Dating preferences are changing, & people are ditching dating apps to find love on Strava, Duolingo, Reddit, & Discord. But dating apps continue to raise prices as their stocks suffer in 2023.
Thanks for your comments, Christopher. I worked in tech and can talk about the how the app helps. I can see the appeal for dating apps and the value they provided by creating a game like experience for someone to go online and find a date.
But everyone knows what to expect from the app and how the experience is going to be, so in terms of the user's experience - they're saturated. They're looking for something else - a different format to find a date. That's what I took away after researching for the article along with my experience in technology.
And raising prices for these apps definitely does not help at all. Which is why maybe the tried-and-tested formula: the old-school way. 😄
The main thing about the apps is that everyone there wants to be approached. No one is forced to endure being hit on by someone they are not interested in which reduces the "creepy."
That's a unique spin on trying to understand why folks on the dating apps were bored of it. Appreciate your perspective!
I do see how everyone waits for the other person to be approached. Users like the profiles that the matching algorithm serves them, then after that it could be a waiting game for who makes the first move. Even if I am wrong here and people are making the first move contrary to our perspective, I feel there is equal value in the argument that users can ghost one another even after a few messages are exchanged which is the next step after someone makes the first move. Ghosting is widespread in the dating app ecosystem. Good point, Dean! I hope I was able to add onto your perspective?
Really interesting to read about the trends, and btw I love the 2 minute version summary. I was shocked to read those costs and had no idea it was that high. I met my husband on Hinge a few years ago when the apps were flourishing, and I’ve been hearing how much the apps have changed recently. Some friends feel like they can’t meet anyone without paying. I’ll definitely pass this along to them!
Thanks for sharing your story Jess. When we researched some of the prices of the premium dating services, our jaws dropped as well. One of the other things that is concerning, is that a lot of these users are on the app for many years at a time, as the Match Group CEO said that users are sticky. While good for the app revenue, paying such prices over many years without long term success may lead to user frustration, and I think that is what is playing out today for the most part.
Exactly! I can imagine it feels like a sunken cost for so many folks and I guess that’s another reason why the alternative options for meeting are on the rise.
People are waking up to the extent of the sunk costs of investing in dating app subscriptions and evaluating the opportunity cost of alternatives. Thanks for the follow up commentary, Jess!
Thanks for sharing your experience Jess. Apart from the high prices, I wouldnt be surpised if changes were made to the matching algorithm of dating apps. I think its similar to Twitter (oh right! its called X now 🥸) - Posts from paying monthly users are given more visibility versus the others.
Were you or your husband on any other dating apps before Hinge? I remember there was some kind of fatigue already building into Tinder right before the pandemic. Hinge rebranded around that time and I remember reading commentary from the previous CEO of Match that they had seen a nice bump in users in Hinge.
Thanks for this reply - yes that’s a great point, seems like there have been algorithm changes too. Just Hinge primarily, tried Bumble for a bit but I couldn’t keep up with how it was always on me to take initial action. In my circles I feel like I hear people using mostly Hinge these days
Dec 21, 2023·edited Dec 21, 2023Liked by Amrita Roy, Uttam Dey
Great analysis of a genre that has never found a solid footing in my observations. If given a choice of a blind date setup by a trusted family member, friend, or colleague versus a “blind date” from a dating app, which one would we bet has a better chance of culminating in a positive, never mind safe outcome?
I would go with the blind date set up by a trusted friend or colleague, but I am sometimes relatively "old-school" in my thinking, relative to my generation.
But I think the real of online dating apps or the success behind them has been the broader range of choices it opens up to an individual when searching for a partner, but as far as we see it, it is starting to change.
Good question, David! You and I would know the answer to your question. (i'm old school in many ways). But the answer to this question would differ for many people based on the generation their from. For example, millennials adored the concept of apps. The advent of the first iphone, Google's Android concept and smartphone app stores coincided with the arrival of Millenials entering the workforce. Many millennials would have a different answer to your question. Maybe the same would be for the younger Gen Z generation.
