Comments on: iDate LA Session Review

By: Allen Spindel

Allen Spindel — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 06:27:17 +0000

Hello David,
Nice Comment on members flocking to a new site that performs better. Totally agree. What do you think about the report from Mr. Brooks about successful dating sites having both a free and paid platform?
As COO of Janis Spindel Serious Matchmaking Inc., we are building such a platform that does just that, while maintaining Janis’ 21 year business model of being the most exclusive and expensive paid online matchmaking site.
Would love to hear your professional comment. I believe you and Janis met at the last conference? Sharing is caring. Thanks. Allen

By: Trackback

Trackback — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 02:10:39 +0000

Trackback message
Title: computer dating
Excerpt: Itâ€™ s easy advice, but that simplicity can be deceitful. Lesbians and gays looking to date online should have a clear concept of what they desire without limiting themselves so much that they prompt failure. You will have a leaning towards black hair and blue eyes, but is a redhead really a deal breaker? And while your obscure hobby could be necessary to you, is it something that you expect a potential date or pal to share so much that youâ€™ ve got to mention it in your profile? Itâ€™ s best to spend a bit…
Blog name: computer dating

By: David Evans

David Evans — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:58:56 +0000

The $83k number is interesting. I wonder what the cost-per-marriage is?

The capital required to develop dating services aside, I see people paying a small amount of money to buy into these new types of dating sites. That denotes quality in people’s minds, and if people are not willing to shell out a few bucks to find a date with a superior system, well maybe they shouldn’t be on the site in the first place. I’m talking $5-10 per month here.

My feeling has always been that the sharp decline in revenue would be offset by enormous amounts of new online daters who would flock to new services which actually performed better than the current crop. 3 million pay for dating out of 90 million singles, don’t you think that number can go up?

By: Markus Frind

Markus Frind — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 03:23:38 +0000

“but the only way to pay for these new types of dating sites is subscription based.”

Why on earth would that be? Match.com already makes $83,000 off every marriage generated on their site. NO paid dating site has a interest in actually hooking people up as it would mean a sharp decline in revenues.

By: David Evans

David Evans — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 18:10:57 +0000

The availability of freely accessible profiles would fundamentally affect member acquisition costs. The issue then becomes “how do I protect myself from crazy people and spammers”.

There will always be free dating, but the only way to pay for these new types of dating sites is subscription based.

Maybe it’s free to browse, pay to contact, pay more to take advantage of search, matching etc. But everyone is in the same giant database. You can still have niches, but key profile fields are standardized across sites.

By: mauricev

mauricev — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 05:12:13 +0000

What irony! Dave, here http://onlinedatingpost.com/archives/2009/02/one-person-one-profle/ you said FaceBook was the way to go get universal open profiles, and you hinted “something” would happen this year, but if Zoosk isn’t allowed to extract even just clerical data from it, how can this possibly happen?

(This is the perfect opportunity for OKCupid to break out become the iPhone of the dating world. Separate the profiles from the search and mail and publish them as the open profile standard.)

By: Markus

Markus — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:04:04 +0000

Singlesnet saw its traffic decline nearly 50% in 3 months… Zoosk seems to be the site to watch now.