I don't doubt that there is flakiness out there. There are pic collectors, stalkers, and a host of different people who are not 100% committed to meeting. However, if you don't mind me pointing out, your approach puts the onus of building the relationship on the (metaphorical) shoulders of the client. As you say, "if [the client] really want". From my perspective, a potential client has initiated a contact and reached out to the provider. That first step is important to acknowledge. It doesn't hurt the provider to respond (which they are doing anyway when they email back "text me please") via email. The only real difference is the quality of the response. Either short, curt, and focused on the providers issues (his annoyance at time-wasters); or; short, polite, and focused on the potential client's issues (responsive to the questions posed). I tell my sales team, don't put extra obstacles in the way of a potential customer. They can always call one of our competitors. As a customer, when a service provider (escort, plumber, tree trimmer, barber, whatever...) responds and throws an obstacle in my way, my first thought is... "There are a 100 other people I could contact, why would I waste my time with someone not focused on me, the client?" I remember... it is my choice. Why should I pay to be blamed for other people's annoyance? Why should I pay for someone to pay attention to themselves? You're welcome to your opinion, just adding a different perspective.