have on them, and the ladies have an equal opportunity to initiate contacts (which many of them do routinely).

This is not to say that there are no problems with SA or no ways in which it is inferior to UC, there definitely are some, but the bottom line for me is that for approximately the last year, I have been finding so many good sugar relationships and candidate SBs via SA that I literally don't have time (or money or energy) to pursue them all, not even all of the quite promising ones, not even close. In such a situation it makes no sense for me to pay UC's admittedly fairly steep prices to increase the number of opportunities I can't pursue even further. And if I spy someone on UC that seems particularly promising or exciting from her profile, she is often to be found on SA too, either immediately or soon.

To be fair, let me emphasize that what I am saying here applies only for "Western SBs with native or good conversational fluency in English", a group that I am very happy to (sugar) date. But SA does not list nearly as many Japanese women, with or without the ability to date in English, as UC. So, if you want a Japanese SB, SA is not (yet) serious competition, though it does have some of those as well.

-Ww
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kegger and just4fun