|
|
Kathryn's Blog: News About Dating Sites and Types
I’ve been helping singles with their online profiles from the very start, in 2002 when I became a Romance Coach. Most usually, I even write the profile essay, using the individual’s own words that they write in answer to some fun questions. I seem to have a particular skill for writing the essays, because my clients usually like them so much that they do not even change a single word. And their profiles get result, which is what we all are looking for.
Occasionally, I’ll get requests, usually from men, to write first emails for them, even once in awhile more than that. Even more occasionally I might do so, but usually only for men who are good guys but severely limited in their writing skills. I do NOT do this sort of writing for people who “don’t have the time.” Dating takes time, and so do relationships. If you haven’t got time to write an email, how are you going to have time to build and maintain a relationship? And no one likes being tricked or fooled. Email recipients are of course going to think that the person sending the email actually WROTE it. Well, maybe they did, since some of these services described below search for candidates, write and send the first emails, then continue the correspondence. They even set up the first date! The next step would be actually going on the date. Yeesh.
What do you think? Would you hire someone to write your emails for you? And what if you found out that you had been corresponding with someone your date hired and not him/her?
The cyber Cyrano
By Claire Prentice
The world of internet dating can be fraught. But, for a fee, a ghost writer will rewrite your online profile with the promise of making you more attractive to others. How does it work?
These modern-day cupids are popping up across the internet. They specialise in ghost writing witty, charming, flirtatious messages on behalf of single men and women unwilling, unable or too busy to do it themselves.
“We’ve noticed a definite trend with more and more of these companies springing up- and there is a huge demand,” says Mark Brooks, editor of Online Personals Watch, a site that tracks internet dating trends.
Clients usually come to these online-dating outsourcing companies because their own attempts to find love in cyberspace just aren’t getting results. Many want to avoid the rejection they feel when their lovingly-crafted messages go unanswered.
“Necessity is the mother of invention,” says Evan Marc Katz, who has worked as a dating coach since 2003 and runs e-cyrano.com, one of the first of this new breed of companies. “There are a surprising number of people out there who don’t know how to market themselves in an original way.”
He stresses that his clients are not losers, but are typically successful, professional and well-rounded people. So what qualifies someone to set themselves up as a dating expert?
“I did online dating myself for years with great success and I worked as a customer-care representative for an online dating company,” says Mr Katz, who is now happily married.
Every date brings financial rewards for the ghost writers, who compare themselves to salesmen, telemarketers and, in some cases, poets. Some offer their services in a range of languages.
Working for a set fee, the companies interview their clients at length over the phone. Using this information, they then write the initial “sell”, the blurb which online daters use to advertise themselves. Many also provide tips and advice on how to optimise your appeal to fellow daters.
TargetLove offers everything, from basic profile writing for £150 to dating coaches who, for around £90 an hour, will talk the unlucky and inept through every step of the dating game.
Some companies will go so far as posing as their client on dating sites and writing messages to potential partners to arrange first dates.
These tactics have provoked controversy. Critics claim it is a dishonest way to try to find true love.
Major turn-off
“It’s awful. You’re misrepresenting yourself,” says Jared Gordon, editor of A Bad Case of the Dates, a blog that collects dating horror stories.
Not so, insists Scott Valdez, the founder and president of Virtual Dating Assistants (VDA). “We are representing our clients as honestly and accurately as possible online,” he says.
VDA does it all: writes a client’s profile, picks out potential matches, sends introductory e-mails and messages back and forth until a date is confirmed. The company guarantees between two and five dates per month in return for fees ranging from £400 to £800 a month.
It bills itself as a company that “specialises in making the dating dreams of busy individuals come true”.
Most of these outsourcing companies are in America and, though the majority of their clients are American, many have customers as far afield as the UK, Canada, Australia, Mexico and South America.
Scott Valdez Mr Valdez says online dating is a ‘screening process’
Typically, the majority of clients are men. Although it says the proportion of women is increasing, 80% of Virtual Dating Assistants’ clients are male.
Mr Valdez, who previously worked in sales and marketing, compares his service to a direct-marketing campaign.
“Online dating is not a date,” he says. “It’s a screening process and a place to filter through the masses to identify potential dates.”
So what tips can would-be daters expect to hear for their money?
“Be specific. And don’t rely on adjectives. Instead of saying you are spontaneous, give an example of an occasion when you were spontaneous,” says Mr Katz.
The dating website OK Cupid does data mining, analysing their users’ data to look for patterns for successful internet dating. Their research suggests that bad grammar and “text speak” are a major turn-off.
Ok Cupid analysed feedback on more than 700,000 photos of daters. The results showed that daters who smiled or look flirtatiously into the camera were rated more favourably than those who didn’t. And people who used pictures of themselves doing something “conversation worthy” such as playing guitar or scuba diving got more positive responses than those who didn’t.
Have they ever had any complaints from clients? “There was one guy who complained we made him sound too cool,” says Mr Valdez.
Most of the companies are relatively small operations, often employing a team of freelance writers. A number have been forced to take on more staff to keep up with demand.
“It’s like the funeral business - there’s always demand,” says Mr Katz. “It’s recession-proof - people are always looking for love.”
Using social networking sites to find the love of your life seems a little beside the point when dating sites do such a good job, and directly, too. But using everything available is not a bad idea. I’m going to start posting articles that highlight ways to use services like Twitter or Facebook, or in this case, Flyertalk.com.
Social Networking Takes Flight
By BARBARA S. PETERSON
On a flight from Newark to the West Coast not long ago, Jeff Jarvis, author of the book “What Would Google Do?” fell into a conversation with a fellow passenger familiar with his work. But it was not a face-to-face chat. Rather, it started as an exchange of Twitter posts at the boarding gate.
Virgin America also offers seat-to-seat messaging via video screens installed on seat backs.
When the plane landed, Mr. Jarvis recalled, the conversation resumed. “It was as if someone had recognized you and come up to say, ‘hello,’ on the flight.” He said it reminded him of the days when passengers could socialize in airborne lounges, “except now it’s happening digitally.”
The mobile phone and laptop are not just tools to stay in touch with the office or home anymore. As Mr. Jarvis can attest, a growing number of frequent fliers are using their mobile devices to create an informal travelers’ community in airports and aloft.
Airlines and social media providers are scrambling to catch up. Airlines are beefing up their presence on networking channels, and travelers’ groups like FlyerTalk.com have created new applications that allow members to find one another while on the road. Business travelers can use these services to share cabs to the airport, swap advice or locate colleagues in the same city. As Mr. Jarvis puts it, “finding a like-minded person to travel with lessens the chance of getting stuck next to some talkative bozo” on a long flight.
Increasing availability of Wi-Fi at airports and on planes has made the travel networking possible. A survey of 84 of the world’s largest airports by the Airports Council International earlier this year found that 96 percent offered Wi-Fi connections, and 73 percent had connections throughout their terminals. About 45 percent offer the service free; the rest charge an average of about $8 an hour.
More than 10 airlines in North America, including American, Delta and Southwest, are wiring their planes for Internet access, and major foreign airlines like Lufthansa are introducing new technology that will let customers connect on transoceanic flights. In-flight calls are still forbidden on most flights, although several airlines, including Emirates, have been testing calling on shorter trips.
As many as 1,200 commercial airliners in the United States will have Wi-Fi capability by the end of the year, according to Chris Babb, senior product manager of in-flight entertainment for Delta Air Lines. “It’s a much different world than it was a year ago,” he said, noting that on a recent flight he exchanged e-mail messages with several colleagues who were in the air at the same time.
And Virgin America, which has wired its entire 28-plane fleet for the Internet, said about half of its passengers brought their laptops with them and 17 to 20 percent were online at any given time. On longer flights, about a third of passengers go online. Like airports, most airlines charge a fee for the service, usually ranging from $5 to $13.
Some airline passengers may mourn the loss of their last remaining refuge from e-mail intrusions. But the benefits of staying connected became clear several months ago during the eruption of the Icelandic volcano that grounded thousands of European flights. Facebook and Twitter set up sites for stranded travelers, who swapped ideas and offered rides to ferry terminals, and Twitter had its own thread. Based on anecdotal reports, the sites helped in getting information out quickly.
For those with time at an airport, FlyerTalk.com has an “itineraries” feature that allows travelers to post their coming flights in the hope that other “flier talkers,” as they call themselves, may be heading the same way.
Lufthansa said it consulted with FlyerTalk members in developing its own product to help customers tap into social networking from any location. The application works on iPhones and this fall will be available on BlackBerrys. A built-in GPS allows users to find fellow fliers who might be nearby. It also has a taxi-sharing feature that travelers can activate upon landing.
Users must already be members of the airlines’ loyalty program, and Lufthansa said it had added privacy controls for those who preferred to travel incognito. FlyerTalk’s president, Gary Leff, said that while some members had welcomed the service, others were skeptical. “Some of us just like to keep to ourselves” on the road, he said.
For those who want to connect, few airlines can match Virgin America for mingling opportunities. In addition to its Internet service, it offers seat-to-seat messaging via its seatback video screens. It has also teamed up with match.com to create a party atmosphere on specific flights (reportedly at least one couple who met this way became engaged). But there is also the potential for spurned advances and hurt feelings.
“Seat-to-seat chatting could lead to a negative form of social networking,” said Jeanne Martinet, a social commentator who writes the missmingle.com blog. “What if someone spots another passenger doing something annoying?” she asked. In the past, that person might have simply suffered in silence. Now, Ms. Martinet said, “It would be tempting to message them, ‘Can’t you get your big feet out of the aisle?’ ”
Porter Gale, Virgin’s vice president of marketing, said there were safeguards against abuse and that a passenger could simply turn off the messaging function. And she said that offering Wi-Fi access had benefits for the airline, like the ability to resolve a customer’s problem before a flight lands.
A passenger once sent an e-mail message to the airline from his seat, saying that he was not pleased with the sandwich he had just eaten, she said. A customer service representative on the ground sent a message back to the plane, and shortly thereafter, she said, the passenger was served an acceptable substitute.
This can work against the airline, too, as Virgin discovered when a New York-bound flight was diverted and some passengers sent out messages venting their annoyance with the delay.
Ooohh, I just don’t know how I feel about this one. The photo with the article (follow the link and maybe you can see it too) shows a very overweight man with a slim, attractive woman, and the article makes clear he is 15 years older than she is. Now, he may have gained the weight since meeting her, but this is such a clear case of a less marketable man (at least with similarly aged American women) using money and the promise of life in the USA to get a young, pretty, and desperate woman. The ick factor for me is high. What about for you?
Inter-racial couple finds true love online
By Henni Espinosa, ABS-CBN North America News Bureau
ORINDA, California – An inter-racial couple found each other 6 years ago through a dating website.
Filipina Rhoda Mae Sancho, 35, and American Rick Vincent, 50, found the love online.
Sancho was born poor in Bacolod City. She was only a high school graduate, unemployed and desperate to get out of the country. She saved P20.00 a day to go an Internet café with the goal of finding true love online.
“Kahit mahirap ako, tinitiis ko talaga na maka-Internet, makatagpo ako ng mabait na Amerikano, makapunta ako dito para maiahon ko rin ang pamilya ko sa hirap,” said Sancho.
In 2004, she found Vincent through a dating website. Vincent is a millionaire stockbroker from the Bay Area who was ready to start a family.
A few months after their first online chat, Vincent flew to the Philippines to meet Sancho and her family for the first time.
“Pinangkra ko talaga siya, sabi ko ‘I’m so sorry. I cannot speak too much English kasi I’m only high school graduate. Sabi niya, ‘It’s okay. I understand what you’re saying.’ Sabi ko, ‘Thanks God!’” Sancho recalled.
For Vincent, it was love at first sight. Because he fell in love with Sancho, he also felt the need to help her and her family out of poverty.
“I knew that if I wanted to marry a Filipina girl, I had to make her parents happy. That’s what I did my first trip. I brought my mother-in-law 2 boxes of See’s Candies,” said Vincent.
“Parang hindi ako makapaniwala na lahat ibinigay niya sa akin. Yung gusto ko lang mahalin niya yung anak ko kasi lumaki siyang walang tatay,” said Sancho.
Not only did Vincent become Sancho’s husband on January 2005, he also became a father to Juliana, her daughter from a previous relationship. Juliana is now 8.
Soon, Sancho bore Vincent 2 children—Charlotte, now 2, and Kenneth, now 10-months old.
While they live comfortably in the US, Vincent has not forgotten to take care of Rhoda’s family and relatives in the Philippines.
