Edmonton woman pays thousands for a date and ends up with toothless homeless man

[GGG]

I would say you can usually judge a person by the way they present themselves and be correct more often than not.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by GGG

If you look at all the reviews they provide 1 date in the first two weeks to lock in the contract and then go dark. If they were legitimate wouldn't they continue to send out ill-suited matches to everyone and at least look like they were trying to fulfill the 8 to 16 dates they promised?

I'm not sure, I'm not the one claiming they're hiring guys to go on dates. It's very possible they do only send out one referral and that's obviously wrong but I'm not buying the theory that this man was hired by the company. There are a lot of desperate lonely men out there that it wouldn't make sense for them to hire people to go on dates. If they were going to hire men, they'd at least make an effort of making them lie and say everything the woman wants to hear.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by GGG

I would say you can usually judge a person by the way they present themselves and be correct more often than not.

I disagree. You may think you can but I know so many people who are broke and in debt that are driving cars they can't afford and living in homes they can't afford just to show off and keep up with the joneses. The debt ratio in Alberta is staggering and it's because people are living outside their means wanting new cars and new homes they can't afford.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

I'm not sure, I'm not the one claiming they're hiring guys to go on dates. It's very possible they do only send out one referral and that's obviously wrong but I'm not buying the theory that this man was hired by the company. There are a lot of desperate lonely men out there that it wouldn't make sense for them to hire people to go on dates. If they were going to hire men, they'd at least make an effort of making them lie and say everything the woman wants to hear.

My arguement really is that there is intent to defraud and no intent to match her with anyone who is appropriate. The mechanics of it don't really matter but I'm willing to bet the man is not a paying customer of Edmonton matchmakers and certainly not in their database. Your correct he could just be a lonely guy on POF whose profile they steal.

[wittynickname]

So today I've learned that a woman expecting a man to have a job and decent dental hygiene is asking for way, way too much.

I guess this is why I don't date very much. Damn astronomical standards we ladies have.

[Peanut]

Yep. Better not be middle-aged and also dare to *gasp* look middle-aged while you're at it.

The company is a scam and she is a victim. It doesn't really matter what she looks like or how old she is. And besides, nowhere in there did I read that she wanted someone young, tall, fit and rich. She wanted someone in her age range who was employed. That she considered attractive, which I interpret to mean "had dental hygiene", in this case.

Also to all the dudes complaining about height shaming. It sucks that happens. But the knife cuts both ways, be honest. Most men wouldn't choose to date a woman who was several inches taller than them. This lady was 5'10, which is pretty tall, especially for a woman of her age group.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

His appearance matters because she paid a significant amount of money to find someone she'd consider attractive and he was not that. Her appearance is irrelevant.

It's actually quite relevant. They're a matchmaker, not an escort agency. The quality of her matches will be limited by her attractiveness.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Peanut

Yep. Better not be middle-aged and also dare to *gasp* look middle-aged while you're at it.

The company is a scam and she is a victim. It doesn't really matter what she looks like or how old she is. And besides, nowhere in there did I read that she wanted someone young, tall, fit and rich. She wanted someone in her age range who was employed. That she considered attractive, which I interpret to mean "had dental hygiene", in this case.

Also to all the dudes complaining about height shaming. It sucks that happens. But the knife cuts both ways, be honest. Most men wouldn't choose to date a woman who was several inches taller than them. This lady was 5'10, which is pretty tall, especially for a woman of her age group.

This is the truth more or less any way you want to slice it.

Woman, Man, teeth and employment or otherwise, she is the victim of a scam or at the very least some seriously dubious business practices.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by SebC

It's actually quite relevant. They're a matchmaker, not an escort agency. The quality of her matches will be limited by her attractiveness.

You are pursuming they are a matchmaker and not con artists.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by SebC

It's actually quite relevant. They're a matchmaker, not an escort agency. The quality of her matches will be limited by her attractiveness.

lol

No, it isn't.

Do you think that "attractive" and "employed" are really obscure requirements? Or that "attractive" is some society-designated standard? Because it isn't. Maybe you're ugly. Maybe you're handsome. But I absolutely promise there are people in the world that look at you and have differing opinions on which category you fall into. There are people that pretty close to unanimously fall into one of those two categories, but they're less the rule over the exception.

It does not say she was looking for Brad Pitt. She wanted someone her age, employed, and attractive to her. Basic. Her appearance is irrelevant because if the matchmaker could not find a match, they should have refunded her money, not matched her with someone who was the opposite of her requirements just to lock her into the contract. That's a scummy thing to do. And it's scummy to say she didn't deserve better treatment because she was unattractive.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by pylon

Ok. Let's do this, and turn it around. If a man approached CBC about this service, and complained even remotely about the appearance or social status of a woman he was set up with? Oh lord. He'd be publicly shamed into the Stone Age. Go Fund ME's and makeovers would be pouring in. Oprah would have the slow piano music darkened studio intro for her.

Or let's do this:

A guy complains to the media about paying seven thousand dollars to be set up on a date gets set up with a homeless woman as part of the scam... then what?

There wouldn't be as many gags about his weight or looks, I know that. He's been ripped off, and she doesn't end up on TV getting a makeover because she's a crook.

There are an awful lot of fat guys out there and they are no doubt well-represented on every message board in existence.

[PepsiFree]

Let's put it a different way (this should play better with the male crowd who don't understand):
You walk into a Ford dealership with 20K and say you want a loaded F-350. They rightly say "Sorry sir, you can't afford that, but you can afford a Fiesta hatchback!" Rightly you say no thank you and keep your money. You want a truck, and even if you can't afford the truck you want, you're certainly not going to spend your money on something you don't want.

