Hacker News Reader

Comment by icambron | Hacker News Reader

I think the key on the rejection thing is to remember that the other person is also on the hook for $20, and won't get another match if they reject you. So if the service is even basically working from a matching perspective [1], you should get a date. Rejecting you is basically saying, "this person is so bad that I'd rather give up my $20 than trust them that this might be a match". I also think it's interesting that you focussed on the possibility of you being rejected as opposed to you rejecting the match.

[1] A big if. I'm skeptical about the whole thing, specifically about the "we match people, not profiles" claim, which makes little sense to me, since your profile is all they know about you. But my point is that the economics of it seem OK.

View on HN

Ah, correct. I meant to say also that we used to send people on dates for $20, and the few times people had bad times, they said they would have rather paid $20 not to go. So it's better to spend $20 and not waste time, than it is to spend $20 and go on a date that you know instantly isn't a good fit.

[1] We should explain this better, but when you sign up, you'll see you can tell your matchmaker a lot more about yourself, and we use feedback from each match / date to improve matches. Plus, of course, we're using all of the research we've collected on what makes people compatible. So it's definitely off of more than just a profile, but I get what you're saying.

Honest question, if you think someone is unmatchable based on their expectations not matching up with what they offer. Will you let them know and refuse their business, or will you just throw other unmatchable people at them and keep taking their money. (basically will a reject pool exist where you don't really put in any effort, but just slap together the left overs)

As someone who's only matches on Tinder and OKCupid in the past few months have been camsites and escorts this is an actual concern of mine.

@genericuser A big value add to what we do is that we will offer advice to people who keep getting rejected. If it's that their expectations are too high, we have it on our list to guide some people toward Premium. Not so we can make more money from them (our margins on Premium are lower) but because some people need coaching more than they need matches.

That doesn't really answer the question of the reject pool.

To me it just kinda says you will fault the user if their matches don't result in a date, but try to keep 'helping' them while you are getting paid.

As a further question how do you even out demand for the different matches. Assuming the number of matches contracted by men for women is not the same as the number of matches women for men? Do some people not get matches do some people get surprise double matches(in which case if they were only expecting one date a month won't they generally reject the lesser of)?

I mean honestly I would rather not be matched and not be charged than matched with someone who got extra matches all the same day they weren't expecting.

Mostly because I think I would very rarely reject a date. I like meeting new people even if I may not have a romantic future with them.

Even if I don't think they would be a good fit based on their profile, I'd always be up for having my expectations disproved. I also don't trust profiles to describe people very well.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com