One of our changes this year is that we “pinned” an “EHB, on your side” article at the bottom of the front page. What’s your feedback of this? Do you like it? Is it drawing complainants into the site?

When the Archived tab came out, the blog gave it enormous coverage, so the blog tries its best.

That said, I do have several success couples news clippings among my drafts. I’ll post a bunch of them this month and next month.

Trivia: http://www.expressnightout.com/content/2009/06/bio_in_perfect_harmony.php is the LATEST success couple story featured in the news. Nothing followed, as far as I know.

1. renew subscriptions automatically as a default setting.
2. renew subscriptions automatically without a reminder email and popup three days beforehand.
3. not display a phone number on their storefront or their website front page.
4. etc.

That’s it!

I had understood -in 2003- first and better than anybody the “online dating sound barrier phenomenon”, but it took several years to me to understand that sometimes you can not launch anything new without destroying pre-existent proposals.

I am most interested in destroying the actual entire Online Dating Industry for serious daters than launching my own project.

I have a 4 pillars strategy:

1) Researchers: Since 2005 I had been heavily contacting Academics. Nobody could be conducting research without my knowledge. All the new and fresh research is over my desk.
Nearly all the Researchers know who I am.

2) Investors: I had been contacting them since 2001. They had been fascinated by social networking utilities and mobile applications but very few had invested in online dating sites. So I had contacted the ones which invested in Engage, Be2 and others and said “hey, you had wasted your money”.
Nearly all the Investors know who I am.

3) Actual competititors and newbies: I had contacted all of them and they are very comfortable attracting, converting and retaining subscribers with automatic renewal of their subscriptions and other credit-card billing trickery, than offering a good compatibility matching method. They really do not want to innovate. PlentyOfFish Marriage predictor, eDarling, 12like/VisualDNA, IntroAnalytics, MatchMatrix, Moonit, LittleHint, MatchMatrix and similars are really the same stuff already available, a new garbage.
Actual competititors and newbies know who I am. I really want to be a headache, a pain in the neck for those management teams.

4) Blogs & News: Every time any Investor, Owner or C-level executive of major online dating site is interviewed, I will be posting a comment saying the entire Online Dating Industry for serious daters in 1st World Countries is a HOAX, performing as a Big Online Casino, with low successful rates.

It is matter of time. Soon or later. I will not stop until destroy the entire Online Dating Industry.

The Online Dating Industry needs a major earthquake, a major cataclysm to extinguish those large dinosaurs (Match/Chemistry, eHarmony/eDarling, PerfectMatch, True, Be2, Parship, Meetic and others) that all they did until now were scamming paying members with marketing and credit card billing trickery.

Fernando Ardenghi
ardenghifer@gmail.com

Furthermore, we are the wrong target market. You should be hitting dating site news aggregators, or industry magazines/sites – most importantly investors into your business idea.

I hope I clarified the tree vs forest problem to you.

Which forest John?

It seems you do not understand that the 16PF5 test is the KEY to open the door and leave the infancy of compatibility testing.

Do you know why very few people can design a quantitative method to compare one 16PF5 pattern to another?
The answer is so simple.
Because the ensemble (whole set of different valid possibilities) of the 16PF5 (or similar like 15FQ+) is ………. 10E16 = 10*10*10*10*10*10*10*10*10*10*10*10*10*10*10*10

and World Population is nearly 6.7 * 10E9

6.7 * 10E9 / 10E16 == 0.67 * 10E(-)6 == 0.67 micro part.

World Population is less than 1 micro part of that ensemble. You can not use a regression equation to compare similarity between quantized patterns!

eHarmony is a 10 (ten) years old site. During last 10 years eHarmony Labs could not prove its matching algorithm can match prospective partners 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 Scientific Paper.

Which is the purpose of eHarmony Labs? It is only a smoke curtain, a bluff. Lots of PhD’s draining huge salaries.

Have you seen that eDarling (eHarmony owns 30%) is eHarmony rebranded and improved for some European countries like Spain, Italy, France, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Poland. ?

The new proposals like the ones offered by the new PlentyOfFish Marriage predictor, eDarling, 12like/VisualDNA, IntroAnalytics, MatchMatrix, Moonit, LittleHint, MatchMatrix and similars, are not better than the old ones. Because they only use different versions of the Big5 or other proprietary models instead (like Chemistry or PerfectMatch) to measure personality traits.

They are all like placebo, because they are delivering ON AVERAGE 3 to 4 prospective mates as highly compatible persons per 1,000 persons screened, in exactly the same range as searching on one’s own, with a high percentage of false positives, like gun machines shooting flowers.

It seems Investors, Owners and C-level executives of major online dating sites does not understand that:
WorldWide, there are 5,000 -over five thousand- online dating sites
but no one
is using the 16PF5 (or similar like 15FQ+) to assess personality of its members!
but no one
calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one
can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one
is scientifically proven!

All major paid Online Dating sites are old and in decadence losing traffic since January 2009, 18 long months losing traffic. They had been resting on the laurels of past glories since years. It is not due to the traction of Facebook, it is the Online Dating Fatigue Phenomenon due to Obsolescence of Dating Sites offering Compatibility Matching Methods.

“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.”

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

I just think it has taken a more negative turn. That is less of ‘how we can make eH work for us’, and more of ‘eH is terrible – let us just get our money back’ posts . . .

Looking at eH and other dating sites, they have made little changes and grown little over time. Fernando continues to harp about that their methodology is terrible, but his only solution is to implement his 16PF5 or whatever on a different site.

Yet, we live with eH. We have eH here and now. So we either use it, or turn away and become despondent as far as online dating goes. If statistics are true, soon majority of developed nations’ people will be find their dates and mates online – it will be the norm, not the exception. People will be amazed at couples who hooked up at a bar or a social gathering.

Furthermore, this blog is still in an exclusive niche market. There are no comprehensive eH resource, not sponsored by eH, out there. That makes it unique and powerful. This blog has the ability to be both positive and negative without reprecautions.

Do not dump out the gold from your pan, just because it is sitting under some silt… continue panning.

It started off with making recommendations on how to tweak the questionnaire, or answer questions while communicating, increase matches…

As time went by, I see more and more negative articles – and less and less solutions how we can work the existing system despite its shortcomings. Or… maybe it is just me.