Online Dating Sites are Recession-Proof

Industry watchers have come up with several theories for this surprising growing demand for online dating sites during recession. Some believe that with the slow economy, busy people like the businessmen have more time in their hands now. When the economy was doing well, business was brisk and some people have their hands full. This is not the case now for some of them as some businesses could be closing. Others are only doing part-time work.

Another theory forwarded is that people are looking for companionship now more than ever or, at least, someone to talk to. It certainly doesn't hurt to have someone to share your troubles during tough times.

Perhaps, a more practical look at this growing trend is the theory that with the weakening economy, it is more expensive to live alone than to live with someone else. A couple living together means shared expenses and costs cuts.

eharmony's Greg Waldorf believes that "Going through difficult times with someone special is better than doing it alone." A related survey conducted by eHarmony revealed that 25% of the women seek long-term relationship due to the current state of the economy. As per eHarmony's experience, the number of site visits grew higher when the Dow Jones Industrial Average went down.

OkCupid, another online dating site, reported that in September only 6,000 on-site instant messages were sent daily. These numbers jumped to more than 18,000 now.

AshleyMadison's owner, Noel Biderman thinks that demands for dating sites are growing due to money problems. People want to do something that make them feel better. The fee in online dating sites is a small price to pay to find that kind of adventure.

Whatever reasons it maybe, the growing demand for online dating sites in a weakened economy has certainly spurred online dating business. Perhaps, now is the best time more than ever to open up one.

If you want to find out more about creating your own dating and social networking site, visit datingsitebuilder.com now.

Reference: http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13381506