There are so many simple improvements they could do but don't for some reason.

For example, select all matches within a certain radius from you so that you don't have to click on each of them and check the distance before messaging. Or alert when somebody is within a mile, lets say (with their permission). Or alert your matches when you are near.

I would pay extra for these features.

I just got this. I'm in Eastern Europe (Budapest).

I'm Canadian, they must know that from my iTunes information, which is the only reason I can imagine they would be charging $16.99/month. What an insane price point. That's $203.88 over 12 months. That's a lot of money, even in the world of online thirst.

Starting tomorrow I'm going to readjust my settings. I had my radius set to 100km (small town EE girls ) and for girls aged 18-27 (I'm 28). I'm probably going to go down to 18-22 and 35km. Might as well try to hit home runs instead of hitting for average.

There was an article in Techcrunch from a few weeks ago announcing the new paywall with quotes from a Tinder spokesperson.

http://techcrunch.com/2015/02/03/tinder-...ht-swipes/

Quote:The new feature uses the Tinder Plus paywall to limit “improper use” of Tinder. For the most part, that means that spam bots and other malicious behavior will be detected by algorithms and introduce a paywall to limit the amount of likes a user can give. The paywall lasts for a day and disappears the next morning.

“We’ve reached a point where we’re very confident in our ability to differentiate between improper use of Tinder versus proper use, so we’re starting to introduce barriers that prevent users from behaving a certain way,” said Tinder cofounder and CEO Sean Rad. “This is an effort to temper bots and spam and protect our ecosystem.”

The idea here is that spammers and bot networks will not get enough reward out of power-matching thousands of users if they have to maintain multiple premium accounts.

Rad told TechCrunch that he feels confident in the “aggressive” algorithms that the Tinder spam team uses to detect improper behavior, and that’s why Tinder is finally ready to roll this feature out as a test.

Regular users, for the most part, should really never hit this pay wall. There is the small, but fascinating, fraction of the Tinder population that reflexively swipes right on every single recommendation without even looking at the potential suitor. Those users may trigger the algorithm to put them in the Tinder Plus holding pattern, at which point they’d have to wait until the next day to go on swiping right.

“That behavior happens with a very small percentage of our users, and they usually find that the experience isn’t very good and self-correct on their own,” said Rad.

The algorithms used to trigger this paywall looks at a number of data points, including the number of swipes, direction (obviously), velocity, time spent looking at a profile, etc. This means that a user could theoretically swipe right on 500 recommendations in a row after thoroughly reviewing each individual profile and never get the prompt to upgrade to Tinder Plus.

I would consider myself a regular (male) user. I swipe yes more than no, this is Eastern Europe after all. But I also regularly swipe No. I don't mass swipe Yes or use any app bots. I guess that was enough to be deemed as "improper behaviour." I suspect that the Tinder spokesperson is just BSing us. Every single guy can expect to see this paywall going forward.

Edit:

I just searched "Tinder limit" on Twitter. I see a steady stream of guys complaining. The only woman I saw in the search was this one:



I sure as hell didn't swipe yes 75 straight times. Men are getting screwed over.

I still don't understand why the mass swipers get punished? Aren't they active? Wouldn't, theoretically, the more matches a person had...the more time they'd spend using the app?

I'm talking about before Tinder found a way to capitalize monetarily off thirsty dudes. Back when mass swiping put you at the end of the algorithm for no good reason.

I'm not quite sure what sense that makes. Maybe someone could explain it to me.

Actually, save it. I don't really care.

I'm excited to see how the landscape of Tinder changes as a result of plus.

Will men benefit? Women? Nobody? Everybody? Will it fail? Will it make it more popular?

New version (4.3) is out and limitation is server-side now. Shows 'Out of Likes' notes instead of profiles in third-party clients.
This should effectively kill the bots.
Has anyone updated yet?

Wonder if automated likers will be compatible after paying monthly fee.

Here's Tinder's new pay structure. Tiered more expensive the older you are.. from front page of Google News just now.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03/03/...30_dating/

For the first time got "Out of Likes, Come back Later"
This jumped the shark.
I mostly swipe left.

Yup, just heard on the news that people 30 and over will pay two or three times the amount as their 20 something counterparts. Man that's unprecedented.

Somewhere out there is a group of devs licking their lips at the chance to create a rival app.

Who does this help the most? OKC? Hinge?

$20 a month for tinder plus? Please. I can buy a match subscription for a little more than that. Onto OKC.

