Sullivan Nasties Gave Me Nightmares.

[pharoahegypt]

the opposite problem is happening today... far too many pros posing as amateurs....!!! lost track of how many girls ive recently seen in supposed amateur or first time appearance vids....... only to note below, in the 'other related videos' section of the same video site, that she has already made twenty plus videos....!! if ur gonna perport to using amateur girls, at least dont use someone who's made many other films for ur company..???

another of sullivan's little 'treats' was to have the top shelf girls appear at his shops. it was always the same half dozen girls, always looking tired and bored, and always helping the rip of by charging silly money for a picture with them.

[MaxJoker]

Originally Posted by Mal Hombre

I doubt there's a British member over forty,who doesn't have a bad Sullivan experience in their past.

You`re not kidding , why even his mother called him a c####y little runt ,and that was at his Christening .



28 years old he was

[dandy66]

Originally Posted by Foxbark

Greetings.

To any one who grew up in the 1970s, wank-fodder (when one neededa wee dram of the hard stuff), inevitaby meant going down the newsagents and buying a Sullivan title such as 'Whitehouse' or 'Playbirds'.
What distinguished these mags were 'open fanny shots' (as they delicately called them), and limp (due to UK laws) dicks dangled (yes, dangled) strategically in front of female 'models'.
Anyhow the there was a horrible patina of 1970s dirt and sleaze permeating the mags.The women all seemed to be 'scrubbers' straight out of central casting.The men were even worse.One particular set still gives me nightmares from my youth.The featured stud was hideously ugly, aged about 50 dark and hairy with an odd foreign physigonimy (a primitive type of man, definitely not English and seldom seen in the streets), that for some reason just filled me with revulsion and horror even to this day.
Where did he find these scrubbers?, who were these scrubbers.I am still haunted.

I thought sullivans magazines were the best of the lot in the 70s and 80s.i don't think they were a rip off although they weren't hardcore.and most of the models were the girl next door type instead of the playboy magazine plastic tits type.i don't know why so many people dislike david Sullivan so much.?he is no different to any other acute business man in this country.he found a way to make himself a lot of money and he done it all on his own.good on him I say

[m100]

Originally Posted by dandy66

I thought sullivans magazines were the best of the lot in the 70s and 80s.i don't think they were a rip off although they weren't hardcore.and most of the models were the girl next door type instead of the playboy magazine plastic tits type.i don't know why so many people dislike david Sullivan so much.?he is no different to any other acute business man in this country.he found a way to make himself a lot of money and he done it all on his own.good on him I say

Good evening Mr Sullivan very good of you to join us.

[buttsie]

Pity about all those that got sending through the mail is illegal after ordering

2010 In Were You Ever Ripped-Off by David Sullivan? 86 posts

Originally Posted by Foxbark

Greetings Friends,
AS usual my post is directed mainly towards our british readers, and concerns a time back in the dim, dingy past (many years pre-internet), when the only material even approaching hardcore available in Britain were the strange and jaded publications published by one David Sullivan (Whitehouse etc).

The mags were loaded to the point of saturation with adverts for sullivan's own products and sex-shops.One particular advert I will always remember was printede on the inside front-cover and concerned something called the 'HCP' or 'hard-core book-club'.

In the advert Sullivan promised to sell at mail-order discount dirty books suchs as Color Climax, Rodox, Private etc (all rare as hen's teeth in England), and were illustrated with very explicit lust-making photos that got my 15 year old sap rising and prompted no -end of tugs.

As a youth the idea of mail-order porn (especially forbidden hardcore) appealed.So sillybollocks sent off his postal order - and got in return a letter saying that sending porn through the post was illegal and a 'credit note' supposedly exchangable in a Sullivan sex-shop.

Sullivan worked this thoroughly illegal scam for years and was never legally challenged for the millions he must of ripped-off the good ol'fashioned British wanker - no one had the guts to make a stand.

Anyway to this day I boycott the Sullivan product (which is generally inferior - most of his sex-shops are frankly shit) and purchase American magazine and boot-leg XXX DVD off the Chinaman, in retaliation?

Anyone else ripped off and cares to tell the tale?
Anyone actually got good service from Sullivan?

2013 UK:1980s Sullivan photo sets - origin ?

In the excellent "Porn Gold" printed in the 80s, I vaguely recall some European outfits (CC, maybe Private) that had beefs with Sullivan producing softcore rips off using their titles. They tried to sue, but as their content was illegal under UK law, they had no standing in court.

http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...light=sullivan

2010 My Favourite Ever Sullivan Mag Advert.
http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...light=sullivan

2009 The Sullivan Sex-Shops.
http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...light=sullivan

2008 "Scurvy" Sullivan Sets of the 1970s and 80s.
http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...light=sullivan

2008 'The Sullivan Stable' (Flyblown?)
http://vintage-erotica-forum.com/sho...light=sullivan

[vo1v0d]

Say what you like about Sullivan and his toxic empire but compared to Mayfair and Penthouse and PB, at least you got to see an actual pussy as opposed to a blurry triangle.

[Pinkpapercut]

Originally Posted by vo1v0d

Say what you like about Sullivan and his toxic empire but compared to Mayfair and Penthouse and PB, at least you got to see an actual pussy as opposed to a blurry triangle.

Maybe Mayfair, Penthouse etc weren't explicit - I rarely bought them myself for that reason - but the girls were all lookers. That said, in the later 70s there were other available UK girly mags that featured plenty of pretty girls with their fannies clearly on show, such as 'Men Only' and 'Club International', and plenty of explicit 'held-open' photos of good-looking girls in the Gold Star titles like 'Rustler', 'Rapier', and 'Journal of Sex' (including hardcore) before Sullivan took them over, the difference being that they were competently photographed showing inviting-looking cunnies rather than the Sullivan material that usually looked like infected axe-wounds photographed behind a skip in a badly-lit alley.

I used to have have the feeling on the rare occasion that I bought a Sullivan magazine that it should have come with a free gift - a course of penicillin.

[vo1v0d]

Granted PinkP, but if you saw every edition of Playbirds Whitehouse, Park Lane etc, you will see some of the hottest top models nd major names in glamour and porn in shoots that were too hot for Mayfair and PH, which is the major selling point for the most popular titles. Dont believe me; check the threads.