OKCupid.com vs. True.com vs. Match.com

I had to go through my blog archives to find a blog I already wrote about True.com and Match.com. I'm going to re-post that blog in this blog because we've all been having to put up with their advertising here on MySpace.

Another reason I'm re-posting it is because I find that my ideas I had in that blog seem to have come into play with these two online personal sites. As a matter a fact, some of the silly ideas I had about making my own personals website have come up in a NEW personals website being advertised here on MySpace.com known as OkCupid.com.

I happily joined OkCupid.com. I did it for three reasons. Number one was because it is a totally FREE online personals site unlike Yahoo Personals, True.com, Match.com, eHarmony.com, AdultFriendFinder.com and a host of others.

Number two was the fact the site is rather entertaining and holds my interest for long periods of time with silly surveys and questions you can answer. They have all kinds of tests you can take (some serious, many not) that will make you laugh.

Many of the tests and the questions within are created by actual users. They have a cool matching system based on how you answer questions posed to you. All in all, it's a pretty damn cool and fun site that I'd recommend to anyone, single or not.

And the third reason I joined OkCupid.com was to find ladies of similar interests. I'm not shy to admit it. And let's be honest here, I spend more time on the internet than I do outdoors being sociable. Therefore, it only makes sense that I just might find my true love on a online personals site, right? Right.

Anyway, what I find really interesting about True.com and Match.com is their ad campaigns. It started simply enough with the two going after the singles market but in different ways.

Match.com was more for the conservative approach. They utilized attractive women sitting in front of their webcams to bait guys into visiting their site. For me, the thing about their advertising campaign that made it more appealing was the women used in their ads seemed more my style.

Whereas the women featured in the True.com ads came off like basic club sluts. Even now they still use this same approach to gain memberships. It must be working because now they've moved from the pictures of club sluts to supposed "live" webcams of club sluts.

The club slut picture campaign for True.com always showed some scantily dressed female looking sultry at the camera with some caption that read "Is she naughty or nice". Most of the time, I would just roll my eyes at these ad pictures and think "AS IF"!

Now True.com has gone after the Match.com approach by utilizing these ridiculous webcam girls in their new online advertising campaign.

Match.com had a great idea. I liked the attractive women looking as if they were sitting at home and chilling online in front of their webcam. They were classy and relatable.

True.com has girls sitting around in their underwear or practically stripping in front of the camera. The thing is, True.com doesn't give the sense of an actual webcam. It's more of a sense of watching some cyber slut in a cyber peep show booth.

In all of the True.com ads, the girls (again, dressed in a manner that most real women aren't dressed like when sitting in front of their computer, I'm sure) are supposed to be typing some kind of instant message to you, the online viewer of the ad.

The girl then smiles constantly to the camera while the fake instant message conversation baits you to try and talk to her as if this girl is really on her webcam for you. It's sooooooo cheesy. I wonder how many dumb ass guys have fallen for this?

In most all of the fake webcam footage, the girls are sporting some serious cleavage. There is one of a white girl who pulls off her shirt to reveal a snug undershirt and she dances around in front of the webcam to music we can't hear!

In an other webcam shot, we see one of these club sluts lounging in front of her fake webcam having her fake instant message conversation with us while sucking on a sucker in a tight gray top and matching gray panties.

In yet another ad featuring one of these club sluts, we see a club slut laying down in a tight, one piece black dress that enhances her large breasts.

In another fake webcam/instant message conversation ad, there is a girl in her kitchen who looks to be dressed normally. Then she stands up and is wearing short shorts to show off her ass as she walks to her microwave. When she returns to the computer, she removes her little jacket to reveal boobies in a little bikini top. What is this shit? Did the hot drink she just removed from the microwave make her hot as well? Good God!

One of the lines that always stands out for me from these fake instant message conversations that are part of the ad is "Are you there"? and "Come on... you can tell me anything".

