There is a dating app in my country that doesn’t have the option to chat, if you match you can only choose to meet up or not. If you do, you get to choose from one of the participating bars/coffee shops and you pay a small fee. That fee includes your first drink at the chosen place.
Basically, they monetize by setting people up on dates at specific places they have a deal with, driving customers to these places.
On the other hand you'd think people would flock to an alternative that actually works, while they're searching.
And truly successful in the sense 'never ever need the service again' probably has enough obstacles after the initial matching and dating phase that there could be a fair number of returning customers nonetheless.
Having enough users that could justifiably be called "customer" at all may be a catch of a different kind though. Can't say I know for sure, but I strongly suspect the network effects make it very difficult to attract useful amounts of people to match with to a purely paid service initially, even if it would be readily worth the fees to everyone involved if the system was already established with a large enough network.
Maybe it would have been neat if Musk had bought, and tried to reform, that major online dating service instead of the little bird company...
Explain the game to the user and make a package where the company reserves a large-ish sum on the credit card and they get to cash only when the user stops dating after a successful match.
The dating app doesn't make any money until a successful long-term. The dating app could also require feedback after dates, to both improve matching and verify that one user is not cheating.
If a couple colludes after they get i long-term relationship, they could continue dating... but it increases risks of cheating.
This aligns the interest of the daters and the dating company (less infrastructure expenses and also less risks from reserved but unpaid transactions).
There are open relationships, the app can learn to screen for people with profiles that are prone to that and avoid making the escrow offer.
Interesting idea for sure, but how do you distinguish between users successfully starting a relationship and those just not using the service anymore? Can I say "I did not find a relationship with that person and I'm not interested in looking again for a while"? If so, what would stop people from saying that even if it's untrue?
Also, it means zero monetization for people looking for single encounters and/or flings, which I would bet is a meaningful portion of Tinder's income.
Monetization is pretty straightforward, annual subscriptions, with equal access. Plenty of people will always be looking for love.
I am shocked at some of the prices I saw people paying? $100+ dollars/month to get a reasonable match? How much more monetization do you need there? A $60/year Strava subscription has done more for my love life than this.
I really don't know the solution to this problem but until someone solves it all dating apps will devolve into dark patterns.