He now sends 22 nieces and nephews, even children of Sancho’s friends, to school.
He also bought her parents a new home where he plans to build a swimming pool for them.
Vincent said the secret to an inter-racial marriage is the same as any other marriage.
“I make sure that when she says something, I say, ‘Yes, Hon,’” he said.
“Yung love, walang pinipili yan. Kung nagmamahalan kayo talaga, hindi importante kung sino ka man, kung ano ka man,” said Sancho.
More about matching than maybe you want to know….
High-End Matchmakers Dish on Dating
By Val Brown
Online dating has become increasingly de-stigmatized, but there are many who still aren’t comfortable having their photo online and publicly admitting they need help finding a mate: the powerful, the wealthy, and the well-known to name a few. And though you’d think they would have fewer problems than us mere mortals in finding a significant other, apparently they suffer the same slings, arrows and bad dates as the rest of us. Their solution: professional, pricey, discreet matchmakers. They are not the kind of guys who go on on “Millionaire Matchmaker.”
By “they,” I mean men. Men make up the majority of a high end matchmaker’s clients. Women are generally not the clients but potential matches for the men; and in most cases, they simply pay an application or interview fee. I don’t think this is any sexist plot by the modern day Dolly Levi’s, only a reflection of a dating dynamic that is still alive and well—at least where well-to-do men are concerned.
I spoke recently with three matchmakers, Richard Easton, Janis Spindel and Samantha Daniels. Though New York based, all work with clients across the country (and internationally), and Daniels keeps an LA office as well. All offer a unique perspective and approach to their services, and all have toe-curling prices.
How much will this set a guy back? From $25,000-$100,000, depending on the matchmaker and your deal. This will give you a year to 18 months of matches. Matchmaker Richard Easton, new to the New York market and an anomaly among matchmakers—most are women—says he challenges the price resistance he sometimes encounters with a car analogy. “I’m working with guys who pay $150 grand for a car without the blink of an eye. So I ask them, ‘What’s 50K to find your life partner?’” Fair point. He does offer a $10K starter rate for young Wall St. and Silicon Alley/Valley types as well.
A personable former head of his own boutique M&A firm, Easton has parlayed his expertise in marrying companies into the more rewarding realm of marrying hearts and minds. He says he offers a different perspective on the art cum science. “Men feel more comfortable with me, they will say things to me that they won’t say to a woman, about what they’re looking for, what works and doesn’t.” Putting on my marketing hat, it does make sense that that his branding appeals to masculine sensibilities, with nary a heart or pink flower in sight.
Janis Spindel, the doyenne of New York matchmaking, might disagree. A smart, sassy tsunami of self-confidence, Spindel has the chutzpa and sixth sense needed to ferret out the perfect match for her clients . She’ll approach anyone woman who fits the bill—in gyms, Barneys, a parking garage, on the street. A former fashion sales director, she boasts an uncanny ability to know who is right for whom. With hundreds of marriages and countless relationships in her 17 year career, her combination of intuition, persuasion, and calculation—a quick up and down glance can tell her a lot—are her stock in trade. And she gets results.
“You get invited, you go.” So said Samantha Daniel’s grandmother when she was a girl, and she’s been going ever since, attending events, fundraisers, dinners, reunions—not to directly sell or recruit, but to network. She takes a soft sell approach to her metier. A former divorce attorney, Daniels traded acrimony for harmony, deciding she’d rather bring people together than break them apart. She launched her agency in New York 11 years ago, then set up an office in L.A. after going there to produce the TV show based on her life, “Miss Match.” Very social in both cities, she takes on high profile women as paying clients as well—studio heads, CEO’s, and other successful women who need equally successful—or incredibly well- adjusted—men who will not be intimidated by their success. And Daniel’s former career gives her great insight into what breaks couples up (number one: poor communication), so she can offer clear-headed advice as clients embark upon relationships or marriage.
With all the matchmakers I couldn’t help but think that there are some real sad sacks on their books, but they all insist their clients are actually quite social, popular—but just haven’t found the right person.
And while the price of admission is high for men, money will get you in regardless of your age, height, or attractiveness (though I’m assured that the overly odious are turned down). And if you’re not looking your best, you’ll be sent off to an image consultant for a male makeover.
In order to get on the “roster,” women must be very attractive, fit, be either book smart or street smart, and have a successful career of some sort. “Ivy league educated” gets thrown around a lot in describing both the men and women on the matchmakers’ books. Most women are under 40, with some exceptions. (How old are the men? 27 to 78.) They don’t accept many short women, though they do keep a small pool for very short men. They ask for “natural beauty”, so presumably those botoxed into a state of forehead catatonia or sporting impossibly perky triple D’s are less desirable.
I am curious about how they weed out the gold diggers—why would a beautiful, Ivy League educated 25 year old woman need a dating service to find a man? Spindel assures me she can spot them a mile away, and they won’t get on her roster. Perhaps it’s just time management for these 25 year olds—better to shoot gilded fish in a barrel than trawl through the charity, club or Hamptons circuit for five years.
Whether it was to butter me up to write a positive article, or there was some genuine interest, they all said they may have some guys for me. “How old will you go?” Janis inquired.
“Well, if they’re youthful and in shape, 60. 65 in a pinch.” She seemed surprised. I am way over 40, but I know from internet dating that 45 or 50 year old guys are generally not looking for women their age. You have to go older. And anyway, I’ve always liked older men. And younger, come to think of it.
Daniels asks if I would be willing to relocate? Hmm. L.A., London, Paris…? Sure. A zillion acre ranch in Montana? No.
I’m a little trepidatious. I’ve made a good living and have never targeted wealthy men as suitors. I’ve mostly gone for the starving artists. They suited my creative sensibilities, and I’ve also thought that if I were with someone wealthy I would give up some of my power. I’ve never understood how people can marry for money, not love. That would be torture for me—a waste of good years of my life.
So we’ll see if these matchmakers come up with the goods. I’ll keep you posted. If you see me in a restaurant with a 78-year-old, you’ll know it was a set-up .
If you are wondering why Internet dating hasn’t put matchmakers out of business, here’s why.
Matchmakers thriving despite rise of dating Web sites
Turned off by Internet dating sites that offer a vast selection but take a lot of time, singles are spending bigger bucks for more service that leaves the date-picking to a matchmaker.
By Susan Carpenter
What would you pay to meet the love of your life? Twenty dollars a month for an Internet dating site that lets you wade knee-deep into the dating pool and swim with millions of other singles? Or $1,000-plus for a personalized matchmaker who will do the wading, and weeding, for you?
Over the last few years, a surprising number of singles have been choosing the latter, despite the declining economy. Turned off by Internet dating sites that offer a vast selection but take a lot of time, they’re spending bigger bucks for more service that leaves the date-picking to someone else.
“Matchmaking should have been dead by now,” said Mark Brooks of Online Personals Watch, a Web site that’s been tracking Internet dating of all kinds since 2004.
Instead, the opposite has happened, he said. Matchmakers not only have survived but are thriving, having been aided and legitimized by the entity that was supposed to have killed them off — the Internet.
Like social networking, which had many dating industry experts inaccurately predicting the demise of paid Internet dating sites, Internet dating hasn’t killed matchmaking, but fed it. In fact, the three go hand in hand, leading relationship-minded singles to ever higher levels of paid service.
Though social networking sites such as Facebook may bring people together and do it for free, there’s no guarantee that those brought-together people are available and looking for a relationship. And though Internet dating sites such as Yahoo Personals do a better job of bringing together singles who are motivated to get together because they are paying to find dates, they don’t always do a good job of sorting out the serious from the players, or even to help individuals select people who are truly good for them.
Personalized matchmakers promise to do just that. Of course, they also charge a higher price — anywhere from $1,000 to $100,000, depending on the exclusivity of the service, the number of matches they’ve said they’ll provide and how willing they are to go the extra mile.
“You’re the therapist, the mother, the best friend, the sister, the nonsexual girlfriend. You have to be everything,” said Patti Stanger, star of the Bravo reality TV series “The Millionaire Matchmaker” and proprietor of the L.A.-based Millionaire’s Club matchmaking service.
“It’s not good enough to say, ‘Here’s a nice girl.’ You get them a girl, they’ll sleep with that girl, cheat on the girl. Then I’ve got to get that girl back. I have to go in and do an intervention and be on call seven days a week. That’s why I get the big bucks,” said Stanger, who charges men $25,000 a year and female “millionairesses” $55,000 for 28 months of unlimited introductions. (She finds her female clients take longer to match.)
Whether it’s hooking up her clients with a personal stylist to improve their appearance or enrolling them in an improv class to get over their shyness, “there are 5 million things to do,” she said. There are more details to attend to with clients: manners, appearance, expectations. “In the old days, it was, ‘OK. I know who I’m going to give you. Here she is. Bye.”’
There are two ways to work with a matchmaker. There are the clients who pay for introductions to potential partners and the people with whom those clients are paired. In many cases, the potential partners pay nothing, having joined the matchmaker’s network for free after electronically submitting photos and personal information through a Web site. Equipped with an extensive database of singles, the matchmaker then peruses the possibilities to determine who might be a match and calls in good prospects for one-on-one interviews that help to further hone the pairing in hopes of a click.
Then comes the big unknown: chemistry. A couple could look perfect together on paper, but they can’t know until they’re face to face.
Eight years ago, an actress (who asked to remain anonymous because of what she believes is a lingering social stigma) went on a date through a matchmaking service for the first time. At the time, the then-38-year-old woman thought getting set up through a matchmaker “was crazy” but worth giving a try because she “was never very good at going to Starbucks and seeing the cute guy across the room and smiling.”
After talking on the phone for 2 ½ hours, the two agreed to meet for dinner. “There was an immediate click for me,” she said.
Four and a half months later, they were engaged. Eleven months later, they were married. They now have two kids and are getting ready to celebrate their eighth wedding anniversary.
That actress, it turns out, was part of the first marriage put together by April Beyer, founder of the 11-year-old, L.A. and San Francisco matchmaking service Beyer & Co. Working with 10 to 15 “very special bachelors” per year, each of whom pays her $40,000, Beyer’s talents have since paid off in an additional 29 “I Do’s,” a track record she attributes to understanding what a client needs, not just providing what he says he wants — like a significantly younger woman.
“A lot of times, a man doesn’t know to ask for the woman I give him,” Beyer said. “Matchmakers are not computers. Hopefully our clients are giving us the freedom to be creative and have a bit more latitude.”
That’s a very different idea from many Internet dating sites, which can’t verify all the information provided by their members and which match people based on self-selected criteria, allowing singles to choose their own partners, for better or worse. But increasingly, Internet dating is bringing in a matchmaking component.
In late 2008, Match.com expanded its hunt-and-peck model with a service called the Daily 5, delivering “five matches based on our prediction of which two people would most want to engage in a conversation together,” said Match.com Chief Executive Greg Blatt. In December, the site added yet another matchmaking feature called Singled Out, for “when we have a match with a stronger likelihood of connecting and want to highlight that to our users,” Blatt said.
“A lot of people put their relationships on the wrong course because they select the wrong people,” said Gian Gonzaga, senior director of research and development for Pasadena, Calif.-based EHarmony. “A lot of the things that are powerful forces for initial attraction are different from what makes a relationship successful.”
According to Gonzaga, attraction is important because it gets people into a relationship, but it’s the similarities between individuals that keep them together and lead to more satisfying relationships. It’s that philosophy that’s shaped EHarmony’s extensive member questionnaire and given EHarmony its reputation as the most matchmaker-like of Internet dating services.
If dating is, indeed, a numbers game, then Internet dating sites have the edge. But matchmakers have gut instincts. And for many singles, especially those with more money than time, or more discriminating criteria, or those who, for various reasons, would rather not post a photo online for the entire world to see, that’s even better.
“Women are very attracted to the concept because it’s private. They can’t be browsed,” said Julie Ferman, founder of Cupid’s Coach in Westlake Village, Calif., a matchmaking service that charges $2,500 to $25,000 annually for an average of 2.2 introductions per month and takes both women and men as paying clients.
Matchmaking is strongest among thirty-, forty- and fiftysomethings, according to Fermin. Her average client splits the difference at a median age of 46 and makes at least $50,000.
“If you’re having a hard time making rent or saving for your kid’s college education, I’m the first one to tell someone, ‘Don’t hire a personal matchmaker,’ ” Fermin said.
