If the owner of TalentHook seeks to diversify his business interests, how exactly does that diminish the value of the TalentHook product?

If there’s any wrong-doing here, the mistake is one of branding. Mr. Gonazles might have avoided this discussion if he’d discretely set-up another company or domain to avoid blowback about an adult-oriented “recruiting” business that many might find offensive or exploitative. Need I remind everyone that the internet is full of x-rated stuff like this (and much worse)?

Dig deep enough, and many US Corporations and employers have shady or questionable business interests, and truly criminal behavior such as cheating investors & emloyees (can you spell Enron?), misleading consumers (like the drug recalls), employing child-labor overseas, and rapacious environmental destruction. Boycott them if you wish (you might want to start with oil because it comes from countries where women are abused, exploited and enslaved by their “owners” who are their own fathers, brothers & husbands).

I appreciate that many women & people in the ERE community may indeed be appalled by this kind of business, but as long as it’s legal and involves consenting adults – it’s none of my business and has exactly ZERO effect on my product’s relationship to TalentHook or its relationship with their customers.

It seems that rather than being more competitive to other search options and job boards, Monster is looking for revenue to cover their large investment.

@Hanna @glenn – There are facts here, and the fact is that on November 18, 2009, the domain GentlemensNightLife.com was registered to Talenthook. Philip Gonzalez was both the administrative and technical contact, and used a talenthook.com email address. After this article was published, the contact info on the domain was changed, but we have the screenshots to prove that it was so.

Talenthook should feel free to explain these facts as they see fit, and we will certainly allow them to do so in the comments here.

One thing that is missing from the power search though is Boolean! It’s not possible to exclude a term from a search, for example. I’d say it makes the tool less convenient than it could be. Also, since there’s still life outside of the (perhaps huge) Monster resume DB, recruiters do not have an option of dropping Boolean. (This would be off topic but I think AND OR and NOT are easy; what makes Boolean hard is operators and special characters.) Of course, I am biased. :)

Congratulations to Monster on a nice product!
Irina

There was an article in ere that was brilliantly written on “micro celebrity” where a person had an enormous amout of Facebook friends; but did they really have “friends”. My main takeaway from Raghav’s article is the lack of interpersonal communication via voice is cheapening the value of recruiters and business executives.