Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
Show ALL Forums  > Dating Experiences  >      Home login  
Joined: 3/27/2010
Msg: 94 V p.o.fPage 3 of 8    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)

I recently surfed match to compare it with PoF. Same geographic (etc.) search criteria, and WOW! TONS more eligible ladies there, it would seem! I mean, LOTS more educated, attractive women (exponentially more, in terms of sheer quantity of eligible people) showed up in my search results

This true for the men on Match as well. I am not currently acitive there, but I am going to renew my membership. Better matches and the men there really seem to be looking for more that one-nighters.

Both sites have their pros and their cons, however, for me I have always found the my best prospects at Match.
Joined: 11/23/2009
Msg: 95 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/19/2010 4:35:54 PM
I'm thinking of trying Match for a month. Is it true they still bill your card even after you cancel the membership?
Joined: 8/18/2008
Msg: 96 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/19/2010 4:44:26 PM
Sadly, Match was better in my opinion as well. Here I get only a few messages with one or two sentence responses, usually just to say hello. Not much else. On Match I was easily able to set up a date a week, which eventually was all I could deal with. Some, um, interesting things came about from Match as well. Ha ha ha.

Anyway, I do like the forums here and don't really mind if I never get a date out of POF. I have good luck In Real Life so far.
Joined: 3/27/2010
Msg: 100 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/20/2010 6:33:28 AM

Well, considering the current state of the economy, it's not uncommon. ;-)

While this is a very valid point. This was also the case before the economy took a nose dive.

Also, on Match you fin d a lot less men with children with multiple mothers.

There also seems to be more stability to the men I have met from Match.

That has been my experience.
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 102
view profile
History V p.o.f
Posted: 5/20/2010 7:27:20 AM
In 10 years of on-and-off Match membership I have met one woman. In 3 years of continuous POF membership I have met zero women. So... I guess Match is the more successful of the two for me! Actually, I keep thinking I met a second woman from Match at some point years ago, but during the late 90s and early 2000s when I was meeting a significant number of women from online sources, I apparently sometimes lost track of what sites I met them through. There was also that confusing period when Love @ AOL (which I believe was free) combined with Match.

But anyway, enough about ancient history. Match is without question a far more efficient use of my time than POF. Because it has forced preference listings, I do not waste globs of time emailing women on Match who aren't interested in dating someone of my height and ethnicity, both of which are an acquired taste, apparently. Over 90% of the POF profiles I look at don't list any preferences at all and most don't even have enough information on them for you to be able to read-between-the-lines, so the only real strategy I have is to email every woman I find attractive, which is a tremendous task when there are usually around 10,000 active female users in my area. On the surface, that looks like a great thing, because there are definitely far more women I *can* email on POF than on Match, but it turns out that emailing nearly all of these women is a substantial waste of time and figuring out which ones I should be emailing is like looking for a needle in a Kansas-sized haystack. Match has a fraction of the active profiles that POF has to begin with, and then over 95% of them disqualify me with their preferences, which means I'm left with only a handful of Match profiles I can reasonably write to. But at least I know that 5% MIGHT date me, which is far better odds than I have when sending essentially a completely blind email on POF.

But the obvious problems with Match are: it's a borderline scam (non-paying members can't really communicate and they don't tell you who the non-paying members are), it's extremely expensive ($30-$40 a month to be able email only maybe 5 profiles if I'm lucky?) and undoubtedly a lot of truly great women refuse to pay any money to find dates, so they're not on Match. Therefore, I haven't had a Match profile in a couple of years -- I'm locked up financially in my movie business and can't really afford to splurge on something like Match that likely will end up producing the same results as free sites like POF or or inferior results to a much cheaper and more functional site like Hot Or Not (I've met more than 20 women from HON over the years). Indeed, if Match would just change to Hot Or Not's model of allowing non-paying members to regularly communicate with paying members, I'd probably be right back on it. And have told them so. But their response indicated they didn't care.