But if they do have money, Fermin is confident she can help. In 14 years, she says she’s formed the beginnings of more than 144 marriages.
Not everyone’s a believer.
“What smooth James Bond character with a great personal image is going to write a check to meet somebody?” asked L.A.-based dating coach David Wygant. “These men are looking for women they’ve never been able to get in their lives. They want the 27- to 31-year-old even though they’re 46 to 65. And the women, they can tell you they’re in it for love, but they’re looking for guys with money. This is not love. It’s a gold digger looking for a guy that wants eye candy.”
“Nothing is better than opening your eyes and flirting with the people in front of you,” Wygant said. “People need to get out of fantasyland and think somebody else is going to do it for them.”
That is, of course, easier said than done. And the thousands of singles using hundreds of matchmakers — ELove, It’s Just Lunch, the Millionaire’s Club — seem to prove it .
We’ve had a new wave of innovation in the online dating sphere lately: paying someone else to do your work on the dating site—Scanning for prospects, writing the first and subsequent email, even setting up dates. Without informing the recipient. The next few postings will be reprints of pieces I have found on the wire. Let me know what you think.
Online dating assistants help the lonely and busy
By Ellen McCarthy
Washington Post Staff Writer
Max Hartshorn has pretty much mastered online dating.
It took awhile, but the 24-year-old now knows exactly what kind of message to send to pique a woman’s interest. The Montreal research assistant will come home from work, sit down with his laptop and bang out dozens of e-mails to attractive, eligible women.
He’s never needy—always charming and a little flirtatious. He keeps his missives short and usually includes a question or a subtle challenge. He’s witty, a touch aloof and not overly complimentary.
And when he gets the woman, it’s not his heart that flutters. It’s his bank account.
Hartshorn is a hired gun, ghostwriting correspondence on behalf of single men unwilling, too busy or too inept to do it themselves. His online dating is done on commission for Virtual Dating Assistants, one of the first full-scale Internet-dating outsourcing companies. For $600, Virtual Dating Assistants guarantees clients two dates a month; the “executive service” package promises five dates a month for $1,200. [that’s PER MONTH—editor}
“I get paid for each woman who writes back positively,” explains the modern-day Cyrano de Bergerac. “It’s very analogous to sales . . . like a cold-caller or a telemarketer.”
A telemarketer who toils anonymously in pursuit of love for the lonely. Darkly romantic, no?
No. “I don’t care that much if it becomes a date or not,” Hartshorn admits. His job is “lead generation” only. Sealing the deal is up to the company’s “closers.”
And going out on actual dates? That, unfortunately, the men have to do all by themselves. And the women never need know who hooked them.
* * *
The great promise of online dating is this: You sit on the couch in pajamas, click through sparkling profiles of nearby singles, fire off a few quippy e-mails or a nonchalant “wink” and—ta-da!—a series of romantic rendezvous is instantly on the docket.
It’s love through a high-speed line, a model of amorous efficiency.
For Scott Valdez it worked, but the endeavor required just a little too much effort. He was working 70 or 80 hours a week in sales for a start-up technology company and traveling constantly. Every time he tried online dating, he met interesting women, but he found the process leading to the dates “really repetitive.” So he decided to outsource it.
“Why not just teach my secretary to do it?” he thought.
She didn’t have the time (or maybe the stomach?) to tend to his Internet love life, so Valdez hired a recent college grad who could write e-mails in English and Spanish. Soon he was going on five or six first dates a month.
“It worked for me,” he says. “And I knew so many people that could use the service.”
Last June, Valdez, now 25, founded Virtual Dating Assistants—a company that “specializes in making the dating dreams of busy individuals come true.”
Author Timothy Ferriss popularized the concept when he wrote about outsourcing his online dating accounts to teams of competing writers in his 2007 book, “The 4-Hour Work Week.”
Valdez’s Atlanta-based firm is hardly the only outfit to offer such services. Dozens of profile-writing shops such as Arlington County-based TargetLove have popped up in the past few years, and dating coaches are increasingly managing their clients’ online pursuits. Not to mention the well-intentioned friends and relatives who have taken over the process for the hapless singles in their lives.
But Valdez and his team of 45 freelance writers, including Hartshorn, do it all: write a client’s profile, pick out potential matches, send introductory e-mails and message back and forth until a date is confirmed. Then they turn over the correspondence and tell the lucky fellow where and when he’s meeting Madame X. (And it’s almost always that gender dynamic; 80 percent of the firm’s clients are men.)
Richard, a 39-year-old marketing executive who uses the service, would like to say, for the record: “It’s not like I really have a lot of problems dating people in the real world.” It’s just that he’s busy, splitting time among four cities, including Washington and Miami, and he figures it’s best to meet as many people as possible.
Online dating has worked for Richard, “but it’s all time-consuming,” so when he heard about Virtual Dating Assistants, it seemed like a convenient solution for an on-the-go guy. “Just from a cost-benefit analysis—me spending all this time on doing things that are purely almost secretarial doesn’t make any sense for me,” says Richard, who asked that his last name not be used because he doesn’t want colleagues or potential dates to know he uses the service.
After a lengthy phone interview three months ago, the company’s writers drafted a profile, let Richard tweak it and then started fishing for potential dates. Richard says they soon zeroed in on his preferences in terms of a woman’s looks, education and interests, and he feels satisfied that he’s being represented authentically in e-mails written on his behalf. (This has not been the case for everyone: Valdez described one client who came back from a date saying that “we maybe made him look a little too cool online.” From then on, prospective dates were given a heads-up that the man was shy.)
Richard doesn’t usually tell the women he dates that he didn’t write the e-mails they received. But when one woman wondered why he was constantly active on the site through which they met, he told her the truth: “Look, it’s not exactly like that—somebody’s actually doing this stuff for me.”
Ask Jared Gordon, the 30-year-old editor of A Bad Case of the Dates, a blog that collects dating horror stories, and he’ll tell you the practice is awful: “It is! It’s awful! You’re misrepresenting yourself. You’re lying about yourself.”
In Gordon’s mind, it’s tantamount to having someone else write your college term paper, or putting a picture of a more attractive stranger on your online dating profile. “You’re going to fall in love with someone because of their honesty,” he says. “And some people might say, ‘Who has the time to write a profile?’ But if something is that important to you, you make the time to do it.”
Richard knows some perceive it as callous outsourcing, but he feels he’s being represented authentically by his Virtual Dating Assistant. “These guys are really good at getting to know who you are,” he says. And he adds that the one time he confessed to using the service, his date didn’t seem to mind. “Once you have chemistry with somebody and they know you’re a genuinely good person—that’s really all that matters,” he says.
Mark Brooks, founder of Online Personals Watch, a site that tracks Internet dating trends, says this type of outsourcing is an ethically questionable form of “misrepresentation.” Still, he expects the field to grow.
Professional matchmakers often charge $5,000 or more a year and have a limited pool of matches. Online dating sites are populated with countless singles but can require more attention than some users are willing to devote. “It may look like instant gratification, like you dive into the pool and instantly come up with a fish, but it doesn’t really work like that,” Brooks says. “You’ve got to tap, tap, tap on the keyboard quite a lot to get anywhere.” (One site, OkCupid.com, found that a third of all first messages garner a response, though that doesn’t mean they are positive or that they lead to dates.)
But for many, it’s not just their time that’s at stake; it’s also their egos.
Luke Chao started having his receptionist send online dating e-mails for him after realizing that there was not enough administrative work for her at the hypnotherapy clinic he manages. It was a win-win, he thought, because “online dating is tedious—you have to send out 100 messages to get 10 responses. You have to go through 10 conversations to get one date, and that’s just the first date.” (Dianne Nubla, who writes Chao’s e-mails between her other tasks, says it’s “a good diversion” that she doesn’t mind.)
Chao, a 27-year-old Toronto resident, was soon dating one or two new women a week. In truth, he says, he has the time and writing ability for the task. But by having Nubla take over, he’s sidestepping the worst part of the process: being routinely rebuffed.
“Most women you e-mail don’t respond. Some look at your profile and don’t even read your message before deleting it,” he says. “That’s just the nature of the game—intellectually, I know that. But still, emotionally, I do feel a little small pain of rejection every time that happens.”
Oh dear! Sometimes I read questions and profiles that are so wrong-headed and pathetic that I just want to shake the person! Then, when someone does respond with horrible advice, it’s just “Argh!” Here’s an example below. The letter writer asks the wrong question: You can’t make any man look beyond (ie not see) something as obvious as a wheel chair. So don’t try! And online dating is the best resource ever for people with disabilities, because you can either go on a mainline dating site like Match.com, make your disability clear, but also present your strengths well and see who responds. These folks will be pre-qualified and will know what they are getting into. An even better route is a site for people with disabilities. On those sites, a disability will not be an issue, because either the others have their own, or the able bodied people who are there are ready to take on such problems.
Ask Amy: How can she get men to look past disability?
By AMY DICKINSON
June 16, 2010
Dear Amy: I am a 50-year-old woman who has never been married. I have a disability from an auto/pedestrian accident when I was 25 (I was the pedestrian).
Before my accident, I can’t seem to remember a period of longer than six months when I wasn’t dating a man. Since my accident, relationships have been few and far between.
I’ve tried just about everything—Internet dating sites, dating groups, dating services, a dating counselor (she refused my application when she found out I was in a wheelchair) and even church (the last two guys I was attracted to asked me to introduce them to two other women whom they ended up marrying).
I’ve given up looking at this point, but I truly don’t want to live the rest of my life alone. I’m pleasant to look at, a good conversationalist and have my MBA. How can I get others to look past the obvious (the chair) and see me—the person?
I live alone, own my own house, drive a car, and am out and about almost every day of the week. I’m sure you’ll make the same suggestions I usually get when I pose this question (get involved in activities you like), but maybe, just maybe, you’ll point out something the others haven’t.
Amy says: Your frustrations are common to other middle-age singletons—and you have plenty of company. According to Census statistics released in 2007, there are more than 56 million American adults who have never been married.
What you need to do is to make the life you’d want under any circumstances—traveling, forming satisfying friendships and doing fulfilling work.
It’s healthy to want to share your life with a special person, but if you didn’t find a husband, then what?
During my 17 years of adult singlehood, I developed a plan to build a house with a friend and cohabit, “Golden Girls” style. That might not appeal to you, but it got me through many a rough and lonely patch. The only twist I’d suggest is for you to find a way to stop wishing your wheelchair was invisible to others and instead celebrate the life you’re actually living. Because you adapted so well to your disability as an adult, you might find fulfillment volunteering at your local VA hospital.
My response:
Internet dating sites have become a wonderful resource for all kinds of people who don’t fit the normal, middle of the road picture. Try a dating site specifically for people with disabilities. Google disability+“dating site” and see what you get. On a dating site for people with disabilities, your wheelchair will not be a problem, and your strengths will have a chance to shine. Kathryn Lord http://www.Find-a-Sweetheart.com
OKCupid.com has been doing a great service to online dating by mining and analyzing its copious data.
OkCupid scores by teaching Matt Feb 15
4 comments Latest by Artur spychalski
You’re an online dating site. You’re going up against much bigger competitors, like Match.com, PlentyOfFish and eHarmony. You could spend big bucks on advertising and marketing. But what you’ve tried in those areas didn’t really work.
But what if you start promoting by teaching? You’ve got a treasure trove of data. What if you take a Freakonomics-esque approach to all that info and use it to answer questions and reveal surprising twists?
That’s exactly what dating site OkCupid has done at its blog with posts like The 4 Big Myths of Profile Pictures, How Your Race Affects The Messages You Get, and Exactly What To Say In A First Message.
By turning its by-product (all that data) into something useful, OkCupid is getting on more and more radars. That post debunking the conventional wisdom about profile pictures brought more than 750,000 visitors to the site and garnered 10,000 new member sign-ups, according to the company.
This article explains more:
The blog, which OkCupid started in October, has helped get the company’s name out on other blogs and social networks…Since OkCupid started its blog, the number of active site members has grown by roughly 10 percent, to 1.1 million, according to the company.
“We’ve been up for six years,” Mr. Yagan said. “We’ve only had the blog for six months. It’s a big deal for us.”
Great lesson there. What has your business taught you that’s interesting, noteworthy, or surprising? Share it with the world and get people talking.
Yahoo! announced yesterday that it is turning over its dating section Yahoo! Personals to Match.com to run. Yahoo members logging in to personals.yahoo.com got the news right off, with the home page giving out instructions and the final date: July 21. Here’s what the home page says:
Yahoo! personals is closing on July 21, 2010. But you can still find dates — get FREE personalized email matches from our trusted new partner, Match.com
It’s easy to see who’s on Match.com on Yahoo!
