10 ms·
Older men charged more for using Tinder's premium service
- 00deadbeef 6y agoNot just straight men. Gay men too. I complained to Apple about this and they didn’t care. On iOS at least you can get around this. Create a profile aged 18 and purchase a subscription. Now sign out and create your real profile and use the “restore purchases” option.
- tomp 6y agoI never used Tinder myself but based on what I’ve come across on Reddit, if your profile is “premium” you can just hide your age? I guess that could mess up your target matches but you can presumably still set your own age range filter.
- EE84M3i 6y agoTo anyone that knows anything about tinder having age hidden implies that you have premium implies that you are desperate. Only a fool would use the hide age option.
- tomp 6y agoHaha I haven't considered that. Damn, the economics & related behaviours (signalling, honest signals, supply & demand etc.) of dating are brutal! I'm fortunate I'm off the market (currently).
- Cthulhu_ 6y agoDating apps, specifically; honestly, personally I can't be fucked to play that stupid game. I'll leave that to the extroverts.
- 00deadbeef 6y agoYour age is hidden from view but you are still subject to other people’s filters
- madballster 6y agoSingle, old men are charged more in swinger clubs. Maybe that's where Tinder got the idea.
- Jestar342 6y agoWow they seem really hell-bent on implementing this given they lost/settled a suit in California for it, and now have been "found out" in Aus, too.
- 55555 6y agoThey've always done this, no?
- reallydontask 6y ago> It found that queer females aged under 30 were charged the least, at just $6.99 per month, while city-based straight men over 50 were charged the most, at $34.37 a month. Any Australians care to comment on the use of queer? It's pretty derogatory in the UK (in the context of sexual orientation) edit: added, in the context of sexual orientation edit 2: looks like my knowledge is outdated then :)
- p1necone 6y agoI'm in New Zealand and queer is used by the gay community as a positive/less specific term here.
- ictebres 6y agoI am not a native English speaker, but queer is repurposed by the LGBT community to include everyone, under a single name [1]. It can even include heterosexuality [2]. I definitely do not read it in any derogatory way, and would identify myself as queer. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer_heterosexuality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer_heterosexuality Edit: formatting
- schemy 6y agoIt's an American term and like usual cultural imperialism means everyone else must use it too.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- dmurray 6y agoIt's the "Q" in LGBTQ... so it's definitely a word that is being "reclaimed". Pretty much any word can cause offence these days, but ABC have presumably been advised on a house style that is acceptable.
- 6y ago
- EE84M3i 6y agoThey should be more transparent about their pricing, but it seems to me like they offer different demographics fundementaly different services so charging different amounts isn't unreasonable.
- theelous3 6y ago> fundementaly different services Like what?I went through tinders sales page for their tiers and can't see anything that would offer a different experience based on any demographic: https://www.help.tinder.com/hc/en-us/articles/115004487406-Tinder-Subscriptions https://www.help.tinder.com/hc/en-us/articles/115004487406-T... I get the feeling you may respond telling me that people over 30 are looking for a different type of relationship, to which I say that no type of relationship has a feasible monetary induction price, and even if it did, it is impossible to know which users are looking to have a fling and which are looking for an SO.
- EE84M3i 6y agoPeople have wildly different experiences on tinder based on gender and age, among other things. It would follow that they value the premium features differently and be willing to pay more or less for them too. >to which I say that no type of relationship has a feasible monetary induction price I'm not sure what you mean by this.
- theelous3 6y agoIt doesn't actually follow though does it? Some uber christian 20 y/o girl may want to get married and have kids within the year. Some 46 year old man might just be looking to bone down with his peers. Someone can use any of those premium features to facilitate any of those possibilities, and more. Having more likes or options to message along with a super-like doesn't mean someone is looking for anything in particular. It is simply true that some people > value the premium features differently and be willing to pay more or less for them too. But that's it. There's nothing about age or whatever in there.
- clusterfish 6y agoCharging people different prices based on factors they can't control, and in secret to boot, is just wrong. Whether it's age or race or eye color, it's wrong. Why are people so greedy that they need to push against such simple principles so hard?