And Yahoo currently is basically the same as Match, except they are less adept at keeping out true scammers for some reason. I almost never log in to Yahoo Personals anymore and yet about once every month, I get a notification that some woman wants to talk to me, but by the time I get logged in, her profile has been deleted.

As for "matching," Match and Yahoo pretty much work the same way as POF -- you can email whoever the heck you want to (actually, POF has more mailing restrictions than Match or Yahoo), you can search however you want to (although POF's search functions are vastly inferior) or you can take their match suggestions. Don't confuse "match" with "Match." And don't confuse Match itself with its cousin Chemistry or Chemistry's best friend eHarmony or any of those other crappy services that don't allow you to search on your own but just stick you with matches they make for you. I've never been on eHarmony because they actually have an official policy against taking guys of my height, but I was on Chemistry for awhile, and those matches they sent me were TERRIBLE. Apparently they somehow think an athletic high school valedictorian, National Merit semi-finalist, college magna cum laude graduate with a professional career is supposed to be matched with unemployed obese ghetto women who have 5 kids with 5 different fathers and didn't even graduate from high school! I'm not even exaggerating -- the majority of matches they sent me weren't even high school graduates.

I do, however, to some extent understand why that happened: in addition to actually trying to match your personalities and whatnot by their "formulas," they also have to factor in who is willing to date someone with your physical characteristics, so it seems likely that most of the women whose personalities and common interests I matched up with quite well also said they were unwilling to date someone with my physical qualities (same as in real life, hence all my female friends and no dates), and so the automated system was put in the awkward position of having to send me SOME matches without having any real matches, so they just sent me whoever they had in the system that hadn't disqualified me from dating them... which apparently consisted only of unemployed obese ghetto women etc. So there's no way I'd ever pay money to be part of the Chemistry or eHarmony experience. It just doesn't work for someone like me.

BTW, the one woman I did meet with certainty through Match was pretty much my "dream woman." Seriously. She was just about the most attractive woman that ever walked the earth (and nearly all guys I know agree with me from looking at her pictures so it's not just my opinion) and our personalities and common interests somehow meshed in a million ways. So I really did get "Matched." But, I blew it. Nobody's fault but mine. Just too much pressure for me to be with someone that perfect for me -- I was bound to say something stupid while trying to avoid saying something stupid. So here I am today, 3 years removed from my last date...
Joined: 7/28/2009
Msg: 103 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/20/2010 8:45:04 AM
As for me I find POF to be an endless supply of entertainment, enjoyment, and actually a dating source. It is much easier to meet and possibly date off this site vs. many others I have been a member of. Never mind the forums and friends I have made because I have contacted posters. Thats what keeps me here.
Joined: 3/16/2009
Msg: 104
view profile
History V p.o.f
Posted: 5/20/2010 11:07:56 AM
I always liked match, despite the occasional problems which some here have mentioned. Almost everyone I met or dated came from match, and I had excellent results overall. I had the impression that the members were - in general - a little more sincere with a smaller percentage of really out-there types. Paying to be a member is a filtering condition that seems to help weed out most of the non-starters.
Joined: 8/29/2007
Msg: 106
view profile
History V p.o.f
Posted: 5/20/2010 11:06:01 PM
The thing I have against match is that they send bogus emails and winks in order to get you to pay; then after you pay, it turns out the person never really tried to contact you. You won't know, of course, because they simply won't respond when you write them back. The once they have your credit card, you wind up getting 'automatically' rebilled ad infinitum. I put right into my profile, in the first paragraph, that I absolutely won't respond to winks. Yet, I still get emails from match telling me people wink at me. I know from experience that those are bogus winks. So, I don't go over there anymore.
Joined: 10/8/2009
Msg: 107 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/21/2010 6:53:34 AM
I was a subscriber to Match in '03...met my ex-fiance' there. The only difference I can see between Match and POF is POF is free and has these forums...Maybe Match does now too....I still have a profile there , I just never go.

