I think I kind of get it too...

For a site for tops, there -could- be a bottom, but the focus and filming would be more focused on the top. Little to nothing would be seen of the bottom - just the (forgive the pun) bottom's bottom... and a lot of close ups of action and body shots of the top.

For a 'Bottom' site... I believe the closest thing would be POV (Point of View) - this is done a lot in the straight market, because gives the ability to straight men of delving further into the fantasy of being the one fucking the girl - you don't see anything of the guy except his dick and maybe some stomach or legs. At that point the axiom that the men in straight porn are just 'stunt dicks' becomes much more literal.

Classically, Ryan, the problem with gay POV, and also the 'Top' sort of site, is that it effectively cuts your audience in half. If you have a 'Twink Tops' site, then you'd have your regular twink audience, and then it'd be theoretically cut in half to those people who want to be fucked by twinks.
The same for a 'Latin POV'... you'd have the Latin market, cut in half, to the people that like fucking Latinos.

You can still be niche-specific while satisfying the tops and the bottoms at the same time, doubling your products attractiveness.

Kindest regards,

~Kush