It's time to throw up some dick pics on there and see how that goes

(03-02-2015 11:35 PM)Mister X Wrote:  Yup, just heard on the news that people 30 and over will pay two or three times the amount as their 20 something counterparts. Man that's unprecedented.

Somewhere out there is a group of devs licking their lips at the chance to create a rival app.

Who does this help the most? OKC? Hinge?

In my case it helps day game and brushing up on my elderly chat.

(03-02-2015 09:19 PM)Mister X Wrote:  I still don't understand why the mass swipers get punished? Aren't they active? Wouldn't, theoretically, the more matches a person had...the more time they'd spend using the app?

I'm talking about before Tinder found a way to capitalize monetarily off thirsty dudes. Back when mass swiping put you at the end of the algorithm for no good reason.

I'm not quite sure what sense that makes. Maybe someone could explain it to me.

Actually, save it. I don't really care.

I'm excited to see how the landscape of Tinder changes as a result of plus.

Will men benefit? Women? Nobody? Everybody? Will it fail? Will it make it more popular?

From my experience at pay dating sites. It's mostly going to be unattractive women using Tinder now seeking "LTR". As hotter women will just move on to another flavour of the month.

Now the clock starts ticking on who can code an app faster that fixes all of Tinder's problems without making people pay for it.

HSLD

(03-02-2015 05:14 PM)bigbait Wrote:  

(03-02-2015 09:41 AM)Thesoloist Wrote:  

(02-23-2015 02:33 AM)EisenBarde Wrote:  profile deleted, that shit was hurting my ability to cold approach

Really? How is that?

I've heard that before in this thread

Tinder is charging $14.99 In my area

Tinder was already dead in my small town but now this is the nail in the coffin, with spring coming up, best to focus on other endeavors then hit the field once it gets warmer (May)

RIP Tinder 2012-2015

UK users face a £3.99 monthly fee for the service if they are aged between 18 and 27, and £14.99 a month if they are aged 28 and above.

In the US, the corresponding figures are $9.99 (£6.50) and $19.99 (£13).

Tinder added that members in emerging economies would be charged an average of $2.99 a month for the premium features.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-31700036

Out of curiosity how much would you guys pay for tinder. I would pay a buck or two a month.

But I think it would need to be free for girls. Otherwise the pool will be so small!

I paid £2.49 and I am 28+. I have seen at least three fees flying about. Edit: a few weeks ago I changed my age to 27 for a week so maybe tinder clocked this age. There is no way I'd pay a 30+ surcharge when I could get as many lays from PoF.

The amount of matches I get has collapsed.

just swiped left on a girl's profile... her photo was of her riding on a cock carousel... seriously

(03-03-2015 01:32 AM)The_CEO Wrote:  just swiped left on a girl's profile... her photo was of her riding on a cock carousel... seriously

Lmao.

Makes me want to buy a chick magnet costume (google image) and use it as my main.

I just tested it out more in Switzerland and Poland.

I guess Switzerland is treated like a developing country since it's only a couple of bucks for premium - it's likely related to popularity.

It is interesting that they mention time as one of the algorythms. I took my time one day and it seemed to me that it took much longer before being out of likes. Also I don't do the mass-spamming, because I did not want to check out all those fatties when they match me - waste of time. It's faster to reject quickly, but take a bit of time to check out a girl you like. It's possible that Tinder re-evaluates your matches to that, since I've had then streaks of seeing only hotties for 10 swipes.

Also I set my age on 29 while being 40 - I look younger, but of course not like that. Did not have a problem when meeting one girl recently. She just said: "I like older men anyway." The really young ones seem to care less than the 30 year olds.

It's possible that they are not lying when saying that you could have 500 likes with no premium, but then this might take you a long time checking out each profile, so there seems to be some way to not spend money. Tinder seems to cut out some bots and mass-spammers, which is not such a bad thing. I wish that they would ban the pseudo-escort-spammers quicker.

Verdict: Tinder not yet dead.

Currently has a 1 star rating in the app store with over 1100 ratings already. People are fuming on social media too, as expected.

Trying to figure out the audience here that's willing to pay this fee? Certainly not quality women. I mean really now. I don't know how many quality dudes are gonna pay for it either. So, thirsty dudes - until they get frustrated that their money didn't get them any closer to hooking up with chicks. Then they'll bail.

Sidenote - also, to stop the monthly fee from kicking in again, you have to go to your iTunes settings and cancel the subscription. You can't do it from the app. They're being really shady. I guess they're hoping people just delete the app thinking the payments will stop.