* Largest paid community of diverse singles in the country
* Matches are based on what’s important to you
* Matches are emailed up to three times a week for FREE
We’ll do the work for you
* We’ll move your information to Match.com on Yahoo! Details »
* You’ll start getting matches right away
I stopped recommending Yahoo a couple of years ago. The steam just seemed to go out of the site. Now Match.com really will be the place to go, the only significant competition being eHarmony and PlentyofFish.com. And for my money, I wouldn’t bother with either, even though POF is free. Match.com will be HUGE.
Wow. I love it when I see figures about how well Internet dating is doing in helping couples find love. Stats can be all over the place, but the general direction is up, up, up. As far as I am concerned, meeting online is now THE favorite method for singles to find love, and the third most frequent way newly marrying couples meet. See this article below from the Washington Post, and also click through and see the study the results come from.
Marriage-minded do better online than at bars, survey claims
By Ellen McCarthy
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, April 25, 2010
More than twice as many couples who married last year met through online dating services than at a club or social event, according to a new survey commissioned by Match.com.
The survey found that 17 percent of those who married in the past three years met online, making it the third-most-frequent method of introduction, behind meeting through a mutual acquaintance or at work or school.
“Online dating is by now a preferred way for singles to find dates,” says Joe Tracy, publisher of Online Dating Magazine. “I think the stigma that has been attached to online dating—and there’s still some of that today—has greatly decreased. Everybody knows someone who has done online dating, so people are less fearful to talk about it.”
The study, conducted by the research firm Chadwick Martin Bailey, shows how quickly online dating—in existence for less than two decades—has revolutionized the way people find and pursue potential mates.
“It does seem to have displaced all other forms of dating,” says Susan Frohlick, a cultural anthropologist at the University of Manitoba who has studied online dating. “I would say that it’s been in the last five years that it’s become hyper-mainstream.”
The survey also found that one out of five singles has dated someone they met through an online dating site and that one out of every five new relationships owes its origins to the Internet. It also claims that among recently married couples who met online, 30 percent initially made contact through Match.com. The site has about 3 million active users at any given time, according to the company.
Online dating statistics have always been hazy and are frequently contradictory. The Match.com-sponsored survey, for instance, found that 17 percent of couples who married in 2007 met through online dating sites, but a Harris Interactive poll sponsored by eHarmony found that only 9 percent of couples married that year were introduced through such services. (The Harris study claims that 2 percent of recently married American couples met through eHarmony.)
Regardless of discrepancies, the findings point to the increasingly prominent role the Web is playing in helping singles find someone with whom they want to walk down the aisle. Online Dating Magazine estimates that 120,000 U.S. couples who marry each year met online.
“It’s pretty seismic, if you think about it,” says Greg Blatt, chief executive of Dallas-based Match.com. “You’ve got this new thing out of nowhere that has really jumped in and taken on a significant piece of this basic human interaction, which is meeting people.”
Blatt attributes the industry’s growth to the rise of technology and changes in society that have made it more difficult to meet people through traditional methods. People marry later, work longer hours and live farther from family members who might introduce them to a neighbor’s handsome, eligible nephew. Laptops and modems stepped in to fill the void.
“This is just meeting,” Blatt says. “It’s no different meeting on Match than it is meeting at a party, or at a restaurant or on a subway. . . . Once you’ve met, it’s real life; you either fall for each other or you don’t. You either have a great romance or you don’t.
“It’s not like computers are taking the place of romance,” he says. “It’s just another way to put yourself in a position to meet somebody that then gives you a chance for romance.”
Figures in from the Aussies: Surveys are coming in from all over the world about the prevalence of online dating as the preferred way to look for love, and now here come the Aussies. There, one in four have used the Internet to look for love, and 37% are considering it.
One in four adults have used internet to find a mate
MARY-ANNE TOY
April 17, 2010
AUSTRALIANS are changing the way they date and mate, a survey shows. A Nielsen poll found one in four adults have used the internet to find a partner and another 38 per cent are considering using online dating.
The other 37 per cent – many presumably in relationships – said they would never go online to meet someone.
Of those who had used online dating, 33.6 per cent reported a short-term relationship, 16.2 per cent said they had a long-term relationship, 8.9 per cent said they had married or were in a defacto relationship, and 2.7 per cent had children.
RSVP.com (owned by Fairfax Media, the publisher of the Herald) commissioned Nielsen to conduct the first comprehensive survey of online dating habits. The initial results suggest that online dating is now part of the mainstream.
The survey shows that:
* Of those who had used online dating, 62 per cent had dated someone they met online;
* Men were slightly more likely than women to use online dating services; and
* Most of those polled (72 per cent) were seeking a serious relationship, but many were looking for friendship or just sex.
Nielsen polled 3057 people online in November and 3764 in January, with the data weighted to the general population.
The full results of the survey will be released later this year but NSW and Victorian data so far shows that while there were fewer NSW online daters (57.5per cent had tried online dating, compared with 64 per cent in Victoria), they appeared to be more successful.
Almost 20 per cent of NSW online daters had a serious long-term relationship, compared with 16.6 per cent in Victoria, and 8.5 per cent had married, compared with 5 per cent in Victoria. Almost a third of both Victorian and NSW online daters made a good friend whom they remained in contact with.
Asked what kind of relationship they were seeking (multiple responses were accepted), 72.7per cent nationwide said a serious, long-term relationship, 39 per cent friendship, 18.5 per cent marriage and 27 per cent casual relationships.
Of those who had used online dating, almost half had a profile and were monitoring it. Another 19 per cent had a profile but didn’t check it often and 31per cent had removed a profile.
The Fairfax Digital group marketing director, Lija Jarvis, said when she began working on RSVP four years ago, online dating was still something that was vaguely embarrassing.
“That stigma has definitely dropped because people are advocating for it, talking with their friends, sharing stories with families,” she said.
Since RSVP began tracking marriages in 2003 more than 8000 members have contacted them to report they had married someone they met online.
The poll shows that the biggest group dating online were those had been single for five or more years (38.4 per cent), followed by those who had been single for one to two years (26.7per cent), those who had been single for less than six months (17.6 per cent) and those who had been single for seven to 12 months (16.5 per cent).
The most popular dating websites among those polled were RSVP (54 per cent), Adult Match Maker (21 per cent), eHarmony (20 per cent) and Oasis Active (19per cent).
Internet dating has been a fabulous addition to any single’s tool box, but the big sites really only work for people who are relatively healthy, average to good looking, and middle of the road. If you are not that, you are out of luck. Except that market forces have spawned smaller niche sites for those who don’t fit the big guys. Here’s a bunch of sites that cater to the differently abled:
Finding love online, despite health problems
By Michael Slenske, Health.com
(Health.com)— Lana, a 38 year-old publicist in Los Angeles, California, was diagnosed with genital herpes in 1997.
Since then, she has “kind of been hiding” from the dating scene.
Let’s face it: How do you drop that bomb on a potential love interest? And when?
She considered a number of online dating venues, but she says Match.com asked too many questions on its enrollment form, eHarmony was too “religious,” and MySpace was too much of a “hookup zone.”
“I wanted to meet men with my same diagnosis so we wouldn’t [need to] have ‘the talk,’ or fear of rejection and transmitting,” she says. “Most of us with this don’t wish to spread it.”
Despite—or perhaps because of—the economic downturn, the billion-dollar online dating industry has been booming. But not everyone has felt welcome at the party.
While sites like Match.com and eHarmony don’t discriminate, they also don’t cater to people like Lana who are coping with sexually transmitted diseases, disabilities, or mental health conditions. All of these can make dating—often an ego-shattering minefield for those in perfect health—even trickier.
“On bigger dating sites the competition is tremendous,” says Jim Houran, PhD, a clinical psychologist and columnist for Online Dating Magazine. “And let’s face it, depending on what [the illness] is, it could very well make you uncompetitive in the larger dating pool.”
Fortunately, there are a number of alternatives. A new breed of dating sites has emerged to play cupid for people with chronic diseases and disabilities.
Over the past five years, several sites—such as Prescription4love.com, Nolongerlonely.com, and Cisforcupid.com—have launched to serve the needs of people with conditions ranging from bipolar disorder to Crohn’s disease. Together these sites now boast tens of thousands of members.
In addition to providing their users with a more hospitable environment, these websites defuse the tension over how and when to disclose an illness, which is often an issue for people with diseases and disabilities who venture onto mainstream dating sites.
When health problems equal heartache
After some “horrible” results on other dating websites, Lana joined Prescription 4 Love and the STD-specific site Positivesingles.com.
Both sites require members to disclose their illnesses upfront, clearing the air for what might be a deal-breaking revelation later. Within her first week on Positive Singles, she went on three dates and has since gone on seven more, which fostered one romantic relationship and a friendship over the past two years. She’s even rejected a couple dozen guys.
“I don’t think I would have been able to have 10 dates without the site,” says Lana. “It’s easier to get rejected via email, and you can take baby steps online without hunting outside.”
Though Prescription 4 Love didn’t yield any dates for Lana, this fast-growing online community offers an alternative to mainstream dating sites for thousands of singles.
Now three years old, the site currently has 8,000 members who represent nearly 40 health conditions ranging from genital herpes (2,425 members) to Tourette’s syndrome (32 members).
Ricky Durham founded Prescription 4 Love in 2006, inspired by his late brother Keith, who lived with Crohn’s disease for 15 years before passing away in 2004.
“He was a good-looking boy, and he could find dates, but when do you tell someone you have a colostomy bag? The night you go out? Two weeks after you go out?” Durham asks. “He was having a hard time with that, so I thought if he could find someone who had the same disease, or someone with a colostomy bag, he wouldn’t really have to discuss that.”
Since launching the site, Durham, 48, who previously dabbled in the stock market and worked as a bartender, was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Though he doesn’t find it appropriate to be a member of a community he founded, he says he can empathize with his members.
“It’s nice to find someone who’s going through what you’re going through,” he says.
Love for less
Niche sites are also a lot less expensive. Prescription 4 Love, which started charging in May 2009, is $9.95 per month, while most of the features on No Longer Lonely (including the dating service and chat rooms) are still free.
(Access to the site’s full features is available for $24 per year. That’s substantially cheaper than sites like Match.com and eHarmony, which can cost upwards of $35 per month.)
“To me, that’s pressure right there,” says Robert Watson, the executive director of the nonprofit dating service DateAble.org, which caters primarily to those with physical and mild psychiatric handicaps. “If it’s the 30th day of the month, you’re thinking, ‘I’ve got one more day to find someone or it’s another $35.’”
DateAble, which was founded in 1987 by a Washington, D.C., doctor who wanted to give her patients a way to combat the isolation that accompanied their physical disabilities, charges a $125 initiation fee for the first year and $25 every year thereafter.
For that fee, members get a more personalized experience, as DateAble is more akin to an old-school matchmaking service. The organization has been responsible for almost 1,000 marriages, according to Watson. As one of its first members, he should know: He met his wife, Lynn, at a DateAble Valentine’s Day party in 1988.
“I didn’t want to try it,” says Watson, who has moderate cerebral palsy and was working as a national project director for the United Cerebral Palsy Association at the time. “But I probably knew everybody in my community and nobody I knew wanted to date me or vice versa. Lynn lived 60 miles away, but we made it work.”
By pushing a “friends first” concept, which has been emulated in the communal blog and forum features of Prescription 4 Love, No Longer Lonely, and other illness-specific sites, DateAble members can get up to speed on the dating world in a familiar environment without the prying eyes of the Web.
“People with disabilities, especially developmental disabilities, are typically behind the eight ball because they haven’t had the practice of dating in college or their young adult life,” says Watson. “Many of them never had the puppy love, been broken up with, experienced the fights, or the good stuff.”
To make up for this lost time, his best bit of advice is to be totally honest. Even in our post-Americans With Disabilities Act society, notes Watson, failing to mention that you’re confined to a wheelchair or dealing with another type of handicap might bring a first date to an abrupt end after a courtesy “I’m sorry” drink.
The stigma of mental illness
People with physical disabilities aren’t the only ones who face stigma while dating. People with mental health problems, from chronic depression to schizophrenia, have also benefited from specialized sites.
