About Markus Frind and Shoemoney
I was going to wait until tommorow to address this, but I am getting a lot of referrals today so I am going to do it now. A prominent blogger, Shoemoney, has called out Markus Frind over his $10,000 a day claim with PlentyofFish.com. Shoemoney called me, Rob Scoble, and anyone else who believed Markus’s story stupid.
Here are the facts:
- #1 I tracked down Markus myself and requested an interview with him. He never solicited the interview from me nor paid me for it, as Shoemoney implied Markus was doing.
- #2 PlentyofFish.com Alexa ranking is 837, Websearch is 374, and ranks #5 for dating sites according to Hitwise. Yes, these statistics can be faked. However, as Shoemoney claims in his post “..bullsh*t statistics like 5th largest dating site.” is false and makes me look like I did not do my homework.
- #3 I can not prove that Markus makes $10,000 a day from Adsense. No one can other than Google, so unless they choose to do so I don’t think anything can be concluded. Robert tells me — “No one ever questioned his numbers and I have a lot of readers over at Google.”
Those were the facts, now here are my opinions:
When I read Shoemoney’s post and comments it sounded to me like he was saying Markus was just making these numbers up to get backlinks from bloggers like me. Shoemoney said “I have to give it up to him. He now has a successful site that people go to. Its possible he makes 1k/ a day NOW from AdSense.” If my translation is correct, he is implying that because of these backlinks PlentyofFish.com got great search engine rankings and enough traffic to make $1,000 a day? Look at the traffic rankings, it went up a little bit in March, but not much.
If you choose not to believe Markus, fair enough. What I want you to understand is that I don’t buy into every random persons bullshit. I know very much about how creating fake news stories for backlinks work. Markus had the traffic rankings according to Alexa, online dating industry blogs were talking about him, people had talked to him at conventions, he had a very good reputation on multiple forums, and the numbers made sense.
I like Shoemoney, I read his blog every day, and I have followed his advice and made some good money from it. When I read his post this morning I thought “Oh shit I screwed up.” I have spent half the day e-mailing people, including Markus, and re-examining the data. I can not find any evidence that casts doubt on Markus or points him out as a liar. If I find it, I will post it here along with an apology.
Why are Alexa rankings mentioned so much? From what I’ve read on SEO forums, Alexa rankings are not a good indicator of popularity because people can set up the Alexa toolbar and vist their own site a lot to build their number.
Please set me straight, thanks.
Comment by chris — May 9, 2006 @ 10:22 am
[…] Andrew Johnson’s web publishing blog have an interview with Markus Frind about his success story. And after Shoemoney statement, he report this. […]
Pingback by Sekoyen’s » Blog Archive » PlentyOfFish.com is making 10k a day — May 9, 2006 @ 10:39 am
You are right Chris, that is why I listed the rankings from Websearch and Hitwise as well.
Comment by Andrew — May 9, 2006 @ 11:19 am
I still don’t know why shoemoney is lieing.
Andrew would you get this supposed email of his that i supposidly sent complete with message headers? Compare it against my message headers that i have sent you previously. That should prove beyond a doubt this stuff is BS. This is just one big link bait scam.
Comment by Markus — May 9, 2006 @ 1:59 pm
[…] Over at Andrew Johnson’s Web Publishing Blog, Andrew takes on some of the challengers with the background of his previous story about Markus: I like Shoemoney, I read his blog every day, and I have followed his advice and made some good money from it. When I read his post this morning I thought “Oh shit I screwed up.” I have spent half the day e-mailing people, including Markus, and re-examining the data. I can not find any evidence that casts doubt on Markus or points him out as a liar. If I find it, I will post it here along with an apology. […]
Pingback by » $10,000 Daily via Adsense.. Perhaps not? The Blog Herald: more blog news more often — May 10, 2006 @ 6:06 am
Chris: it would be difficult to fake an alexa rating under 1000.
Andrew: Why the hell would you offer to apologize or jump when Shoe says boo. Normally I like Shoes posts too but he’s just being a twat at the moment.
Comment by webprofessor — May 10, 2006 @ 10:22 am
Is there any reason Markus feels compelled to brag about his income? Is he selling some sort of get rich quick plan?
Comment by Darren McLaughlin — May 10, 2006 @ 2:06 pm
I have read a number of Markus’ post on webmasterworld.com. I am usually doubtful of people who make such huge claims yet reading his advice and attitude towards things I believe him.
Comment by Bradly — May 10, 2006 @ 2:44 pm
Probably the same reason Shoemoney brags about how much money he makes. It makes for good PR and maybe builds his ego up.
Comment by webprofessor — May 10, 2006 @ 6:29 pm
funny thing is shoemoney doesn’t lie when he posts about earnings. he only does it to help other people realize potential, and he actually tells what he does…unlike other people who just brag about how much they make but keep their mouth’s shut when it comes to someone asking them how they do it.
Comment by Andrea — May 12, 2006 @ 3:09 am
Really Andrea ? Your over at his house verifying all that stuff ? And do you beleive that people are obligated to tell you that information ?
Stop acting like a twit and think for yourself.
Comment by webprofessor — May 13, 2006 @ 12:17 am
With that kind of traffic and good ad placement $10K/day is not a question
Comment by Mike 4 shoemoney — June 1, 2006 @ 6:37 am
[…] Markus, the owner of PlentyofFish.com who I interviewed in March, has been invited to be a guest on Shoemoney’s WebmasterRadio.fm show. I guess Shoemoney changed his mind. (update, for clarification this will be next Tuesday June 27th) […]
Pingback by » Markus Frind on Shoemoney’s radio show Tuesday - Web Publishing Blog — June 20, 2006 @ 7:22 pm
Update: I’m still blacklisted as of 5-29-07
Markus Frind of Canada, owner of Plentyoffish.com:
Re: your unfair termination of my membership and your anti-male,
discriminatory, fraudulent and unlawful business model.
Why did you delete my profile and terminate my membership on July 3, 2006 at
8:57 PM?
You did so without any notice or explanation. In fact, you deceived me as to
the reason, resulting in my wasting a lot of my time. Consequently, the next
day, I spent six hours attempting to log on. At first, I assumed your site
was down. Then, I adjusted my browser privacy setting as your automated
notice suggested (this was your deception). When that didn’t work, I
e-mailed my buddy to see whether he could log on. He was able to do so.
Then, I got suspicious, so I searched for my own profile and found that you
had deleted it. Such a delayed search was the only way I could find out!
The next day, I attempted to register another profile, several times, using
three new usernames. Each of them worked for less than an hour, but I did
not get the administrative deletion message when I searched for each of
those names after they had been deleted. All I got was a deadend, without
any explanation. The first thing I did with the first two new profiles was
to contact all the people I had been commmunicating with, to explaine what
had happened, so I wouldn’t leave them hanging. But, obviously, none of them
got my note because my e-mail was automatically deleted with my profile,
immediately after I sent it.
Consequently, you left about a dozen of my friends hanging, in addition to
many more whom I had contacted for the first time. You therefore damaged
many relationships, frustrated many people, and destroyed the investment we
had made in our relationships, and destroyed the investment of my time I had
made in writing my profile and searching for prospects.
On or about July 4, 2006, I e-mailed your Tech. Support Dept., asking them
why I had been terminated. I have not received any response. I saw no other
recourse posted on your website at that time.
You owe me and my friends better treatment than this. You owe the People of
the United States better treatment. You brag on your website that you are
the largest free dating website, and that you rank #5 overall. Therefore,
you have the responsibility to treat users fairly and to give them proper
notice and explanation of membership termination, because such termination
limits their alternatives to the extent that you brag about, yourself. As
you should know, a provider in a monopoly position, such as yourself, has a
special duty and responsibility to the public.
Your actions are unfair, irresponsible, reckless and monopolistic.
It appears that your business model exploits certain dynamics that drive
your business, to the extreme extent that you unfairly and unlawfully
discriminate against male members to maximize the number of female members
and your advertising revenue. This business is driven by ads posted by
female members, which attract men who respond to initiate contact. Females
initiate only a small fraction of contacts, as you know from your own
statistics. Such facts mirror the real world outside of the Internet.
Consequently, you do anything you can to retain female members to the extent
that you pander to them by terminating male members whenever they get a
certain minimum number of complaints from females, regardless of the merit
of the complaints. However, it’s obvious that you don’t do the same for
complaints by males, as indicated by your unresponsiveness to my complaints
about females who have obviously fraudulent or absurd ads. Some of those ads
are duplicates (they even log on to both profiles in rapid succession). Some
of them state absurdly wide or narrow age ranges. Some are generally absurd
and frivolous. Some are masseuses looking for business. Some are
18-year-olds looking for 55-year-old sugardaddies. Some are obviously
prostitutes. Many of them misstate their height (e.g., they list their
height at 6′, but say they are 5′5″ in their description). I’ve notified you
of many such ads, but you have failed to respond to any of my complaints.
It appears that you program your computers to automatically terminate male
members whenever a minimum number of female members complain, regardless of
the merit of the complaint. In my case, you terminated me at 8:57 PM (your
time) on Tuesday night, July 3, 2006 during a 4th of July weekend. I doubt
anyone was working at POF then, so it appears this process was done
automatically by computer.
I understand that you run this website with only two employees: you and your
wife. But such a low-cost business model is no excuse to discriminate
against male members and to deny them due process. If you don’t have the
resources to handle complaints fairly, you should simply advise complainants
to block mail from members they don’t like, as Matchdoctor.com does.
Complainants don’t have to read mail or profiles they don’t like. As soon as
they read something they don’t like, they need only move on to the next one.
Therefore, terminating male members, based merely upon the number of
popularity votes by female members, is unnecessarily retaliatory,
contemptuous, discriminatory and undemocratic. And it’s unlawful.
You break the law by discriminating against males, defrauding males, and by
knowingly and intentionally allowing fraudulent
ads of female members to remain posted.
You unnecessarily destroy relationships and destroy the investment of time
male members have made in your website. Ironically, you also destroy
investments your female members have made in relationships with male
members. Their male friends just suddenly disappear, without explanation.
You just leave them hanging. They are frustrated and saddened, and the men
appear to have abandoned them, without explanation. That’s de facto
defamation against male members.
And, obviously, your allegation that only 0.5% of your members are
terminated is false, given the circumstances of my termination. I used no
obscene language, nor did I post an obscene profile. And you can’t show why
my profile or written statements are unlawful. Therefore, if you terminate
men like me, you must terminate a much higher % of male members than you
state you do. That’s fraud, too.
And my style of communicating is nothing like the widespread unethical,
sexist, anti-social, psychotic, irrational behavior I have observed among
your female members. And those are the people who seek to retaliate against
men by clicking on the “abuse” button.
Your Terms of Use are stated so vaguely that they would allow you to
arbitrarily terminate any member for any reason. For example, anyone might
interpret any statement as “mean” or “offensive.” Anytime anyone expresses
an opinion about anything, someone will be offended.
The fact that the largest free dating website in the U.S. is allowed to post
and execute such sloppy, primitive, ignorant and unlawful Terms of Use is a
travesty.
The fact that you don’t charge a membership fee is irrelevant. You
monopolize your market, and you deny arbitrarily terminated male members any
viable alternative. You have already put such alternatives out of business,
or you have taken so much market share from them that they aren’t viable
alternatives. Ironically, you created your own argument against your
actions.
In addition to the above violations, you perpetrate racketeering, in
violation of U.S. Federal RICO Statutes.
Two of your competitors, Yahoo and Match.com are being sued by many parties
for perpetrating violations of law similar to yours.
Therefore, if you fail to reinstate my membership, by Wednesday, July 12,
2006, I will take the following legal action against you:
I will file complaints with the following government agencies:
1. All 50 U.S. State Attorneys General
2. The U.S. Attorney of Phoenix, AZ.
3. Various government agencies in Canada
4. The U.S. Federal Trade Commission
5. The U.S. Dept. of Justice.
6. The FBI.
Also, I will solicit similarly terminated former male members to participate
in a class-action lawsuit against you. I will be using the same attorneys
who are suing your competitors.
Time is of the essence. I am losing friends and romantic opportunities as
you read this, and my damages continue to mount.
Sincerely,
Shawn Mattson, XWallstreeter
Comment by Shawn Mattson — May 29, 2007 @ 5:47 pm