The Widening Gap between Dating Sites As The Market Matures

by David Evans on April 2, 2009   in Dating Software, Innovation, Personality Testing, Research, Social Networking, Startups, Technology, Traffic

Niche dating sites can be incredibly effective if you’re Jewish, Black, Gay, Athletic or belong to any number of groups where it makes sense to self-identify as part of a particular group of people. Matchmaker was the first site to have many different demographic areas broken out inside a single dating site, but Date.com merged everything into one database when they acquired the site.

These days I’m increasingly interested in how large dating sites are taking advantage of the staggering amount of information the collect about their users. Large dating sites are spending tens of millions of dollars logging, storing, analyzing and refining compatibility algorithms on multi-terabyte data sets based on what users is doing on their sites. Data such as the number of emails being sent and responded to daily and hundreds of other metrics and measurements are being captured, at least I hope they are.

Smaller sub-500,000 member niche dating sites are simply not able to compete when it comes to designing compatibility algorithms and dynamic content display. They have to think smarter about which data to collect and how to feed back what they learn about how people use their site in an ongoing incremental update process. Dating sites are not set-it-and-forget-it enterprises, although this is how much of the industry views itself.

Building a quick site turning on the marketing dollars and watching the money pour in works for a few sites, but is not the golden rule by any means when it comes to competing in today’s crowded marketplace.

The widening gap between niche sites and mainstream dating sites reminds me of when Google was starting to get traction. There was Alta Vista, HotBot, Dogpile and 25 other search engines. In the past 5-7 years the majority of them having fallen by the wayside as Google has risen to prominence. This has not been the case in the online dating industry, yet.

Downloading a dating platform and rolling the dice with a few thousand dollars is almost certainly a recipe for disaster in today’s market. This is not to denigrate dating platform providers. On the contrary, I think there is a lot of room for groundbreaking sites to rise up and take market share from slack dating site operators. but what I’m hearing from people day in and day out is a lack of innovative though in regards to what singles are looking for in a dating site these days and the platform providers are simply providing just that, a platform. That’s where I come in as a consultant.

Dating sites are simply starting up all over the place these days as they try and cash in on the recession-based surge the media has done such a good job mis-reporting.

Lately I’ve noticed that most dating software vendors are reticent about discussing their businesses and that more and more people are building sites themselves, either through software platforms or White Label Dating. I still get 10-20 emails a week from startups, but now they are looking for free feedback on their concept, not the multi-month engagements of the past where I work with them to refine their business models and deal with the 87 issues any dating site startup needs to address in order to be successful.

If the industry is at the point where anyone can launch a dating site or become a pseudo-affiliate of White Label Dating, where is the interesting stuff happening? These days the action and interesting stuff tends to be happening at the top ten dating sites. Thats where the real innovation and growth is occurring, along with one heck of a steep learning curve. And that’s where my focus is moving towards as well.

Lately I’ve been reading more stories like these:

Is Big Data at a tipping point?

Online dating: Your profile’s long, scary shelf life

How Google and Facebook are using R:

Itamar Rosenn at Facebook conveyed how Facebook’s Data Team used R in 2007 to answer two questions about new users: (i) which data points predict whether a user will stay? and (ii) if they stay, which data points predict how active they’ll be after three months?

For the first question, Itamar’s team used recursive partitioning (via the rpart package) to infer that just two data points are significantly predictive of whether a user remains on Facebook: (i) having more than one session as a new user, and (ii) entering basic profile information.

For the second question, they fit the data to a logistic model using a least angle regression approach (via the lars package), and found that activity at three months was predicted by variables related to three classes of behavior: (i) how often a user was reached out to by others, (ii) frequency of third party application use, and (iii) what Itamar termed “receptiveness” — related to how forthcoming a user was on the site.

Facebook’s “In-House Sociologist” Shares Stats on Users’ Social Behavior

These stories may seem to have little to do with online dating, but as a whole they can be seen as incredibly inspiring when viewed from the perspective of someone running an established dating site or looking to start one.

One one end of the spectrum we have bare-bones sites like SinglesNet at the top of the charts, both for traffic and consumer complaints. On the other end we have analysis-driven dating sites like Chemistry and eHarmony (both with their share of complaints as well) leading the charge into massively scalable dating sites able to match members heuristically.

In between we have the niche sites making a tidy profit for a handful of companies focused on satisfying customer demand and hopefully having a good time while they do it.

Then we have the startups, which range from naive to incredibly thoughtful when it comes to business models, marketing plans and expectations. See above.

Each sector of the online dating industry has is own set of issues and objectives but all share these common goals: Attracting members, converting them and then retaining them for as long as possible. This in effect is the essence of online dating and of the work I perform, day in and day out, for five years and counting. These goals will not change anytime soon, but the strategy, execution and resources required the achieve them are evolving drastically. That’s what I attempt to discuss here in the hopes that the online dating industry values my effort and insight enough to warrant hiring me.

As compatibility matching and the systems required to support millions of members continue to increase in complexity, the number of dating site able to compete is going to shrink. This will lead to consolidation, with a few Googles MSN Seach and Ask.com’s in play and then a tier of niche sites catering to 500,000-people communities based on age, sexuality and interest. The rest of the market will solider along, strong enough to live on shoestring budgets and clever marketing campaigns. I think this is exactly where the market needs to go, but the timeline in which this will happen is anyone’s guess.

Anyone who disagrees should go read up on Facebook’s growth, the small number of social networks and the consumer revolt against myriad profiles and demand for simplicity. Online dating is different from social networking in many ways, but the writing is on the wall. What do you think?

Sharing:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Digg
  • email

Related Posts

Dating Industry Market Size
Thoughts on Niche Dating Sites
MySpace Launches “My Ads” Self Serve Ad Platform
Update Dating Profiles With Facebook Status Messages
Warehouse dating

{ 1 trackback }

Thoughts on Niche Dating Sites | ZikBlog
January 13, 2010 at 5:55 am

{ 16 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Jonas Cronfeld April 2, 2009 at 1:54 pm

At dating.co.uk we’re not trying to “retain them for as long as possible”.

We’re trying to make them come in, fall in lave and get out as fast as possible :-)

I think we need more CEO’s with heart in this industry.

Of course it’s logical that you need to keep people longer to make money – but it’s such a creepy strategy in a business that’s about getting people together.

I hope and believe that doing what’s best for our customers will pay of in the end.

All the best,
Jonas
Co-founder, Dating.co.uk

Reply

2 EuropeanKiss April 2, 2009 at 3:16 pm

Jonas,

I agree with you!

There are so many dishonest dating site owners, that it makes me work harder. Dating sites are not about traffic or number of members, its about quality members that actually succeed in meeting their special someone.

Tony
EuropeanKiss.org

Reply

3 Your Royal Flyness April 2, 2009 at 3:24 pm

What very few people are talking about is dating via social networking sites. Unlike many of these “professional” services, sites like MySpace and Facebook are free and are the means at which millions of people have and continue to hook up all around the world. Personally, I’ve met hundreds of women online.

Check out my clips at http://www.youtube.com/flynesspublishing (18+ recommended) and http://www.MySpaceToMyPlace.com

Flyness

Reply

4 Fernando Ardenghi April 2, 2009 at 4:39 pm

“Large dating sites are spending tens of millions of dollars logging, storing, analyzing and refining compatibility algorithms on multi-terabyte data sets based on what users is doing on their sites.”

refining compatibility algorithms?
Ha, ha ha ha ha

That is what you believe.
OR
That is what they want you to believe.

Online dating sites offering compatibility matching methods are only fueled by big marketing budgets /expenditures (over USD 90 million per year) and not by serious scientific evidence.

eHarmony Labs is only a smoke curtain.
“Why Him? Why Her?: Finding Real Love By Understanding Your Personality Type” Dr. Helen Fisher’s new book is another smoke curtain.

Sites like eHarmony, Chemistry and others SHOULD prove they can match persons who will have more stable and satisfying relationships than couples matched by chance, astrological destiny, personal preferences, searching on one’s own, or other technique as the control group in a peer_reviewed Scientifc Paper.

Compatibility matching methods have a “sound barrier” named MORE precision than anyone can achieve by searching on one’s own!
Compatibility should be expressed with an integer and at least 8 decimals to “break/cross” that barrier.
E.g. for a prospective male customer (sample but calculated with real values)
“Over 1,000,000 million women database, here is the list of the 12 more compatible with you. Notice that woman#1 is the most compatible but she could be more compatible with other men right now.
woman#01 is 95.58476277% compatible
woman#02 is 95.56224356% compatible
woman#03 is 95.52998273% compatible
woman#04 is 94.18354278% compatible
woman#05 is 93.00453871% compatible
woman#06 is 93.00007524% compatible
woman#07 is 92.99738452% compatible
woman#08 is 92.37945551% compatible
woman#09 is 92.29779173% compatible
woman#10 is 92.27114287% compatible
woman#11 is 92.19515551% compatible
woman#12 is 92.12249558% compatible”

Actual sites offering compatibility matching methods: eHarmony, True, PerfectMatch, Chemistry, Yahoo!Personals -WeAttract-, PlentyOfFishChemistryPredictor, Be2, MeeticAffinity, Parship, BasisNote, ScientificMatch, Genepartner and others are reaching LESS precision than anyone can achieve by searching on one’s own!

——————-

“The widening gap between niche sites and mainstream dating sites reminds me of when Google was starting to get traction”

Wait and see.
I think Match and Chemistry had reached its operating ceiling! No matter what bells, whistles, horns, drums or other pyrotechnic devices they try, they are not going to reach and sustain more than 2,000,000 paying subscribers.

Regards,

Fernando Ardenghi.
Buenos Aires.
Argentina.
ardenghifer@gmail.com

Reply

5 David Evans April 2, 2009 at 4:45 pm

Number of people married off at eHarmony, 2% of all marriages.
Number of people married by Fernando’s mystery algorithm, 0.
Just saying.

Reply

6 casualencounters.com/blog/ April 2, 2009 at 4:52 pm

EuropeanKiss, if they meet them you lose their business. It’s a business. Do you want to stay in business?

Reply

7 Samuel Agboola April 2, 2009 at 7:20 pm

@ David.

I think Fernando’s mostly right (eHarmony’s 2% number is highly suspect and – without far better verification than a marketing driven survey they themselves commissioned – should be treated, at best, as self-serving. It’s also worth noting that with a 50% divorce rate marriage is a questionable marker of success.)

To the main point, the problem dating sites have is a lack of useful innovation. What the dating industry is missing is disruptive change. Challenges to the old assumptions about people’s wants and desires. A recognition that customer surveys don’t lead to invention.

Ask people how they want to improve the iPhone and they’ll tell you to make it needs a keyboard, a pointer or trackball and all the other stuff which differentiate it from a Blackberry. Ask people how to improve a Porsche and they’ll ask for more space, a smoother ride and more seats – or a Volvo as it’s otherwise known. The big dating sites have been on this path for years. They’re reacting to users who won’t know what they want because it doesn’t exist. Asking them for advice is like appointing them as creatives – pointless.

At Vooji we’ve taken a different approach, starting with a clean-sheet, not based in emulating, or fitting in with, any dating site cliches. There’s a lot our site won’t do or even allow but what it does do is exciting, fresh and unique. You might not like it but some people will love it. That’s a far better position to be in than trying to appeal to large numbers of people already satisfied with the status quo.

The clones will cannibalize each other and the innovators will thrive. That most dating site CEO’s don’t even recognize sites like IMVU as competition shows how narrow most people’s vision of online dating has become.

Reply

8 David Evans April 2, 2009 at 7:35 pm

Samuel, you’re missing the point, Fernando has been attacking all compatibility matching systems for years and yet his solution has yet to match a single couple. All I’m saying is put up or chill out. Throwing a ton of math at us in a comment is counterproductive and after the 75th time it gets old.

The primary disruption in the online dating space are mobile players and those bolting on dating app to Facebook. These are the only companies with access to the venture capital required to change the game significantly. Organic growth just doesn’t do it anymore.

IMVU is not competition for dating, it’s an avatar place for young adults.

Your dating site atm is a blog and it’s current post talks about fuc^&ing women. that said, you do have a few good posts but first impressions are key and you lost me already.

Mobile dating will have its day, then video dating, in this order.

Reply

9 Sam Moorcroft April 2, 2009 at 9:58 pm

My observation about dating posts and comments is that there are two types, which (mostly) pass each other in the night.

1. The “art” of the space, as in, the look, feel, algorithms, feature sets and innovation strategies, etc.

2. The “business” of dating, as in, making $$.

So, we have people talking past each other, over and under each other’s heads, getting frustrated on occassion, then the odd post which never seems to make *any* sense, coming way out in left field somewhere (ahem, Fernando, cough cough), and so on.

Yes, it would be nice to have better sites and those *few* of us (who actually *make* serious money, and don’t just talk about it as if it is something that really doesn’t matter, as if we are somehow above that) in the space are constantly looking at ways to do this. But, we are driven (mostly) by the market and *not* by some quest to have the coolest, cutting edge site for art’s sake. Well, ok, some of us are, but we wouldn’t be doing all that if we weren’t successful financially.

I find it amusing watching all these people out there prancing on about this thing or that which has to be done or else we are going to disappear(!), because they are clearly experts and we are clueless. Yes, the few of who actually make any money are clueless.

Ahh, art and business. Never the twain shall meet;-)

Reply

10 Jonas Cronfeld April 3, 2009 at 1:59 am

@ casualencounters.com/blog/

That’s like a doctor saying his plan is NOT to help his clients get well – and that’s just plain sick! Or the auto mechanic intentionally leaving some parts broking, so he’ll know they’ll come back. Dooooh!

All the best,

Jonas
Co-founder, Dating.co.uk

Reply

11 Mark Brooks April 3, 2009 at 6:18 am

Forget pareto. The top 10% of dating sites account for 90% of the traffic these days.

Any dating service that is resting on its laurels at this stage won’t be around in 6 months.

Reply

12 Jackie April 3, 2009 at 9:44 am

Fernando has been attacking all compatibility matching systems for years and yet his solution has yet to match a single couple. All I’m saying is put up or chill out. Throwing a ton of math at us in a comment is counterproductive and after the 75th time it gets old.

Couldn’t agree with you more!!!

Reply

13 Jackie April 3, 2009 at 10:24 am

Fernando has been attacking all compatibility matching systems for years and yet his solution has yet to match a single couple. All I’m saying is put up or chill out. Throwing a ton of math at us in a comment is counterproductive and after the 75th time it gets old.

Couldn’t agree with you more!!!
Oops…forgot to say great post! Looking forward to your next one.

Reply

14 Kamran April 4, 2009 at 12:54 am

I know what you mean about difficulties getting traction. I started my site two years ago. A typical site would not be able to start without lots of promotion money. I went back to the drawing board and am adding some options that I think are innovative (which goes back to your point). Unfortunately, software development is just too time intensive and has taken a long time adding those options.

Reply

15 Pemo Theodore May 7, 2009 at 1:41 pm

A bit late to the party – sorry – but I would like to second Jonas’s comment. Please could we have more CEOs of dating sites with heart and vision! Money isnt all there is to any business and making sure that your customers have lots of support to find a good match means that your site gets credibility and therefore more customers. Its very short sighted & basically greedy to rip people off where their hearts are concerned! Great post Dave, yet again, thanks Pemo

Reply

16 EuropeanKiss May 7, 2009 at 2:02 pm

Pemo,

I agree! I’m the CEO of EuropeanKIss and have been working very hard in gaining trust in users, making sure any support or help inquires are answered promptly and filtering scammers and spammers.

Most dating sites are full of scammers, spammers, fake profiles and very bad designed, because they don’t care about the users, they care about $$.

Don’t get me wrong, yes online dating is a business, but as in any business (online or off) they need to be done in a customer is always right fashion, because any trused business brings back more business in new customers or repeat customers (Users)

Tony
EuropeanKiss

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: