If you’re looking for a date, do you use Facebook or Match.com? If you’re young and hip (or at least, you know, cheap), you probably said Facebook: which is exactly what online dating services are afraid of.
As the unpersonals evolve, what’s the benefit of paying to play? We can think of more than a few reasons: pay sites offer access to a pool of people specifically interested in dating and mating, while unpersonals simply offer access to a pool of people. Personals profiles tend to offer up exactly the information you’d want about a potential partner, whereas unpersonals profiles tend to be more free form. And, of course, personals have those snazzy matching algorithms. Which, uh, may or may not work. But still.
We’re pretty sure that pay personals are in it for the long haul — sure, they’ll have to grow and evolve in order to keep their audience, but can’t the same be said of any business?
[Photo by jeffsand]
-
What is Boinkology?
Insightful analysis of sex, relationships, dating - and everything in between.
Popular Posts:
-
Most Discussed:
RSS
Comments
Unpersonals will win, hands down. People like free!
February 19th, 2008 at 1:56 pmI like unpersonals because 1) they’re free (unlike most personal sites) and 2) I haven’t met creepy people on most unpersonals yet (unlike free personal sites like OK Cupid and Plenty of Fish).
February 19th, 2008 at 2:39 pmUnpersonals all the way! I hate being charged to send messages and the pool of people on dating sites - while they are looking for dates - is often much different than that on other social sites.
I won’t call them desperate because I have had ads myself on all sorts of sites, but they’re people who are actively seeking a relationship.. and I’ve found that the relationship itself is often much better when you just meet someone you click with and THEN pursue a relationship rather than looking for someone who’s looking for someone.
February 19th, 2008 at 2:53 pmOKCupid has been free since its inception, offers a pool of people nominally interested in dating, and isn’t pay to play. Oh, and it has a snazzy matching algorithm that generates pretty Javascript graphs.
February 19th, 2008 at 3:11 pmG M:
I still think of OKCupid as an unpersonal, largely because it has the quizzes and games that allow people to join the site while still claiming that they’re not there for the dating.
Also it’s free. Free!
February 19th, 2008 at 3:26 pmLux: Hence I say ‘nominally’ interested in dating. We all know the rule that there are no girls on the Internet. Hence when one peeks her head into OkCupid just for the quizzes, she usually will put this fact on her profile REAL quick after getting spammed.
It’s still mainly a dating site, though. The primary mechanics of the site are about dating.
February 19th, 2008 at 6:20 pmEven if I weren’t really cheap, I don’t think I’ll ever trust paid dating websites. A few years ago I read an article (I’m surprised it wasn’t more widely circulated) about a scandal at Match.com regarding fake messages and even fake dates to keep people renewing their membership.
Maybe it was a hoax, but supposedly people would get messages from bogus profiles just before renewal time came around, to make them think “hey, maybe this is working.” But the real kicker was a guy who said after three dates with a woman he met through Match.com, she confessed that she was hired by the site to go on first dates with guys, up to three or more a day! Maybe it was disproved, but I think there was a lawsuit involved… Even if it didn’t happen, it’s too plausible for me…
Anyone else know anything about this? Does Boinkology have a team of “Investigators” for self-important muckraking like most major local news outlets?
February 21st, 2008 at 11:34 pmLeave a reply :