Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

m.bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 98 posts

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#41

Post by bazookajoes »

Alex3917 wrote: post #15
devindotcom wrote: post #4

I really think this was the most boneheaded monetization plan I've seen in a while. This group is the flightiest, most experimental bunch of early adopters, and that kind of price tag is going to make them laugh out loud. It is ten times what I thought it was going to be. Limiting interaction with the app (driving users to the next service, conveniently located at the icon next door) was strike one. This is strike tw…

> I really think this was the most boneheaded monetization plan I've seen in a while. If the goal is to actually make money and not just maximize their number of users, this could be a good thing. For people over 28 willing to pay, their odds of getting a date just went way up. And for people over 28 not willing to pay, it doesn't matter if they leave anyway. I'm not saying this definitely isn't going to be the next…

Why do you think their odds went up? Basic tinder will still be free. Tinder plus offers little competitive advantage to paying users. The only features are Undo and Passport

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#43

Post by WildUtah »

citricsquid wrote: post #19
thrillgore wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OKCupid and Tinder (and Match) share the same owner, IAC.

and OKCupid engages in price discrimination too, and has done for many years. The price you'll see for OKCupids premium service ("A-list") is based on a variety of factors: attractiveness, age, location, gender... an attractive woman will pay ~$3.99 per month whereas an unattractive middle aged man will pay ~$20.

How do they do the attractiveness rating? Is it an internal eval or some kind of crowdsourced bayesian inferential hotornot?

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#44

Post by lazaroclapp »

madengr wrote: post #31
skizm wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious questions: Can they give people discounts based on how old they are? Can they give student discounts? Is there a legal line between giving discounts/charging less vs charging more?

Senior discounts (55+) are quite popular in the USA, although I don't hear young people complaining.

Senior discounts are based on the assumption that this age group is likely to be formed by people who are retired. Similarly, student discounts are intended for full time students that don't have the "expected" source of income that is having a job. I guess Tinder would be ok if they offered student discounts (or senior discounts ;) ). The issue here is whether they can charge 27 year old professionals a different rate than say 30 year old professionals.

That is not a discount for people without a steady source of income. That is potentially a deliberate attempt to skew the demographics of their user base towards younger users (although less of an issue that it would otherwise be, since Tinder without-premium-features remains free to use for 18 year olds, 40 year olds and 109 year olds).

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#45

Post by markbao »

citricsquid wrote: post #19
thrillgore wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OKCupid and Tinder (and Match) share the same owner, IAC.

and OKCupid engages in price discrimination too, and has done for many years. The price you'll see for OKCupids premium service ("A-list") is based on a variety of factors: attractiveness, age, location, gender... an attractive woman will pay ~$3.99 per month whereas an unattractive middle aged man will pay ~$20.

I was surprised at this so I looked it up. Anecdata: http://www.reddit.com/r/OkCupid/comments/28oeo6/alist_subscr...

If this is true, it's pretty cruel. Yeah yeah supply and demand, but that doesn't make it any less harsh.

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#46

Post by graeme »

jfoutz wrote: post #27

I'm surprised they're charging women. Perhaps this just reveals my sexism. They obviously have the data, I guess it's impressive they're able to charge men and women the same price. I'd always put tinder in that category of hookup-ish bar that doesn't charge women cover.

I don't expect women to pay. The way Tinder work for most people is that men get few matches, and women have a stack of a few dozen to a few hundred potential matches waiting.

When someone right swipes you, they go to the top of your stack, and you see them first. Most men swipe right on every profile. So most women match on almost 100% of the profiles they swipe right.

As a consequence, men swipe a LOT more than women, and it will be mostly men who hit the usage limits.

(I haven't quite figured out the math, as every match is two ways. Nonetheless, it's significantly easier for women to get matches.)

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#47

Post by Zelphyr »

krschultz wrote: post #42
Zelphyr wrote: post #39

This is such a bad idea that it strikes me as a PR stunt.

You are giving them way too much credit. FWIW, the CEO of Tindr is 27.

I suspect you're right but damn; didn't SOMEONE on his board pull him aside and say, "uh, yeah... you don't want to do that."??

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#48

Post by tsotha »

citricsquid wrote: post #19
thrillgore wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OKCupid and Tinder (and Match) share the same owner, IAC.

and OKCupid engages in price discrimination too, and has done for many years. The price you'll see for OKCupids premium service ("A-list") is based on a variety of factors: attractiveness, age, location, gender... an attractive woman will pay ~$3.99 per month whereas an unattractive middle aged man will pay ~$20.

Seriously? That's just the kind of guy who will be summarily ignored, too. What a waste of twenty bucks.

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#49

Post by bazookajoes »

onion2k wrote: post #9

I'm reasonably certain the UK's age discrimination legislation under the Equality Act 2010 could be used to take Tinder to court for this. Basically, it's illegal to charge people more simply because of how old they are. http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/your-rights/equal-rights/...

OK Cupid has been price discriminating for at least a year. Does anybody know if they do it in the UK?

http://www.reddit.com/r/OkCupid/comments/1nkdfx/

http://www.reddit.com/r/OkCupid/comments/28oeo6/

Some states in the the US also ban price discriminating based on sex or gender. For example, California, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Wisconsin. Does anybody know if OK Cupid price discriminates in the UK?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladies%27_night

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#50

Post by minimaxir »

lazaroclapp wrote: post #40

Keep in mind this is only for the infinitesimal subset of Tinder users that will be paying for the "premium" feature set anyways. Basic Tinder remains free for all ages, as far as I understand. That said, I agree with the BBC's unnamed expert (who is probably Paul Kedrosky quoted again at the end of the article): ' One expert said the move was "sleazy". '.

Basic Tinder was crippled (swipe limit) in order to convince people to buy the premium version.
Post reply on HN