Hacker News Reader

Comment by julienmarie | Hacker News Reader

I made that mistake when launching my first dating website By trying to be more efficient. Unfortunately, this market is not about dating, it's a dopamine delivery market. You want to keep people long, increase your LTV, show them an ever better possible "match" so you never settle. You don't want them to actually meet someone. Hence the crappy chat features ( while the rest of the tech stack is usually pretty solid ).

View on HN

Right. The apparent business model is "supply service to person x for service y" but the actual business model is "keep user online long enough to make them valuable eyeballs to sell to somebody else, be it another consumer of service, or an advertiser, or whatever"

Have any companies in the market been successful going the premium route? A service that costs a lot but is designed for the best user experience and outcomes? Maybe they interview potential members in person and work to ensure the “marketplace” has a good balance. Or maybe they take a more active role in the pairing. Starts sounding like a matchmaker.

For a dating service company not to be overly incentivized to keep users swiping forever, a membership model like with a country club could also work: a large upfront fee to join and then maybe a smaller reoccurring fee to maintain membership.

There was a season of Startup where the startup attempted this approach. The company was (is?) called Dating Ring. https://www.gimletmedia.com/startup/origin-story-season-2-1-...

The only honest incentive is if you charge a high price for a successful relationship. The downside is you have to send people a bill when they get married.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com