4 ms·
Tinder to charge older users more for premium facilities
- minimaxir 12y agoPrice discrimination only works if people can't easily identity that discrimination is in play. Otherwise, there will be backlash, which is what has been happening on Twitter this morning. It's also worth nothing that price discrimination really doesn't work if it can easily be gamed. Many people create secondary Facebook profiles for Tinder; this implementation just ensures that there will be a lot more "27 year olds" on the service.
- benihana 12y ago>this implementation just ensures that there will be a lot more "27 year olds" on the service. which ultimately hurts the service as nobody will be able to know who is 27 and who is older than 27
- bazookajoes 12y agoI predict that people will put their real age in their bios. Many older people already do this today.
- MangoDiesel 12y agoYes exactly. This is a really badly designed implementation of a pricing tier strategy. It also seems likely that by incentivizing users to lie about their age, Tinder will create an entire zone of fake ages between something like 25-27, where users do not want to be grouped in with all of the "27 year olds" so they go year(s) lower. Thus, eliminating user trust for ages of anyone at numbers approaching 27.
- baddox 12y ago> Price discrimination only works if people can't easily identity that discrimination is in play. While this specific pricing model seems odd to me, I don't think I agree with your general claim. I think everyone understands the iPhone product line, with different prices for different amounts of storage space. As far as I know, that works really well for Apple, yet it would be difficult to have a more blatant example of price discrimination. edit: There are several people claiming that price discrimination requires the products to be completely identical. I maintain that is not how the term is used in economics. I replied with more detail here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9135084 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9135084
- mmastrac 12y agoI think what he means is charging different prices for different users for the same product.
- bazookajoes 12y agoI wonder if it matters that Tinder is a service not a product. In MS Office it is possible for two people to have the same user experience. But on Tinder the people that you interact with are the product. Legally this distinction is probably irrelevant.
- baddox 12y ago"Price discrimination" is widely used to refer to identical or nearly identical products whose cost of production is nearly identical despite being offered at significantly different prices.
- dragonwriter 12y ago"Price discrimination" means charging different users different prices for the same product/service. Apple charging different prices for different amounts of storage space is not price discrimination.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- baddox 12y ago"Price discrimination" is widely used to refer to identical or nearly identical products whose cost of production is nearly identical despite being offered at significantly different prices.
- czr80 12y agoPrice discrimination is when a business charges different prices to different groups of consumers for the same product or service. Charging different prices for similar goods is not pure price discrimination.
- hsod 12y agoMovie theaters very clearly show the different prices for different groups (students, seniors, etc.) and no one seems to mind. Same with zoos, museums, etc.
- AdrianRossouw 12y agodon't those also require the presentation of a valid student id, or some form of senior citizen id ?
- hsod 12y agostudent ID-- yes. senior citizen ID is probably just a drivers license with a DOB on it. not sure if you were agreeing or disagreeing with my point?
- duaneb 12y agoAlso, people are generally better with price CUTS for those perceived as disadvantaged, e.g. the elderly, students, etc. People are also GENERALLY ok with short-lived extra fees for the young and/or provably risky: think credit cards, rental cars, hotel rooms(?). I don't think I've ever seen a case of a price HIKE, though; stereotypically I imagine a grumpy group of older people.
- guessbest 12y agoAlternative Headline: Tinder to open market for over 28 year olds to much more competition.
- devindotcom 12y agoI really think this was the most boneheaded monetization plan I've seen in a while. This group is the flightiest, most experimental bunch of early adopters, and that kind of price tag is going to make them laugh out loud. It is ten times what I thought it was going to be. Limiting interaction with the app (driving users to the next service, conveniently located at the icon next door) was strike one. This is strike two. Who's going to wait for strike three? Not people who want to meet someone new and are being told they can't use this app the way they have for the last six months, that's for sure!
- Alex3917 12y ago> I really think this was the most boneheaded monetization plan I've seen in a while. If the goal is to actually make money and not just maximize their number of users, this could be a good thing. For people over 28 willing to pay, their odds of getting a date just went way up. And for people over 28 not willing to pay, it doesn't matter if they leave anyway. I'm not saying this definitely isn't going to be the next Digg 2.0, but I think success here is at least plausible.
