5 ms·

From the article: In February, Match Group agreed to buy Azar’s parent company for $1.7 billion.

indigochill 5y ago
So we're still letting monopolies blatantly buy out all their competition, I see (also see: Facebook's purchases of Instagram + Whatsapp).
- 3rly 5y ago
  How do you know that this outcome was not the desired endgame for the creators. It wasn't as if they were harassed to sell. Lastly, which "we" are you referring to?
  - langitbiru 5y ago
    > It wasn't as if they were harassed to sell. Bumble founder disagreed. https://www.vox.com/2018/3/20/17141308/bumble-match-group-new-york-times-ad-lawsuit-acquisition https://www.vox.com/2018/3/20/17141308/bumble-match-group-ne... From the article above: "Match, which owns another popular dating app and Bumble competitor, Tinder, is suing Bumble for violating two patents and for allegedly stealing trade secrets. It was a lawsuit made all the more intriguing considering Match wants to acquire Bumble;"
    - swiley 5y ago
      Software patents should require the source of the implementation to be published. That's the whole idea behind patents in the first place.
      - joycian 5y ago
        Exactly, you give the government a way to replicate your insight, in return you get x years of monopoly. With the first part being non-existent (didn't inventors even have to supply physical prototypes etc.?) the patent system is easy to abuse.
  - BasedInfra 5y ago
    Monopolies aren’t hostile takeovers. It’s companies buying competitors for market dominance with no regulatory pushback that’s the issue.
  - adrianN 5y ago
    What the founders want is not terribly relevant for monopoly laws. They're for the protection of the consumers, not of the company owners.
FriedrichN 5y ago
Doesn't the Match Group own the majority of dating sites/apps used in the west? Why are we still allowing these monopolies to gobble up any and all possible competitors?
- meowkit 5y ago
  Anti trust is defanged unless the target steps on the legislatures toes. Accountability is kind of old fashioned in the modern world if I had to opine.
scrollaway 5y ago
Christ. There's nothing they can't get their hands on, is there?
- standardUser 5y ago
  There's Bumble, Coffee Meets Bagel, Happn, Grinder and plenty of other smaller apps. But far and away the bulk of dating app traffic goes through a Match property.
  - joe_guy 5y ago
    Unfortunately dating apps are an area where popularity does matter. Few are going to stick around on a largely empty app. I was banned from Tinder about a year into the pandemic. I would sometimes idly swipe over that year to pass time but wasn't having conversations. I can only conclude that something in my profile was misunderstood. They will not explain why, but I am now banned from all Match owned properties. That more or less leaves Bumble. At least until Match owns them.
    - scrollaway 5y ago
      If you're in Europe, thanks to GDPR, you have the right to get the data that led to your ban, as well as the right to correct such data (and thus, potentially, appeal).
guerrilla 5y ago
You have got to be kidding... When will someone stop Match Group, who own every dating app most people have heard of: Tinder, Match.com, Meetic, OkCupid, Hinge, PlentyOfFish, Ship, and OurTime.
- abledon 5y ago
  is this why Bumble has a stock price on NASDAQ? they are the only ones holding out against facebook dating & match.
- chongli 5y ago
  Perhaps the solution is to launch a denial-of-service attack in the form of founding so many dating sites that Match Group can't afford to buy them all!
  - vidarh 5y ago
    Alternatively there's a good business here in creating a cookie-cutter dating site concept with the intent of selling all of them to Match. Or take it one step further and sell turn-key dating-site startups. "Optimised for a quick Match Group acquisition".
    - guerrilla 5y ago
      That doesn't really benefit the customers though. It just makes the problem worse.
      - vidarh 5y ago
        Presumably it'd eventually make Match Group's strategy of buying up all the competitors un-viable after some time, as there'd be an ever-increasing stream of dating apps driving up the customer acquisition costs by competing with each other and Match, while making Match effectively pay for the same customers over and over again as customers get convinced to try yet another new dating app and Match has yet another acquisition target. This entire space is really hard to make work well for users, though, because users interests are so at odds with the service providers, in that anything that helps you meet someone quickly reduces the amount of chances they have to upsell you. It's in their interest that you remain frustrated.

