I didn’t really read the whole thing, but maybe this is a sneaky way to get more money from all the prostitutes that use tinder? Surely they are the “most active” users. Maybe those filters can help them find clients more frequently.
The article is trying to draw a parallel that doesn't make any sense to me:
> Tinder parent company Match Group Inc. has experience with high-priced subscriptions for some users. In 2022, it bought The League, an invite-only dating app that targets “ambitious, career-oriented singles.” The League has a VIP plan that costs $1,000 per week. The company previously said the success of The League’s high-price subscription made Match Group rethink how it could address “high-intent users” on its other apps like Tinder.
OK, that makes sense. High-income people can advertise their income to potential mates who are looking for that. The high price signals that you are ambitious and career oriented, or at least that if you aren't, someone who is might be interested in marrying you anyway.
> The new plan announced Friday, called Tinder Select, was only offered to less than 1% of Tinder users who are among the app’s most active, the company said.
What's the point of that? Here the high price signals that... you have a lot of sex? Why are we segmenting on activity?
Tinder claims to have 75m users, so even if 0.1% of users take this up its an extra 50m-ish. I'd say thats the main point. Monetize the people that are potentially addicted somehow.
1% of the entire user base is a massive percentage of people who use the app at all anymore: the real filter is the $500 but saying that only the "1%" qualify will help sell it to buyers.
For sure no one who's already successful on Tinder is going to pay for this
#1 Better to take one shot at $500 before paying a pick-up artist $5000-10,000 from training/conferences
#2 Imagine you make $100k USD and haven't scored a date in a decade. Wouldn't taking a gamble of $500 seem appealing just in case it finally gave you a shot?
I dunno, to me not hard to understand at all. USA is not Europe, escort prices there start $300+/hr these days, a lot more in NY/LA etc. also making $500 sound like less
For me Hinge proved most successful out of everything I tried, it gave me the most matches that actually resulted in real world dates and eventually to finding my current partner of almost 3 years now.
N.B. I only ever use free versions as I do not believe in paying for these apps so cannot speak to paid versions.
> I never understood the point of hookup apps like Tinder.
Access to hundreds+ of interesting people from the comfort of your couch? I've met many interesting women on tinder, that I'd never have met "in real life", including my fiancé.
Facebook Dating worked best for me as a 48 year old, and that was after 4 years bouncing between different apps having roughly a couple of dates per month. It gets pricey, and just so time consuming.
depends what you are looking for. if you just want to continually hook up with new people, a better subscription might be good for you. I also didn't read the article, so I have no idea what the subscription is about
This makes sense. It provides a signal of seriousness by cost.
Coincidentally, my neighbor is working on a dating app that instead verifies income sheet and/or balance sheet as a proxy filter for people who want to date similar HNWIs. (It's anti-sugar*.)
Perhaps one day there will be a dating app that pairs people by appearance, stats, and interactive personality match by machine learning and does a real background check while blinding the biases of visual and profile particulars before in-person meeting so the focus is on real communication, not who's the most attractive or the best comedian. Failing that, it's easier, simpler, and cheaper to talk to people in the real world.
business idea. spend $500 on a profile, make yourself look handsome and you are guaranteed to find people who have lots and lots of money so you dont have to sift through crap people and suddenly you are set for life.
i suppose a lot of people would be going this route, aka golddigging
at such price point I bet they can hire a "professinonal" and offer them to someone who's desperate/frustrated, like natural perfect match once a few months. with extensive telemetry they can detect who is actually frustrated to the point of leaving 500$/m subscription.
probably illegal
How's this going to work in areas where there are few users? Do matches which might've been kind of marginal to begin with get put behind an even bigger paywall?
The numbers don't make a lot of sense to me. Are all these men cheating on their wives? Where are the 8 other women getting their needs met? Are they meeting men in regular life or something? So why aren't all the men on tinder doing the same thing?
I think the thing is women don’t need apps. They get hit on all the time, throughout their daily lives. Dating as a woman is not about trying to find opportunities; it’s more about wading through the morass to find a man you deem worthy.
Yeah, but those dudes hitting on them in real life, they're on tinder, no? The world is about 50/50 men and women. If it's 9 to 1 on tinder, that means most of those men have girlfriends or wives, or these women that aren't on tinder are all hooking up with the same 5 dudes. The math just doesn't add up otherwise.
Interesting. A lightly used, high-class call girl is $280-$380 which is obviously much less than the Tinder subscription and you're actually guaranteed sex each month.
That's illegal in many countries. In the US, where it is illegal, the cost would be $2000 USD. Plus, there are people interested in real love on Tinder and that can't be bought directly for any amount.
The pricing isn't even that bad if it helps someone find the right person in a short amount of time.
The market for this would be people who don't actively want to use tinder, but just get in and out and in a good relationship.
Trying to push this into the hands of the "most active" users is only going to end with the people that shouldn't have these features abusing them to try and control their next victims.
>The pricing isn't even that bad if it helps someone find the right person in a short amount of time.
There's no guarantee of that. It's like paying 500/month for a fortune teller to.
You're better off spending that 500/month on grooming, fitness, nutrition and going out socializing, or even an escort. Paying that much for tinder is a scam.
Meeting someone thru a 500/mo subscription service seems akin to meeting someone at a rich-potential-spouse convention. It’s possible to find the right person , whatever that means, but probably you’re selecting for gold diggers of both sexes.
This makes me realize that at least some of the users who will pay $500/mo. will not be naturally rich but view it, at least in part, as an investment to get access to rich mates.
You're paying them so they can get you off their platform? I doubt that. If they could filter out perfect matches and only show you ones that keep you on the app, they would
