Percentage of 1st Dates That Lead to 2nd

[Anonymous 3]

OldBill wrote:

Under the new system, women will only see those messages from those men whose profiles they have visited and liked. For that high SMV to get thousands of messages, she’ll first have to visit thousands of profiles and no woman is going to put in that kind of work.

They are simply bowing to their paying customers wishes,the men. At the end of the day they are the paying customers & in the real world of commerce that’s what counts.
I wasted enough time & money on them. These days(12 months ago) I would say the average response in 1:50. Maybe convert 1 in 3 into a date & risk a 25% chance of being stood up. To think I used to pay for these sites,most of them you can’t even block the non replying profiles.I could have written 3 novels & founded a business empire in that time hehe.
But I think this move by the dating sites could be the beginning of the end for them which isn’t a bad thing. Having used them on & off from the late 80s
(ICQ chat) I can see how they have played a large role in raising expectations in these ungrateful parasites.
I now date Mgtow style, I take myself out , I have a nice meal then go to a bar to listen to some live music. It’s amazing how much more affordable these thing are when you only pay for one.

[TwistParticipant]

Quell wrote:

has 6 dogs.

Must go through peanut butter by the case.

[QuellParticipant 2538]

sidecar wrote:

Quell wrote:

This old landwhale described how she went on 56 dates in six months which equates to 9.3 dates per month or roughly 2.3 each week.

That’s 56 first dates.

You skipped over her second part, she is the gatekeeper:

Allow maybe 20% went to 2 dates, 5 or 6 to three, and one keeper.

It’s going to be the 80/20 rule all over, only part of the total set is the number of contacts made that don’t even lead to dates.

[sidecarParticipant 35867]

Philandry wrote:

She may have many suitors but they are low grade wimps and beggars and beneath her.

Beneath her?

Look at her. I find that very hard to believe.

Quell wrote:

You skipped over her second part, she is the gatekeeper:

Naw.

She pretends to be, but that’s just her doing her best to pretend she isn’t being rejected by all those men.

[PhilandryParticipant 538]

Beneath her?

Look at her. I find that very hard to believe.

Sidecar,
I am just grading them the way she would…

Being a man is incredible good luck. Do not waste it on the unlucky.

[Won'tGetFooledAgainParticipant 3331]

Also don’t forget she actually looks worse than her pictures in real life, they all do.

Just goes to prove that even very average looking women on dating websites are so inundated with attention that they can afford to be way more picky than in real life. Even your average full time mum to my princesses, different dad for each child, no job, massive debt, crap house woman still believes she deserves a Brad Pitt lookalike, buff with tats, well paid job, property portfolio and nice guy with an exciting bad boy streak man.

So they end up pump and dump fodder while they wait for this perfect man to turn up and take them away from their crap life. They think they deserve all of this because they just happened to be born with a vagina, even though they bring nothing to the table.

For women, everything eventually boils down to Alpha Fucks, Beta Bucks.

[sidecarParticipant 35867]

Philandry wrote:

I am just grading them the way she would…

Her subjective mental defense mechanisms have no bearing on objective reality.

The reality is she’s a lonely crazy cat lady but with dogs instead. She will die alone and the dogs will eat her.

And that is not our problem.

Won'tGetFooledAgain wrote:

So they end up pump and dump fodder while they wait for this perfect man to turn up and take them away from their crap life.

I don’t recall who said it, but some of the men here who have looked into online dating say it’s the same worthless women on those sites year after year after year. They’re running out the clock when the game ended for them decades ago.

And that is also not our problem.

[Won'tGetFooledAgainParticipant 3331]

sidecar wrote:

Philandry wrote:

I am just grading them the way she would…

Her subjective mental defense mechanisms have no bearing on objective reality.

The reality is she’s a lonely crazy cat lady but with dogs instead. She will die alone and the dogs will eat her.

And that is not our problem.

Won’tGetFooledAgain wrote:

So they end up pump and dump fodder while they wait for this perfect man to turn up and take them away from their crap life.