So we're still letting monopolies blatantly buy out all their competition, I see (also see: Facebook's purchases of Instagram + Whatsapp).

3rly 5y ago
How do you know that this outcome was not the desired endgame for the creators. It wasn't as if they were harassed to sell. Lastly, which "we" are you referring to?
- langitbiru 5y ago
  > It wasn't as if they were harassed to sell. Bumble founder disagreed. https://www.vox.com/2018/3/20/17141308/bumble-match-group-new-york-times-ad-lawsuit-acquisition https://www.vox.com/2018/3/20/17141308/bumble-match-group-ne... From the article above: "Match, which owns another popular dating app and Bumble competitor, Tinder, is suing Bumble for violating two patents and for allegedly stealing trade secrets. It was a lawsuit made all the more intriguing considering Match wants to acquire Bumble;"
  - swiley 5y ago
    Software patents should require the source of the implementation to be published. That's the whole idea behind patents in the first place.
    - joycian 5y ago
      Exactly, you give the government a way to replicate your insight, in return you get x years of monopoly. With the first part being non-existent (didn't inventors even have to supply physical prototypes etc.?) the patent system is easy to abuse.
- BasedInfra 5y ago
  Monopolies aren’t hostile takeovers. It’s companies buying competitors for market dominance with no regulatory pushback that’s the issue.
- adrianN 5y ago
  What the founders want is not terribly relevant for monopoly laws. They're for the protection of the consumers, not of the company owners.

FriedrichN 5y ago

Doesn't the Match Group own the majority of dating sites/apps used in the west? Why are we still allowing these monopolies to gobble up any and all possible competitors?

meowkit 5y ago
Anti trust is defanged unless the target steps on the legislatures toes. Accountability is kind of old fashioned in the modern world if I had to opine.

scrollaway 5y ago

Christ. There's nothing they can't get their hands on, is there?

standardUser 5y ago
There's Bumble, Coffee Meets Bagel, Happn, Grinder and plenty of other smaller apps. But far and away the bulk of dating app traffic goes through a Match property.
- joe_guy 5y ago
  Unfortunately dating apps are an area where popularity does matter. Few are going to stick around on a largely empty app. I was banned from Tinder about a year into the pandemic. I would sometimes idly swipe over that year to pass time but wasn't having conversations. I can only conclude that something in my profile was misunderstood. They will not explain why, but I am now banned from all Match owned properties. That more or less leaves Bumble. At least until Match owns them.
  - scrollaway 5y ago
    If you're in Europe, thanks to GDPR, you have the right to get the data that led to your ban, as well as the right to correct such data (and thus, potentially, appeal).

guerrilla 5y ago

You have got to be kidding... When will someone stop Match Group, who own every dating app most people have heard of: Tinder, Match.com, Meetic, OkCupid, Hinge, PlentyOfFish, Ship, and OurTime.

abledon 5y ago
is this why Bumble has a stock price on NASDAQ? they are the only ones holding out against facebook dating & match.
chongli 5y ago
Perhaps the solution is to launch a denial-of-service attack in the form of founding so many dating sites that Match Group can't afford to buy them all!
- vidarh 5y ago
  Alternatively there's a good business here in creating a cookie-cutter dating site concept with the intent of selling all of them to Match. Or take it one step further and sell turn-key dating-site startups. "Optimised for a quick Match Group acquisition".
  - guerrilla 5y ago
    That doesn't really benefit the customers though. It just makes the problem worse.
    - vidarh 5y ago
      Presumably it'd eventually make Match Group's strategy of buying up all the competitors un-viable after some time, as there'd be an ever-increasing stream of dating apps driving up the customer acquisition costs by competing with each other and Match, while making Match effectively pay for the same customers over and over again as customers get convinced to try yet another new dating app and Match has yet another acquisition target. This entire space is really hard to make work well for users, though, because users interests are so at odds with the service providers, in that anything that helps you meet someone quickly reduces the amount of chances they have to upsell you. It's in their interest that you remain frustrated.