However, with inflation running rampant, and dating apps pricing out many of millennials and Gen Z folks they're trying to cut costs. And to find some one to hook up with, they're going doing a combination of the old school way plus asking someone on their Snapchat or Instagram network to hook them up with one of their friends.
I guess its the case of "old wine in a new bottle"?
Interesting read, I just like seeing how the world is evolving. I would think that paid subscriptions would cut down on fake profiles and possibly have more serious people signed up. Next level would be verifying ID's before getting an account. Interesting that men are still more willing to pay than women especially when it could increase safety.
As a business model they should factor in that some of their customers will be successful and leave unlike some other subscriptions people are likely to keep for life.
The other thing to look at with some of these new business models is are they actually profitable? If not that gives you some insight into how much they should be charging.
You bring up a lot of many good points in one chat bubble, Chris. A lot to unpack. Phew!
First - profitability. Bumble & Match are profitable on EBITDA basis. High interest rates environments forced these companies to find ways to increase high margin revenue. As an investor, I get why they tried to raise prices. But it appears as if there are diverging trends between inflation falling and companies raising subscription prices across all their apps.
About fake profiles - to me fake profiles is like the unwanted problem child of social media's boom that it can't get rid off. Its just going to be there. ID verification was a no-brainer but Tinder released this only recently in late 2021. It took them a whole decade to realize the value of adding profile verification as a feature. If you haven't yet, you should watch The Tinder Swindler - you'll understand why folks behind fake profiles dont mind paying subscription given the money the make on gullible users.
I'm curious though- have you you used any dating apps or older legacy services like eHarmony or Match.com?
Never tried any of them, just find it interesting to see the world evolving. Married 20 years ago so it was old fashioned meeting at a university dance.
Interesting insights here into an industry I have never looked at in detail. But I am still convinced that this is not really a good investment opportunity.
Bernhard - you bring up a point of view that hasn't been discussed before on the post or in the comments of this post. So thank you very much for that! I love all these different points of view the post goes into.
Back to your PoV - I agree with you 💯💯💯. Bumble is still not making money on EBITDA basis. Match is in a different place delivering negative shareholder equity consistently. What has me more skeptical about Match is how much their asset values are inflated by their goodwill.
But that's just me. What are your concerns with these 2 companies or any other matchmaking companies that are on your radar?
Hi Uttam, these apps face a unique paradox: successful matches mean losing active users, creating a constant need to attract new users, which is costly. Additionally, the majority of users prefer not to pay for these services, limiting revenue growth. And it's important to remember that love isn't confined to algorithms and swipes. Unlike subscription services such as Netflix or Spotify, where you receive continuous value and entertainment, the fundamental essence of love and human connection can be found in everyday life, outside the digital sphere. So in general I think that the lifetime of this business model is very limited.
Dating apps offer an “arranged marriage” version of hook ups where as these other non-dating apps offer a non obvious organic way of meeting someone increasing the thrill of a hook up as love marriage once did, in contrast to its conservative cousin, the arranged marriage. So dating apps are losing their shine.
And yeah, when you can seemingly find love for free, why pay?!
I think one of the things that is emerging after a decade of booming dating apps, is that people who sign up on dating apps to find partners to marry are getting increasingly frustrated as the matching algorithm and pricing structure are not optimal, thus causing them to find other ways to meet people based on aligned set of interests on apps such as Strava, Duolingo, etc. On the other hand, dating apps are still seeing revenue from their so-called "power users" who pay for premium pricing, but the motive there is generally hook-ups, instead of finding long term relationships, so far, dating apps are catering to that segment well. May be over tim,e we will see better incentive focused and targeted apps designed to fulfill the purpose of people who are looking for relationships vs. hookups.
Absolutely. Catering to people who are looking for relationships can be a double edged sword - it results in higher churn of users from the platform, unlike hook ups. Finding the balance of incentivising users and platforms simultaneously will be an interesting problem to solve - it's not impossible but people will need to get creative, which hasn't happened in a long time now, as you guys rightly allude to it in your post.