Here, I'll tell you something creators of True.com... FUCK OFF. I'm so sick and tired of these goddamn ads! I don't buy and I won't buy it. And the fact that you think your ads are appealing to an intelligent guy such as myself makes me want to barf all over my monitor.

Now, I'm a total pervert and some of these ladies are total boner material. But that's my non-intellectual side coming out. I guess True.com is hoping for men's cocks all over the world to be making the decisions and clicking on these True.com ads to find their dream girl.

But True.com has now gone and tainted Match.com with piss poor advertising. I guess the club slut appeal ad campaign is more beneficial because now Match.com is doing what True.com is trying to pull off.

Instead of sticking with what looks like real women in front of real webcams, Match.com has taken the obscene route by featuring women (some of which also look like your basic club slut) wearing tight clothes.

The ad campaign is also really lame. In the ad, we're looking at some woman bending over in little shorts. She stands up to look directly into the camera. The camera represents our point of view. Or, rather, a males point of view.

At this point, the female will say "It's not polite to stare" and proceeds to make conversation throughout the ad. They have several of these ads. There is one of the girl bending over at the gym. There is one of a girl bending over at a jogging path. There is one of a girl sitting in a booth at a cafe and the point of view is up her skirt until she gets out attention to look at her face. Another is of a woman walking down a city street and our point of view is looking at her ass until she gets our attention to her face.

All of them are dumb. And all of them are going the True.com club slut route. I don't mean to be disrespectful to the models being used in these ad campaigns but I'm already sick of seeing them. I'd like to ask Congress to have True.com and Match.com removed from the internet. And to have the lame asses at True.com executed.

OK, maybe that's a bit harsh.

The thing that is odd about OkCupid.com is it's the kind of website I wanted to make for online personals. It's funny, witty and again, FREE! It has many one-liners throughout the site that will make you laugh. Plus, it's down to Earth and doesn't take itself too seriously. I appreciate that a great deal.

I'd like to give big kudos to the creators and staff of OkCupid.com for their work and sense of humor. I'd also like to thank them for their efforts to put the likes of Match.com and True.com to shame with their useless and ineffective ad campaigns.

Here now is the original blog I wrote back on February 17th of 2007 about the battle between Match.com and True.com when these ad campaigns weren't as prominent as they are now. Enjoy!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Saturday, February 17, 2007


The battle between True.com and Match.com

You know, months ago I went off on True.com and their sultry ads. To be honest, I'm STILL sick of them. Yeah, sure, the ladies featured in them are prized boner material but GIVE ME A BREAK!

"Is she naughty or nice"? the ads always ask. Well, considering she is wearing tight, form fitting clothes and her boobies are popping out of her top AND she has a look of "fuck me" written all over her late night Cinemax body... I'd say she's naughty... VERY naughty... rawr!

Then we have a clever set up from Match.com where their advertisements make it look like a female is live on her webcam. Now, in the back of my mind I'm thinking what most guys are probably thinking: WHEN ARE THE CLOTHES COMING OFF?!

But they never do. And I really wouldn't expect that from Match.com. I would from True.com, however. They seem more of a guide to cyber escorts than anything else.

Let's face it, SEX SELLS. But this concept that True.com is going for doesn't work on me. These stupid ads don't make me want to go there and try out their site and its features. No thanks.

True.com missed the boat when it came to toning it down. Match.com has picked up where True.com failed, in my opinion. The women featured in the phony live webcam ads are more my style. And I think the campaign is a clever marketing tool.

True.com = SLUTS and Match.com = CLASS. Now, I need to find a happy medium. A site that can help me find a classy slut. Maybe I need to start another account at Adult Friend Finder? No, that is straight up freaky sluts. Which is cool.

I've used a few personal services in my time. They're all bullshit, really. Everyone lies, including myself, to make themselves out to be a more promising catch.

You never really meet the kind of women that are featured in the ads you see for places like True.com, Match.com or Yahoo Personals. These are professional models hired to be photographed to entice you and your erection into thinking that women like that exist on their service.

