This week’s round of congratulatory applause goes to Zoosk, which just filed its S-1 registration statement with the SEC and announced its plans to raise $100 million in an initial public offering.

The company will trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol ZSK, with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, and Citigroup Global Markets underwriting the IPO. Oppenheimer & Co. and William Blair will also be joining as co-managers.

As part of its filing, Zoosk provided details of its global online dating business.  The company states that the website now has 26 million members across 80 countries, including 650,000 subscribers (users who pay for access to additional features and products). The company also states that its user base grew from 18 million at the end of the year in 2012 to its current numbers, a 44% growth rate. The number of paying subscribers grew to 650,000 in 2013 from 483,000 in December 2012.

As those subscriber numbers have grown, so too has revenue. Revenue increased 63% from 2012 to 2013, rising from $109.1 million to $178.2 million. Net loss also decreased drastically during that period, from $20.7 million in 2012 to just $2.6 million at the end of 2013. Subscriptions account for much of that revenue ($153.8 million), but Zoosk also has a rapidly growing virtual currency business that jumped from $5.4 million in revenue in 2012 to $24.3 million a year later.

On top of that, Zoosk has raised more than $60 million since being founded in 2007. Investors include Crosslink Capital, Keating Capital, Canaan Partners, Bessemer Ventures, ATA Ventures, Jeff Epstein, Plug & Play Ventures, and Amidzad Partners.

While it started out on the web, Zoosk has been hugely successful in the mobile arena. In the Apple App Store it's the #1 grossing dating app and a top 25 grossing app overall. Much of that success can be chalked up to the site's proprietary Behavioral Matchmaking engine, which learns from a user's clicks, messages and other actions to produce more compatible matches. The better the data it gathers, the better its recommendations get.

Looking to the future, Zoosk knows the biggest challenges it will face. The service must optimize its strategy for retaining current members as well as its approach to attracting new members and subscribers. Zoosk must find a way to retain high levels of user engagement and subscription rates and, most importantly, must continue honing its Behavioral Matchmaking engine in order to connect users with mutual attraction.

To find out more about this service you can read our review of Zoosk.

Online dating has become a typical way to meet people outside of your own social networks. In fact, the majority of people have tried it at least once.

But what about the opportunity to connect via social media? Most people have a Facebook or Twitter account, and they contain a wealth of information about what we like, who we are, who are friends are, and what we do. The natural progression of social media is to harness this information and look to who might benefit from it – including online daters.

In fact, eHarmony released a study recently which found 7% of people who married after meeting online had met for the first time on social networking sites like Facebook, MySpace and ClassMates – not through matchmaking chat rooms, online dating sites or other romance-based online connections.

In an article in Time Magazine, Jeffrey Hall, associate professor of Communication Studies at University of Kansas, decided to investigate this connection. He wanted to learn more about who was meeting their significant others through social media, and how well these marriages fared.

He surveyed over 19,000 people who had been married between 2005 and 2012, and asked them how they’d met. Those who met on social networking sites were more likely to be younger and married more recently compared to those who met online in other ways. He was surprised to find that those who met via social networking sites were just as happy as those who met online, and those who met online in general were happier than those couples who met in more traditional ways, such as through friends.

Social networking sites have potential advantages over online dating sites, Hall noted. For one, you can meet people through networks of friends, which means there is some connection first. This puts many people – especially women – more at ease. Also, people are more likely to represent themselves in an honest light over Facebook, because their friends are reading their posts and making comments. You get a more complete view of the person you’re meeting – where she likes to eat, what TV shows she watches, what she does for a living. A Facebook page is a little more personal than an online dating profile.

Another interesting finding in the study was that most of the marriages resulting from social media connections were among African Americans. Hall attributes this to the fact that African Americans and Latinos were over-represented on social networking sites between 2005 and 2012, and use social networks to engage with their already close network of friends.

Social media is an important part of making romantic connections, and is growing in popularity every day. Maybe it’s time to check Facebook if you want to meet someone new.