Retailer apps are missing out by not having a “Community” feature on them, ie, opting into discovery when someone of similar interests in food, entertaining, etc is in-store. Or even IKEA matching people who live buying furniture with those who live assembling furniture (disclaimer, I love assembling stuff! I’m also professionally trained, so... 😳)
I'm laughing as I read this. Interesting feature to ask retailers to have on their apps. Sometimes I feel my wife married me so I could assemble all our furniture and she wouldn't have to pay for getting it assembled. 🤓🥸😬
The "community" feature would be indeed amazing. I also love the IKEA idea, haha, disclaimer, I am my co-author's wife and I admit I know nothing about assembling furniture.
Dec 21, 2023·edited Dec 21, 2023Liked by Amrita Roy, Uttam Dey
Great article.
In my humble opinion, dating apps are ill equipped to deal with human attraction/romance. It's baked into their origin as hook-up apps. We emphasize different markers for attractiveness in short vs. long term partners, but dating apps are heavily weighted towards short term attractiveness (looks, superficial markers of success, ect.)
There's no indication of whether the person on the other end of the screen is thinking in superficial short-term ways, or open to deeper connection. There are buttons on the profiles like "short term, short term open to long, long term, life partner, ect." but that doesn't capture the shifting moods and emotions of a living person.
Two people who are perfect for each other may match, but they're communicating in entirely different modes so the connection isn't made.
Fantastic perspective and thanks so much for sharing. And fully agree with you on that dating apps have geared themselves towards "short term" relationships, cuz, that will mean that users stick around on the platform and pay for a very long period of time, what good is it to an app if an user pays, finds his/her soulmate and then leaves the app, cuz there is no more use of it left.
thanks for sharing your perspective. Loved it. Especially this line :"There are buttons on the profiles like "short term, short term open to long, long term, life partner, etc." but that doesn't capture the shifting moods and emotions of a living person. "
As someone who has been on several of the apps (unfortunately) I think we swung too hard and now people are rebelling and opting out of the online dating scene so we might end up swinging fast the other way (people choosing to meet naturally / organically). interesting read!
Thanks for your intriguing perspective, Katarina. It's quite interesting - what you mention here. While researching for this post, I remember coming across many sourced I had bookmarked that suggested, concepts like Matchmaking, DIY Dating, and Dating Coaching is making a huge comeback.
Right now, most start ups offering matchmaking are launching them in a club format. Some offer date-coaching and dating therapy too. There's Ambyr Club, Lox Club, Inquire Within. There's also a new dating app called https://tame-app.com/ that forbids ghosting.
Thanks Alejandro, glad you enjoyed the post. Did you ever use a dating app? I can imagine the dating scene in Lisbon is more geared towards IRL meetups and getting to know each other, vs. relying on an app, but I may be biased.
I've used some of them on and off in the past ~ 5 years and I've seen the decline first hand. 5 years ago it was much easier to meet people that way. Now it's more challenging and most men are forced to pay. People have a hard time committing to someone since someone better may be potentially sitting some swipes away. I've never used them in the US, but in Lisbon and Spain they're becoming the most popular way to meet someone, compared to other traditional methods.
I was reflecting on your point but I wouldn't be surprised that its becoming popular in Portugal. Since user growth is declining for many consumer app companies in the US and in other developed markets, many app companies are looking towards other less developed markets to penetrate into. Apps companies like Match, Spotify and Etsy have already outlined to investors how they plan to lead user acquisition strategies into newer markets. Thanks for your perspective, Alejandro.
Dating is actually a complex ritual of society that is really underappreciated. None of the dating apps today have done much to solve problems if there were any in the first place. All that they have done is thrown some sprinkles and confetti to spice it up but the problem hasn't gone away. Think about great apps that have actually solved problems & then managed the lifecycle of the problem after solving it - Uber, Spotify, Maps... They all complemented life in the technology world. Unlike Tinder.
Great perspectives, Sully! Yes. I do see the problem that still largely stays unsolved. Its now mostly become a money making racket for app subscriptions. This sector is ripe for disruption.
I've been married for 28 years, but if I was single again, I would have to find some creative way to find a woman who could put up with an Aspergian who is obsessed with baseball and history.
Because of my Asperger's, I lack common sense and social skills. I would be better in an online format, where I could write an essay.
Anyway, the girl of my dreams would have to be able to handle one or both of two questions:
1. "Two earth-shaking events took place on August 4, 1914. Everybody knows one. Nobody remembers the other. Name them."
The correct answers can be:
A. The correct answer.
B. "I think I know one, but I'm dying to know the other...will you tell me over dinner?" or words to that effect.
2. "In the history of baseball, there have been 24 Perfect Games, tossed by 24 different pitchers. However, one man has been the catcher for TWO Perfect Games. Name him."
A. The correct answer.
B. "One guy caught two? That's amazing. Let me think...no, it wasn't one of the Yankee catchers in 1998 or 1999...will you tell me over dinner?" Or words to that effect.
By the way, the only man to play in THREE Perfect Games was outfielder Paul O'Neill.
Thanks v. much for sharing your experience and perspective. Unfortunately, I am not a baseball fan but I can feel your passion for the game sitting and reading your comments. The experience you shared is what many people have started to look for nowadays rather than just the online dating profile experience where everyone would just swipe left or right on a profile.
The hook up apps can never be marriage apps. They are inherently different businesses. The company wants recurring revenue and the desirability metrics are different.
People gravitating towards other apps are looking for longer term connections.
On a hook up app, a 10 on attractiveness with a 6 on personality will do great. But who wants to marry that? Anyone smart would rather marry the 10 on personality with a 6 on attractiveness. But the hook up apps can't do anything to verify personality.
Even if they could, personality and attractiveness are both subjective. Personality often takes vastly longer to judge. Unless someone just lets the mask slip, they can fake it for quite a while. Or maybe that's just my weakness in reading people. I compensate by bringing in trusted friends to render an opinion.
I see the rise of these other apps as a way to screen for authentic interests. Similar interests can certainly help in a relationship.
Last point. Most matches for male profiles go to the top 10%. Am I top 10%? Probably depends on if I list my occupation (stock analyst, not "substack writer"). But if the other person has even a rough approximation of my income, how could I trust the relationship? Their motives could be entirely pure, but how could I be confident?
I married at 20. My wife accepted me before I had money. I never have to wonder about her incentives.
The most visible and marketable traits are precisely the ones we don't want to be the basis for the relationship.
Great insights, Michael. Apologies, that it took me a while to get back. Decided to shut my laptop for a few days after Friday last week. You are 100% right about marriage apps and hook up apps having totally different business models. I also resonate with the idea that we don't necessarily want to be matched on the basis of our most visible and marketable traits, as the alignement of incentives will be distorted.
I think people who are on dating apps with the purpose of finding someone to marry, will churn increasingly as they find ways (that are often free) to meet people aligned with same set of interests on other apps that alreadt exist or perhaps newer ones that come about with a better business model and incentive structure.
As for the hook up apps, I don't think I will ever fully comprehend the insane pricing structure and the extent of peoples' willingness to pay, but that is just me.
Hope you had a lovely Christmas and wishing a Happy new year in advance.
Guess I am old and old school. I have never understood dating online after reading you excellent article I still don't.
Thanks for your comments, Christopher. I worked in tech and can talk about the how the app helps. I can see the appeal for dating apps and the value they provided by creating a game like experience for someone to go online and find a date.
But everyone knows what to expect from the app and how the experience is going to be, so in terms of the user's experience - they're saturated. They're looking for something else - a different format to find a date. That's what I took away after researching for the article along with my experience in technology.
And raising prices for these apps definitely does not help at all. Which is why maybe the tried-and-tested formula: the old-school way. 😄
The main thing about the apps is that everyone there wants to be approached. No one is forced to endure being hit on by someone they are not interested in which reduces the "creepy."
That's a unique spin on trying to understand why folks on the dating apps were bored of it. Appreciate your perspective!
I do see how everyone waits for the other person to be approached. Users like the profiles that the matching algorithm serves them, then after that it could be a waiting game for who makes the first move. Even if I am wrong here and people are making the first move contrary to our perspective, I feel there is equal value in the argument that users can ghost one another even after a few messages are exchanged which is the next step after someone makes the first move. Ghosting is widespread in the dating app ecosystem. Good point, Dean! I hope I was able to add onto your perspective?
Yes I can understand that. For me the creepy is online dating.
That is understandable. Personally, I dislike them tremendously and while I have used them in the past it has been a couple years.
Really interesting to read about the trends, and btw I love the 2 minute version summary. I was shocked to read those costs and had no idea it was that high. I met my husband on Hinge a few years ago when the apps were flourishing, and I’ve been hearing how much the apps have changed recently. Some friends feel like they can’t meet anyone without paying. I’ll definitely pass this along to them!
Thanks for sharing your story Jess. When we researched some of the prices of the premium dating services, our jaws dropped as well. One of the other things that is concerning, is that a lot of these users are on the app for many years at a time, as the Match Group CEO said that users are sticky. While good for the app revenue, paying such prices over many years without long term success may lead to user frustration, and I think that is what is playing out today for the most part.
Exactly! I can imagine it feels like a sunken cost for so many folks and I guess that’s another reason why the alternative options for meeting are on the rise.
Oooh! Great way of summarizing this!
People are waking up to the extent of the sunk costs of investing in dating app subscriptions and evaluating the opportunity cost of alternatives. Thanks for the follow up commentary, Jess!
Thanks for sharing your experience Jess. Apart from the high prices, I wouldnt be surpised if changes were made to the matching algorithm of dating apps. I think its similar to Twitter (oh right! its called X now 🥸) - Posts from paying monthly users are given more visibility versus the others.
Were you or your husband on any other dating apps before Hinge? I remember there was some kind of fatigue already building into Tinder right before the pandemic. Hinge rebranded around that time and I remember reading commentary from the previous CEO of Match that they had seen a nice bump in users in Hinge.
Thanks for this reply - yes that’s a great point, seems like there have been algorithm changes too. Just Hinge primarily, tried Bumble for a bit but I couldn’t keep up with how it was always on me to take initial action. In my circles I feel like I hear people using mostly Hinge these days
Great analysis of a genre that has never found a solid footing in my observations. If given a choice of a blind date setup by a trusted family member, friend, or colleague versus a “blind date” from a dating app, which one would we bet has a better chance of culminating in a positive, never mind safe outcome?
I would go with the blind date set up by a trusted friend or colleague, but I am sometimes relatively "old-school" in my thinking, relative to my generation.
But I think the real of online dating apps or the success behind them has been the broader range of choices it opens up to an individual when searching for a partner, but as far as we see it, it is starting to change.
Good question, David! You and I would know the answer to your question. (i'm old school in many ways). But the answer to this question would differ for many people based on the generation their from. For example, millennials adored the concept of apps. The advent of the first iphone, Google's Android concept and smartphone app stores coincided with the arrival of Millenials entering the workforce. Many millennials would have a different answer to your question. Maybe the same would be for the younger Gen Z generation.
However, with inflation running rampant, and dating apps pricing out many of millennials and Gen Z folks they're trying to cut costs. And to find some one to hook up with, they're going doing a combination of the old school way plus asking someone on their Snapchat or Instagram network to hook them up with one of their friends.
I guess its the case of "old wine in a new bottle"?
Interesting read, I just like seeing how the world is evolving. I would think that paid subscriptions would cut down on fake profiles and possibly have more serious people signed up. Next level would be verifying ID's before getting an account. Interesting that men are still more willing to pay than women especially when it could increase safety.
As a business model they should factor in that some of their customers will be successful and leave unlike some other subscriptions people are likely to keep for life.
The other thing to look at with some of these new business models is are they actually profitable? If not that gives you some insight into how much they should be charging.
You bring up a lot of many good points in one chat bubble, Chris. A lot to unpack. Phew!
First - profitability. Bumble & Match are profitable on EBITDA basis. High interest rates environments forced these companies to find ways to increase high margin revenue. As an investor, I get why they tried to raise prices. But it appears as if there are diverging trends between inflation falling and companies raising subscription prices across all their apps.
About fake profiles - to me fake profiles is like the unwanted problem child of social media's boom that it can't get rid off. Its just going to be there. ID verification was a no-brainer but Tinder released this only recently in late 2021. It took them a whole decade to realize the value of adding profile verification as a feature. If you haven't yet, you should watch The Tinder Swindler - you'll understand why folks behind fake profiles dont mind paying subscription given the money the make on gullible users.
I'm curious though- have you you used any dating apps or older legacy services like eHarmony or Match.com?
Never tried any of them, just find it interesting to see the world evolving. Married 20 years ago so it was old fashioned meeting at a university dance.
Lovely to hear! thanks for sharing your experience, Chris!
Interesting insights here into an industry I have never looked at in detail. But I am still convinced that this is not really a good investment opportunity.
Bernhard - you bring up a point of view that hasn't been discussed before on the post or in the comments of this post. So thank you very much for that! I love all these different points of view the post goes into.
Back to your PoV - I agree with you 💯💯💯. Bumble is still not making money on EBITDA basis. Match is in a different place delivering negative shareholder equity consistently. What has me more skeptical about Match is how much their asset values are inflated by their goodwill.
But that's just me. What are your concerns with these 2 companies or any other matchmaking companies that are on your radar?
Hi Uttam, these apps face a unique paradox: successful matches mean losing active users, creating a constant need to attract new users, which is costly. Additionally, the majority of users prefer not to pay for these services, limiting revenue growth. And it's important to remember that love isn't confined to algorithms and swipes. Unlike subscription services such as Netflix or Spotify, where you receive continuous value and entertainment, the fundamental essence of love and human connection can be found in everyday life, outside the digital sphere. So in general I think that the lifetime of this business model is very limited.
Dating apps offer an “arranged marriage” version of hook ups where as these other non-dating apps offer a non obvious organic way of meeting someone increasing the thrill of a hook up as love marriage once did, in contrast to its conservative cousin, the arranged marriage. So dating apps are losing their shine.
And yeah, when you can seemingly find love for free, why pay?!
I think one of the things that is emerging after a decade of booming dating apps, is that people who sign up on dating apps to find partners to marry are getting increasingly frustrated as the matching algorithm and pricing structure are not optimal, thus causing them to find other ways to meet people based on aligned set of interests on apps such as Strava, Duolingo, etc. On the other hand, dating apps are still seeing revenue from their so-called "power users" who pay for premium pricing, but the motive there is generally hook-ups, instead of finding long term relationships, so far, dating apps are catering to that segment well. May be over tim,e we will see better incentive focused and targeted apps designed to fulfill the purpose of people who are looking for relationships vs. hookups.
Absolutely. Catering to people who are looking for relationships can be a double edged sword - it results in higher churn of users from the platform, unlike hook ups. Finding the balance of incentivising users and platforms simultaneously will be an interesting problem to solve - it's not impossible but people will need to get creative, which hasn't happened in a long time now, as you guys rightly allude to it in your post.
Amrita, are you available?
Best
TC
Nope. She's taken. 🤨
Sorry TC, I am married to my co-author Uttam. No immediate plans to break up, but I will keep you posted. :)
Heyyyy!!! Ok..... No muffin for you tomorrow morning.🙄
😂
Keep an eye out for me 🙏💓, ya never know, a "Substack Romance"
Retailer apps are missing out by not having a “Community” feature on them, ie, opting into discovery when someone of similar interests in food, entertaining, etc is in-store. Or even IKEA matching people who live buying furniture with those who live assembling furniture (disclaimer, I love assembling stuff! I’m also professionally trained, so... 😳)
But dating apps are dying...
I'm laughing as I read this. Interesting feature to ask retailers to have on their apps. Sometimes I feel my wife married me so I could assemble all our furniture and she wouldn't have to pay for getting it assembled. 🤓🥸😬
🤭😉
The "community" feature would be indeed amazing. I also love the IKEA idea, haha, disclaimer, I am my co-author's wife and I admit I know nothing about assembling furniture.
Is that why you married him? Looks fade, furniture assembly skills are FORRRRREEEVVVVEERRRRR!!!! 😀😀😀
Great article.
In my humble opinion, dating apps are ill equipped to deal with human attraction/romance. It's baked into their origin as hook-up apps. We emphasize different markers for attractiveness in short vs. long term partners, but dating apps are heavily weighted towards short term attractiveness (looks, superficial markers of success, ect.)
There's no indication of whether the person on the other end of the screen is thinking in superficial short-term ways, or open to deeper connection. There are buttons on the profiles like "short term, short term open to long, long term, life partner, ect." but that doesn't capture the shifting moods and emotions of a living person.
Two people who are perfect for each other may match, but they're communicating in entirely different modes so the connection isn't made.
Fantastic perspective and thanks so much for sharing. And fully agree with you on that dating apps have geared themselves towards "short term" relationships, cuz, that will mean that users stick around on the platform and pay for a very long period of time, what good is it to an app if an user pays, finds his/her soulmate and then leaves the app, cuz there is no more use of it left.
thanks for sharing your perspective. Loved it. Especially this line :"There are buttons on the profiles like "short term, short term open to long, long term, life partner, etc." but that doesn't capture the shifting moods and emotions of a living person. "
As someone who has been on several of the apps (unfortunately) I think we swung too hard and now people are rebelling and opting out of the online dating scene so we might end up swinging fast the other way (people choosing to meet naturally / organically). interesting read!
Thanks for your intriguing perspective, Katarina. It's quite interesting - what you mention here. While researching for this post, I remember coming across many sourced I had bookmarked that suggested, concepts like Matchmaking, DIY Dating, and Dating Coaching is making a huge comeback.
Right now, most start ups offering matchmaking are launching them in a club format. Some offer date-coaching and dating therapy too. There's Ambyr Club, Lox Club, Inquire Within. There's also a new dating app called https://tame-app.com/ that forbids ghosting.
What extra dating features do you get for $500 a month? $1000 a week? 😳
Those better be some hot dates!
❤️🔥❤️🔥❤️🔥 Lol! 😆
Haha, it is insane indeed.
Such a wonderful analysis on a thorny topic. It confirms my suspicions: dating apps are broken.
Thanks Alejandro, glad you enjoyed the post. Did you ever use a dating app? I can imagine the dating scene in Lisbon is more geared towards IRL meetups and getting to know each other, vs. relying on an app, but I may be biased.
I've used some of them on and off in the past ~ 5 years and I've seen the decline first hand. 5 years ago it was much easier to meet people that way. Now it's more challenging and most men are forced to pay. People have a hard time committing to someone since someone better may be potentially sitting some swipes away. I've never used them in the US, but in Lisbon and Spain they're becoming the most popular way to meet someone, compared to other traditional methods.
I was reflecting on your point but I wouldn't be surprised that its becoming popular in Portugal. Since user growth is declining for many consumer app companies in the US and in other developed markets, many app companies are looking towards other less developed markets to penetrate into. Apps companies like Match, Spotify and Etsy have already outlined to investors how they plan to lead user acquisition strategies into newer markets. Thanks for your perspective, Alejandro.
Dating is actually a complex ritual of society that is really underappreciated. None of the dating apps today have done much to solve problems if there were any in the first place. All that they have done is thrown some sprinkles and confetti to spice it up but the problem hasn't gone away. Think about great apps that have actually solved problems & then managed the lifecycle of the problem after solving it - Uber, Spotify, Maps... They all complemented life in the technology world. Unlike Tinder.
