Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

From 10 Hours a Week, $10 Million a Year - Plenty of Fish

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 39 posts

Re: From 10 Hours a Week, $10 Million a Year - Plenty of Fish

#11

Post by kyro »

I think you guys should give him a bit more credit. True, the interface is horrible, and yes, luck was definitely involved, but when you look beyond that, he managed to deliver a service that, in my opinion, filled the needs of many - a completely free of charge dating site. Many other dating sites are extremely limiting with respects to being able to contact people, often times not even letting users message each other without submitting to a monthly fee.

It may look like crap, and he may have used shady tactics to gain traction, but the guy is making $10 million a year. I'm sure most of you would put up with much more if the reward for doing so was so delicious.

Re: From 10 Hours a Week, $10 Million a Year - Plenty of Fish

#12

Post by blader »

henning wrote: post #7

File under: people with no taste who don't really deserve to be successful. Even if you don't think "doesn't deserve" applies, still file under no taste. If you want to be tasteless and really big, try getting an executive position in Wal-Mart or something.

Taste is not universal. This not PC, but there is a correlation between class and taste in design. The clean, uncluttered design appeals to the 'elite', but the masses just have different taste in things. There are reasons why CNN and Fox News look the way they do.

http://www.graphpaper.com/2006/09-04_class-and-web-design-pa...

Re: From 10 Hours a Week, $10 Million a Year - Plenty of Fish

#13

Post by blader »

kyro wrote: post #11

I think you guys should give him a bit more credit. True, the interface is horrible, and yes, luck was definitely involved, but when you look beyond that, he managed to deliver a service that, in my opinion, filled the needs of many - a completely free of charge dating site. Many other dating sites are extremely limiting with respects to being able to contact people, often times not even letting users message each ot…

I think we're too quick to attribute what we don't understand to just plain luck. I wouldn't underestimate Markus - running a site with 300MM page views per month single handedly is pretty impressive.

One quick observation: it's not an accident that some of the ugliest websites on the internet (MySpace, Craigslist) are also the most popular.

Re: From 10 Hours a Week, $10 Million a Year - Plenty of Fish

#14

Post by inovica »

One thing to note is that he ALWAYS looked at the business case. He realised that to be a "me to" wasn't going to work and so his model was to offer a completely free dating site and make money from advertising. Whilst others obsess with creating great design and how cool they are, this guy just created something that works. I think rather than being negative towards him, we should learn a lesson from him.

On some of the comments below regarding shady tactics, I can't speak for this as I don't know anything about the company. If this is the case, then it's not great, but from Rockerfeller to Steve Jobs this has sometimes been the way of it. I think if we can take some lessons from the good side - ie quick to market, novel approach to making money, and apply them to what we are doing ourselves then that's a good thing

Re: From 10 Hours a Week, $10 Million a Year - Plenty of Fish

#15

Post by inovica »

blader wrote: post #13
kyro wrote: post #11

I think you guys should give him a bit more credit. True, the interface is horrible, and yes, luck was definitely involved, but when you look beyond that, he managed to deliver a service that, in my opinion, filled the needs of many - a completely free of charge dating site. Many other dating sites are extremely limiting with respects to being able to contact people, often times not even letting users message each ot…

I think we're too quick to attribute what we don't understand to just plain luck. I wouldn't underestimate Markus - running a site with 300MM page views per month single handedly is pretty impressive. One quick observation: it's not an accident that some of the ugliest websites on the internet (MySpace, Craigslist) are also the most popular.

Well said. There is some research out there (sorry don't have time to re-look) which covers "Bad Design" and how it has worked well for some companies. Often I think people like these sites as they appear to be amateur and not run by some slick corporate

Re: From 10 Hours a Week, $10 Million a Year - Plenty of Fish

#16

Post by corentin »

inovica wrote: post #15
blader wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we're too quick to attribute what we don't understand to just plain luck. I wouldn't underestimate Markus - running a site with 300MM page views per month single handedly is pretty impressive. One quick observation: it's not an accident that some of the ugliest websites on the internet (MySpace, Craigslist) are also the most popular.

Well said. There is some research out there (sorry don't have time to re-look) which covers "Bad Design" and how it has worked well for some companies. Often I think people like these sites as they appear to be amateur and not run by some slick corporate

It's just that people have a different opinion of what good style is (a lot of people love Comic Sans MS and websites with animated, blinking stuff).

Re: From 10 Hours a Week, $10 Million a Year - Plenty of Fish

#17

Post by zoltz »

blader wrote: post #12
henning wrote: post #7

File under: people with no taste who don't really deserve to be successful. Even if you don't think "doesn't deserve" applies, still file under no taste. If you want to be tasteless and really big, try getting an executive position in Wal-Mart or something.

Taste is not universal. This not PC, but there is a correlation between class and taste in design. The clean, uncluttered design appeals to the 'elite', but the masses just have different taste in things. There are reasons why CNN and Fox News look the way they do. http://www.graphpaper.com/2006/09-04_class-and-web-design-pa...

There may be an underlying reason for the difference in tastes here: if you are generally inclined to reflect on the things you encounter you don't want to be presented irrelevant clutter because it wastes your reflection resources. The "masses" are not inclined that way, for them it's just: the more they get presented with the better.

Re: From 10 Hours a Week, $10 Million a Year - Plenty of Fish

#18

Post by dhouston »

inovica wrote: post #15
blader wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we're too quick to attribute what we don't understand to just plain luck. I wouldn't underestimate Markus - running a site with 300MM page views per month single handedly is pretty impressive. One quick observation: it's not an accident that some of the ugliest websites on the internet (MySpace, Craigslist) are also the most popular.

Well said. There is some research out there (sorry don't have time to re-look) which covers "Bad Design" and how it has worked well for some companies. Often I think people like these sites as they appear to be amateur and not run by some slick corporate

the causal link is probably UI simplicity, not bad design.

survivorship bias strikes again: for every CL or POF there are thousands of ugly sites which are dead; and the vast majority of popular sites have pleasing designs.

Re: From 10 Hours a Week, $10 Million a Year - Plenty of Fish

#19

Post by bayareaguy »

It is hardly surprising that it only takes one person to run this kind of thing.

Everything they say he does was done years earlier (match.com and hotornot come to mind), but the technology needed for this kind of application hasn't changed in a decade.

Perhaps he's being a little disproportionately rewarded for his efforts but that's just good business. Also I'm sure he's helped make plenty of real people happy who could care less about how his site looks.

Post reply on HN