Jim Leftwich, 39, a college librarian from White Plains, New York, has lived with schizoaffective disorder, a condition that combines features of schizophrenia and mood disorders (such as depression), since 1992. In 2004, after years of brushing up against the harsh realities of the dating scene, Leftwich founded No Longer Lonely, a dating site that caters to the mentally ill.
“I thought to myself, ‘There should be something like this out there,’ and I was surprised to find there wasn’t,” says Leftwich. “If you’re mentally ill, it’s kind of a hostile world out there. I thought by taking down that whole bugaboo of having an illness, making it all open with everyone knowing, it would facilitate things. People would be more trusting and relationships might be more successful.”
No Longer Lonely now has 16,000 members and a brand new interface (similar to those of social-networking sites) that allows users to upload poems, art, videos, and blogs. The site has been responsible for more than 20 marriages.
“I find with my clientele, they’re more willing to get to know someone remotely and they’re more open,” he says. “They don’t have the same kind of prejudices that people in general tend to have.”
Even though most mental illnesses can be controlled with medication, therapy, or a combination of the two, some people still view conditions such as bipolar disorder as a mark of weakness or instability.
“Even in today’s enlightened society, where acceptance and diversity are hailed as the right thing to do…mentally ill people tend to be outcasts. It’s terrible,” says Houran, who is also a former instructor of clinical psychiatry at the Southern Illinois School of Medicine.
“The minute someone knows you have a certain mental disorder, they assume it means that you’re not capable of love, or that you’re dangerous or unstable. Those are myths. Given the right care, people with mental illnesses and other medical conditions can lead very normal, functioning lives.”
Some mental illnesses—certain mood or personality disorders, for instance—could cause problems in fledgling relationships, Houran acknowledges. And especially if the relationship progresses to thoughts of marriage and kids, two partners who each have bipolar disorder, for example, could find themselves debating whether it’s safe or wise to have children.
However, says Houran, in most cases these considerations aren’t enough to forestall a relationship. “Even under the best of circumstances, people still have major relationship challenges,” he says.
For Houran, this outgrowth of illness-specific dating sites and services is a boon. “Niche sites are growing in popularity because they allow people with these very specific needs or interests to connect in a way that’s not possible on the big dating sites,” he says.
“The big dating sites are akin to Wal-Mart. You have a lot of quantity, but that doesn’t mean you’re going to find people with a lot quality in the way you define it. That being said, niche sites by their very construction tend to be very small. So I always advocate [that] people use both.”
Do you know what moved Internet dating out of the shadows and into the mainstream? 9/11. Traffic and membership on dating sites soared after the 9/11 tragedy as people yearned for more meaningful connection with others. The recent financial downturn has repeated the pattern. While none of us want another disaster, when one happens (and it will), your dating site will be the place to be as the activity jumps.
People Turn To Online Dating In Times Of Stress
Find-love-131059 OPW - Apr 12 - When you hear about tragedies such as the Polish president’s plane crash this weekend that took 100 lives, your mind tends to think of your loved ones. However, if you don’t have that special someone in your life, what do you do? History has shown that in times of crisis, be it of September 11th proportions, a devastating earthquake, or even the stock market, people tend to turn to dating sites in times of need. The stock market crash of 1998 is a perfect example of this. For example, Manhunt recorded three times as many new memberships than usual on September 29th when the stock market fell 700 points. It was the best single day in their entire history. According to Gian Gonzaga, senior research scientist at eHarmony, “It makes a lot of sense. People seek out companionship in times of stress. Studies repeatedly show that being in a relationship can help a person’s psychological and physical health.” A poll done by Opinion Research Corp. also found that younger, single people who were stressed about the economy and its impact were more likely to seek out a relationship. Thomas Enraght-Moony, former CEO of Match.com, said it best, “During these trying times, people are looking for hope in their inbox.” As an industry, we certainly do not hope for bad things to happen, but it is good for the bottom line.
A recent survey of Swedish singles ages 25-60 found that the Internet was the tops cited resource for looking for love. All the numbers I have seen lately point in the same direction: going online has moved into the lead in the mate search marathon. See below:
Single Swedes finding love on the internet
Published: 16 Apr 10
Swedes are increasingly using electricity to fuel their chemistry as 23 percent of respondents in a survey report finding love online.
Participants in the poll were asked just one question: “Where did you meet your partner?”
Websites topped the list of meeting places for those polled in the study carried out by Sifo on behalf of online dating service match.com.
“Sweden has seen a dramatic change over the last ten years. Internet dating has gone from being a marginal phenomenon to one of the most common ways of meeting people in the country,” said match.com marketing director Hanna Bergholm in a statement.
“Nordic singles have always been among the most active when it comes to internet dating but this is remarkable and incredibly gratifying.”
More traditional forms of courtship still held sway in the poll, however, with a majority of couples hooking up through friends and acquaintances, work, dinner parties and a combination of other offline scenarios.
Sifo spoke to 1,111 men and women in the 25-60 age group who had entered into a relationship over the last four years.
Where did you meet your partner?
- Via an internet dating site, 23%
- Via friends and acquaintances, 21%
- At work, 14%
- At a pub or nightclub, 13%
- At a dinner or party, 8%
- Other, 8%
- At school/university, 4%
- Through a hobby/interest, 4%
- On a trip or holiday, 3%
- In a public place, 2%
- Through a newspaper contact ad, 0%
Aha! It was only a matter of time! Chatroulette meets online dating. Chatroulette seemed to me to be only a hair’s breath away from online dating anyway, and now here’s a mashup of the two. Actually, this seems like a very good idea, though still in need of a little refinement. For instance, on the site featured here MyChanceRomance.com, the only filters are your own gender and what you are looking for. Age doesn’t come into play, and my guess is that for now, it’s going to be a young person’s game. Also, those webcams do not flatter, and we older folks need all the help we can get.
MyChanceRomance.com Brings Chatroulette to Dating
HOLLYWOOD (Hollywood Today/RPR) — Combining traditional internet dating and the novel idea of chatroulette, mychanceromance.com offers new way to log on and find love by pairing random strangers for webcam-based conversations.
Montrealers Greg Isenberg and Aaron Blauer have brought the two concepts together with mychanceromance.com, where singles can search for their perfect match through successive chats with people identified as potential mates.
MyChanceRomance, recently featured in The Huffington Post, Mashable and AOL plans to allow searches using filters for location, age, and religion, among others. Now, anyone who wants to use the chatroulette concept to find romance can do so, all without paying a cent or even having to sign-up or register in any way.
“We built mychanceromance.com for three reasons,” said Isenberg, a 21-year old computer science student at McGill University, “the lack of filters on Chatroulette; the high proportion of people nonetheless looking to find love on Chatroulette; and the inability of big dating sites like eHarmony and Match.com to successfully replicate the offline dating experience online.”. “ Yet online dating is hugely popular and is a 1.049 billion dollar a year industry. It is bigger than porn,“ says Isenberg.
“The online dating space is very static, which is unusual because the inherent way we find a date is through social interactions, such as in a bar,” said Blauer, a 21-year old business student at Concordia University. “Finding a partner on MyChanceRomance.com is natural because it’s face-to-face, real-time and has the same thrill and excitement you would get speaking to someone at a bar.”
Added Isenberg, “A reason why Chatroulette has been such a success has been the element of chance. As you click next, you never know who you will get and it’s this adrenaline rush of getting a farmer from Missouri or a high school kid from New York City, keeps users engaged. The same idea applies to us. We are seeing extremely high average time on site, because users are curious to see who will be next.”
I don’t know if Chatroulette is just another bottle rocket, zipping in and out of sight practically overnight, but it’s kind of fun for about 10 minutes. Here are two of my blog postings on it:
Chatroulette - Just a trend?
Chatroulette becomes one step less private
Chatroulette is like the ultimate extension of online dating and pairing: completely random, instantaneous pairings with anyone, anywhere, in real time and on webcam. Don’t like what you are seeing? Hit “Next!” and up comes somebody else. Sound familiar? Now, given the anonymity and the webcams, what can you expect? About every fifth random shot is some guy masturbating. Wouldn’t you know?
I found the whole thing so potentially scary that I wouldn’t even try by myself, so bribed my husband Drew and an adventurous dinner guest to try it with me. Sure enough, #2 guy was a shot of his bare midsection. But we did also chat with a fellow (clothed) in Turkey and another in Russia.
Both Drew and our friend thought the concept interesting, but wanted to be able to narrow the search to possible mutual interests. Chatroulette does not have that function. But leave it to cyberspace to come up with a solution: here it is, http://zupyo.com/ Supposedly, you can use keywords to search and find like-minded folks, anywhere and everywhere. Now, I just gave it a try (using the keyword yoga) and found nothing, so please report back your experience.
You know, when I was first starting out as a Romance Coach back in 2002, it was practically impossible to find mentions of Internet dating at all in the media, much less find any good numbers. So I am a sucker for facts and figures that relate to online dating and romance. Here’s an article that is full of numbers, some of them good and factual, some just opinions, but interesting nonetheless.
Online dating by the numbers
By Kimberly Dawn Neumann
Online dating can truly be as easy as one, two, three (i.e., create a profile, search for matches, send an email “hello”). But there are some other numbers you might want to think about when seeking a true cyber-connection. Though each person’s online process is as unique as his or her profile, check out the following by-the-numbers guidelines. Because with the right numbers in place, your online success ratio just might turn out to be a positive equation.
87 million = the number of single people in the United States.
And guess what? According to the U.S. News & World Report, nearly 40 million of those are dating online (or have at least visited an online dating site) at any given time in the last year. That kind of number definitely increases your chances of meeting someone (and should encourage you that you’re not the only single person left on the planet).
120,000 = the number of marriages per year that result from Internet matches.
In other words, the stigma is gone, gone, gone. “If you are looking for lasting love, work on your online dating program,” says Dr. Diana Kirschner, author of Love in 90 Days. Invest the time needed to create a top-notch profile, search often and reply to promising profiles.
2007 = the year midlife men and women made peace with online dating.
Dr. Kirschner says that 2007 is the year it all changed for people over 45. “More of them found lasting love through online dating as compared to the traditional method—through their network of family, coworkers and friends,” says Dr. Kirschner. “So if you are in this age group, your chances are now better online.”
100 = the maximum distance (in miles) in which you should search for serious matches.
Unless you own a private jet, emailing people 3000 miles away is just silly. “You want to keep looking within a certain mile radius and should start close by,” says dating guru David Wygant (http://www.davidwygant.com). “Don’t waste time with people when they say they want to meet somebody within 10 miles and you live 500 miles from their hometown… it’s about being efficient, and the more people you find that you can actually meet in person, the better your chances of finding a match!”
20 = the number of words you should use to describe your match.
“You don’t want people to feel they can’t measure up to a long list of qualities… you want to cast a wide net and gather many types of potential partners,” says Dr. Kirschner. “Love almost always comes in a surprise package!”
15 = the number of profile compatibility matches you should seek.
You know that thing about oil and water not mixing? Yeah, that’s why Match.com has mutual matching. You don’t have to be identical to your date, but knowing that there is some degree of compatibility in what you are seeking is a really good start. So before you email, check this little tool on the right-hand side of every profile you view and see how your compatibility odds add up. Shooting for (at minimum) 15 of the 25 criteria in common is a good gauge.
6 = the maximum number of potential dates you should chat with at once.
If you’re serious about finding a match online, keep in mind that chatting with more than six people at a time can get seriously confusing! Do yourself a favor and be a little discerning. This isn’t an all-you-can-date buffet.
5 = the number of emails you should exchange before giving out any personal information.
Remember, we live in the age of online searching, so if you give out too much info too fast, you may be giving away more about yourself than you realize. But after a couple of nice emails, feel free to move forward. “Two emails between the two of you, and by the fifth, you should say you’d like to chat over the phone,” says Laurie Puhn, J.D., author of Instant Persuasion. “It shows confidence, and there is no reason to email for weeks.”
5 = a good number of photos to post.
“You should aim for three body shots and two head shots; every single one of them has to be current,” suggests Wygant. “They need to be clearly defined and showcase who you are and what you are about.” The absolute minimum number of photos you should post? Two—one headshot and one full-body photo. Otherwise, people will think you’re hiding something.
4 = the number of weeks you should wait to contact someone again.
“Just because you contacted somebody a month ago or two months ago or three months ago, that person may not have responded because he or she may have been dating somebody else and just happened to have a picture/profile still up online,” says David Wygant. “So, it’s okay to re-contact, but don’t do it with the exact same email… type something different or ask a question. Remember, online dating is about starting a conversation!”