@Zelcorpion - I don't understand how Tinder is NOT dead. I can't think of a product or service that said "well we used to be free, but now we're going to charge $10 a month to use our product, and $30 if you're 30 or older." It's absolutely unbelievable. Google, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Vine, Youtube are all free to use, and all of them are financial powerhouses. They found a way to make it work. Get fucking advertisers if you're that hard up for money. Not suddenly stamp a $10 MONTHLY (not one time) fee on a product that previously was free. That's such poor business strategy I can't even begin to get into it.

Sure, as a company they'll make some money initially, as $10 per user is a lot more than $0 per user...but they're not gonna have users!

This thread is losing relevancy with every new post.

(03-03-2015 04:52 AM)Mister X Wrote:  Currently has a 1 star rating in the app store with over 1100 ratings already. People are fuming on social media too, as expected.

Trying to figure out the audience here that's willing to pay this fee? Certainly not quality women. I mean really now. I don't know how many quality dudes are gonna pay for it either. So, thirsty dudes - until they get frustrated that their money didn't get them any closer to hooking up with chicks. Then they'll bail.

Sidenote - also, to stop the monthly fee from kicking in again, you have to go to your iTunes settings and cancel the subscription. You can't do it from the app. They're being really shady. I guess they're hoping people just delete the app thinking the payments will stop.

@Zelcorpion - I don't understand how Tinder is NOT dead. I can't think of a product or service that said "well we used to be free, but now we're going to charge $10 a month to use our product, and $30 if you're 30 or older." It's absolutely unbelievable. Google, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Vine, Youtube are all free to use, and all of them are financial powerhouses. They found a way to make it work. Get fucking advertisers if you're that hard up for money. Not suddenly stamp a $10 MONTHLY (not one time) fee on a product that previously was free. That's such poor business strategy I can't even begin to get into it.

Sure, as a company they'll make some money initially, as $10 per user is a lot more than $0 per user...but they're not gonna have users!

This thread is losing relevancy with every new post.

Nah - I mentioned before that a good part of it is shitty decision making. I personally would keep it free for women, but offer search options, massive automatic like options for men who pay premium or even platinum. You could milk the cow dry, but they are not doing it - partly because of being motivated by the gender-is-a-construct crap, feminism, etc. I am certain that if guys here went to work on Tinder you might even have super-platinum offers for 500$ per month with massive advantages or even consulting/coaching being offered for 2000$ a month.

Tinder claims that only a small part of mostly men did mass-approaching so far. Yes - but they don't take into account that those men fucked the majority of girls out there. The sexual market place is highly unequal and the most "popular" guys on Tinder are all mass-swipers. Women can be more selective. The changes are badly done - it's their New Coke experience. You can still tinder away and get laid, but it's worse in my opinion.

(03-03-2015 05:04 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(03-03-2015 04:52 AM)Mister X Wrote:  Currently has a 1 star rating in the app store with over 1100 ratings already. People are fuming on social media too, as expected.

Trying to figure out the audience here that's willing to pay this fee? Certainly not quality women. I mean really now. I don't know how many quality dudes are gonna pay for it either. So, thirsty dudes - until they get frustrated that their money didn't get them any closer to hooking up with chicks. Then they'll bail.

Sidenote - also, to stop the monthly fee from kicking in again, you have to go to your iTunes settings and cancel the subscription. You can't do it from the app. They're being really shady. I guess they're hoping people just delete the app thinking the payments will stop.

@Zelcorpion - I don't understand how Tinder is NOT dead. I can't think of a product or service that said "well we used to be free, but now we're going to charge $10 a month to use our product, and $30 if you're 30 or older." It's absolutely unbelievable. Google, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Vine, Youtube are all free to use, and all of them are financial powerhouses. They found a way to make it work. Get fucking advertisers if you're that hard up for money. Not suddenly stamp a $10 MONTHLY (not one time) fee on a product that previously was free. That's such poor business strategy I can't even begin to get into it.

Sure, as a company they'll make some money initially, as $10 per user is a lot more than $0 per user...but they're not gonna have users!

This thread is losing relevancy with every new post.

Nah - I mentioned before that a good part of it is shitty decision making. I personally would keep it free for women, but offer search options, massive automatic like options for men who pay premium or even platinum. You could milk the cow dry, but they are not doing it - partly because of being motivated by the gender-is-a-construct crap, feminism, etc. I am certain that if guys here went to work on Tinder you might even have super-platinum offers for 500$ per month with massive advantages or even consulting/coaching being offered for 2000$ a month.