Great perspectives, Sully! Yes. I do see the problem that still largely stays unsolved. Its now mostly become a money making racket for app subscriptions. This sector is ripe for disruption.
I've been married for 28 years, but if I was single again, I would have to find some creative way to find a woman who could put up with an Aspergian who is obsessed with baseball and history.
Because of my Asperger's, I lack common sense and social skills. I would be better in an online format, where I could write an essay.
Anyway, the girl of my dreams would have to be able to handle one or both of two questions:
1. "Two earth-shaking events took place on August 4, 1914. Everybody knows one. Nobody remembers the other. Name them."
The correct answers can be:
A. The correct answer.
B. "I think I know one, but I'm dying to know the other...will you tell me over dinner?" or words to that effect.
2. "In the history of baseball, there have been 24 Perfect Games, tossed by 24 different pitchers. However, one man has been the catcher for TWO Perfect Games. Name him."
A. The correct answer.
B. "One guy caught two? That's amazing. Let me think...no, it wasn't one of the Yankee catchers in 1998 or 1999...will you tell me over dinner?" Or words to that effect.
By the way, the only man to play in THREE Perfect Games was outfielder Paul O'Neill.
1988: Tom Browning, with the Reds.
1998: David Wells, with the Yankees.
1999: David Cone, with the Yankees.
He was on the winning side each time.
Thanks v. much for sharing your experience and perspective. Unfortunately, I am not a baseball fan but I can feel your passion for the game sitting and reading your comments. The experience you shared is what many people have started to look for nowadays rather than just the online dating profile experience where everyone would just swipe left or right on a profile.
It's one of my two obsessions in life, and they are linked.
"Whoever wants to understand the heart and mind of America had better learn baseball." -- Columbia historian Jacques Barzun.
The hook up apps can never be marriage apps. They are inherently different businesses. The company wants recurring revenue and the desirability metrics are different.
People gravitating towards other apps are looking for longer term connections.
On a hook up app, a 10 on attractiveness with a 6 on personality will do great. But who wants to marry that? Anyone smart would rather marry the 10 on personality with a 6 on attractiveness. But the hook up apps can't do anything to verify personality.
Even if they could, personality and attractiveness are both subjective. Personality often takes vastly longer to judge. Unless someone just lets the mask slip, they can fake it for quite a while. Or maybe that's just my weakness in reading people. I compensate by bringing in trusted friends to render an opinion.
I see the rise of these other apps as a way to screen for authentic interests. Similar interests can certainly help in a relationship.
Last point. Most matches for male profiles go to the top 10%. Am I top 10%? Probably depends on if I list my occupation (stock analyst, not "substack writer"). But if the other person has even a rough approximation of my income, how could I trust the relationship? Their motives could be entirely pure, but how could I be confident?
I married at 20. My wife accepted me before I had money. I never have to wonder about her incentives.
The most visible and marketable traits are precisely the ones we don't want to be the basis for the relationship.
Great insights, Michael. Apologies, that it took me a while to get back. Decided to shut my laptop for a few days after Friday last week. You are 100% right about marriage apps and hook up apps having totally different business models. I also resonate with the idea that we don't necessarily want to be matched on the basis of our most visible and marketable traits, as the alignement of incentives will be distorted.
I think people who are on dating apps with the purpose of finding someone to marry, will churn increasingly as they find ways (that are often free) to meet people aligned with same set of interests on other apps that alreadt exist or perhaps newer ones that come about with a better business model and incentive structure.
As for the hook up apps, I don't think I will ever fully comprehend the insane pricing structure and the extent of peoples' willingness to pay, but that is just me.
Hope you had a lovely Christmas and wishing a Happy new year in advance.
I tried Dating Apps briefly several years ago...
I have two problems with them:
1. Men pay, too much
2. What or who is Real or Honest ???
My Conclusion: No Gracias.....
Valid concerns, Steven. Shared by most respondents who were part of some surveys I looked at while researching.
Which dating apps did you try at the time?