Same bad points though:

Old pictures
Old pictures
Old pictures ....I just don't get why people DO that? It's not like the person they're fooling won't find out!
Joined: 7/28/2009
Msg: 108 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/21/2010 7:11:46 AM
Its across the board. Guys do it too~ If they are willing to lie about a pic what else are they hiding? I get burnt out on the B.S. dished out on all sites. You know the type that tells you what they think you want to hear just to meet~ then you see an entirely different side after weeks of convo~ its every where. Why pay for that- ?
Joined: 11/29/2009
Msg: 109 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/21/2010 7:23:30 AM
The ONLY difference (IMO/IME) between Match, POF, Yahoo, eHarmony, Lava, Singlesnet, DateHookup, monetarily, and their respective formats. Nine out of ten times you see the same people on all or some of the same sites, and experience the same nonsense i.e old pics, unavailable peeps, etc...... lol

Joined: 10/8/2009
Msg: 110 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/21/2010 12:09:37 PM
xlr8ingmargo AHA! That's why I said PEOPLE not

I don't get why either sex lies about anything online...the most common I've found/heard are:
Old pictures...showing a much younger thinner version of themselves
drug use
activities....yes people say they're into activities to appeal to more people yet actually don't DO the activity. I swear every woman in my area lists camping as an activity when they've never camped, which in MY case is good since I don't camp, but I shy away from them thinking they do like to camp.
Joined: 10/9/2008
Msg: 113 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/21/2010 11:53:26 PM

The ONLY difference (IMO/IME) between Match, POF, Yahoo, eHarmony, Lava, Singlesnet, DateHookup, monetarily, and their respective formats. Nine out of ten times you see the same people on all or some of the same sites, and experience the same nonsense i.e old pics, unavailable peeps, etc...... lol

when I first came to POF I was stunned by how many users were also on adult friend finder....

Joined: 11/18/2009
Msg: 114 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/25/2010 11:44:08 PM
POF is better since its free and I actually have had ladies respond and real dates from women I met on POF and nothing from the pay sites like and Funny because Yahoo is going away to
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 115
view profile
History V p.o.f
Posted: 5/26/2010 7:25:47 AM
"Funny because Yahoo is going away to"

That was the first I've heard of that, so I signed into my Yahoo account and lo-and-behold, that is indeed truthiness! I'm not sure how I feel about that. On one hand, I believe the more competitors the better it is for consumers, so I'm usually anti-consolidation. But Yahoo and Match were practically identical twins and had equally outrageous prices and for the most part the same customers, so in this case competition wasn't doing the consumer any good. So this move is probably for the best. Not that it will affect me one way or the other -- haven't had a Yahoo subscription

BTW, I don't know that I would necessarily consider Match profiles "higher quality" -- I agree with many others that many of the same people you see on Match also have POF profiles. But if you live in a major metro like I do, then there are regularly more than 10,000 opposite sex members on site per day on POF and the weeding process is substantial. Because of Match's high subscription rates, it's automatically weeding out a ton of the bums that POF has, though obviously plenty of deceptive people have money, too. I'm just saying, there's a much higher probability that any one profile you come across on Match by a SUBSCRIBING MEMBER was made by a person with genuine intentions than any one profile you come across on POF. Out of those 10,000+ POF profiles each day, there are many thousands who are just playing games and messing around with people and you could spend all month trying to weed through the waste, while on Match, you could probably actually go through all the profiles that would interest you in a matter of interests, and the vast majority of them that you could actually communicate probably aren't playing games or just messing around with people -- after all, most people who are just messing around on the internet aren't willing to be $30 a month to do it.
Joined: 11/23/2009
Msg: 119 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/27/2010 8:40:24 PM
So with match...can you identify who is paid member and who isnt if you're a paid member?
Joined: 6/12/2005
Msg: 120 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/27/2010 9:24:58 PM

(Messages this short may not be posted - Messages this short may not be posted - Messages this short may not be posted - Messages this short may not be posted...)
Joined: 3/8/2008
Msg: 121
view profile
History V p.o.f
Posted: 5/27/2010 9:25:56 PM
The paid members can respond to messages. The non-paid members can't. They can only "wink" at you.
Joined: 3/10/2009
Msg: 122 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/29/2010 12:23:38 AM
its about the same. on Match I was informed that We cannot meet your matches at this time. so the computer did the work for me ..... Here, apply the same filters.... and lo and behold.... there are not enough matches locally, defaulting to state/national level.

