Brian jokingly asked me today if I had a spreadsheet going to evaluate the women I meet. (It was probably only half-jokingly since he knows how I love my number-crunching.) I’ve become wise enough to realize that love is more a matter of the heart than one of mathematics, but it’s been a long learning process.
In 2005, when I found myself single after a long relationship, I plunged headlong into dating and eventually began to wonder how productive it really was, leading to the inevitable spreadsheet. eHarmony sent me 249 matches over a 7 month period. I had some contact with 46 (18%), but only 4 actual dates (< 2%). On Match.com, I found 42 women over 3 months interesting enough to to contact and continued emailing 8 (19%), but none led to actual dates.
Online dating is big business, especially when you look at the monthly fees for some sites. So the frugal dater naturally wonders if it’s more cost effective than the standard benchmark of buying a woman a drink. For eHarmony, the cost per match contacted came to $0.34; for Match, $0.55. It’s a bit surprising, considering eHarmony’s costs are higher at face value; perhaps their is some truth to Dr. Neil’s claims that his 29 dimensions of compatibility produce better matches. Any of the women I’ve dated, of course, are welcome to comment on that 
