4 ms·

I think the author missed an important factor: misaligned incentives. Dating apps make money when users spend time (and money) on the platform. Users who find

by gassi 11mo ago

I think the author missed an important factor: misaligned incentives. Dating apps make money when users spend time (and money) on the platform. Users who find a partner tend to leave the platform, so dating companies are incentivized to prevent that from happening. Those companies then have more opportunities to up-sell those users on premium features, which they're more likely to purchase due to repeated failure and/or feelings of inadequacy.

cbondurant 11mo ago
This is exactly why I always make it a point to discourage my friends from using dating apps. A dating app that is effective at solving the problem it is ostensibly designed to solve will never make money as people will be matched quickly and will have no need to pay for the service. So clearly no profitable dating app is good at matching people. I'm of the opinion that using a tool that is constantly setting you up for romantic failure and rejection in the name of keeping you on its platform is a really good way to wreck your mental health.
- zelphirkalt 11mo ago
  On the other hand, if it was so easy to find a match, then we wouldn't be trying to use dating apps. I think it is just generally hard to find a good match for many people these days.
  - nradov 11mo ago
    The other side of that is that many people are simply terrible and really unsuitable for being in any sort of long term stable relationship. No dating app can solve that problem (unless maybe they incorporate mental health and life coaching services, which seems kind of sketchy as a combination). Whether the situation has gotten generally harder these days is impossible to say but I certainly don't envy those still in the dating pool.
10000truths 11mo ago
This is often parroted, but the reasoning is flawed. The vast majority of the platform's growth will come from new users, who are entering the dating scene. If they fail to capture that audience (say, by having a reputation of not performing as advertised), then no amount of upsells or string-alongs of existing users will sustain them, as their user base will only ever decrease, and investors will see that and withdraw accordingly.
- djoldman 11mo ago
  > The vast majority of the platform's growth will come from new users... Userbase expansion is new users less leaving users for a time period. So there are two factors, not just "new users." In any case, Match Group apps are well into the phase of focusing on extracting the most money possible from their paying users as opposed to gaining new users. After all, infinite users are useless to a company, even if it costs nothing to support them, if none of them pay.
- parpfish 11mo ago
  And to add to that- seeing a real world friend go on dates or start a relationship because of an app is better than any marketing you could ever buy. If you want to drive top-of-the-funnel growth, make the product good even it causes some folks to drop out once they’re in a relationship.
  - CuriouslyC 11mo ago
    They don't need that. What option do most young people have? Most young men can't approach women, most young women can't handle being approached and we don't have shared spaces where people can get to know each other and pair off anymore. Young people think the apps are dumpster fires, they hate them, but the alternative is sadly worse.
- Etheryte 11mo ago
  I don't think this counterargument holds. It's a hell of a lot easier to get a customer who already paid once to pay a second time than it is to get a customer to pay for the first time. Also, I think most people are well aware that by and large, dating apps have a very low success rate for the majority of their users. People use them anyway.
brudgers 11mo ago
Users who find a partner Tinder is not Match is not Grind. People partner for various reasons and durations.
e2e4 11mo ago
Facebook dating has different incentives. https://www.facebook.com/dating https://www.facebook.com/dating
- jeffbee 11mo ago
  The only thing I can dream up less appealing than that would be dating on Nextdoor.
- phkahler 11mo ago
  IMHO they should be the best one and use that to draw people to FB. They don't need to keep people in the dating app since its not the primary business.
feoren 11mo ago
[flagged]
- DaSHacka 11mo ago
  > This is exactly why a dating app should be developed and provided by the government. Side note: If this gives you the heebie jeebies, you are part of the problem. Bravo, I haven't laughed this much in a while. God-tier satire.
- linguae 11mo ago
  I’m sure there are many people who don’t want their dating lives influenced by whatever rulers are in charge of their governments. Democrats won’t like a MAGA dating service, and vice versa.
  - tbossanova 11mo ago
    What about a nonprofit instead?
- sqrt_1 11mo ago
  I think Japan did this last year https://japandaily.jp/japans-government-initiatives-to-boost-marriage-and-birth-rates-through-dating-app/ https://japandaily.jp/japans-government-initiatives-to-boost...
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- tomhow 11mo ago
  Please don't use HN for ideological battle like this. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - feoren 11mo ago
    Anyone can decide a statement is "ideological" just by disagreeing with it. The statement "the government can and should provide services to its people if those services are important to its future and the free market is incapable of providing them" should not, and did not used to be, ideological. The fact that such a statement is far outside of the current Overton Window is the result of a decades-long propaganda campaign to destroy everyone's faith in government so it can be looted, and everyone who parrots "government bad" is (knowingly or not) playing a part in this propaganda campaign. I assume the issue you have with my comment is that I knew 95% of readers would immediately regurgitate "but government bad!", but of course I was right that that happened. When the Overton Window shifts to the point where saying "people should be decent to one another" becomes a radical ideological statement, make sure you flag every comment that says that too. We can't have radical ideologues on HN, after all.
TimTheTinker 11mo ago
Bingo. This is the effect that keeps (a) incumbent platforms in place, (b) users on those platforms, (c) and potentially new platforms from coming online and offering a "superior" experience.
KolibriFly 11mo ago
I'm not sure it's purely malicious. It might just be the result of optimizing for engagement metrics
NoahZuniga 11mo ago
This is pretty obviously addressed in the article. The premise of the article is why don't users migrate to better platforms when the large ones are extracting as much money as possible (because the incentives are misaligned)
ta12653421 11mo ago
By far absolutely _not_ true: - i have worked in the space for some years for two of the biggest platforms in my country - dating sites track a lot KPI and discuss them and test them thoroughly - the KPI "do-more-users-leave-our-platform-earlier-if-our-matching-algo-is-just-too-good" - I promise: In alle the years, this question WAS NEVER - NEVER!!!!!!! - raised, regardless wich Manager or which Exec. This metric isnt even debated. And here comes why: the most important thing to form a relationship are "technicals" which can NEVER be introduced into an app. There may be some advances in genomic matching, but no body deployed this so far and it wont happen unless Apple watch as a gene encoding module. There are one night stands, there some marriges (we had a "winners board" in our office), but 99% of all cases when people met, its going to be "failure" (in a sense "no match") Regardless how good your algo is - it doesnt matter when it comes to a reality check. Therefore, Dating apps have absolutely no fear of you signing off because you fond someome - its very likely that you will come back soon, second: From operators perspective it would be a good thing if people would tell "i found my match on XYZ", but sine this does happen only super rarely, there are only few such stories. So - NO: Dating sites do fear someone deleting the account. (except: you are a startup and have to keep every profile to gain some size)
- thomastjeffery 11mo ago
  And yet, the premium features are overtly aligned against user success! I believe you that these app devs think they are optimizing for user success, but that doesn't change the incentives that frame their work. The greatest utility of a dating app should be that it provides a higher number of opportunities. This feature is explicitly broken by the most popular dating apps. Often, it is put behind a paywall, which has the same effect as being broken.
  - kelnos 11mo ago
    > The greatest utility of a dating app should be that it provides a higher number of opportunities. I'm not sure I agree with that. Limiting opportunities can actually be a better experience. Too many choices can lead to decision paralysis.
  - 11mo ago

