kolleamm Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Full article here (quote near bottom of article): Online Dating: Why We're All Buying Into A Scam | Charles J. Orlando | YourTango The quote speaks for itself. " The business of online dating is business, not love. You want the dirty truth? Don't say I didn't warn you. The online dating industry generates $1.9 billion (with a "B") of revenue every year, earned mostly from monthly subscriptions. The typical dating site customer spends an average $239 every year in their quest to find love; just under $20 a month. However, were those monthly subscribers to find love quickly (as these dating sites promise to deliver, thanks to their algorithms and science), they won't stay subscribed to the site very long. They will have found love and won’t be dating anymore… and there goes the dating sites' monthly subscription fees. Think about it: If everyone fills out a 400-question compatibility survey, chances are decent that there will be some commonalities… perhaps even a connection or two. If that's the case, and the science/algorithms are so good/accurate, why would anyone have to spend $239 over 12 months to find someone with whom they click? According to "Sally" (name has been changed), a senior consulting programmer who's assisted in the creating of compatibility algorithms at a number of online dating sites, it costs the average dating site approximately $120 to generate a new customer. (In the subscription-based services world, this is called the Cost of User Acquisition, and includes the fees associated with advertising, promotion, sales bonuses, transaction fees, and more). But if the monthly fee is only $20 a month, the dating site needs to keep you using their services (read: unmatched) for at least six months just to break even. To show a profit, they need to keep you unmatched even longer. According to Sally, this is how it's done: "When a subscriber completes their online questionnaire and profile, the site's technology matches them up with compatible potentials, and the subscriber is shown a selection of matched profiles. However, although the algorithm is capable of matching based on compatibility, only one of the profiles shown is actually a match based on their algorithm; the others are either random profiles of other users, or fake profiles entirely. If the subscriber doesn't happen to click on the profile generated from the algorithm and instead selects one of the other randomly generated profiles, the algorithm shuts off for the next 4-5 months in an effort to recoup the cost spend of acquiring that subscriber. It's been done like this for years, and is the way the business works." " Gee I wonder why OLD takes so long to never work....profit? Yeah. Link to post Share on other sites
Mirages Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Correct me if I am wrong, but... In super urban areas, do sites let you see less than 100% of your specified matches? I don't know. In my area, not urban, I set specifications on OKC or match, or whatever, and get a complete list based on search criteria. My observation of each profile renders interest. I really don't get persuaded by any matching algorith, as attraction (and repulsion) is more fickle than that. Now eharmony, etc. yes they hold the dice in the matter. Either way I agree that there is profit in the industry, and in the funeral home industry, and in running a hospital. If it is manipulative and conspiratorial, I'd say Zoosk is the most corrupt version of OLD I've seen, i.e. stringing people along for money and not detaching when told to. The others, ok with me. Link to post Share on other sites
Author kolleamm Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 The main point is however that however you search, you being successful on their sites in the short term would mean lost profits even through ads, they need to keep you there as long as possible. Link to post Share on other sites
salparadise Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Thank you for this. I've really been needing a better external rationalization for why I'm still single. Blaming it on the nature of the women who use online dating wasn't working for me anymore, and looking within is way too uncomfortable. An evil conspiracy by big business using sophisticated algorithms... perfect! Are t-shirts available? 3 Link to post Share on other sites
TouchedByViolet Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Eh doesn't make sense. People view and message profiles that interest them, the pictures and the content. They are not limited by algorithms. There will always be single people in society. Its not like everyone is going to match up and never breakup leading to the end of the OLD industry. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Online business of any sort has always been business, going way back to some of the first consumer online businesses, adult entertainment. Consider how well the site we post on is placed in search indexes and imagine it was a dating site. How does it grow? Sure, users find it in internet searches and think it'll help them so they sign up. After all, it's free (as a .org, it is by definition non-profit). But to really grow, just like any business, presuming one operates it like a business, meaning for-profit, one usually needs advertising and that costs money. That money has to come from somewhere. Ad clicks are great, if small, increments. Real money comes from subscriptions and selling perceived value for those subscriptions. It's that kind of stuff which makes guys like Neil Clark Warren (eHarmony) successful. He did an amazing job of combining skills in psychology with those in theology and creating a profit-base in business. Getting people to buy is all about psychology and, if people are willing to pay for something, why give it to them for free? That's what capitalism is all about. Even in this day and age there are still plenty of large and popular dating sites which are free. Millions of people use them every day. For those who perceive value in the sites which charge a subscription fee, there's that option. There are even private online matchmaking services which cater to individuals for a fee. I interacted with some of those years ago when international dating. They were known as 'agencies' where I was. I used them for everything from apartment rentals to train tickets to bird-dogging dating prospects, yep all for a fee. Why? I perceived value in that fee and was satisfied with the results. That's what business is all about. Link to post Share on other sites