- hkmurakami 12y agoI wonder what the reaction from each segment of the current Tinder userbase would be if someone outright cloned Tinder as a new, standalone app (i.e. not embedded inside of an existing brand with a preconceived image, a la OKCupid's Tinder clone)
- bazookajoes 12y agoWhen you say okcupid's tinder clone are you talking about locals?
- hkmurakami 12y agoI think it was called Instamatch? (it's been a while)
- fsniper 12y agoI think this price discrimination will have some backlash. If they have gone with the pitch "discounts for younger users" it would be more easily accepted.
- TillE 12y agoIf nothing else, that's some pretty awful PR. Why not sell it as a "student discount" or similar? Nobody wants to hear about the cold business logic of setting prices.
- onion2k 12y agoI'm reasonably certain the UK's age discrimination legislation under the Equality Act 2010 could be used to take Tinder to court for this. Basically, it's illegal to charge people more simply because of how old they are. http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/your-rights/equal-rights/age/new-law-ban-age-discrimination-services-public-functions-and-associations-–-exceptions http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/your-rights/equal-rights/...
- skizm 12y agoSerious questions: Can they give people discounts based on how old they are? Can they give student discounts? Is there a legal line between giving discounts/charging less vs charging more?
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- Osmium 12y agoI see plenty of under-25 offers? e.g. theatre tickets, railcards... (though the latter is also available to students of all ages, but you don't have to be a student to get it, just 25 or under)
- _delirium 12y agoIn Germany at least, afaict older students can't get the railcard discounts; the terms specify "student (< 27 years old)". I've found that a lot in Europe, unlike in the U.S., where as a late-20s grad student I was perfectly able to get student discounts at most places just by showing a student ID.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- madengr 12y agoSenior discounts (55+) are quite popular in the USA, although I don't hear young people complaining.
- jyrkesh 12y agoTinder is really messing this up hard. First this, and now I've run out of "likes" for 12 hours based on some new hard limit. I've never had any real success using Tinder, and I've only continually engaged because it's a mindless way to pass the time (playing God with acceptance/rejection is fun). Now, it's just yet another dating app that isn't worth paying for. Back to OKCupid, I guess.
- thrillgore 12y agoOKCupid and Tinder (and Match) share the same owner, IAC.
- citricsquid 12y agoand OKCupid engages in price discrimination too, and has done for many years. The price you'll see for OKCupids premium service ("A-list") is based on a variety of factors: attractiveness, age, location, gender... an attractive woman will pay ~$3.99 per month whereas an unattractive middle aged man will pay ~$20.
- WildUtah 12y agoHow do they do the attractiveness rating? Is it an internal eval or some kind of crowdsourced bayesian inferential hotornot?
- bazookajoes 12y agookcupid is now very similar to tinder in that users can rate each other on a 0-1 scale. (It used to be 1-5). The rating algorithm is probably a lot like pagerank. Ratings by users that are rated highly matter more. The potential signals are: * swipes yes or no * messages received * length of conversations * number of unmatches/blocks received
- logn 12y agoIt's the latter (using things like click through rates). I'm not sure if any one blog sums up their methods, but they write about this topic a lot. In one post I read, they specifically mention that having a high quality camera correlates with their attractiveness ratings and so do different types of poses. So "attractiveness" might be better thought of as popularity, not beauty (though, that's the approximation).
- kelukelugames 12y agoBecause we have more money or we are more desperate?
- Malic 12y agoProbably, yes - and yes.
- bazookajoes 12y agoThose are factors, but also because older people are typically looking for a long-term relationship and young people are typically looking for a short-term relationship. People are willing to pay a lot more for a potentially life changing long-term relationship. I think eharmony and match.com's pricing strategy proves this.
- smileysteve 12y agoThe addon features aren't great for the segmentation. Ie. People pay for eHarmony over Tinder because they're likely to get better match.
- Dylan16807 12y ago>One expert said the move was "sleazy". Oh screw you, BBC. Expert on what? If you want to insult it, go ahead, but don't pretend that calling it 'sleazy' is an act of journalism, an expert explaining facts. Side note: I'm amused by the people suggesting they push to frame it as a discount. That would be sleaze. This may be jerk behavior but it's not dishonest.
- pixie_ 12y agoYea they should of just said discriminatory. Well that's kinda sleazy too.
- brianbreslin 12y agoThis could be a fascinating price discrimination experiment. They could constantly change prices on people based on their behavior in the app, or how many times they see the upgrade offers, effectively maximizing their revenue.