3 = the number of searches you should conduct per week.
You don’t have to be a fanatic about online dating to find a match, but being proactive helps. Commit to searching at least three times per week, since you never know when Mr. or Ms. Right will post a profile—and you don’t want to miss out!
3 = the maximum number of weeks before you meet in person.
“Why waste time in a fantasy email relationship with someone who turns out to have absolutely no chemistry with you?” says Dr. Kirschner. Better to find out sooner rather than later (and then have to plan an awkward escape!).
2 = the length of time in months that you should give a relationship to develop once you’ve met.
“Give promising connections at least two months to show consistently improving contact,” says Dr. Kirschner. “This is an indication, although not a guarantee, that this relationship is not just a hot encounter that will fizzle out.”
1 = the number of matches you are ultimately seeking.
Before you get frustrated or overwhelmed, keep in mind that the ultimate goal is finding just one person who is your match, whether you’re searching for a lifelong partner or just some to get to know in the weeks ahead. And the odds are in your favor… just look at the numbers!
I love to see the numbers about online dating, and here we have them compiled in a handy poster. These numbers will knock your eyes out. A figure they don’t include is a recent one that I found: that 31 percent of marrying couples between the ages of 45 and 54 met online. Incredible, huh?
Via: Online Schools
Oooh, now this is rather creepy. The anonymous feature that makes Chat Roulette so fascinating gets contaminated by Google Maps???
New Site Unmasks Chatroulette Players
By JENNA WORTHAM
I have a confession to make. I’m addicted to Chatroulette, the buzz-generating Web site created by a Russian teenager that pairs anonymous strangers with each other in a video chat room.
For me, Chatroulette offers a welcome break from the daily digital footprints I leave across the Web on sites like Twitter, Facebook and Google Buzz, where every comment, tweet and “like” is tied back to my real-world identity. Chatroulette is intended to be comfortably anonymous, and it also has the sheen of nostalgia. It’s reminiscent of my earliest encounters with the Internet – firing off messages about schoolwork and television shows in AOL chat rooms and chattering with my World of Warcraft guildmates about their families, jobs and weekend plans.
But now a service called Chatroulette Map, a mash-up of the site with Google Maps, is peeling back some of the anonymity of the users cruising through the site.
Chatroulette Map,which first bubbled up on blogs like Laughing Squid, grabs screenshots of people using the service and, using their IP address and geolocation tools, plots their location on a global map. (Note: Some images may not be work-safe.)
On one hand, Chatroulette Map offers a riveting snapshot of the people who are trying out the service. But on the other, it strips away some of the voyeuristic appeal of being able to peer into a random stranger’s home and life without revealing much information about yourself.
Of course, playing Chatroulette is not without some risk. My colleague Nick Bilton aptly described it as “speed-dating tens of thousands of perfect strangers — some clothed, some not.” The upside to Chatroulette Map is that some of those users might think twice about getting unclothed, making the service more family friendly and less jarring for its users.
On the other hand, the service raises privacy concerns for people using Chatroulette. A recent update on Chatroulette Map reads: ”We’ve decided, at least for the time being, to hide I.P. and host information as some user-identifiable information was found in some entries.”
I’ve reached out to the creators of Chatroulette Map for comment and will update if they respond.
What do you think about Chat Roulette? Is it the ultimate Facebook—faces (or nude body parts) only? Or is it a passing fancy? Seems sort of like the ultimate speed dating, could be taped by singles somehow… What do you think>
Hate ChatRoulette? Then You Hate The Internet
By Mathew Ingram
Every once in a while, a service or feature comes along that crystallizes everything people love and hate about the Internet. ChatRoulette is definitely one of those services. Plenty has been written already about the new social tool, which is a little like the Internet video version of speed dating. It was created by a 17-year-old Russian student as a lark and has exploded in popularity with as many as 50,000 simultaneous users, attracting interest from some (including Union Square Ventures investor Fred Wilson, who offered to fly the founder to New York for an interview and suggested he might invest) and revulsion from others.
The revulsion comes because of the somewhat prolific use of ChatRoulette by exhibitionists and other, er… excessively outgoing users, an experience that writer Ivor Tossell described eloquently in a recent article entitled “Click. Naked Guy. Click. Naked Guy. Click. Naked Guy.” Suffice it to say that young children — or even easily offended adults — shouldn’t be left to wander around ChatRoulette unsupervised. Tyler Coates of The Awl came up with a list of the top 25 things people said to him on ChatRoulette, which should give you some idea of what to expect.
Based on a cursory glance through this kind of material, or some of the bizarre and hilarious screenshots that have sprung up around the web, it would be easy to dismiss the service as a kind of pornographic and/or mentally deficient version of StumbleUpon (which probably should have thought of it before Andrey Ternovsky did, to be honest). But services like ChatRoulette are like a Petri dish for the social web — what they show us is frequently unappetizing, and even unhealthy, but can also give us a glimpse of what the future (or at least one version of it) might look like. In a recent post about ChatRoulette, sociologist and Internet researcher danah boyd said:
I find it difficult to respond to the fears because I find it endearing. ChatRoulette reminds me a lot of the quirkiness of the Internet that I grew up with. Like when I was a teen trolling through chatrooms, ChatRoulette is filled with all sorts of weird people.
She adds that one of the things she likes most about the service is its randomness — you never know what you are going to find when you click the “Next” button. Boyd’s fellow researcher Sarita Yardi also wrote about the service in a guest post on boyd’s blog, saying:
ChatRoulette reminds me of when people said blogging was like making a private diary public. The idea of sitting in your bedroom showing your face to anyone in the world is simultaneously anonymous yet deeply revealing. This violates almost all social norms of the offline world.
There have been other services much like ChatRoulette. One of the first things it reminded me of when I saw it was an early Internet network called CU-SeeMe, which allowed anyone with a web-cam to connect to and see anyone else. Of course, in the mid-1990s when CU-SeeMe became available, hardly anyone had a web-cam, so mostly what you got was bored university students in their IT labs. Not long afterward, however, we got the JenniCam — an always-on webcam that Jennifer Ringley set up in her dorm room that displayed whatever she was doing, from homework and sleeping to sex.
The main difference between then and now isn’t that anything radical has changed about the Internet or human nature, but a difference of scale. Instead of weak, dial-up connections to the web, broadband penetration is widespread (and likely to grow) and speeds are increasing. Streaming video is no longer something that is restricted to university students with their T1 lines. And webcams are ubiquitous as well, giving every teenager and bored retiree the equipment to jump on ChatRoulette or any other service. You think ChatRoulette is bad now? Wait until streaming video from cell phones and handhelds through services like Qik becomes commonplace.
Former SixApart executive Anil Dash said recently that ChatRoulette made him think about the power of the audience and of shared experience (however tawdry that experience might be). New York magazine also had a recent piece about how ChatRoulette sums up a lot of what is both good and bad about human behavior, both on the Internet and in the real world. As usual, the Internet finds ways of holding up a mirror so that we can see ourselves as we really are, warts and all. That mirror is getting faster, better quality, becoming more widely distributed, and yes — now includes video.
When I heard about Chat Roulette, I was both intrigue and weirded out. I could see the attraction, but it felt very scary and possibly mesmerizing. I didn’t even dare to try it while I was home alone, and I am pretty brave. So one night when Drew and I had an old friend for dinner, I talked them into joining me for a brief spin of the wheel. We chatted briefly with a man in Turkey, then Germany, then a young dude gave us the finger—I typed in “Nice finger!” but I don’t know if he hung around long enough to see it. Then we got the perennial hazard of anything anonymous and visual: a guy masturbating, nude torso only. Ah well.
Both Drew and our guest wanted something more than serendipity. They want to be able to talk to someone about a specific topic, like science or opera. That could be quite interesting, like a huge Meetup group. I sort of like the chance meetings, though. Even the masturbator.
Serendipity or celebrity: luck of the draw in internet Chat Roulette
RACHEL OLDING
A new web phenomenon pairs videochat partners across the world, writes Rachel Olding.
IN the first 10 minutes on Chat Roulette, we spoke to two Japanese teenagers in Tokyo, a party of young lads asking to do unsavoury things, an elderly American gentleman and a man in a cat suit. Surprisingly, and contrary to some reports, there were only three naked men masturbating.
Such is the luck of the draw on Chat Roulette, a website (http://www.chatroulette.com) created by a 17-year-old Russian, Andrey Ternovskiy, who revealed his identity to the world only two weeks ago.
The latest internet phenomenon pairs the user with a random videochat partner anywhere in the world. Users either talk or click ‘‘next’’ to move on to another person.
The results are sometimes serendipitous, putting you face-to-face with an interesting person, but more often they’re sexual, bizarre, awkward or all of the above.
Just four months after its inception, the site has up to 30,000 users at a time and has titillated the ever-evolving world of social networking.
‘‘It’s not new for people to talk to random strangers but what is new is the technology and the increased capacity for these selective random introductions on a global basis to happen,’’ a communications expert at the University of South Australia, Collete Snowden, said.
Unrestrained by normal boundaries of social etiquette, protected by the computer screen and emboldened by the live and unrecorded format, Chat Roulette users range from curious peeping toms to exhibitionists.
‘‘There isn’t much chatting, it’s mostly just about the shock factor,’’ said Patrick Stevenson, who logged on in a Groucho Marx disguise. His younger brother chatted to a Canadian model for two hours. Others have hit upon famous identities.
‘‘It starts off small,’’ said one user, JJ. ‘‘You have a few minutes while dinner is cooking. You figure, ‘‘Let’s go see what wacky thing I can find on here.’’ An hour later your food is burnt and you’re talking to a group of people about beer … in Switzerland.’‘
In his only interview to date, Ternovskiy told The New York Times he created the project for his friends because they were sick of video-chatting to each other.
‘‘Everyone finds his own way of using the site,’’ he said. ‘‘Some think it’s a game, others think it is a whole unknown world, others think it is a dating service. Some people are using the site in not very nice ways - I am really against that. Others do unbelievable things I could never think of.’‘
Curiosity keeps users coming back, but while opening an unmarked door can be thrilling, it can also be dangerous.
One user, Rafael Vieira, saw a man with a noose around his neck and a message that read: ‘‘It’s too late to save me, I’m at Pennsylvania St. 34.’‘
Honorary associate in the digital culture program at University of Sydney, Mark Pesce, said the site was not yet appropriate for young people.
‘‘When people get a better handle of Chat Roulette, it will become very much like YouTube, which is completely sanitised. Whether Chat Roulette or not sticks around, the idea of it will and I think people will build systems around that to make it cleaner.’‘
Internet dating is nothing but a growth industry. Disasters? People go online to look for love. The economy is in the pits? People go online to look for love. Bad weather? People go online to look for love. Holidays over? People go online to look for love. It seems any excuse will do. It’s cheaper than a date, saves time, and it works. Go for it!
Online dating soars as temperatures plunge
By Will Smale
Business reporter, BBC News
Singletons seem to be using their time stuck at home to join dating agencies
As the UK’s big chill shows no sign of ending, people appear to be seeking to raise the temperature with a bit of online romance.
With millions of Britons unable to make it into work because of the snow and ice, one of the unforeseen effects has been a reported surge in the number of people exploring website dating agencies.
Stuck at home and bored with daytime television, singletons are seemingly turning their attention to finding a new partner via their laptop, with two of the UK’s largest online dating sites both reporting a big increase in traffic over the past two days.
Mysinglefriend.com says visitors to its website soared by 55% on Tuesday alone, with its busiest time coming at 1500 rather than the traditional 2200.
Meanwhile rival site Singles365.com says its visitor numbers grew 27% across Tuesday and Wednesday compared with a year ago.
‘Icebreaker’
“January is our busiest month anyway, as many single people make it their new year’s resolution to find a partner,” says Singles365.com spokeswoman Katie Mowe.
“However, the increase in traffic over the past two days has been very unusual, as typically they are quiet days for us - we are usually busiest at weekends.
“We can only put this down to the bad weather meaning more people are staying at home. We saw a similar picture when we had snow last year, but obviously the weather is a lot worse at present so the increase has been much more marked.”
Sarah Beeny, founder of Mysinglefriend.com, says the snow was “proving to be an icebreaker for singles out there”.
“January has always been our busiest month, but this surge in traffic is unprecedented.”
The big increase in people using dating websites comes at a time when the industry is already booming.
Online websites have helped remove the stigma attached to dating agencies
According to a study by market research group Forrester Research, the number of Britons paying to use online dating agencies is set to grow from 2.6 million people in 2006 to six million by 2012, creating revenues of around £368m.