Aaron Schildkrout and his friend Brian Schechter founded HowAboutWe four years ago as an alternative to traditional online dating. In a recent article in The New York Observer, he said that the fundamental problem with online dating sites was that they needed to keep subscribers. The sites work best when people are looking for dates, not when they are in relationships and dropping out. Dating sites depend on a huge database of subscribers.

HowAboutWe’s focus is a bit different for an online dating site. For one, they have branched out from their online dating platform to creating a valuable resource for all people interested in dating and relationships.

The primary goal of their dating site is to help people meet offline (and get them there as quickly as possible), so they can move towards forming relationships. Instead of searching through profiles, members can create an idea for a first date, put it out to the network, and see who’s interested. Schildkrout says it’s a way for people to meet more organically.

Because of the site’s focus on date activities, it was a natural progression to create a site for couples who are looking to be inspired. Many couples are bored with the same old dates they do all the time, but don’t have the time to research or a lot of money to do something more unique. This is where HowAboutWe comes in – they curate dates particular to each city they service, and set the whole thing up for a discounted price.

It’s an appealing idea for couples. As Schildkrout says, “We make the booking process and the reservation process extremely easy — you never have to show a voucher, your name’s already on the list. We do all the work for you. We take care of all the details.”

The company is also getting into media content, acquiring sites like The Date Report and Nerve.com and creating two additional new blogs related to dating and relationships. “We built out a world-class editorial team,” says Shildkrout, “and for the last three months, we’ve been working really hard to create a media wing focused on becoming the authoritative voice on all things love, and have grown traffic dramatically in that process.”

Popular apps like Tinder and the bigger or more traditional dating sites like OkCupid don’t seem to bother Shildkrout. He sees Tinder as more of a lightweight hook-up experience and OkCupid as an algorithm-matching experience which might not match you with someone outside your type. He is focused on his product, on connecting people in a real-world way. And he’s looking to build content that gets a conversation started. 

Is a company that's only 20 months old and has no revenue model really worth $5 billion? Spoiler alert: no.

IAC/InterActiveCorp recently bought back 10% of mobile dating service Tinder. Although it's easily the hottest mobile dating app on the market, it’s hard not to approach Tinder with a healthy dose of skepticism. $5 billion is, to put it bluntly, a completely insane number for such a young company.

According to the market research company IBISWorld, the entire online dating industry is worth just $2 billion. How on earth could a company that gives away its dating app for free be worth more than the entire dating industry? The answer is simple: it can't.

The number, first reported by Bloomberg and quickly picked up elsewhere, was based on the $500 million IAC had allegedly paid to buy a 10% stake in Tinder from venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya, but it's far from accurate. Sam Yagan, CEO of IAC’s Match Group (which includes IAC’s online dating companies) recently confirmed that a deal was made, but declined to comment further.

“I can confirm on the record that we did a transaction with Chamath, but this valuation is nowhere near the truth,” he told Forbes. Tinder CEO Sean Rad added that the Bloomberg report was “meaningfully incorrect.” Forbes found that an e-mail to Palihapitiya did not receive an immediate response, but noted that his statement on Twitter read “My Tinder sale for $500M is inaccurate. I sold my stake but value was much less. Thx @samyagan for official IAC pos’n. #wishfulthinking”

That being said, it's far too early to write Tinder off as worthless. Just because it has no revenue model to speak of to date, doesn't mean it has no value to investors. With 10 million active daily users, Tinder is fundamentally changing the way a massive number of people behave and engage with each other. That's bound to be worth something.

“Tinder’s really doing something that has been the Holy Grail for online dating: it becomes fun,” says Mark Brooks, a consultant to the Internet dating industry. Unlike traditional dating sites, surfing profiles on Tinder is fun, low risk, and not time-consuming. Users don't have to fill out tedious surveys and the swiping process practically eliminates the fear of rejection. Thanks to Tinder, mobile dating is exciting and mainstream, a major coup that the rest of the dating industry has never been able to figure out.

