Comments on: Does using model pics helps a marriage site? [Cheesy]

By: Trinidad Freshley

Trinidad Freshley — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:21:16 +0000

Please, can you PM me and tell me few more thinks about this, I am really fan of your Blog …

By: subhash chandra

subhash chandra — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 11:14:38 +0000

Devanga Vivaha.com is an exclusive matrimonial portal for Marathi Devanga community people across India. The portal has the exclusive members who belong to Marathi Devanga community and is interested in matrimonial services.

By: Ramesh

Ramesh — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 06:43:17 +0000

I don’t get what’s so special about this post. Every ad and marketing person uses image sources like ImagesBazaar for their promotional works. This includes pictures of models posing as brides, doctors, drunkards or whatever. The customer these days are prudent enough to understand that these are mere models selling a product or service.

Aren’t majority of the thumbnail images in social networking sites like Orkut fake pics of some models/actors? Aren’t these people too culpable for misleading?

By: Bharat

Bharat — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 20:43:07 +0000

The Times of India group which owns SimplyMarry.com are known for voilating every norm – from FERA voilations, to passing off adverts as news (they started the “Paid PR” concept), to their ET journalists being caught trying to blackmail a company.

This is the smallest scam.

Often TOI lifts images from individual blogs as well without any acknowledgement – leave aside permission.

By: Umesh

Umesh — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 06:55:20 +0000

Comparing Aishwarya using Lux to SimplyMarry’s fake profiles is improper. Aishwarya is not the commodity which is sold here, its the soap. I can understand that if they make the soap look beautiful on screen/print but they do have the same shape and color of the original. There is something which i can expect for in the product. But the fake profiles are completely fraudulent types. May be they should just use a good looking couple picture for the ad who can endorse the brand. But not try to sell something which doesn’t exist at all.

By: Anshul

Anshul — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 04:27:44 +0000

@Arun Vijayan
Exactly!
Its ethically wrong to claim you can sell a product which is actually absent from your inventory.

By: Arun Vijayan

Arun Vijayan — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 11:30:26 +0000

Every business operate on some commodity – in SimplyMarry’s case its user profiles. For that simple reason, faking a profile is improper. Especially if they state fake photos with fake demographics, it is more improper

You can’t compare Lux/Condom ads with SimplyMarry’s newsletter.

By: Amit Doshi

Amit Doshi — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 10:49:40 +0000

It skirts theline, but I think they are ok. I think it would matter in what context you recieve this newsletter. Are you already a member or not? If your already a member this is pretty deceptive even if its not outright lying. If your not than its just an ad.

By: jayant sharma

jayant sharma — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 10:48:06 +0000

wow!
so why do they have fake profiles then?
You cant play with user’s trust – in such a case, they shd have said ‘meet beautiful brides @ blah..”

By: Giridhar

Giridhar — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 10:40:02 +0000

sir, this is not a search-bot newsletter that is supposed to send you profiles of people who match your requirement..
This is clearly an advertising newletter, that the admins push to ur inbox, once they get hold of your email ids…
See the subject of the mail “Simplest way to meet your dream bride from your own caste”. If the subject had been something like “These people match your search”, “Profile matches for you Mr xxx”, Recently uploaded profiles from your xxx caste”, then I will agree with your point…
but now its just a simple spam ad in your inbox..

By: jayant sharma

jayant sharma — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 10:33:19 +0000

My goodness – you seem to have no clue on email newsletter vs. advertising.
When you subscribe to email newsletters (that are supposed to be sent on a query basis), you should (i repeat, should) receive real data – and not fake ads.
Okay – so you are the kind who will abuse your registered users by faking data (in the name of advertising)..great sir!

By: Giridhar

Giridhar — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 10:27:35 +0000

For that matter, you cannot use models anywhere in advertisements?

Aishwarya rai in Lux Soap, …does it mean that we will become Aish if we use the soap?
Deepika in BSNL.. does it mean that the service can only be used by hep beauties like deepika?
Bipasha.. on using that shampoo.. will u get that definitely-long-strong-fake hair????
packages of condoms.. does it mean that u will have super mojo to have sex and enjoy like they show in those pic, if u use them?

sir, advertisement is not real life depiction.. its a marketing strategy to lure people to like your service and familiarize them….

I see nothing wrong in their mails…

By: Twilight Fairy

Twilight Fairy — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 08:33:54 +0000

surprisingly i know some ppl who actually used to believe (dumbly) that these are real people who have posted their own profiles on the matrimonial website and trying to masquerade as someone else by putting up pictures other than their own!

and ur shaadi ad post of course had a shaadi couple pic ad in the feed

By: Arun Vijayan

Arun Vijayan — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 06:47:04 +0000

I have worked on Rediff matrimonials. We used to send out REAL profiles to the users after doing a matching. The one showed above is deceptive and upright wrong.

-mixdev

By: suraj jain

suraj jain — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:34:18 +0000

For fruther reading :

Nice blog post “Do matrimony site ads actually work? ”
discusses how using the same model images for longer period might be hampering the Matrimonial sites brands

http://whitespace.umeshgopinath.com/2008/12/do-matrimony-site-ads-work.html

By: Anshul

Anshul — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:00:25 +0000

Well the image reads
“Hi, I am Seema
27 yrs of age
working in a convent school
as an english teacher”

Now that is deceptive enough for you to believe that the girl in the pic do have her profile on the website. Some versions of the ads from matrimonial sites have buttons like “chat now”, “email me” right next to pretty-faced girls. I believe they won’t work either.

By: Sridhar Oruganti

Sridhar Oruganti — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:43:44 +0000

Isn’t it eye candy advertising?
They should have been more discreet though.

By: Suraj Jain

Suraj Jain — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:34:19 +0000

Here are the links of 3 images used by Simplemarry in thier mails

http://www.imagesbazaar.com/preview.aspx?id=144551&s=3

http://www.imagesbazaar.com/preview.aspx?id=134859&s=3

http://www.imagesbazaar.com/preview.aspx?id=134815&s=3

lol

By: Abhishek

Abhishek — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:27:00 +0000

@Chandra

Absolutely true

By: Vivek

Vivek — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:26:25 +0000

gr8 work suraj.. )

By: Sameer

Sameer — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:24:28 +0000

Hehe, good “catch”
If you have to fake it, be smart about it

By: Chandra

Chandra — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:15:20 +0000

Wow… it is a great find! whenever I used to see these matrimonial ads on the web, I always believed they are the photos of models. and if they are not why would such beautiful women keep their profile on matrimonial websites

By: Amit Doshi

Amit Doshi — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 09:22:02 +0000

Of course its stock photography. What else would it be?

Can you imagine the nightmare of having to find appropriate images(beautiful women/handsome men) from the website itself, than deal with getting permission from that person to send it out in a newsletter?

And doesnt the fact that they would forward a few selected profiles in a newsletter mean that those so published will be recieving more responses? That would impact the sites neutrality. I cant see the email too clearly, but it shouldnt be deceptive, i.e. Join our site and get married to her!, but barring that Stocks images are the right way to deal with this.