This vast increase has come as more adults are computer literate, the old stigma attached to joining dating agencies has dissipated, and the ability to join an agency via a laptop makes people more comfortable and confident to take the plunge.
However, it is not just traditional dating websites that have reported a big increase in business over the past few days.
IllicitEncounters.com - a website which provides a platform for married people to conduct affairs - says it gained a record number of new members on Wednesday, with the majority coming from areas of the country worst hit by the extreme weather, including Hampshire, Berkshire, and the wider West Country.
The firm says that over the past six days as a whole, it gained 2,567 new members, 37% more than usual, and as a result has needed to take on additional staff to cope with the rush.
“In light of these figures, I’d be interested to see how much work those working from home have actually done,” said spokeswoman Sara Hartley.
But with the bad weather set to continue into next week, many people who have found a prospective new partner via a dating website may have to wait sometime before they can actually meet up for their first date.
Yea, Spark.com! Fatties of the world, unite!
Spark.com Thinks BeautifulPeople.com Acted Ugly
New Online Dating Site Offers Free Subscription to ‘Booted Beauties’
BEVERLY HILLS, CA—(Marketwire - January 6, 2010) - Spark®.com, created by the same people behind such successful online dating sites as JDate®.com, BlackSingles.com® and ChristianMingle®.com, announced today that they will offer a free subscription to all 5,000 members ousted from BeautifulPeople.com yesterday for allegedly putting on a few holiday pounds and being “newly chubby.”
“As a company based on inclusion and creating communities where people feel comfortable and safe, we’re outraged over the widely publicized actions taken by BeautifulPeople.com,” said Adam Berger, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Spark Networks®, the parent company of Spark.com. “We created Spark.com to be a place where all are welcome and we adhere to the philosophy that any two people willing to take the time to first know themselves, and then learn about others, can improve existing relationships as well as form new and rewarding ones. We are so disappointed in how that ‘other site’ behaved, and feel the right thing to do is to offer a free one-month subscription to anyone who was kicked off that other site for putting on a few extra holiday pounds.”
To take advantage of this special offer, all people have to do is log on to Spark.com, complete a free profile and email their Spark.com username and rejection notice from the other site to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address), and they’ll receive a free one-month subscription within 24 hours.
Easily one of the LEAST attractive attributes I see in both men and women is fat phobia, followed quickly by looks snobs—those folks who look for perfection, even thought they are far from it themselves. Here’s a dating site that is a wonderful refuge for them both—fat phobics and looksists. And see what BeautifulPeople.com, a dating site that has a “strict ban on ugly people” did after the holidays. Charming, huh? At least they have a place of their own to hang out, away from the rest of us who are a bit more tolerant.
Dating site for beautiful people expels ‘fatties’ after holiday weight gain
By Mallory Simon, CNN
(CNN)—A dating site that markets itself as an elite community for beautiful people with a “strict ban on ugly people” has axed about 5,000 members for packing on the pounds during the holiday season.
The international site BeautifulPeople.com threw out members after they posted photos “revealing that they have let themselves go,” according to a company statement.
“As a business, we mourn the loss of any member, but the fact remains that our members demand the high standard of beauty be upheld,” said Robert Hintze, founder of BeautifulPeople.com. “Letting fatties roam the site is a direct threat to our business model and the very concept for which BeautifulPeople.com was founded.”
The site describes itself as an “elite online club, where every member works the door”—that is, users can join only after enough members vote them “beautiful” during the 48 hours after their profile is uploaded.
And apparently, enough beautiful people were angry that some members had enjoyed a bit too many treats during the holiday season.
So BeautifulPeople.com sent those flagged members e-mails, according to the company statement, telling them they could register again for the site when the extra pudge was gone.
“We responded to complaints by moving the newly chubby members back to the rating stage. This is the same as having them re-apply,” Greg Hodge, managing director of BeautifulPeople.com, said in a statement.
The company said it “expelled” 1,520 users from the U.S., 832 from the U.K., 533 from Canada, 510 from Poland, 425 from Germany, 402 from Italy, 323 from France, 220 from Denmark, 176 from Turkey and 88 people from Russia. In the e-mail, it gave users suggestions for boot camps and workout facilities to get themselves back in shape.
Some gave the site a shot again, hoping fellow users might not see them as the “fatties” others had.
“Their re-applications were reviewed by existing members, and only a few hundred were voted back in. Over 5,000 were rejected,” Hodge added.
Hodge admits, and has admitted from the time his company started, that his site may not be fair, but people want to date someone they are attracted to.
“Is it elitist? Yes, it is, because our members want it to be,” Hodge said when the company started out in 2005. “Is it lookist? Yes, it is, because our members want it to be. Is it PC? No, it’s not, but it’s honest.”
And on this site, beauty is certainly in the eye of the beholder; only one in five applicants is normally accepted, a company statement said.
Maintaining those standards is what the site is about, Hodge said, and that’s why people were expelled.
“Every year we see that some of our members from Western cultures eat and drink to excess over the holidays, and clearly their looks suffer,” he said in a statement. “The U.S.A. has been grossly over-indulging since Thanksgiving. It’s no wonder that so many members have been expelled from the network. We hope they will be back after shedding the festive pounds.”
Love those facts and figures. See my underlines for particularly interesting numbers about good old AshleyMadison.com I actually had someone call me up the other day, thinking that I somehow had something to do with Ashley. Only to say bad things. The only good thing I can say about AshleyMadison is that perhaps it gives married people who want to fool around a place to go. I haven’t heard so much lately about married folks trolling the dating sites and pretending to be single, so maybe Ashley is doing her job.
Marriage and divorce ... with a modern twist: PDQuotient
By John Campanelli, The Plain Dealer
(edited)
8—Percent decline in the divorce rate from 2003 to 2008 in states without constitutional bans on same-sex marriage.
20.7—Percent decline in the divorce rate from 2003 to 2008 in Massachusetts, the first state to legalize gay marriage (2004).
0.9—Percent increase in the divorce rate from 2003 to 2008 in the states with constitutional bans on same-sex marriage.
About 20—Percent of new divorce cases that contain the word “Facebook” in their petitions.
30—Percent of “singles” on online dating sites who aren’t single.
More than 4.5 million—Members of AshleyMadison.com, the dating site for married people that carries the tagline “Life is short. Have an affair.”
70—Percent of AshleyMadison.com members who are male.
I love it when I see science catching up and studying what is actually going on in the dating world. Here’s proof of what I have been saying and seeing about the use of dating sites by older singles: Underlines are mine.
Online dating more popular
NEW YORK - ANY lingering stigma about finding true love online seems to be fading, particularly among older adults, researchers found.
In a study of 175 newlywed couples scientists at Iowa State University said those who met through online dating agencies, or social networking sites, tended to be older than other couples who met through traditional ways offline.
They were also less likely to be marrying for the first time and had shorter courtships before tying the knot - 18.5 months instead of 42 months.
‘In many cases, there are real structural forces that encourage the support and use of these technologies,’ said Alicia Cast, an associate professor of sociology at the university. ‘And one of them is just structural constraints on people’s time - such as people who have kids, or have full-time jobs, or work long or extensive hours,’ she added in a statement.
But the online spouses were as attractive, intelligent and had the same self-esteem levels of the offline couples.
Prof Cast and her graduate assistant Jamie McCartney studied data on the couples over a three-year period. Twenty five couples in the study had met online. ‘My understanding is that there are very few studies that have been able to simultaneously get access to a source of couples who met through more conventional means, along with those who choose to meet people online,’ said Prof Cast.—REUTERS
I love how you can find just about anything you want on the Web, even, as we well know, Sweetie Pies. But I do have difficulty with the thought that busy people can’t make the time to manage their own love life. How do they expect to make a relationship work, with all the time that THAT takes, if they don’t even have the time to find the guy or gal in the first place? But where there is a need, a service appears. Here’s one that may work for you, if you can’t find the time to do what needs doing.
Busy Women Can Now Outsource Online Dating to VirtualDatingAssistants.com
With the loneliest time of the year right around the corner, Virtual Dating Assistants LLC, a company that has allowed men to outsource online dating since June of this year, has decided to open its doors to time-strapped women. Now busy female professionals can fully delegate their online dating duties to an expert team of virtual dating assistants for only $480/month.
Miami, FL (PRWEB) December 1, 2009—
On June 10th, Virtual Dating Assistants LLC entered the online dating scene with a unique concept. The company proposed to enable busy men to fully outsource their efforts on internet dating sites such as Match.com and OkCupid.com to a team of seasoned pros. The company’s virtual dating assistants handle everything from profile creation to online interaction and, ultimately, bring online dating offline for its male clients.
Since its initial launch, the company’s executives reportedly came to the realization that not offering to service women was a big mistake. According to Scott Valdez, Co-Founder and President of VDA, “While our service was initially designed for men, countless women have gone out of their way the past five months to make it clear to us that they could benefit from a service like ours. Once we were certain we had made a strategic error, we began testing profile strategies, emails and other factors to determine what approaches men respond to on internet dating websites. We had to make sure we were able deliver the same level of service and overall results to women before we officially opened the door.”
What we realized though, after talking to countless time-strapped women, is that they need help weeding through the masses for potential keepers. Plus, many of them want to take a proactive approach to pursuing the most eligible bachelors possible online.
That time is now. For $480 per month, the company’s virtual dating assistants will devote 40 hours towards helping busy women to identify and meet high-quality men through a variety of online dating websites.
“I had always assumed that professional men would find our service most appealing since they have to take a proactive approach and craft hundreds of customized messages to women online, which takes considerable time” remarks co-founder Mark Anderson. “What we realized though, after talking to countless time-strapped women, is that they need help weeding through the masses for potential keepers. Plus, many of them want to take a proactive approach to pursuing the most eligible bachelors possible online. Like our male clients, many female professionals simply don’t have the time to handle these difficult and time-consuming activities themselves.”
The company will guide female clients through the process of defining exactly what they are looking for in a partner (age, ethnicity, body type, physical distance, “deal breakers”, etc.) and then help them to brand themselves properly online so that they attract him. The assistants will continually weed through incoming emails (sometimes hundreds per week) looking for keepers but since the keepers aren’t always the ones doing the emailing, the assistants will also be filtering the databases of various online dating sites to find men that meet the client’s requirements. Once identified and approved by the client, the assistants will craft and send customized emails to them on the client’s behalf.
The company guarantees at least 2 dates per month that meet each client’s criteria but, based on pilot testing results, anticipates arranging an average of 6 dates per month for its female clients.
Statistics show that 58% of single women have tried online dating and that women, on average, have 30 minutes less free time each day, which means less time to devote to finding that special someone. Virtual Dating Assistants now has now opened its doors to these time-starved women looking for companionship.
ABOUT VIRTUAL DATING ASSISTANTS LLC
Virtual Dating Assistants is the first company to allow time-starved singles to outsource their online dating. The company handles everything from profile creation to online interaction and effectively brings online dating offline for its clients by setting them up with dates that meet their specifications.
The company is the brain child of Scott Valdez and his partner Mark Anderson, who originally had his virtual assistant schedule 79 first dates using online dating sites over a 12 month period. These dates eventually led Anderson to his wife and a happy family life.
For more information, view Virtual Dating Assistants’ website at: http://www.VirtualDatingAssistants.com
Erg. Ashley Madison. But here’s an article that focuses on an interesting slant, that Ashley exploits what is an essentially conservative market: those who see themselves as conservative and married, but want a little spice without upsetting the apple cart. Makes me think of our old buddies Ted Haggard and Jim Bakker. The Shakespeare quote “The lady doth protest too much, methinks,” is apt, except the lady in these cases tends to be men. Did you know that Ashley M is trying to recruit Tiger to be a spokesman? It fits their demographic.
Ashley Madison’s Conservative Values
Posted by Amanda Hess
AshleyMadison.com, an online dating site that facilitates extramarital affairs, has never been too popular among moral conservatives. Earlier this year, Deroy Murdock argued on Human Events that Ashley Madison has edged out gay marriage as the number one threat to traditional matrimony. Now, cluck-clucking conservatives won’t have to choose between the cheaters and the gays: Ashley Madison has begun marketing itself as a place where the married can pursue their same-sex attractions, too.