LIES!

Actually, I take that back. The one service I've used a couple of times with somewhat good return was Yahoo Personals.

Of the women I've met from Yahoo Personals, there is one I still talk to on a regular basis. Actually, this female is kind of outside the norm of women I had encountered prior on Yahoo Personals.

I hope this female doesn't mind me sharing this. I won't say her name but she is quite stunning and I've had a crush on her since we first met. She just floored me. And she was a redhead! And we all know my love (fetish) for redheads! But I also realized in coming to know her that I wasn't the kind of guy for her.

This woman is classy and talented and sexy in many ways. She is an accomplished actress who just recently moved to Los Angeles to pursue he career even further. I just received an email from her telling me how it's been for her since she arrived a couple of weeks ago.

I'm really, truly proud of her. She inspires me to pull my own head out of my ass and get back into radio.

She and I are good friends and I have Yahoo Personals to thank for that. I guess it's wrong for me to say that really attractive women don't use online personal dating services because they do. I can attest to that.

However, there have been a few other attractive women I've encountered from such services that didn't turn out for the better. Most of them have completely relied on their attractiveness to get them through life and have the sense of a cinder block.

Or they know they're so hot that when you try to see beyond that, they get irritated that you aren't constantly showering them with compliments and gifts.

*barfs*

Christ, I hate women like that.

Now, me, I'm just your average Joe. I'm not incredibly good looking but I'm not a dog, either. However, my bipolar whack job attitude can really put a damper on my stunning good looks and award winning sense of humor and personality.

And that's where I fall short with women like my actress friend. I'm not enough man for someone of her stature. That's not me putting myself down. It's just a realistic fact.

Pretty people normally hook up with pretty people so they can create pretty babies.

I think being pretty is a lot more rough than it looks to average Joe's and Jane's like you and I. I'm sure the consensus must be that when you see a really attractive person, they're more than likely dating someone of equal hotness.

In most cases, I bet that isn't true. As a matter a fact, I think that civilized, fun, smart, witty attractive people are just as frustrated and lonely as a regular looking person because they're encountering those model type dipsticks that are so prominently featured in ads for True.com. Therefore, True.com is defying the purpose.

It should be called UnTrue.com.

I think I'm going to start an online personals service and call it "Realisticpersonals.com".

It'll ask your standard questions for match making like age, weight, height, income, occupation, likes and dislikes, personality traits, etc.

Then my site will re-ask those same questions again to verify that you lied the first time.

Plus, my site will ask odd questions like "How often do you clean your toilet"?, "When's the last time you emptied the crumb tray to your toaster? Did you even KNOW it had a tray"?, "ER or House"?, "CSI or Law & Order"?, "Starbucks or Folgers"?, "Ramen or Mac & Cheese"?, "How quickly do you change a burned out lightbulb"?, "Do you get along with your parents"? and a variety of other questions that really get to the heart and mind of a person.

I think I'll make another site called "realisticpenis.com". This site will be dedicated to men who aren't ashamed of being an average Joe nor are they ashamed of their average size.

And, of course, it'll come complete with pictures for every profile posted so each guy can proudly display a flaccid and erect member for ladies who just don't care about size.

Ok, maybe not.

My real point here is that True.com features women I wouldn't want to know anyway.

I might try Match.com, though. And probably hit up Yahoo Personals again. But not before I fix some of the things I'd wind up lying about in their questionnaires.

One of the first things they ask should be: "Have you been or are you presently completely fucked up emotionally and/or mentally?"

The multiple choice answers should be: "Yes", "No", "Maybe" and "Who isn't?!"

To continue living in my own denial, I'd check "Who isn't?!"

You know what, I think it's best I stay single for a while. I'm cool with that. Besides, masturbation is so much for alone! Or with a Twinkie®.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... that was gross.

Betcha won't look at a Twinkie® the same again, will ya?!

-Mike The Janitor
©2007
Millenoma Publishing