by gassi 11mo ago

cbondurant 11mo ago

This is exactly why I always make it a point to discourage my friends from using dating apps. A dating app that is effective at solving the problem it is ostensibly designed to solve will never make money as people will be matched quickly and will have no need to pay for the service. So clearly no profitable dating app is good at matching people. I'm of the opinion that using a tool that is constantly setting you up for romantic failure and rejection in the name of keeping you on its platform is a really good way to wreck your mental health.

zelphirkalt 11mo ago
On the other hand, if it was so easy to find a match, then we wouldn't be trying to use dating apps. I think it is just generally hard to find a good match for many people these days.
- nradov 11mo ago
  The other side of that is that many people are simply terrible and really unsuitable for being in any sort of long term stable relationship. No dating app can solve that problem (unless maybe they incorporate mental health and life coaching services, which seems kind of sketchy as a combination). Whether the situation has gotten generally harder these days is impossible to say but I certainly don't envy those still in the dating pool.

10000truths 11mo ago

This is often parroted, but the reasoning is flawed. The vast majority of the platform's growth will come from new users, who are entering the dating scene. If they fail to capture that audience (say, by having a reputation of not performing as advertised), then no amount of upsells or string-alongs of existing users will sustain them, as their user base will only ever decrease, and investors will see that and withdraw accordingly.

djoldman 11mo ago
> The vast majority of the platform's growth will come from new users... Userbase expansion is new users less leaving users for a time period. So there are two factors, not just "new users." In any case, Match Group apps are well into the phase of focusing on extracting the most money possible from their paying users as opposed to gaining new users. After all, infinite users are useless to a company, even if it costs nothing to support them, if none of them pay.
parpfish 11mo ago
And to add to that- seeing a real world friend go on dates or start a relationship because of an app is better than any marketing you could ever buy. If you want to drive top-of-the-funnel growth, make the product good even it causes some folks to drop out once they’re in a relationship.
- CuriouslyC 11mo ago
  They don't need that. What option do most young people have? Most young men can't approach women, most young women can't handle being approached and we don't have shared spaces where people can get to know each other and pair off anymore. Young people think the apps are dumpster fires, they hate them, but the alternative is sadly worse.
Etheryte 11mo ago
I don't think this counterargument holds. It's a hell of a lot easier to get a customer who already paid once to pay a second time than it is to get a customer to pay for the first time. Also, I think most people are well aware that by and large, dating apps have a very low success rate for the majority of their users. People use them anyway.