- gaff33 6y agoWhat about car insurance? Is it ok to charge more to insure teenage drivers?
- antihero 6y agoIs it ok to charge people more based on postcode? IE charge poorer people more because they live in areas with higher crime. I think no. Everyone should shoulder the costs.
- Cthulhu_ 6y agoAnd yet when it comes to insurance (car or otherwise), in my country at least the area you live in changes the cost of insurance; some areas have a higher rate of theft, some brands are more likely to be stolen, and some demographics are more likely to end up in an accident (due to inexperience or recklessness). It's a difficult one; objectively speaking, cost is a factor of risk, and risk is what insurance is for. But at the same time, it's discrimination based on age - not ALL people who just got their license are reckless.
- aspenmayer 6y agoYou can control if you drive or not despite your ability or lack thereof to control a car. Just don’t get behind the wheel.
- taspeotis 6y agoIn Australia they don’t charge more on the policy, but if you have an accident your co-pay is higher if you are young, have had your license for fewer than X years, the car is high power e.g. sports car. But if you don’t crash you pay the same as the next regular Joe.
- skocznymroczny 6y agoOKCupid also charges men, especially more than women for their premium service. It's common on online dating apps. Not much different than real life... in many clubs women can go inside for free while men have to pay entry ticket fee.
- qshqwudhoquc 6y agoMy issue with this is that these decisions aren't necessarily being made because of operating costs. It doesn't cost more to host a man than a woman.
- gambiting 6y agoHaving too many men can impact the experience women have, and if they leave then the entire platform collapses. The cost to "host" a user is the same regardless of gender but platforms like these work only if the gender ratio is at least somewhat balanced - the fee seems to help with that, just like it does in a physical club(where it also doesn't cost any more to host a man than it does a woman).
- est31 6y agoGender imbalance also negatively impacts the experience of the men: nobody wants too much competition. Currently there are 3 men for every woman on Tinder [0]. [0]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/975925/us-tinder-user-ratio-gender/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/975925/us-tinder-user-ra...
- insickness 6y agoGay men are charged $8-13 while gay women are charged $7. Gay men and women aren't dating each other so this has nothing to do with gender imbalance.
- theredlion 6y agoGay men can choose not to pay if they are unhappy with the price
- sasaf5 6y agoNot only this, at least last year (when I abandoned Tinder for good) they were charging women more for the "daily picks" feature (it selects top ranked profiles).
- aspenmayer 6y agoWhat does this feature do? Does it basically stack your match deck so high ranks are top pull every time? Really makes Tinder seem like a one-armed bandit. Either you pay and get quality folks on balance, due to ratings and such washing out the boys from the men, or you play your hand on randos. And people actually pay for this privilege? What a world.
- username90 6y agoNot really, men don't want high value women since men rarely get matches even when they reject nobody and get the less selected women. Women get matches all the time so they reject almost every candidates to get to the good ones, so to them the feature to remove results they would probably reject anyway is more important. However even for women with this feature you only get men who has plenty of options and is still looking, do you really want that? You are very unlikely to get a long term relationship that way.
- sasaf5 6y ago> you only get men who has plenty of options and is still looking plus people that are ranked on a single dimension, so you only get the same kind of polished person that is liked by the majority. Now if Tinder would offer some sort of selection by categories like activities, tastes etc, that's a feature I would happily pay for. Other apps already have that.
- NestedLoopGoBrr 6y agoThey’re actually adding interests now as part of their matching algorithm, but the top picks are unique to each person, based on a number of different data points.
- xd 6y agoI've only done a quick bit of research but can't seem to find a clear list of protected characteristics in Oz like we have in the UK, age being one of them.. I don't use tinder but just looking up their pricing model it's £3.99 for under 28yo and £14.99 for 28yo and over in the UK... how is this not a breech of the Equality Act 2010?
- qshqwudhoquc 6y agoI'm the last person to defend old men from discrimination (mostly because it's uncommon), but yeah this doesn't sound right to me.
