Tinder Is Working on a $500 Subscription | Hacker News Reader

Tinder Is Working on a $500 Subscription

news.yahoo.com

14 pointselorant17 comments

Does it come with verified STI testing?

I got Tinder Platinum and it‘s an absolute fucking scam. It‘s not even a good skinner box anymore, it‘s just a microtransaction video ad-game. No part of it works as expected and all of it feels like it‘s controlled by an AI that wants you to spend money (which it is).

- Top picks is a wall of >= 9/10 men that would never ever match with me. This is very depressing. I am getting pressured to super like them, as if that isn‘t just embarassing. Many of them outside of my radius settings!

- I am at the end of the stack, no more guys in my 10km radius, after swiping a few guys per day

- Yet I occasionally see guys well beyond my radius, which ignores my settings

- I often see "social ad accounts", profiles of very hot IG dudes with only their IG handle in the Tinder profile

- I repeatedly see guys I swiped away, they also stay in the "liked you" list after I swiped them away in normal mode

- The very expensive swipe surges of which I get a free one per month generate A LOT of guys I haven‘t seen before in my radius, when the stack was empty a second before, this pressures me to buy more surges (no thanks)

The swiping based on barely any info part of Twitter makes it garbage in itself.

It allows you to filter out others based on how they chose to or don't mind to present themselves, so I like that part at least.

If you're paying $500 / month, what incentive does Tinder have to find you a lasting partner? That is assuming finding a long term relationship is the goal, which it not the case all the time. That being said, I don't have any alternate pricing models in mind, pricing / monetization is hard.

Tinder is one of the few (edit: potentially) honest matchmaking services. As in, it doesn't lose if you find a partner, since most matches are intentionally short term.

Matchmakers that promise long term relationships have an inherent conflict of interest.

> Tinder is working on an ultra-expensive subscription offering that seems explicitly geared toward those wealthy enough (or at those feigning affluence) looking to swipe right on other semi-influential folks.

I'm betting the practice of this will be sex work, regardless of Tinder's intentions. Someone who looks for "high-class" clients is going to be making the money to justify paying the subscription and it's supposedly intended to pair them with other people who can afford the subscription.

High class sex work is accessible without tinder, and acquiring high quality clients is often more of a filter than a net. I'm not sure what the incentive is for either SW or clients to use tinder, seems like a very unstable middleman and significant drain on the SW's working time (dealing with texts from nonsense clients is part of the job, can't imagine how bad it would be on tinder).

Desperate single men are a very lucrative demographic.

You underestimate the number of desperate women willing to spend money on this nonsense too.

The speculations in the article strike me as ill-considered, and I've got serious doubts that they think matching rich people with other rich people is going to work for them.

However... I suspect a lot of people would pay for an online Cyrano de Bergerac to make them look better. Pick the right profile picture, polish your text, maybe even watch over your shoulder if you say something stupid. ("'DTF?' is not a good opening line. Try asking a question about something you read in her profile.")

I know more than one person who are paid to polish on-line dating profiles and help with approach, and they've been doing it for years. It appears to be a pretty good side-gig for a writer, tho I'm told some clients are more challenging than others.

Could a possible risk of an identifier of this membership attract leeches? Meaning a person scrapes up enough to find actual wealthy people. What controls are in place to mitigate people from fooling or gaming the system? Net worth validation?

The membership is the NWV -- 500/month and been a member for at least 3+ months means they have the money to spend.

In practice I bet it'll be a bunch of gold diggers, a few fakers, and a few-upper-middle-class folks are flexing. The hyper-rich don't need to use Tinder

It could very well turn into a better investment to pay $500/mo and then ghost a bunch of matches after the enterprising young man slept with them.

You could hire 10 hookers every month in Thailand or Colombia for that kind of money.

Presumably there is less likelihood of getting robbed or kidnapped. Esp. if you're flashing money around.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com