A Better Match.com

I’ve been playing around with an idea for a better Match.com. Now, truth be told, at this point I don’t think there will be a better Match.com because of the sheer volume of people on the site. There are a few other legitimate competitors, and many people are using great free sites like OkCupid now, but overall, I think Match has some huge advantages.

That being said, I have an idea for a better Match that combines the dating site with a daily deal concept. The idea is to add urgency and simplicity to online dating. Groupon works because you have a limited amount of time to make a single decision once a day. It wouldn’t work if you had a month to buy the Groupon or if you had 30 different deals to choose from every day.

So the basic idea for Daily Date is that once a day, you get an e-mail with a single match for that day. You have until the end of the day to decide if you want to go on a date with that person (and that person is concurrently making the same decision about you), and after that, they disappear.

The site would be free. However, intrinsically tied to the choice to go on a date with the person is the choice to purchase an exclusive first-date deal from the site. Restaurants would sign up to be eligible for the deal, and the site would triangulate each deal based on where the two people live or work.

One other note: The site would only match you with people that meet your key specifications. I regularly get matched on Match with women who hate cats or have kids or smoke–those are dealbreakers for me, so it’s a waste of my time to have to remove them from my daily matches. I’ve added a rating system for attractiveness and grammar for that same purpose. There are a few other touches I’ve added–you’ll see them on the infographic.

Here’s the infographic. What do you think? Also let me know if I’m getting too creepy with the Amy Adams bit.

13 Responses to “A Better Match.com”

  1. I can always count on you to make me laugh, but I also think it’s a fantastic idea, Jamey. One of these days you should actually go for one of these cool ideas you come up with… you might make a fortune. Then again, you’re such a great writer, I’d hate to see you get so caught up in the entrepreneurial bit that you stopped having time to write.

    • Jamey Stegmaier says:

      Thanks Cara, we’ll see. For now it’s a good test to try to boil these ideas down to a single infographic. It’s easy to keep adding on little ideas, but I think the most compelling and powerful concepts are the simple ones.

  2. T-Mac says:

    I like the idea, and I, like Cara, chuckled as I saw your personality come through in this idea. I think most people would think, “Grammar score? What?” (but in a perfect Jamey world, that would count as much as attractiveness).

    • Jamey Stegmaier says:

      Grammar is so important! To me, at least. 🙂

      • Poor grammar is something of a pet peeve for me, too, yet I married a man who makes several grammar mistakes that he just won’t let go. “Had went” is probably the worst of them – like nails on a chalkboard. It drives me nuts when he says that, and it drives him nuts when I correct him, yet we’re still in love. He’s one of the smartest people I know, which at one time I wouldn’t have believed possible of a man who says “Do you know where it’s at?” Part of me wants to answer, “I’ve got two turntables and a microphone.”

        • Jamey Stegmaier says:

          Cara–I think we all have a few mistakes that we have always made and will always make. I have some typos that I make more consistently than others, and I mispronounce several words (I think the worst is “milk,” which I pronounce “melk”).

          • I suspect you’ve already discovered my typo demon: accidentally writing “breath” when I mean “breathe.” I know the difference, but apparently my fingers don’t. My editor never caught it either, so we’re doing a re-release of my book to correct that… and a few others. Oh, and I think the British say “melk.” So, considering they invented this language, you’re in good company. 🙂

            • Jamey Stegmaier says:

              Exactly, that’s what I’ve been doing all these years: Using the English pronunciation.

              I haven’t noticed that typo yet–so far your book has been very well edited! 🙂

  3. LJG says:

    This is a great idea! 🙂 I was actually talking to someone the other day about a rating system for online dating. The “grammar score” is perfect for you but also very important. I also don’t like when punctuation or capital letters aren’t used. And now I’m going to add weird poetry to my list of things I don’t like. Creeps me out! 🙂

    • Jamey Stegmaier says:

      I certainly think it’s worth having on the site. Most people probably don’t care, so they don’t need to use it as a filter. But I would definitely use it.

  4. Ariel says:

    I love the idea! I’m still on the fence with the concept of online dating in general, but I would totally sign up for this site. Unfortunately, it is challenging to rate someone’s grammar because a ‘private rating’ mechanism will be skewed to reflect the standard of the majority – and the majority of the world thinks ‘LOL’ is actually a word. But I applaud the effort! Also, as for being matched with smokers or cat haters, I think the key here is to classify things as ‘absolute deal breakers’ (ADBs?) and ‘dislikes.’ If Amy Adams didn’t love cats, would you still go out with her? It is challenging to say that one attribute defines a person, and so if Match.com thinks you fit the person on all other levels, they give you that option. I also think that your site caters to those who would rather have one potentially high quality candidate. Online dating currently appeals to the power of numbers theory: If you date enough trash, you’ll either find your diamond in the rubble or get tired enough to settle for something less than perfect.

    ps – I think you are hoping that one day Amy will google herself, find your blog, leave her husband and fly to St. Louis to marry you. And the only way to achieve this goal is to make sure you are the number one hit on google when her name is entered. Here, I’ll help: Amy Adams, Amy Adams, Amy Adams

  5. […] ways we like to be rejected. However, sites like Match leave people guessing. I propose that my improved Match.com remove guessing from the equation and make it part of any initial email to someone new. See […]

  6. […] recall that I hypothesized a similar concept that merged dating and daily deals about a year ago (see that post here). So I was excited to see someone else who bought into that […]

Leave a Reply