I didnt think I was that demanding, apparently I am one picky sumnabiatch. What you call high maintence, I call risk mitigaton.
Joined: 8/18/2008
Msg: 123 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/29/2010 6:04:45 AM
One very cool thing I have discovered about POF is that you can constantly rewrite your profile, thus making it a sort of status update if you will. You can add something about a holiday weekend, mention what you have been up to lately, etc. Very cool! It makes your profile less static. This is impossible on Match, as your profile needs to be approved. Meh.
Joined: 3/22/2010
Msg: 125 V p.o.f
Posted: 5/31/2010 5:01:29 PM
people tend to value what they pay for, so IF I were seriously looking for a relationship ONLINE, I'd join a pay site...

perhaps others share my attitude, that would explain a few things

I'd rather meet a man who has some $$$ that someone who has none
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 127
view profile
History V p.o.f
Posted: 6/2/2010 7:21:33 AM
"There are more profiles on match."

This is definitely not true. Just did a 50 mile search from my zip code for female members 18-35 who logged in during the past 24 hours on both Match and POF. Match showed 680. POF stops giving you search listings at 600, so I had to break it down into individual years (that is, a search for 18-year-olds, a new search for 19-year-olds, a new search for 20-year-olds, etc.). Well, each year came up with 300-600+, so, yeah, it's probably something like 5000, vs. Match's 680. In the past I've come up with over 10,000 on POF for women of all ages, among those who have logged in within a day. There is simply no way "paid" can compete with "free" in terms of sheer numbers.

"$30 a month? Pfftt. I spend that in a week on coffee." + "As for the cost, match isn't that expensive."

Although I agree this is not a ton of money even in these economically-challenged times, it is a lot of money "per lead" for someone like me. Although there are 680 women 18-35 with active profiles on Match at the moment, if I do a "reverse search" (one that finds women whose dating preferences don't eliminate me), only a couple dozen show up, most of which don't have pictures, and those that do seem to be suspicious profiles (even if they're just suspicious because they didn't do ANYTHING with their preferences, meaning they are either scams or someone not serious about the site -- or they just have really questionable dating tastes). Although technically you are free to email anyone you want on Match, it's not such a wise thing (especially time-wise) to be emailing women whose preferences state they aren't interested in dating someone like you. Therefore, I often end up paying $30 and end up emailing almost no one during that 30 day period (I also don't think any woman has ever sent me a first contact email on Match either). Nevertheless, it's somewhat of a better situation than POF, as it doesn't have forced preferences and women rarely put their preferences in their profiles, so I end up wasting tons of time emailing women that I would know not to email on Match. Wasting time or wasting money -- that's pretty much my dilemma between POF and Match.

BTW, as someone pointed out, many Match users are on POF, so I do sometimes use Match's preference listings to determine if I'm going to email someone on POF. Today while during the first paragraph experiment, I came across a woman on Match I recognized from POF -- in fact, I had written her an email on POF months ago that was not responded to, and I remember her better than most of the hundreds I write because she was a fellow writer and we appeared to have MUCH in common. However, I now see why she didn't write me back on POF: minimum height requirement of 5'9" (she is 5'0, interestingly) and only ethnicity she is willing to date is white. So, I never had a POF chance, despite our personality similarities.

So again, which is worse: the time I wasted emailing her (and hundreds like her) on POF or the money I would have wasted on a Match membership to find out I couldn't email her?

