61–70 of 98 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
I see plenty of under-25 offers? e.g. theatre tickets, railcards... (though the latter is also available to students of all ages, but you don't have to be a student to get it, just 25 or under)
Tinder is really messing this up hard. First this, and now I've run out of "likes" for 12 hours based on some new hard limit. I've never had any real success using Tinder, and I've only continually engaged because it's a mindless way to pass the time (playing God with acceptance/rejection is fun). Now, it's just yet another dating app that isn't worth paying for. Back to OKCupid, I guess.
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
(it's been a while)
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.
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.
That is not stated in the Tinder FAQ, in the BBC article or the TechCrunch article.
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.
Rather, I think they're trying to profit from an asymmetry that they believe exists: that there is a significant population of people over 28 who would really like to hook up with people under 28, and are willing to pay for the privilege.
They may also believe that they will be more attractive to their core demographic if there are fewer older people in their system.
They may even believe that they will be more attractive to their core demographic if their older demographic skews richer.
No idea whether they're right, but they presumably have a pretty good data-set to work from.
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". '.
Also, really, BBC? You grant anonymity to an "expert" to say that Tinder is sleazy? You really couldn't find someone who would go on the record there?