- jfoutz 12y agoI'm surprised they're charging women. Perhaps this just reveals my sexism. They obviously have the data, I guess it's impressive they're able to charge men and women the same price. I'd always put tinder in that category of hookup-ish bar that doesn't charge women cover.
- bazookajoes 12y agoMany people in tinder are using it for real dating, not just hookups. Many bios include "Not looking for a hookup".
- richardbrevig 12y agoMy personal experience with these types of apps is that what people post in their profile and what actually happens upon meeting are not highly correlated.
- protomyth 12y ago"Perhaps this just reveals my sexism" Not really, it just means you've come to the same conclusion as bars in the US have for years.
- graeme 12y agoI don't expect women to pay. The way Tinder work for most people is that men get few matches, and women have a stack of a few dozen to a few hundred potential matches waiting. When someone right swipes you, they go to the top of your stack, and you see them first. Most men swipe right on every profile. So most women match on almost 100% of the profiles they swipe right. As a consequence, men swipe a LOT more than women, and it will be mostly men who hit the usage limits. (I haven't quite figured out the math, as every match is two ways. Nonetheless, it's significantly easier for women to get matches.)
- bazookajoes 12y agoWhat better methods of price discrimination do you think they should use? * Perhaps men could be charged more than women - it's sexist and a double standard but in many parts of the world men are expected to pay for dates anyway. * Perhaps users need to say if they are looking for a short term relationship versus a long term relationship and are charged more (or less) to match with others who are looking for a long term relationship. * Perhaps users are only charged if they match with more than X people per month.
- protomyth 12y ago"What better methods of price discrimination do you think they should use?" None. Same service, same price. A tech company, given all the ageist news articles, probably shouldn't price on age.
- tsotha 12y agoIt's kind of a stretch to call Tinder a tech company. It's a hook up site, basically, and they want to charge less attractive people more money for the same reason fat people can't find stylish clothes - too many unattractive people will hurt your brand.
- protomyth 12y agoAge is not a good discriminator of looks, particularly starting at 28.
- nilkn 12y agoI'm not sure I agree. And it's not just about looks. It's about youth and the hook-up culture. College students are more likely to be into that sort of culture than older working professionals, which means they're more valuable to Tinder as users. That said, I don't agree with this pricing strategy.
- protomyth 12y ago
- Zelphyr 12y agoThis is such a bad idea that it strikes me as a PR stunt.
- krschultz 12y agoYou are giving them way too much credit. FWIW, the CEO of Tindr is 27.
- Zelphyr 12y agoI suspect you're right but damn; didn't SOMEONE on his board pull him aside and say, "uh, yeah... you don't want to do that."??
- bazookajoes 12y agoI imagine that they didn't realize this would blow up because it didn't blow up when okcupid started doing it. However they probably forgot that tinder is on much larger stage than okcupid.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- lazaroclapp 12y agoKeep in mind this is only for the infinitesimal subset of Tinder users that will be paying for the "premium" feature set anyways. Basic Tinder remains free for all ages, as far as I understand. That said, I agree with the BBC's unnamed expert (who is probably Paul Kedrosky quoted again at the end of the article): ' One expert said the move was "sleazy". '.
- minimaxir 12y agoBasic Tinder was crippled (swipe limit) in order to convince people to buy the premium version.
- bazookajoes 12y agoHow do you know that Tinder Plus doesn't have the same swipe limit? That is not stated in the Tinder FAQ, in the BBC article or the TechCrunch article.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- minimaxir 12y agoVia Reddit: http://i.imgur.com/LtHhRbY.jpg http://i.imgur.com/LtHhRbY.jpg
- bazookajoes 12y agoThank you, it is interesting that that is not in FAQ
- aetherson 12y agoI think Tinder's users are pretty inured to being thought "sleazy." Also, really, BBC? You grant anonymity to an "expert" to say that Tinder is sleazy? You really couldn't find someone who would go on the record there?
- chris_wot 12y agoUnder the Age Discrimination Act 2004 s28 "Goods, services and facilities", this would be illegal under Australian law.
- eghad 12y agoSounds like an anchoring strategy--articles direct their attention to the higher price point for users older than 30, and the $10 monthly fee for the premium version doesn't look that bad in comparison (which for the 2 added features is a little steep imho).