Tinder claims that only a small part of mostly men did mass-approaching so far. Yes - but they don't take into account that those men fucked the majority of girls out there. The sexual market place is highly unequal and the most "popular" guys on Tinder are all mass-swipers. Women can be more selective. The changes are badly done - it's their New Coke experience. You can still tinder away and get laid, but it's worse in my opinion.

The issue though is this whole thing has turned off the entire user base. Not one person is saying "oh we have to pay now? Sweet."

People are very turned off now. Men and women alike. Women will stop using the app, guaranteed. Not all of them, but men on here had been complaining about drop in matches and whatnot long before this whole thing. The "it" girls will move to the next new app before it goes mainstream. At the moment, that looks like Hinge. Although that's not perfect either. Lot of things they ask you to fill out and we all know the more you fill out the more potential things women will rule you out for. Tinder was simple. You could put whatever you wanted in your profile and it was based purely on physical attraction. I don't get why that's so difficult to duplicate. But I digress.

You may be able to get a lay here or there on Tinder going forward, but men have already dealt with flakes, and the app plain old fucking up and hiding your profile from women. Now you throw in a smaller user base. I don't know.

Also - and this was happening before the price drop but the price drop cemented it...Tinder was losing the cool factor. It wasn't "cool" to be on Tinder anymore. Actually, people viewed it as embarrassing more than anything. Every other day was a new buzz feed article poking fun at Tinder in some way. If your product is geared towards a young audience, and you lose the cool factor, you're finished. Ask Myspace. Ask Microsoft. Tinder lost the cool. I've never seen a company regain the cool. Don't underestimate that aspect.

Can you get around this swipe limit by simply not updating the app? It seems that unless you want to pay for Plus, there's no benefit to the update anyway.

I did notice a girl I matched with posted a moment of Tinder preventing her from swiping right for 12 hours, so it does happen to women as well. Major turn off.

(03-03-2015 10:19 AM)getdownonit Wrote:  Can you get around this swipe limit by simply not updating the app? It seems that unless you want to pay for Plus, there's no benefit to the update anyway.

Not with the previous 4.1.4 version. It still shows 'plus' features. And limit is enforced by the server now as well.

(03-02-2015 09:14 PM)Nemausus Wrote:  The new feature uses the Tinder Plus paywall to limit “improper use” of Tinder. For the most part, that means that spam bots and other malicious behavior will be detected by algorithms and introduce a paywall to limit the amount of likes a user can give. The paywall lasts for a day and disappears the next morning.

The idea here is that spammers and bot networks will not get enough reward out of power-matching thousands of users if they have to maintain multiple premium accounts.

Rad told TechCrunch that he feels confident in the “aggressive” algorithms that the Tinder spam team uses to detect improper behavior, and that’s why Tinder is finally ready to roll this feature out as a test.

Men always get screwed over online, but I'm glad the bots are gone!

(03-02-2015 11:35 PM)Mister X Wrote:  Yup, just heard on the news that people 30 and over will pay two or three times the amount as their 20 something counterparts. Man that's unprecedented.

Somewhere out there is a group of devs licking their lips at the chance to create a rival app.

Who does this help the most? OKC? Hinge?

Somewhere right now Markus from POF is laughing like Dr. Evil....

Another new "feature" I noticed on the new Tinder app yesterday is that when you go to unmatch someone they give you a list of reasons why you're doing so. One of them is "bad offline behavior". So now Tinder is going with a defacto rep system where they're even going to police how our in person dates go? It looks like Tinder is now giving the feminists and white knights even more tools in their arsenal.

(03-02-2015 05:40 PM)DJ-Matt Wrote:  I see a shit ton of people suddenly lying about their age or just dropping off Tinder. Personally I hope for massive drop-offs of these thirsty ass betas fucking it up.

Majority of guys deleting Tinder are these guys. "I'm not paying to be left swiped" is the general moto and the hatred of bot spam.

I'm sure there are other factors which Tinder can ensure your profile is shit listed in some way. Now that they mention how liking a lot over a short period means you are a spammer will help some guys be more careful.

I wonder what the sweet spot for this type of flagging is.

So far I have summarised how to best get ahead with Tinder.

- Delete every 2-3 weeks. Re-open an account in 1-2 weeks or more depending on what leads you have. This app is great little side dish for game

- Remember to swipe left a fair bit. This is why I swipe left on any girl with some form of social media platform listed on her profile. They can go fuck themselves for all I care.

This coupled with fatties, crazy looking short haired tatt girls, multiple kid single mothers, uglies and my gut feelings on escorts makes you a harder target

However if a woman flags your profile because you sent her abuse this might affect the whole process. You can get banned for a certain time on Tinder.