brudgers 11mo ago

Users who find a partner Tinder is not Match is not Grind. People partner for various reasons and durations.

e2e4 11mo ago

Facebook dating has different incentives. https://www.facebook.com/dating https://www.facebook.com/dating

jeffbee 11mo ago
The only thing I can dream up less appealing than that would be dating on Nextdoor.
phkahler 11mo ago
IMHO they should be the best one and use that to draw people to FB. They don't need to keep people in the dating app since its not the primary business.

feoren 11mo ago

[flagged]

DaSHacka 11mo ago
> This is exactly why a dating app should be developed and provided by the government. Side note: If this gives you the heebie jeebies, you are part of the problem. Bravo, I haven't laughed this much in a while. God-tier satire.
linguae 11mo ago
I’m sure there are many people who don’t want their dating lives influenced by whatever rulers are in charge of their governments. Democrats won’t like a MAGA dating service, and vice versa.
- tbossanova 11mo ago
  What about a nonprofit instead?
sqrt_1 11mo ago
I think Japan did this last year https://japandaily.jp/japans-government-initiatives-to-boost-marriage-and-birth-rates-through-dating-app/ https://japandaily.jp/japans-government-initiatives-to-boost...
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
tomhow 11mo ago
Please don't use HN for ideological battle like this. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- feoren 11mo ago
  Anyone can decide a statement is "ideological" just by disagreeing with it. The statement "the government can and should provide services to its people if those services are important to its future and the free market is incapable of providing them" should not, and did not used to be, ideological. The fact that such a statement is far outside of the current Overton Window is the result of a decades-long propaganda campaign to destroy everyone's faith in government so it can be looted, and everyone who parrots "government bad" is (knowingly or not) playing a part in this propaganda campaign. I assume the issue you have with my comment is that I knew 95% of readers would immediately regurgitate "but government bad!", but of course I was right that that happened. When the Overton Window shifts to the point where saying "people should be decent to one another" becomes a radical ideological statement, make sure you flag every comment that says that too. We can't have radical ideologues on HN, after all.

TimTheTinker 11mo ago

Bingo. This is the effect that keeps (a) incumbent platforms in place, (b) users on those platforms, (c) and potentially new platforms from coming online and offering a "superior" experience.

KolibriFly 11mo ago

I'm not sure it's purely malicious. It might just be the result of optimizing for engagement metrics

NoahZuniga 11mo ago

This is pretty obviously addressed in the article. The premise of the article is why don't users migrate to better platforms when the large ones are extracting as much money as possible (because the incentives are misaligned)

ta12653421 11mo ago

By far absolutely _not_ true: - i have worked in the space for some years for two of the biggest platforms in my country - dating sites track a lot KPI and discuss them and test them thoroughly - the KPI "do-more-users-leave-our-platform-earlier-if-our-matching-algo-is-just-too-good" - I promise: In alle the years, this question WAS NEVER - NEVER!!!!!!! - raised, regardless wich Manager or which Exec. This metric isnt even debated. And here comes why: the most important thing to form a relationship are "technicals" which can NEVER be introduced into an app. There may be some advances in genomic matching, but no body deployed this so far and it wont happen unless Apple watch as a gene encoding module. There are one night stands, there some marriges (we had a "winners board" in our office), but 99% of all cases when people met, its going to be "failure" (in a sense "no match") Regardless how good your algo is - it doesnt matter when it comes to a reality check. Therefore, Dating apps have absolutely no fear of you signing off because you fond someome - its very likely that you will come back soon, second: From operators perspective it would be a good thing if people would tell "i found my match on XYZ", but sine this does happen only super rarely, there are only few such stories. So - NO: Dating sites do fear someone deleting the account. (except: you are a startup and have to keep every profile to gain some size)

thomastjeffery 11mo ago
And yet, the premium features are overtly aligned against user success! I believe you that these app devs think they are optimizing for user success, but that doesn't change the incentives that frame their work. The greatest utility of a dating app should be that it provides a higher number of opportunities. This feature is explicitly broken by the most popular dating apps. Often, it is put behind a paywall, which has the same effect as being broken.
- kelnos 11mo ago
  > The greatest utility of a dating app should be that it provides a higher number of opportunities. I'm not sure I agree with that. Limiting opportunities can actually be a better experience. Too many choices can lead to decision paralysis.
- 11mo ago