Why do some people include the club’s standard transportation allowance for the first meeting in the allowance?
This content is machine-translated.
I seem to remember that transportation money is described as a token of appreciation for accepting the offer and properly showing up for the date that day.
So why include it in the allowance for a private arrangement?
Is the transportation money deducted from my allowance because I’m a Type C?
If someone is Type A or Type B, do they really say, “I gave you transportation money last time, so I’m deducting that amount this time,” and pay ¥10,000 or ¥5,000 less when they meet for the second time?
👤Asked byGuest👩GenderFemale🎂20s👑Universe female member
Thank you for your question.
Kurosaki from the Kansai Unit will answer.
Perhaps he finds it troublesome to hand them over separately.
I believe the most important thing is for both parties to have a shared understanding, so given your experience, it may be best to clarify when discussing the allowance whether it includes transportation expenses.
I’m sorry I couldn’t give you a more definitive answer.
The amount is important, after all.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
When it’s transportation expenses plus an allowance, it’s normal for the amount to decrease from the second meeting onward because you’ll only receive the allowance after the first time.
In your case, since the allowance remains the same after the second meeting, I think you can consider that it hasn’t actually been reduced.
That said, before getting upset, you should make sure to clearly confirm the terms when deciding on the allowance.
Marika
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
People have different views, but I do think the terms should be agreed on beforehand—or, more specifically, that the man should clearly state them before entering into an adult relationship (intimate).
If he didn’t provide the transportation money upfront in the first place, or only brought this up after the adult relationship (intimate), then I’d say that papa wasn’t being very gentlemanly.
Regardless of the arrangement, I give the transportation money separately from the allowance, and I clearly explain the allowance, including the amount for future meetings.
There seem to be cases where someone tests you by haggling over a difference of a few tens of thousands of yen—basically seeing whether you’re too focused on money, or willing to accept a small loss for a greater gain. But some papas, myself included, may simply be too lax about these things because we feel it would look bad to make someone we like think less of us over a difference of a few tens of thousands of yen. We’re just trying to look cool, I suppose（笑）
It cuts both ways. From my perspective, I may technically lose out in the end—though we’re only talking about a few tens of thousands of yen—but I feel I gain something worthwhile too, so I’m fine with that.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
What do you think?
I think the person asking the question should simply stand by that position.
That said, if there’s a woman who’s not overly focused on money and is okay with an implied arrangement, the papa (a male supporter) will probably gravitate toward her instead. If it were me, I’d continue seeing a woman who was comfortable with that.
It’s a matter of sacrificing a little now to gain more in the long run. You could either argue over the transportation costs for one meeting and part ways, or continue the relationship. Even with an implied arrangement, staying together for a year could result in a fairly substantial total allowance.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
Same as Dai.
When negotiating, I’d be explicit—for example, “When it’s 50,000 yen, that’s 10,000 yen for transportation plus the remaining 40,000 yen,” and negotiate from there.
The total amount stayed the same after the second meeting as well.
After a year, he increased the allowance when he was short on money, and it stayed at that amount ever since.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
I also include transportation costs in the allowance, but only for the first date with a Type C woman.
For example, if I give her 1 for transportation plus 5 as her allowance—6 in total—the first time, and then give her 5 as the allowance the second time, wouldn’t she feel like the amount had been reduced?
Personally, I just prefer to keep things as consistent as possible.
Incidentally, I recently gave an allowance using the arrangement above, but she didn’t thank me or say anything in particular.
Maybe she simply took it for granted, but I feel that a man’s response can also change depending on how the woman reacts in situations like this.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
Huh? Aren’t you supposed to receive the transportation fee upfront?
Isn’t the allowance paid once you’ve agreed on the terms?
Maybe she gets it all at the end?
You should report him to the club. Make sure you receive the transportation fee as soon as you sit down at the first meeting. If he doesn’t offer it, I think it’s fine to ask.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
I understand why you’re upset.
There could be all sorts of reasons they do that, but basically, the main one may be that they want to keep the allowance low. In Joe’s case, things went through a lot of twists and turns, but we eventually settled on the allowance and transportation costs being separate. The papas are experimenting and figuring things out too. Please try to watch over them with a little patience and understanding.
(3 replies left)
(3 replies left)
💡 This question has no password registered, so the reply feature is unavailable.
If you access from the device/browser used to post the question, you may be able to set a password later.