Ashley Madison’s gay (and bi-curious) population is modest, but growing. Worldwide, the agency hosts 4.7 million members seeking extramarital affairs. Of those, only 143,427 are seeking some same-sex action. About two-thirds of Ashley Madison’s same-sex seekers are women looking for women; one-third are men seeking men. Noel Biderman, Ashley Madison’s CEO (married, two kids), says that his service provides a necessary sexual outlet for gay men and women who are trapped within the confines of traditional marriage. “There are men and women who, for whatever reason, might have been motivated to pursue a traditional marriage because they did want to build a family,” Biderman says. “Unfortunately, in our culture, their sexuality is still at odds with that arrangement.”
In an age when marriage equality is gaining serious steam, helping closeted gays escape their repressive straight marriages seems downright altruistic. But Ashley Madison isn’t so progressive as to encourage gay men to marry each other. “They’re not looking to leave their families,” Biderman says of the same-sex contingent. “They’re looking to have this on the side.” Ashley Madison is not here to release gays from the closet—it’s here to offer them a peek outside before returning them safely to nuclear family life. Meanwhile, it invests in the repression. “I don’t want to call it ironic, because people who find this ironic assume that we’re a home-wrecking service,” Biderman says. “We’re not. We are a marriage preservation service.”
Nobody relies on the preservation of traditional marriage like Ashley Madison. Ashley Madison’s motto, “when divorce isn’t an option,” seems strange in a country where no-fault divorce makes it easy to reset one’s relationship status to single. But Ashley Madison is not designed for folks willing to ruin their home lives so transparently. The service relies entirely on secrecy and discretion—what skeptics might call “lying” and “self-delusion.” “This is not a service for people in open marriages,” says Biderman. “There are sites out there for the courageous ones—the swinger couples who have found the courage to say, ‘I love you, but I need to do something different in the bedroom,’” he says. Ashley Madison, on the other hand, is for people who “can’t voice their sexual concerns to their spouses, because they are terrified of the repercussions,” he says. “There’s this notion that people who engage in infidelity are lying and deceitful,” he says. “But people wouldn’t have to lie if these more realistic sexual options were socially acceptable.”
As soon as those “realistic sexual options” are accepted, though, Ashley Madison goes kaput. The service wouldn’t be making any money if people weren’t terrified of communicating with their spouses. Besides, secrets are hot. Ashley Madison’s branding centers around the service as a sexy, hush-hush taboo. Ashley Madison may have built an empire out of facilitating transgressions, but its continued success lies in reinforcing the traditional. Biderman’s business will only remain viable so long as its members continue to invest in conservative, heterosexual marriages which reinforce monogamy. “People have told me, ‘Oh, you should open Ashley Madison in France,’” says Biderman. “I tell them, ‘You know, I don’t think they need me.’”
To date, Ashley Madison has only identified a need in the U.S., Canada, and Australia. In order for the service to expand, Biderman has got to locate other cultures that are currently struggling between the repressive and the progressive. “Places like Brazil offer an interesting dynamic, where infidelity among men is extremely high and among women it’s much lower,” he says. “There’s no reason to believe you can’t be wildly successful there. There is an incredible opportunity for a global phenomenon.”
Biderman’s latest campaign to make this an Ashley Madison world has, so far, failed to reach its full potential. “We always thought there would be a marketplace for same-sex affairs, but it’s been difficult to cultivate it,” says Biderman. “We could probably stretch those legs further, but there are so many obstacles to advertising our brand. We have enough difficulty advertising infidelity—think about the problems we’d have marketing to same-sex infidelity. I cant even tell you one avenue where I could effectively market that.”
Ashley Madison’s target demographic —people who lead conservative lifestyles but secretly yearn for a transgressive kick—is difficult to target. Social conservatives, remember, are obligated to respond to businesses like Ashley Madison with concern, outrage, and calls for banning. Ashley Madison claims to support the institution of marriage. Other American institutions have proven less than supportive of Ashley Madison. Recently, police kicked a tanker truck advertising Ashley Madison affairs out of the city of Philadelphia. Earlier this year, an Ashley Madison commercial was deemed too hot for the Superbowl. “We’ve got the Parent Television Council saying these ads are reprehensible,” says Biderman of the Web site’s conservative backlash. “There’s this huge fear to have any sort of conversation about sex.”
As a result, Ashley Madison’s marketing strategy has attempted to awkwardly straddle the divide between the conservative and the progressive. In one television spot, targeted toward women, Ashley Madison is offered as an alternative to a life married to a sexist pig. This husband arrives to an anniversary dinner late, leaves early, and in the meantime, ogles other women and implies that his wife is fat. Cheating on this guy practically constitutes a feminist act. The ad targeted at men contains no such progressive bent. In this version, the poor man’s wife isn’t a jerk—but she’s fat, and she snores, too! This man is encouraged to cheat on his wife for more, shall we say, traditional reasons: he just wants to fuck someone else behind her back. And there’s nothing progressive about dudes doing that.
Ashley Madison’s new PR push advertising same-sex affairs may further alienate the conservative base it requires to stay relevant. Then again, perhaps the gay element is just what Ashley Madison needs to keep conservatives abreast of its services—and curious about exploring its taboos. Every time a religious conservative declares a sexual practice an affront to human decency, a new conservative kink is born.
Matchmakers, beware! And also, singles: just because the service claims to be matchmakers does not mean that you will find what you are looking for.
Woman sues dating service after several dates and no Mr. Right
CHICAGO (STNG)—A woman who signed up for a Chicago-based dating service hoping to meet her soul mate filed a lawsuit against the matchmaking company Thursday, claiming all the service brought her was heartache, disappointment and stress—and cost her $3,500.
In May, Sheena Finnegan signed a contract with Élan Relationships, which has been “Chicago’s premiere personal introduction service” for 18 years, according to its Web site.
Finnegan, who refers to herself as a “busy, professional Chicago single” whose “time constraints prohibit [her] from getting the kind of exposure necessary to find a life partner” claims she counted on Élan to find her a suitable life partner, according to the suit filed in Cook County Circuit Court Thursday.
In exchange for $3,500, the service allegedly promised Finnegan to find her “genuine, high caliber, professional” matches by setting her up with six “qualified introductions” in a six-month period, the suit alleges.
As opposed to Internet dating, Élan’s Web site claims they “value the significance of personal introductions based on true compatibility and priorities.”
In May, Finnegan met with the company’s director, Mary Harris and owner Eileen Messier for over an hour, explaining what she was looking for in a mate. Harris and Messier are also named as defendants in the suit.
On May 30, Finnegan had her first date scheduled with a man named Mark—he canceled due to “car trouble,” the suit said. On June 6, she went on a date with a man named Steve, who she felt was not a good match. On June 28, she finally met Mark—who bragged about his homes and money, which Finnegan was not pleased with. On June 20 and June 27, she was scheduled to go on a date with Chris—who canceled both times.
On June 26, Finnegan contacted Élan, asking that her membership be extended due to the cancellations. The company agreed to extend it for one month, the suit said. After a few more dates, and two more cancellations, Finnegan said she realized the men she was meeting were not serious about finding a relationship—and that one of the men did not even sign up on his own accord, someone else signed him up.
She again contacted the company, claiming the service was not what she was promised and asking for a full refund. The company refused.
Finnegan said the company’s contract was “misleading…false…fraudulent” and did not make any favorable matches for her. The suit claims Finnegan endured heartache, stress and disappointment and has nothing to show for the $3,500 she spent trying to find a committed relationship.
The suit accuses Élan, Harris and Messier of breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud, deceptive business practices, intentional misrepresentation of material fact and negligence. The eight-count suit asks for an unspecified amount of money in damages as well as an injunction to prevent Élan from continuing to practice deceitful business techniques.
Anyone who reads what I write for more than five minutes knows that I say “Don’t be cheap with your future—pay the bucks and join a good dating site.” Match.com is my favorite. But the free Plentyoffish.com is now the industry leader and there must be reasons why, beyond free. Here’s a report below by Dave Evans who writes Online Dating Insider. He critiques from the inside, actually using PlentyofFish for a few months. Markus is the developer and owner of PlentyofFish, which has made him marvelously wealthy on ad revenue alone. I’ve underlined in the article what I think is particularly interesting in Dave’s report.
Free Dating Overtakes Paid Subscriptions, Now What?
by David Evans on September 24, 2009
Markus at Plentyoffish let me know about his post today, Worlds top dating sites for August from comscore.
I’ve stopped using paid dating sites for a few months to gauge firsthand how effective free dating sites are. Basically I’ve been on Facebook dating apps, Plentyoffish and OKCupid. Someone asked me about mobile apps recently. I personaly don’t use mobile apps for the most part. Why squint at the screen when I can go home and view on a 24″ monitor. I’m not in that much of a rush to get a date. I know, thats just me, but mobile clones of the desktop just aren’t interesting anymore.
Based on a few months on Plentyoffish, here are a few personal observations, some of which go against what I’ve been saying for years, but things change as the online dating industry evolves.
I wouldn’t date 98% of the women on Plentyoffish, but the 2% I would date is getting to be a huge number and I can’t avoid this anymore. There seems to be a lot more attractive women on the site compared to a few years ago. Some people are going to hate me for saying that but it’s true.
Match says you are paying for customer service. Sure Markus has lots of complaints in the forums but if you don’t get in trouble and act accordingly, who needs customer service? How much customer service is related to billing at a site like Match or eHarmony? Can a free site with no paid help deliver results like a free site? I used to think not, and the fact is that people pay for assistance. Would you buy a free car if there wasn’t a dealership to take it to?
Plentyoffish is like crack, the whole site is built to keep you clicking on faces through a variety of means. The embarrassing “people who haven’t gotten email in 24 hours” display and the constant barrage of photos on every page keeps me clicking like crazy.
The more you click the more likely you are to come across someone you want to meet. This is what kills eHarmony. I’m hearing of people getting 7 matches a month, which is ridiculous.
I end up clicking on a lot of Plentyoffish profiles because so many women (men too) have terrible photos or one blurry photo and that has me moving on without a glance. If a photo isn’t up to par, it should be removed. I don’t know how that would be measured but it sure would help. I would also outlaw people who hold camera in front of themselves in bathroom mirror photos, personal pet peeve. Women, go ahead and continue to show too much cleavage on Plentyoffish. That’s why many men consider it a pickup site. If I could filter on women in suggestive poses I would, because they are 99.999% of the time not my type.
So what if the freemium model at Plentyoffish isn’t compelling? Does it really matter? I’m the first to admit that I sometimes need to get off my high horse when it comes to the perceived quality of dating sites. Most people just want a date and could care less what a site looks like or functions. They just want to be discovered.
A few constructive criticisms that no doubt Markus can refute. I am completely aware that on many sites, things that don’t make sense to me, or seem broken, are actually designed that way on purpose. This is why having access to dating site statistics is so incredibly important and why it’s unfortunate that generic dating sites never do anything with the wealth of information at their fingertips.
Fix the photo system, the display doesn’t work very well, I’m always mousing over the photos and having to readjust to view the profile. Go browse a few people and you’ll see what I mean.
The profile layout needs to be redone. Put everything above the fold, don’t make me scroll down on each and every profile. Match is brilliant, you see everything you need to see immediately. On Plentyoffish I have to focus, scan, scroll and interpret the text, which is a pain and takes too much time. Markus can afford a designer now, change the serious member logo, it’s awful. This is why I am not a designer and I outsource all client User Experience and UI stuff to Thought-Rocket. If it was up to me everything would have lots of whitespace around it and look like it was designed in Europe.
I despise the big-boobed ads for human pheromones next to every single woman’s photos. That’s tacky and crass. The crap-tastic ads for the competition are getting stale as well. Then again, I’ve been looking at the site for five years inside my little bubble. People will put up with a lot of junk if something is free.
I’m amazed at the amount of traffic Plentyoffish is getting, north of 100 million visits a month I believe. And the visits per month kicks everyone else off the chart. These numbers are so much higher than Compete reports it’s ridiculous, although Quantcast seems to peg them at 200 million monthly visitors.
The exact numbers don’t matter, what matters is that Plentyoffish is destroying the free dating competition and paid dating will now always be a smaller market than free. This doesn’t mean that free is better, just, free, which is enough of a value proposition for millions of singles to join free dating sites. There will always be those who will gladly pay for the privilege of meeting online for many other reasons. Do you want to go to a KOA Campground or a boutique hotel? The choice is yours to make.
Food for thought: anyone can go buy a boatload of traffic like Singlesnet and True and get into the top ten dating site list. How can we as an industry gauge how good a dating site is when not taking traffic into account as the sole metric by which success is measured?
|
|
