ABC NEWS — June 19 — Some
businesses still don’t cater to homosexuals, ignoring a potentially
lucrative source of revenue, says Duke University economist Keith A.
Bender. One of the most well-known examples is eHarmony.com. "These
companies are cutting out a certain segment of the population that they
could be getting revenue from," Bender said. "Statistics I’ve heard say
that around 10% of the population expresses some homosexual tendencies.
There are 417,044 pairs of unmarried male partners and 362,823 pairs of
unmarried female partners living together in this country, according to
a 2006 American Community Survey from the U.S. Census Bureau. FULL ARTICLE @ ABC NEWS
Mark Brooks: Its a branding decision. eHarmony is not for everyone. They could/should introduce a gay brand perhaps though or at least drive their gay traffic to a site that can look after them.
I don’t know why eHarmony couldn’t have just said all along what we know to be true: catering to the gay market violates the religious beliefs of the founders/senior executives.
Instead, they have waffled, pretended the reason is something else (that no one believes), and otherwise made things worse for themselves.
What was wrong with simply saying, “This is not a market we agree with morally, besides which, we have no experience with it. We chose to serve the hetero market. It’s a free market out there; if there is an opportunity, someone else can serve it. We have no obligation to serve everyone.
“Christian sites don’t permit non-Christians, Vegan sites don’t permit non-Vegans, heck, men can’t use women’s bathrooms, either, but none of these are ‘discriminatory’ in the negative sense!
“The beautiful thing about the Internet is its ability to segment markets. If there is a demand, someone will meet it.”
End of story.
Instead, they have gone the waffling route, stirred up a hornet’s nest, and compromised their own, deeply held beliefs – in full view of everyone.
Tch tch.
I don’t know why eHarmony couldn’t have just said all along what we know to be true: catering to the gay market violates the religious beliefs of the founders/senior executives.
Instead, they have waffled, pretended the reason is something else (that no one believes), and otherwise made things worse for themselves.
What was wrong with simply saying, “This is not a market we agree with morally, besides which, we have no experience with it. We chose to serve the hetero market. It’s a free market out there; if there is an opportunity, someone else can serve it. We have no obligation to serve everyone.
“Christian sites don’t permit non-Christians, Vegan sites don’t permit non-Vegans, heck, men can’t use women’s bathrooms, either, but none of these are ‘discriminatory’ in the negative sense!
“The beautiful thing about the Internet is its ability to segment markets. If there is a demand, someone will meet it.”
End of story.
Instead, they have gone the waffling route, stirred up a hornet’s nest, and compromised their own, deeply held beliefs – in full view of everyone.
Tch tch.
The uphill battled eHarmony would face from gays in the US if they created a new site or welcome them at eHarmony.com is practically insurmountable. The only place they could include them is on international expansion sites.
Good points Sam.
Wasn’t there a guy who tried to sue eHarmony over height-ism?
The uphill battled eHarmony would face from gays in the US if they created a new site or welcome them at eHarmony.com is practically insurmountable. The only place they could include them is on international expansion sites.
Good points Sam.
Wasn’t there a guy who tried to sue eHarmony over height-ism?