So the free market popped up and introduced Chemistry.com, a dating site whose ads target eHarmony rejects.

Of course, though, the writer has to drop in with some ridiculous analysis:

Dr. Warren [the creator] himself has defended eHarmony with a couple of different arguments, laid out in an interview on NPR’s Fresh Air: 1) He says eHarmony’s partner-matching algorithms have been derived through studying successful straight marriages. Having done no studies on how to identify good gay matches, eHarmony declines to even take a stab at it. 2) He says eHarmony’s goal is creating marriages, and since same-sex marriage is “largely illegal” that’s an “issue for us.”

I call complete bullpoo on both these rationales. Healthy long-haul relationships look the same all over the world, and all over the demographic map. If Warren needs to see more data before he accepts that, he should go out and gather it. There’s no shortage of happy gay couples to study. And the financial incentive is obviously there—so what’s stopping him?

With regard to the marriage issue: Dating sites don’t perform wedding ceremonies. The product on offer here is love. If a couple subsequently wants some sort of state-sanctioned union, or not, that’s the couple’s business. (And a gay couple can always move to Massachusetts if marriage is a must.)

First of all, it’s simply not true that solid relationships look the same all over the map — in particular, the role of women varies widely by culture. I would guess that an eHarmony in some countries would match people along far different dimensions.

But more importantly, the ignorance of marketing strategy is astounding here. With any product, businesspeople try to find a niche. This way, they can target a very specific market with scarce advertising dollars. eHarmony’s niche lies in straight people who are looking not just to meet people and fall in love, but to marry.

It’s a young business, and branching out is a risk that could dilute the brand’s focus and possibly flop. (Or, admittedly, succeed — all the more reason to let the people with stakes in the enterprise decide.)

The writer’s response is, in essence, saying, “this new product is selling well and growing, and my entire business relies on its success, so why not invest a bunch of money in something else, just to see if it works?”

That’s just not the way it works in marketing, and for the better — if eHarmony added gays, gays would get a lot less of the focus than they will on Chemistry.com, which is much more targeted toward them. Everyone is better off this way. The free market at work.

By Robert VerBruggen