I don’t recall who said it, but some of the men here who have looked into online dating say it’s the same worthless women on those sites year after year after year. They’re running out the clock when the game ended for them decades ago.

And that is also not our problem.

I used POF 4 years ago and met a teacher who had been separated for a year and I was her 17th date. It felt more like a job interview, but I was still a bit blue pill then so we stayed in touch as friends. Usual scared of losing her SMV, must be more to life story about why her and her husband split. Anyway, she then dated the younger guys, went to a sex party and told me how she wanted to meet someone naughty etc.

We lost touch years ago but I had a look on POF recently and surprise, surprise she is still on there and some of the pictures are the same as four years ago. Oh, and she is lying about her age saying she is 40 when she is really 44 now. Wonder in those 5 years of online dating exactly how many c~~~s she has ridden.

She is not the only one, I saw loads of women on there who have been using it for 4 years or more, same women are also on Tinder etc.

Yet still, they will not compromise.

For women, everything eventually boils down to Alpha Fucks, Beta Bucks.

[PhilandryParticipant 538]

Sidecar,
you are right of course.
It helps to outline the tremendous gulf between these deluded hags and reality.

Being a man is incredible good luck. Do not waste it on the unlucky.

[BeerParticipant 11832]

OldBill wrote:

High SMV women get thousands of messages.
Middle to low SMV women get hundreds of messages.
High SMV men get tens of messages.
All other men get one message.

I used OkCupid years ago. I remember getting a mail from them one day saying someone to the effect of basically a certain percentage of people had rated me 4 or 5 stars so I’d now be matched with females who also hit the threshold…

I was pretty much amazed, because I wasn’t on there only messaging the 10s, and maybe 1 out of 5 messages I sent out even got a reply, and maybe 30 or so messages sent out led to dates with 2 women, both of whom were much heavier than their pics would have you believe lol. I got a few messages from women who contacted me first, but, literally all of those types were land whales that were 1 out of 10, with a 1 being generous, that NOBODY was sending any messages to so they had to send first messages out.

The funny part though is before I erased my profile I did a search for men searching for women. Amazing how many guys on there are six feet tall with athletic builds who make sure to post pics that send out the vibe they have money.

So in essence online dating for women inflates their egos because all the 5s think they’re 10s just because of the sheer number of thirsty guys, while many of the desperate thirsty guys are full of s~~~ trying to put on a front that they are something they really aren’t…so unless you want to be full of s~~~ just for some pump and dump, online dating is really the worst “dating” experience you could design.

sidecar wrote:

I don’t recall who said it, but some of the men here who have looked into online dating say it’s the same worthless women on those sites year after year after year. They’re running out the clock when the game ended for them decades ago.

And that is also not our problem.

I still browse some of them anonymously for hahas once in a while. The last time I actually had a profile on one was like 5 years ago. I still see some of the same women, and oddly enough, with the same pics that were probably several years old to begin with when they were posted lol.

Funny thing is I see a few chicks from my high school/college days on them that were some of the more hot girls in their primes. Naturally some of them turned into whales at this point, while some are still pretty damn hot, but the thing is if they were smart they could have had their pick of men 5-10 years ago. Instead now their early 30s with baby rabies wondering why Mr. Right with a six figure income isn’t sweeping them off their feet, buying them a house, and making babies with them.

I don’t think its a big surprise most women want a wedding, a house, and babies…but for a lot of them I hope the carousel ride in their 20s and not finding anyone to give them these things after they hit the wall is worth feeling like failures in their 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, etc. That is their problem, its not men’s problem if we aren’t stupid enough to sign a marriage contract these days, especially one with a round the block post waller.

[SandalsParticipant 4254]

Twist wrote:

Quell wrote:

has 6 dogs.

Must go through peanut butter by the case.

My goodness, how many Whitney Wisonsin’s are there?

Won'tGetFooledAgain wrote:

I used POF 4 years ago and met a teacher

There you go. Teacher. women should not be allowed to teach. Look at the influence. This is why the millennial generation is such freaks and imbeciles.

[Author]

Posts