- gambiting 6y agoDid you have to add the "white" in there? Was it definitely necessary or adding anything to this discussion?
- qshqwudhoquc 6y agoI took it out just for you
- Joeboy 6y agoMaybe take out the "old" too? Or do you really think age discrimination is uncommon?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- radegast 6y agoand this is why Trump is gonna win again! :)
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- dschuetz 6y agoOne more reason not to use online dating platforms.
- Razengan 6y agoOr create better ones.
- pixelpoet 6y agoSeriously, I would donate to an opensource no-frills efficiently run platform that isn't selling your data etc.
- Cthulhu_ 6y agoGreat in theory, in practice you'll land in a hugely competitive market and you'll be struggling to find enough people to sign up. Actually you'll likely find plenty of men, but women - actual, genuinely interested women, not bots / scam accounts - is a lot more difficult. Personally, I think one should create social communities and have things develop from there, not dating sites where the only reason to go there is to find a match. Source: met my girlfriend via gaming forums. I mean sure it took over ten years between first seeing each others' usernames on there and her moving in, but still.
- bradlys 6y agoGenuinely curious - do you think such a mechanism like yours is really relevant to the rest of the population? I'm not sure what you were doing in those 10 years leading up to you two getting together... but most of us want to be dating someone in that time - not waiting 10 years for a single match.
- aspenmayer 6y agoI don’t agree with discrimination in pricing or any other kind in that sense on the platform side. Never paid for Tinder either, but for what it’s worth I did meet my wife on there. And she’s amazing, so there’s that.
- nom 6y agoAdjusting prices by demographic is so common in many industries. Charging less for children, families and the elderly is the same thing. Charging less for women in clubs. Same with booking hotels and flights, based on browsing history, IP address, cookies and the extrapolated demographic. Even a repair contractor adjusts his prices up for someone who lives in a mansion with expensive cars in the driveway, and down for a single mother with three young kids running around her. Of course Tinder charges more for older men, why wouldn't they. Every industry ever wanted to be able to do this, and some can now automate it easily with all the available demographic data they collect.
- M2Ys4U 6y ago> Adjusting prices by demographic is so common in many industries. And often illegal. Discrimination based on sex/gender or age is (usually) prohibited in Europe, for example, unless there are very compelling grounds to do so.
- gridlockd 6y agoThe fact that there's a 10:1 ratio of male to female users on dating platforms might be considered "compelling".
- ChuckNorris89 6y agoIf we reverse the "expensive for older men" and call it "discount for younger men/free for women" is it still discrimination?
- a_f 6y agoOf course. The issue lies in the difference based on gender/age, not the weighting to either party
- rzwitserloot 6y ago> Discrimination based on sex/gender or age is (usually) prohibited in Europe From museums to bus fares, europe is littered with discounts for 65+ and <12 or <18. So is this a case where government run orgs get to price discriminate but business can't, or where the laws make explicit exceptions for gigantic subsets of the economy (I'd call transportation a pretty big sector), or... what? Your claim that price discriminating based on age is illegal in the EU is hard to believe without some proof.
- polote 6y agoTinder has two goals: - make the most money from vulnerable people - make non vulnerable people behave like if they were on a social network Having different price, per geography, gender and age is just a consequence of the first. It is not surprising that you can't see anymore the instagram handles of people on tinder. Instagram is a direct competitor to tinder for most of their users ( the non vulnerable ones). Actually that's very smart, Tinder is probably the only big social network (tinder is not a dating app) which didn't require ads or a lot of funding to get big, only because one small portion of their user are willing to pay to be part of their community
- aspenmayer 6y agoThank you. You said what I was thinking. It’s a parlor trick to get people to lower their guard like they do at a club with chill vibes and good people through subtle polish and serviceable functionality. It’s not Wolfram they’re coding at Tinder but I am curious what they are coding there. It’s a mystery.
- NestedLoopGoBrr 6y agoTinder removed the IG handles more likely because men were stalking women’s instagrams and it wasn’t immediately obvious connecting to instagram was going to display your username for all to see.