insert_name Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Thank you for this. I've really been needing a better external rationalization for why I'm still single. Blaming it on the nature of the women who use online dating wasn't working for me anymore, and looking within is way too uncomfortable. An evil conspiracy by big business using sophisticated algorithms... perfect! Are t-shirts available? I keep coming back to that '80% of the men on OLD are rated as being unattractive' statistic. Its very telling. Thats not to say that women are the sole reason why OLD doesnt work for the majority but its worth bearing in mind when encouraging men to keep blaming themselves. OLD women are hard to olease because the system caters to them. A lot of men just cant and wont win no matter how many handstands they pull on a deserted beach at sunset. Link to post Share on other sites
gaius Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Okcupid doesn't even charge subscription fees and they're obviously making enough money to not only pay for their bandwidth but whatever staff they need to run the site. The 120 dollar figure makes no sense. Sorry, but if you're never having luck with OLD it's not some corporate conspiracy against you. It's just you. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
JuneJulySeptember Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Hmm. I don't use algorithms. I pick women where I fall in or close to their parameters, who have somewhat decent text profiles and I throw darts. So. Not applicable. Link to post Share on other sites
TheyCallMeOx Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Met my ex on a dating service. If I can find a woman like that again on a dating service, then call me an idiot because I'm falling for a scam. Link to post Share on other sites
normal person Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Is this really a surprise? If you do OLD, don't rely on their "algorithm," if you can even call it that. Set some basic parameters for a search and go through and read the profiles yourself. That's the most affective way of finding someone appealing to you. Use the computer to find people, not to pick people for you. You seem to have some horrible bias against OLD. Plenty of people have found it to be useful. Maybe the technology isn't the problem. If you don't like it, you're free to stop using it at any time. Link to post Share on other sites
LookAtThisPOst Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Well, there you go then. See the advice given by those here who thought you should "tweak" your profile and other such online dating advice pretty much goes out the window in this case. Link to post Share on other sites
salparadise Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 I keep coming back to that '80% of the men on OLD are rated as being unattractive' statistic. Its very telling. Thats not to say that women are the sole reason why OLD doesnt work for the majority but its worth bearing in mind when encouraging men to keep blaming themselves. OLD women are hard to olease because the system caters to them. A lot of men just cant and wont win no matter how many handstands they pull on a deserted beach at sunset. That 80 percent below average statistic is revealing, and it's pretty consistent with the evolutionary theory that explains why 95 percent of the women are only interested in the top 5 percent of the men (of course the numbers aren't literal). I also think that Barry Schwartz' study on the Paradox of Choice applies to online dating as much as anywhere else, maybe more. I can't claim to not be guilty of something similar. As much as I'd like to find someone nice to settle down with, I'm just not interested in about three-fourths of the women in my age range for one reason or another––lack of physical attraction being among them. It has always been difficult for about half of all men to "do well" with the women, so this is not unique to OLD, but lack of appeal does seem to get highlighted in that venue. It's not really such a big mystery now is it? There are certain thing a man must do to be one that women flock to... be attractive, confident, dominant, tall, intelligent, sociable, high-status and wealthy. Otherwise, offer a significant lifestyle upgrade and be good at eating... oh, never mind. Bottom line is that if you're not appealing to women in real life and think you should be able to just log on and pick one, then it's largely the expectation that's the problem. Link to post Share on other sites
Imported Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) Wait a sec......are you saying Online Dating isn't pretty much like this for every guy? Might as well give up and just watch porn I guess. Edited January 29, 2015 by Imported Link to post Share on other sites
TigerLilly78 Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 wait noooo a on line "business" thats trying to turn a good profit? *gasp*...how dare they..lmao 1 Link to post Share on other sites
LookAtThisPOst Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Thats not to say that women are the sole reason why OLD doesnt work for the majority but its worth bearing in mind when encouraging men to keep blaming themselves. Right...I keep tired of hearing the, "Well, it must be YOU that's doing something wrong that you're unable to garner interest from women online!" The initial post pretty much disproves that. Link to post Share on other sites
insert_name Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Right...I keep tired of hearing the, "Well, it must be YOU that's doing something wrong that you're unable to garner interest from women online!" The initial post pretty much disproves that. Well not really because that initial post is a very niche example- from the MO it sounds like eharmony which has a very unique business model based around putting complete trust in the site allowing you to see matches it selects. My experience is the same as others in this thread, I just search for all women in my area and sift from there so I am not necessarily relying on the sites I used to do any work for me other than to show all the women within a certain boundary and it sounds like others do the same. What I would say is that if people want to point the finger at the man then point them to the OLD thread where the guy is getting rejected online because of his height. Still, I'm sure it was because of his pictures and his orofile really (yawn)...... Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts