I have just launched my dating website, Wink2date and Wink2play we have had an okay start, doing fairly well and we also have a data base since 2001 so that’s great! come and check us out at http://www.wink2date.co.uk

Many Thanks

Phil

You can get traffic easily by spamming people, putting up dumb posts everywhere that trick people into coming to your site.

If you’re looking to attract visitors that might actually convert to members: You start with a quality site that is differentiated from your competitors, you target the right audience with good PR, good social media and a lot of ad spend. Finally, you create a good landing page that clearly explains your site and why it’s superior / why they want to join and finally, a sign up process that’s easy to complete.

Sure, sites like OKCupid may be growing, but what does that have to do with the paid sites? Which of them are losing business to free sites? I have always argued that never the twain shall meet. Well, there *is* some cross-over, but it is tiny.

Those who are serious use paid sites and those less-so use free ones. And, it is not like paid sites cost a lot. We are talking about a potential spouse for what, roughly 30 cents a day (on an annual plan) to a dollar a day (on a monthly plan) for most sites?

Funny how people spend $1.50 to $5.00 on a coffee/latte/whatever drink a day, but can’t find 30 cents to a buck to meet their soul mate! Talk about misplaced priorities.

We are not talking $5,000 annually – online dating isn’t a matchmaking deal.

Once this wretched recession is finally over (a year from now? Two years? Who knows, with this one), you watch what happens to the paid sites (those of us who survived and are super strong): revenue will be terrific.

As for the free ones, there will always be a market for them.

As for Match, according to Sam (Yagan), is known to 90% of the singles in US, which he said was approximately 40 million people. (He was quoting researched statistics, but I don’t have the sources.) Match has two choices to make more revenue as I see them – 1) Improve conversion rates 2) Improve their ability to earn money from the non-paid members. I believe they tried this with Stir and Downtoearth (both of which failed). So, while they’re doing a REALLY solid business, with the exception of acquisitions or improved conversion rates, they’re going to have trouble growing further.

As for the rest, eHarmony has had its PR problems, Spark Networks is having its problems trying to grow its non-JDate brands, POF is diluting its brand (I think) with it’s eVow…. All the while, OK Cupid does seem to be getting stronger, not weaker. Other new sites are popping up, but are they going to retain users or just experience a rush of new members who leave the site two months later?

My question would be though — what happens when we exit the recession. It’s my understanding (based anecdotes, not facts) that prior to the recession, OK Cupid catered more towards younger daters, or those not looking for a serious relationship and/or marriage. I think OKC benefited from the recession by having people join the site that wouldn’t have previously joined. I wonder if that trend will continue after the recession ends, or whether people will go back to paid sites.

That said, something definitely needs to be done in relation to how the industry’s freemium models operate. Personally, I believe that there needs to be more transparency.

Sorry for the long rant.

Re: Sam Yagan from OKCupid – he’s a smart guy and has a snazzy dating site. However, before taking over the business (if you mean becoming the top free dating site – and putting paid to paid dating, if I can use a pun here), he first needs to catch up to Markus and POF. OKC is only a fraction of POF’s size. He’s the Apple of dating and Markus is the PC.

And, he needs to put a serious dent into that $300M or so each that eHarmony and Match are generating each and every year – not to mention all the other sites earning decent revenue, whether large or small.

Back to our new friend Michael Kamen (aka retro-abortion) here: please tell us your invention is actually beneficial. That Segway thing was a bust.

As for OK Cupid, I won’t argue. It’s one of the best sites out there. Before OK Cupid, a different site was the best one out there. It’s the way things work.

As for being a data aggregator or some sort of “travelocity” for dating. Good luck with that, if that’s your goal. Dave Evans has only talked about a “meta-dating” site about 5 times over the past few years. The biggest issue isn’t even the ability to get the profiles from all of the various sources. In some respects, that’s the easy part. The downside is if you aggregate a Match.com profile, I still need to be a Match.com member to write to that person… SO… unless you can get Match to let you send a message to a Match member on a “pay per action” format, I think you’ll have trouble.

But most importantly, enough of this futility talking about our fatal mistakes — get off your ass, get your product out there, and stop hiding behind an anonymous ID. Until then, we won’t know whether your product with be the new darling baby in the industry, or just an abortion. (You’re not the only one who can play on words.)

p.s. As for someone stealing your ideas, I prefer a quote from Howard Aiken (American computer engineer and mathematician) “Don’t worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you’ll have to ram them down people’s throats.”