- polote 6y agoBumble did it for that, probably not tinder. Most people who put their insta expect others to be able to add them on insta. This is the whole point of insta, it is to have the most people as possible watching at you. Tinder has always struggled to keep users in their app, which is the most important goal when you are a social network
- AjithAntony 6y agoTinder is still there for the "discovery" of the people to add on Instagram, that is not going to change. Tinder doesn't make any extra money after people match, whether they continue to chat in or out of the app. Once connections are made and the users move out of the app, they still come back to Tinder for more discovery.
- gridlockd 6y agoI doubt this is (potentially illegal) age-based discrimination, more likely it's sexual-market-value-based discrimination. It's easy for Tinder to determine who is or isn't attractive - older men just happen to be at a disadvantage here. It's not Tinder making that choice, it's the women on the platform. Charging more in this case is arguably in the interest of older straight men. The experience of a woman on a dating platform is to get bombarded by hundreds if not thousands of messages. Do you, an affluent man in his best years, want your profile to be drowned by out by hundreds of losers that never stood a chance? One way to mitigate that is to limit exposure to people willing to afford a modest amount of money. Let's face it, if you are old and you can't afford 30+$/month for something as significant as dating, you are not going to find a woman anyway, might as well take you out of the game so as not to annoy the women on the platform with your unsightly presence.
- Razengan 6y agoDating apps are probably one of the best examples of conflict of interest: Your purpose is to help people stop using your service! When money comes into play, you obviously don't want your users to leave. Honestly, at this point, who is to say that the good matches are not paid employees acting as real users, or that "ghosting" (ending matches or blocking messages) isn't forced by the service, to induce an addiction? Clearly they can get away with scummy tactics, so why not milk all the money they can?
- est31 6y ago> Dating apps are probably one of the best examples of conflict of interest: Your purpose is to help people stop using your service! Most companies that offer some product are in this dilemma. You want to satisfy your customer's demands but not too much so that they come again. You could sell them a laundromat or fridge that lasts 40 years, but you rather sell them one that lasts 10 and welcome them back in your shop much sooner. Planned obsolescence basically.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Cthulhu_ 6y agoPlenty of dating sites have been proven to have fake profiles, or being rife with bots trying to sell premium chat- or cam services and scams. Example from a quick search: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2019/09/ftc-sues-owner-online-dating-service-matchcom-using-fake-love https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2019/09/ftc-s...
- hatedatingapps 6y agoI used to work for the third largest online dating company in the world, and we had a tedious 150 questions quiz even before user were allowed to login in the app. And guess what: this test was only used to define a pricing bucket for the user depending on their past dating experience, how desperate they are, location, device os and other factors. There were some psychology related questions and a decision tree to dig deeper in one's soul.
- hatedatingapps 6y agoAnd their whole business model was built around an idea to trick user into paying yearly subscription for the first year and then do whatever it takes to make them pay for the second year. Cancelling subscription was a quest itself, and given that couple of company's brands are targeting >50 years old people, it was relatively easy to scam them and not return the money
- hellisothers 6y agoTo the people complaining this isn’t fair, let’s agree that: * they’re not doing this to make more money off the higher charges cohort as that doesn’t make sense * they’re trying to make they most money, period, and that is done by attracting the most people overall * in order to do that they’re trying to maintain a ratio that attracts all cohorts of all sexes, ages, and orientations * because there is some non-reciprocal demand among cohorts (more older men like younger women than vice versa) So if they just charged everybody an equally low rate you’d wind up with a lopsided population that none of the cohorts want and people would leave. Nobody wants this. So arguing it’s not fair because discrimination isn’t fair as a rhetorical argument feels intellectually dishonest since the state you’re advocating for is a failed one.
- ryandrake 6y agoTo me, this isn't a discrimination thing as much as it is simply different prices for different products. Dating sites offer men and women wildly different products. Men (especially older men) are paying for volume--a steady supply of potential matches, since matches are extremely rare. Women are paying for a filter, since otherwise they would all be inundated with matches all the time. Totally different products. I'd imagine the product for men is likely a lot more difficult to provide, too, hence the higher price.