Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities • Hacker News Board

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#51

Post by tsotha » Mon, Mar 02, 2015, 10:50 PM UTC

protomyth wrote: post #38

bazookajoes wrote: post #28

What better methods of price discrimination do you think they should use? * Perhaps men could be charged more than women - it's sexist and a double standard but in many parts of the world men are expected to pay for dates anyway. * Perhaps users need to say if they are looking for a short term relationship versus a long term relationship and are charged more (or less) to match with others who are looking for a long t…

"What better methods of price discrimination do you think they should use?" None. Same service, same price. A tech company, given all the ageist news articles, probably shouldn't price on age.

It's kind of a stretch to call Tinder a tech company. It's a hook up site, basically, and they want to charge less attractive people more money for the same reason fat people can't find stylish clothes - too many unattractive people will hurt your brand.

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#52

Post by protomyth » Mon, Mar 02, 2015, 10:52 PM UTC

tsotha wrote: post #51

protomyth wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"What better methods of price discrimination do you think they should use?" None. Same service, same price. A tech company, given all the ageist news articles, probably shouldn't price on age.

It's kind of a stretch to call Tinder a tech company. It's a hook up site, basically, and they want to charge less attractive people more money for the same reason fat people can't find stylish clothes - too many unattractive people will hurt your brand.

Age is not a good discriminator of looks, particularly starting at 28.

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#53

Post by bazookajoes » Mon, Mar 02, 2015, 10:52 PM UTC

mmastrac wrote: post #17

baddox wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Price discrimination only works if people can't easily identity that discrimination is in play. While this specific pricing model seems odd to me, I don't think I agree with your general claim. I think everyone understands the iPhone product line, with different prices for different amounts of storage space. As far as I know, that works really well for Apple, yet it would be difficult to have a more blatant example…

I think what he means is charging different prices for different users for the same product.

I wonder if it matters that Tinder is a service not a product. In MS Office it is possible for two people to have the same user experience. But on Tinder the people that you interact with are the product. Legally this distinction is probably irrelevant.

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#54

Post by hsod » Mon, Mar 02, 2015, 10:53 PM UTC

minimaxir wrote: post #2

Price discrimination only works if people can't easily identity that discrimination is in play. Otherwise, there will be backlash, which is what has been happening on Twitter this morning. It's also worth nothing that price discrimination really doesn't work if it can easily be gamed. Many people create secondary Facebook profiles for Tinder; this implementation just ensures that there will be a lot more "27 year old…

Movie theaters very clearly show the different prices for different groups (students, seniors, etc.) and no one seems to mind. Same with zoos, museums, etc.

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#55

Post by citricsquid » Mon, Mar 02, 2015, 10:54 PM UTC

tsotha wrote: post #48

citricsquid wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

OKCupid is smart about that too, based on how attractive you are you'll see -- and be visible to -- people in a similar "league" to you. You're not going to be seeing beautiful women who could model if you're an unattractive male. This is pretty good for people who are unattractive, because they can focus on people they're more likely to have success with.

https://www.quora.com/Is-being-one-of-the-most-attractive-pe...

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#56

Post by bazookajoes » Mon, Mar 02, 2015, 10:55 PM UTC

WildUtah wrote: post #43

citricsquid wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

okcupid is now very similar to tinder in that users can rate each other on a 0-1 scale. (It used to be 1-5).

The rating algorithm is probably a lot like pagerank. Ratings by users that are rated highly matter more.

The potential signals are:

* swipes yes or no

* messages received

* length of conversations

* number of unmatches/blocks received

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#57

Post by bazookajoes » Mon, Mar 02, 2015, 10:59 PM UTC

hkmurakami wrote: post #30

Alex3917 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

I wonder what the reaction from each segment of the current Tinder userbase would be if someone outright cloned Tinder as a new, standalone app (i.e. not embedded inside of an existing brand with a preconceived image, a la OKCupid's Tinder clone)

When you say okcupid's tinder clone are you talking about locals?

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#58

Post by samoli » Mon, Mar 02, 2015, 11:00 PM UTC

lazaroclapp wrote: post #44

madengr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ra…

> That is potentially a deliberate attempt to skew the demographics of their user base towards younger users

Or maybe those over 28 are willing to pay more, and this is a move to maximize revenue.

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#59

Post by nilkn » Mon, Mar 02, 2015, 11:01 PM UTC

protomyth wrote: post #52

tsotha wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's kind of a stretch to call Tinder a tech company. It's a hook up site, basically, and they want to charge less attractive people more money for the same reason fat people can't find stylish clothes - too many unattractive people will hurt your brand.

Age is not a good discriminator of looks, particularly starting at 28.

I'm not sure I agree. And it's not just about looks. It's about youth and the hook-up culture. College students are more likely to be into that sort of culture than older working professionals, which means they're more valuable to Tinder as users.

That said, I don't agree with this pricing strategy.

Re: Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities

#60

Post by bazookajoes » Mon, Mar 02, 2015, 11:03 PM UTC

tsotha wrote: post #51

protomyth wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"What better methods of price discrimination do you think they should use?" None. Same service, same price. A tech company, given all the ageist news articles, probably shouldn't price on age.

It's kind of a stretch to call Tinder a tech company. It's a hook up site, basically, and they want to charge less attractive people more money for the same reason fat people can't find stylish clothes - too many unattractive people will hurt your brand.

The demographics of tinder have changed over the past year. Many people on it are not looking for hookups.

In this case tinder is not charging unnattractive people more. Tinder has an algorithm that shows (mostly) only attractive people to other attractive people. That part is free!