On dating apps, men will always be the customer and women are the product. You cannot fix this asymmetry due to how attraction works and the risks involved between men and women. Ironically Instagram is 'the' dating app as you can vet people better and see if they have any social proof. Real life skips a lot of the BS altogether.
I can't ever see anything improving. They will just learn how to manipulate men further into paying, where you suddenly get swarmed with likes then get nothing for a period then get swarmed again so you remain hooked and eventually pay.
I find it interesting that this niche manages to survive, and that the most common takes are attacks on the gimmicks rather than the quality of the people signing up.
The last time any dating apps were "good" was when they weren't apps, but websites. People on these sites back then weren't really trying to optimize for anything. Many were honest and had realistic expectations. It was considered a bit loserish because it's the digital version of the want ads. Of course, everyone likes piña coladas.
Dating websites were the less exhausting alternative to going out drinking or finding new social circles. People understood that low risk meant low reward, but hey it was either that or no date at all.
In other words, this was always a pretty bad scene. What changed is the marketing angle more poised to take advantage of the naive. Making it shiny because computers isn't really working anymore. It's crazy it ever did.
Its a little bit of a balance act, they want to match you with someone that's good enough to date a couple times but not enough to date long term.
I think the mathematics work better if they match you with "mostly compatible" people rather than "not compatible at all". Success stories are important because that's how you build recognition.
Now a days though, match group owns all dating apps so they have a monopoly in dating. Whenever a new app comes to market that's "better" (which will be, in its initial stages) they acquire. Users migrate and then they ruin. Rinse and repeat.
They recently acquired sniffies (a gay cruising app) for like 100M. Go figure.
I've looked into match group before, they're the usual suspects (Blackrock, Vanguard) and practice lawfare. If you don't take their buyout (like how bumble refused) then they try to sue you with software patents which I thought were all basically invalidated in Alice v. CLS Bank. But yeah, they're not a nice group of people who want to match you up. They're in it for money. And the way match group operates makes others reluctant to enter the market, unless they are just looking for a big buyout payday.
Facebook apparently already has a dating app. I've heard anecdotally it is much better than the match group apps, maybe for older age ranges? I'm married and haven't used dating sites in over 20 years.
In theory the 'knows people you know' thing is a good vetting system for finding people to date though.
That is only the case if people enter exclusive relationships. But if someone has access to a dating app or system that works really well, there is little reason to do that.
Breeze has a really cool formula in which you pay exclusively for each date. And a date is organised automatically for each match, without any possibility to chat beforehand.
Not exactly, you only have a very limited amount of profiles visible every day. About 4, though maybe it depends on the location. So there is no endless swiping. You also cannot match anyone else until you have set up a date with your last match, and if you opt out too many times (again, probably three or four) your account gets blocked.
In any case, you only pay for dates you go to (unless you cancel at the last moment). Their incentive is to send you to as many dates as possible.
Coffee Meets Bagels tried that. A few matches at 12PM every day.
I think the key problem for dating apps is that 90% of women on it will only match with the top 10% of men. Meanwhile, most men will try to match with anything that has a nose and eyes.
I don't think Breeze's concept fixes that since it's still up to the girl to match.
Why does it? I'm curious. I think it solves most of the issues of the traditional apps. (But yes, I didn't mention a fundamental aspect: they propose you only a very limited amount of profiles each day, no endless swiping: if you don't fancy any of your daily ~4, tough luck, you can come back tomorrow).
You don't. You go to the date (in a public place, set by the app) and if there's something fishy about them you can report them to the app (there's an explicit feedback request after each date).
Ooh, you lost $12! And your date did too, and probably the account as well. As for the risk of getting murdered, I think it's unavoidable in any app (and in life in general) but probably worse if you organise the date by yourself.
When y'all get tired of this faffing about: pursue a suitable community of faith; date an actual person of the opposite gender until Destiny (and other wise eyes) indicate a match; marry, and let two be a large value of one; have or adopt some children; enjoy the fullness of life in all its seasons.
The old formula has endured and shan't be supplanted by these fancy gizmos.
Church is one of the worst places to try to date and that’s not the purpose. The only purpose of church is worship, not socialization or politics or pushing an agenda or judgment
The problem is that doesn't actually work. I've spent my entire life active in communities of faith and that certainly has never involved, helped with, or facilitated a date let alone a long term relationship.
I find that so incredibly hard to believe, in my experience it's like the primary purpose of people in relationships past a certain age is to play matchmaker.
It seems inevitable if you are consistently around people and known to be single that they will try to set you up with *someone.
This does absolutely nothing to address the underlying social, economic, and ideological reasons why new relationship formation is struggling so much, especially with Gen Z. It's not a technological problem, in other words.
I won't go into my personal explanations here as I'll just be downvoted into oblivion (there are other forums for that discussion) but I will say this: without men and women having reasons to be in relationships--especially long-term reasons--then relationships won't happen. It's proving easier to get our needs met outside of relationships.
This should be the title
I can't ever see anything improving. They will just learn how to manipulate men further into paying, where you suddenly get swarmed with likes then get nothing for a period then get swarmed again so you remain hooked and eventually pay.
The last time any dating apps were "good" was when they weren't apps, but websites. People on these sites back then weren't really trying to optimize for anything. Many were honest and had realistic expectations. It was considered a bit loserish because it's the digital version of the want ads. Of course, everyone likes piña coladas.
Dating websites were the less exhausting alternative to going out drinking or finding new social circles. People understood that low risk meant low reward, but hey it was either that or no date at all.
In other words, this was always a pretty bad scene. What changed is the marketing angle more poised to take advantage of the naive. Making it shiny because computers isn't really working anymore. It's crazy it ever did.
I think the mathematics work better if they match you with "mostly compatible" people rather than "not compatible at all". Success stories are important because that's how you build recognition.
Now a days though, match group owns all dating apps so they have a monopoly in dating. Whenever a new app comes to market that's "better" (which will be, in its initial stages) they acquire. Users migrate and then they ruin. Rinse and repeat.
They recently acquired sniffies (a gay cruising app) for like 100M. Go figure.
* Recruit friends to make recommendations mimics classic searching techniques
* Can scope out a more complete bio early in the process, for both AI and Human filtering/matching
* Their long term incentives will be meet if they post cute couple pictures or generate new long term users
In theory the 'knows people you know' thing is a good vetting system for finding people to date though.
In any case, you only pay for dates you go to (unless you cancel at the last moment). Their incentive is to send you to as many dates as possible.
I think the key problem for dating apps is that 90% of women on it will only match with the top 10% of men. Meanwhile, most men will try to match with anything that has a nose and eyes.
I don't think Breeze's concept fixes that since it's still up to the girl to match.
The old formula has endured and shan't be supplanted by these fancy gizmos.
It seems inevitable if you are consistently around people and known to be single that they will try to set you up with *someone.
as surely as fire will burn
the gods of the copybook headings
with terror and slaughter return
I won't go into my personal explanations here as I'll just be downvoted into oblivion (there are other forums for that discussion) but I will say this: without men and women having reasons to be in relationships--especially long-term reasons--then relationships won't happen. It's proving easier to get our needs met outside of relationships.
Enlighten us.