"Gack, it sounds like you've spend your entire adult life looking for love online," etc.

Yeah, that's pretty much me, too. I've been far more successful landing dates from online than in real life (ironic, I know, considering what I just wrote in the preceding paragraphs), primarily because I'm creative writer but a weak talker so it's much easier for me to impress through the written word than the spoken word. But this same factor also works against me, because women build up a much different perception of how I act in their heads than is actually the case, which leads to a great deal of disappointment upon actually meeting, and not a whole lot of repeat dates/meetings/whatever; I try to alleviate that pattern by speeding up the amount of time to get to my initial meetings, but it seems I'm always on the woman's schedule when it comes to such things, and most women think of the online route as the "get to know the guy fairly well first before meeting" route, and my "cool" emails don't help in that respect (yet is ironically the primary thing that gets me meetings to begin with!), so it just drags on for weeks/months/years, causing the actual perception of me to become more and more distorted prior to the first meeting.

And I also spent the last decade watching the interesting evolution of online dating -- it's somewhat ironic that it came full-circle, as the free services were dominant in the late 90s, then came the Era of Match and now Plenty of Fish has brought "free" back to dominance again. To some extent that's true about online in general.
Joined: 3/10/2009
Msg: 129 V p.o.f
Posted: 6/2/2010 11:55:15 PM
Go watch Glenn Gary Glenn Ross...... its just the same old tired leads packaged in a new bow.... telling.
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 131
view profile
History V p.o.f
Posted: 6/3/2010 6:56:20 AM
I actually don't run into very many talk/email, friends or hang-out profiles on POF -- if you were doing a search for men, maybe men are just more likely to choose those options than women (which makes sense considering the typical man's fear of commitment). So that advantage probably does go to Match for women, but I don't think it makes that much difference with men. That said, you can search POF by dating preferences and leave out those categories so the only men that show up in your searches are looking for dating or long-term relationships.

So I just discovered that Match has a "highlighted member" option. For I guess a little extra money, you can have your profile highlighted green. So there actually is a way to tell who for sure is a subscriber now: anyone who has a green highlighted profile is definitely a paid subscriber who can send regular emails. Doesn't mean there aren't some subscribers who didn't pay the extra for the highlight, but I would think it would be wise for any subscriber to pay the extra (not sure how much extra) for the highlight, that way everyone knows who the subscribers are. For the record, it looked like about 1 out of every 8 women or so had highlights in my typical searches, but I'm not sure how they're going about distributing the highlighted profiles in searches. Not sure I would recommend only sending emails to highlighted profiles, but it would assure that you aren't completely wasting your time sending that person an email (he/she may still not be interested, but at least if he/she is interested, he/she can definitely write you back). This is certainly an improvement over the "let's have everybody guess who is a subscriber and who isn't" crap that leads to situations in which you're not a subscriber but get a message so you decide to become a subscriber just to read the stupid message.

One other thing: another dating website besides HotOrNot that allows communication between subscribers and non-subscribers is Can't say I've ever been impressed with that site, as their search functions are not impressive -- it's almost as if you're paying for Plenty of Fish, but it does have a pretty big user base, supposedly bigger than Match's (heck, they say that right on the front page). So if you're a non-subscriber and get a message from a subscriber, you can reply to it, just like with HON, which is probably the best setup for a pay site, as most women just aren't willing to pay to get dates, but most men are, so it works out much better than Match.
Joined: 7/28/2009
Msg: 132 V p.o.f
Posted: 6/3/2010 10:25:52 AM
Free or not its still the same pool of people on all the sites.
I have great luck so it doesnt really matter much to me.
I cant complain about my choices being I never experienced a bad date.
I have made some great friends (even if I got dumped/did the dumping).
Its all in a great weeks fun, and I certainly wont be home alone!
He's to meeting new people and having a great time! Life is what we make it.
Show ALL Forums  > Dating Experiences  >