What they didn't do was say "Sure, that's possible, please fill out the paperwork and provide the cheque." So you pay 20K, think you're getting an F-350, and they present you the keys to a brand new Fiesta you just bought. Wouldn't you consider that insane and criminal?

If a person asks a matchmaker service to set her up with someone her age, employed, and who she finds attractive, it's not acceptable to charge her $7000 and fail to meet her basic requirements, no matter what she looks like. If she's really that bad (she doesn't look like she should be resigned to the toothless unemployed to me) then you say "Sorry, we don't feel we have any suitable matches for you." Simple, honest.

[btimbit]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with someone knowing exactly what they want in a partner. Being picky is a hell of a lot better than settling and then over the years slowly resenting that person more and more for not meeting your expectations

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

lol

No, it isn't.

Do you think that "attractive" and "employed" are really obscure requirements? Or that "attractive" is some society-designated standard? Because it isn't. Maybe you're ugly. Maybe you're handsome. But I absolutely promise there are people in the world that look at you and have differing opinions on which category you fall into. There are people that pretty close to unanimously fall into one of those two categories, but they're less the rule over the exception.

It does not say she was looking for Brad Pitt. She wanted someone her age, employed, and attractive to her. Basic. Her appearance is irrelevant because if the matchmaker could not find a match, they should have refunded her money, not matched her with someone who was the opposite of her requirements just to lock her into the contract. That's a scummy thing to do. And it's scummy to say she didn't deserve better treatment because she was unattractive.

Assuming they are trying to make matches, they will be trying to match her with other clients, most of which also want an "attractive" person. It really limits who they can match with her.

If they have a bunch of 4's and the average attractive person is a 7, someone on one side of the match-up is going to be disappointed, or maybe both.

It's subjective of course on who decides what is attractive. It's possible that they saw the man as in the same league as this woman. We don't know what he looks like and only have her story to go by. I am thinking the company is a scam, but it is pretty unfair to the guy who may be in the same situation (i.e., looking for a match and set-up with her).

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It's possible that they saw the man as in the same league as this woman. We don't know what he looks like and only have her story to go by. I am thinking the company is a scam, but it is pretty unfair to the guy who may be in the same situation (i.e., looking for a match and set-up with her).

It's possible, but doesn't really explain him missing the requirements of "taller than me" or "employed."

You could say "well, it's a maybe on attractiveness and the height is off, but he hits all the other boxes and is a good personality math so let's see."

It sounds like he didn't hit any marks, and they didn't try again once they had her money. It's definitely a scam, and she's the victim.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

It's the real life Frank Reynolds! Does he like rum ham?

I think it would be very safe to say he likes rum. Not sure about ham though.

Working previously in credit in the business I work in, as calgaryblood alluded to, never judge a book by it's cover. I met some people with staggering wealth, and they were trading in 15 year old jalopies, wearing Kirkland Velcro shoes, or living in very modest homes it not so fancy neighborhoods.

I had a guy once almost walk out of the dealership because we wouldn't give him a free set of rubber floor mats. He already worked us down to cost on the car, so there was nothing left. I just relented and gave him them to keep the deal together for the sales guy. When I did the credit application with him, I has to ask him to repeat himself, twice, on his income. Put it this way, the guy could have bought a new Ferrari, with one pay cheque.... even after the tax man hit him.

But nope, "Gimme free floor mats on this plain Jane car I could buy with one day worth of income and run into the ground, or I'm walking out." I actually admire a guy like that. Sticks to his principles, and doesn't let his wealth get in the way.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It's possible, but doesn't really explain him missing the requirements of "taller than me" or "employed."

You could say "well, it's a maybe on attractiveness and the height is off, but he hits all the other boxes and is a good personality math so let's see."

It sounds like he didn't hit any marks, and they didn't try again once they had her money. It's definitely a scam, and she's the victim.

From a straight up service provider perspective, yeah, she was ripped off I suppose. They sold her a service that they probably couldn't reasonably provide.

I would just love to know the role of the "homeless, unemployed, toothless gentleman". If he was also a victim, then it is in really bad form for her to publicly embarrass him like this. If you read the whole story, he later becomes a "partially toothed man that lives in a trailer".

Honestly, this is one reason why I hate the media these days. This is really only half of a story and we are left to fill in the narrative ourselves.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Assuming they are trying to make matches

I don't know about that assumption. My assumption is they took this woman (and others, apparently) for every penny they could get, and paid a homeless guy $50 to go out with her to trigger this contract she had signed.

No homeless guy is spending thousands of dollars trying to get a date. He obviously wasn't a customer of this service.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

So today I've learned that a woman expecting a man to have a job and decent dental hygiene is asking for way, way too much.

I guess this is why I don't date very much. Damn astronomical standards we ladies have.

Definitely not asking too much but she's got to understand that she's an overweight middle aged woman who isn't that attractive either.

Sure, she might be employed but he might be employed as well. She called him homeless and he wasn't so wouldn't be shocked if he had a job as well.

And again, this is one side of the story. The man might have a completely different story.

And she just didn't ask he be employed and have good dental hygiene or else she wouldn't be paying several thousand dollars if her standards were that low.

Company is definitely scummy but I don't see anything they're doing that would be illegal. Some people need to take responsibility for their actions and cheque book.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I don't know about that assumption. My assumption is they took this woman (and others, apparently) for every penny they could get, and paid a homeless guy $50 to go out with her to trigger this contract she had signed.

No homeless guy is spending thousands of dollars trying to get a date. He obviously wasn't a customer of this service.

He wasn't homeless, and he also wasn't paid to go out on this date unless someone had evidence of this.