“IAC’s not valuing Tinder based on what it’s worth,” Brooks notes. “They’re valuing it based on what they’ll lose if they don’t own it. If Tinder can own mobile and own the younger demographic, then IAC is owning the future with Tinder. It’s an international phenomenon.”

Are you online dating? Chances are, you’re spending some time searching through profiles, emailing, and trying to meet new people. This can get overwhelming if your time is tight between work, school, and family obligations. But it doesn’t mean that you should put online dating last on your priority list.

Have you ever come home from a rough day at work, knowing that you’ve set up a coffee or drinks date to meet one of your online matches, and just didn’t feel like going? Did you cancel? After all, you’ve never met this person, and you have nothing invested in whether or not you see each other again. What’s wrong with canceling or rescheduling for another night?

A big problem with online dating is that people can get really flaky. Other parts of your life take priority from time to time, so your personal life gets put on the back burner. Or maybe you're just not that interested in pursuing a relationship. Unfortunately, this means a lot of people are cancelling at the last minute and just don’t care how it might come across to your dates.

Have you ever been frustrated with an online date who kept canceling or rescheduling? Did this make you rethink your own behavior?

Following are some tips to help you avoid being flaky yourself:

Confirm the date in advance. This shows that you are respectful of the other person’s time which makes a good first impression. It also helps you stick to the plan you made without texting a cancellation at the last minute.

Don't schedule to meet someone if you’re not interested in getting to know them. If you aren’t feeling it, then why make plans to meet? There has to be a spark of interest for both of you to be motivated to try and connect.

Cut it short if you need to. If your work schedule is an issue with dating, there are ways to work around it without canceling at the last minute. Book your dates close to your office. Cut them short if necessary instead of canceling altogether. Make it work if you really want to meet someone.

Don't text if you're cancelling. Call. If an emergency has come up, don’t text to say you won’t make it. Call your date. It shows that you are considerate of his time and makes a good first impression.

Follow up after the date. Don’t leave your date hanging if you weren’t all that interested. Be polite and direct instead by saying thank you for a nice time, but he’s not the right fit for you. When you practice doing this, you’ll notice fewer people “disappearing” on you in return.

Traditionally, online dating websites match users based on things like shared preferences, interests, and goals. There's no doubt that all those things are important elements of a successful relationship, but there's one hugely important factor that dating algorithms don't take into account: physical attraction.

Sure, online daters can list vague specifications about things like height and body type preferences, and of course most of us are guilty of spending more time on photos than profile essays, but matchmaking formulas give very little weight to attraction. Until now, that is. A new potential matchmaking formula created by computer scientists at the University of Iowa puts mutual physical attraction front and center by only matching you with partners who are likely to find you attractive.

The formula works by analyzing your message history in order to make date recommendations based on shared tastes and the kinds of people you found attractive in the past. The scientists who designed the algorithm described it using a fictional online dater named Mike: “It is Mike’s taste that affects whom he approaches through initial contacts, and his attractiveness that determines whether he can get responses.”

In other words, Mike – or any of us – can initiate conversations with anyone he wants, but he won't get very far if he continually reaches out to people who don't find him attractive. If the people you contact never reply, all the recommendations in the world will never be of any use. The most effective online dating algorithm would be able to suggest matches based on the likelihood that they will respond to your messages.

“Considering the match of both taste and attractiveness, our model tries to improve dating partner recommendations by boosting a user’s chance of getting responses,” the researchers write.

To test their theory, they used anonymized data on 47,000 users from a real dating website over the course of a period of nearly 200 days. Their program analyzed the replies each user received and used them to evaluate the user's attractiveness or unattractiveness based on the assumption that people who receive more replies are more attractive. When compared with other methods of matchmaking – like pairing people based on shared interests and other variables they had in common – the results showed that the beauty-based method was significantly more effective.

“If a user approaches a partner recommended by [our engine], he/she will have a better chance of getting responses,” the researchers say. So far the attractiveness sorting formula is just a concept, but it's probably only a matter of time before a dating service seeking to be the next best thing turns it into a reality.