Communication

Every new dating app on the market is trying to compete with Tinder’s soaring popularity. The only problem is, not many differentiate themselves enough to do it effectively. Most of the new apps have the same basic concept – swiping through photos of people nearby, seeing who you might want to message. Clover wants to do things a bit differently in the latest version of its dating app.

Clover launched back in April 2014 with little fanfare, but recently they have debuted a new feature to try and distinguish themselves from the Tinder-like apps. While many people enjoy “Tinder-ing, ” there is still a gap between what people expect from an online dating site or app and what they actually get – leading to much disappointment. Fortunately, this problem might persuade daters to try new apps – hoping to find the right formula for dating success.

Part of the problem Clover execs noticed with Tinder is that people weren’t actually meeting up in real life – they were just scrolling and messaging. So they decided to make Clover focused on getting to the actual date - but with simplicity and ease like Tinder, rather than complicated matching algorithms and a long communication process like traditional dating sites.

Instead of encouraging people to just scroll through photos, Clover’s newest version includes an “on-demand” feature that allows you to meet matches IRL (in real life) more quickly. It works like this: you pick a date and time in the calendar and where you want to meet (your favorite bar, restaurant, etc.), and the app suggests a potential prospect to join you. You then decide if you’d like to spend your time with him/her. If you do, the date is confirmed and all you have to do is show up on time.

“Our new on-demand service will find people that actually want to meet you and you’ll be able to find a date as easy as it is to order a pizza or a cab,” says Clover CEO Isaac Raichyk.

Raichyk argues that it is difficult to actually go on a date using other apps or even dating sites like OkCupid. Just because people are matched doesn’t mean that they will make the effort to meet. So why not do it more organically by confirming a date and time to see if there’s chemistry between you in person rather than waste more time texting back and forth for nothing.

While this sounds really good in theory, the app will have to prove itself in practice. The premium service is free for users to download and test for a week, but after that, it will cost you $9.99 per month - a hefty fee compared to most apps, but cheaper than online dating subscriptions and personal matchmakers. There are also certain pay-to-play features like a $.99 charge to change your name/ handle. The new on-demand feature however will be included in the free version.

Just how crazy are single consumers for Tinder? And how much will they be willing to pay for the service?

The company is betting that certain features will be very valuable to Tinder users who have been requesting them since the service launched. So valuable that the company will be beta testing different price points in the UK, Germany and Brazil, with prices ranging from $.99 US to $4.99 to as high as $20.00 US for the premium version of the app, Tinder Plus.

Tinder Plus will roll out in these three markets first to determine how to proceed in other markets.

Antidate may be the antidote to disappointing mobile dating. At least, that's what they hope to be.

The dating app space is obviously exploding (thanks primarily to Tinder, but also apps like Happn and Hinge). The latest contender to enter the ring is Antidate, which hopes to knockout the competition with its asymmetric, gender-skewed approach to the dating app experience.

Here's the twist: male users are visible to women within the app (and their location is plotted on a map), but women aren't visible until they indicate interest in someone (by initiating a conversation, for example, or clicking a guy's profile). This strategy allows women to filter out unwanted advances while men get to sit back, relax, and let the ladies take the lead.

"When we first talked about a dating app, Tinder hadn’t launched and the only mobile dating apps we knew about were the gay ones like Grindr. We knew girls wouldn’t want to be viewable on a map so came up with the idea of an asymmetric experience for guys and girls,” co-founder Mo Saha told TechCrunch.

Saha saw benefits for both sides in Antidate's concept. Women could feel safer, knowing that their location information would never be revealed, and could avoid receiving messages from men they weren't interested in. Men who were tired of always making the first move could use the app to reverse the typical dating dynamic. “We also knew that online dating conversations are five times more likely to continue if started by a girl,” Saha noted. Win-win-win.

Antidate is still in the early stages, but it has a few other interesting tricks up its sleeve that might help it get noticed, such as:

• A real-time selfie requirement that time stamps photos, to eliminate the problem of people posting out-of-date photos to their profiles
• A rating feature, so users can indicate how much someone they met in real life looks like their photos
• Ephemeral messaging, so communications between potential dates disappear after 24 hours
• An Instagram usage requirement, which filters (no pun intended) the pool of prospective users and targets a younger, more social crowd

Although it's been in development for around 2 years, Antidate has only been out in beta on iOS for a few months. A full version launched recently and a marketing push is planned for the December holidays. Keep an eye out for what could be your new favorite dating app in 2015.

Let’s face it, we human beings are visual creatures. When you meet someone new in person, what’s the first thing you do? Most likely, you look at him and decide on how attractive he is. Would you pursue him if you had an opportunity?

This type of superficial behavior is pretty standard. Most of us assess and judge others according to their appearance. The soaring popularity of apps like Tinder give us evidence that even in the digital age when we can get more information on almost anybody we meet if we just took the time to Google them – we prefer to say yes or no based on their looks.

Case in point: in the two years Tinder has been on the market, smartphone sales have gone up dramatically, which means more people have access to the app. The statistics speak for themselves. Tinder processes more than a billion swipes daily, matches more than 12 million people in the same amount of time (only a fraction of the overall swipes are mutual however), and though the company won’t release information on the number of users, sources say it could be as large as 50 million active users.

More important than people signing up for Tinder is the fact that they use it – as regularly (if not more often) as other popular social media like Facebook or Pinterest. According to a recent article in The New York Times, on average, people log in to the app 11 times a day. Women spend as much as 8 and a half minutes on it, while men spend 7.2 minutes (sorry guys). If you add it up, that’s almost 90 minutes per day.

But is the phenomenon of Tinder purely based on our basic animal instincts? Are we really only looking for someone who is physically attractive, or who embodies a physical ideal of some sort?

Maybe not. Many of Tinder’s users (mostly men) are looking to rogue apps like Tinderoid that manipulate Tinder’s database so they can “swipe right” to multiple profiles at once without even looking at a single photo. They are looking to increase their odds of matching with a woman, rather than looking for someone they find physically appealing. But what is the goal - is it just to hook up with more women? Maybe, but that’s another matter.

Tinder is a vehicle for meeting more people, and works a lot faster than your traditional online dating process. Maybe it’s appeal is not just about the photos, but instead due to the vast quantity of people you can “pick and choose” anytime, anywhere - and how quickly you can match and meet up.

The real question is: does it improve the overall dating experience? The jury is still out on that one.

Popular online dating company Zoosk announced this week the launch of Dating Insights, a new feature on its site that allows members to see a holistic view of their dating activity and preferences culled from Zoosk’s original “behavior-based” matching technology.

Zoosk has long marketed the benefits of its technology, which tracks how users behave on its site and matches them accordingly. For instance, if Zoosk notices that you mostly reach out to bookish guys, then it will start matching you with more literary types. It works for both daters and Zoosk, because the more you use the service, the better (and more curated) your matches will be.

The new feature Dating Insights will offer members information about their own individual dating preferences, and will also aggregate information about members who have shown some interest. The idea is to help you understand your patterns and preferences so you can have a better overall dating experience.

Dating Insights is divided into three sections:

Who Likes You – this feature provides demographics of matches who have shown the most interest in the user, like those of a particular age, body type, education, ethnicity, religion, and whether or not they smoke.

Who You Like – Zoosk sums up your preferences, not based on your profile, but on your behavior. For instance, Zoosk will let you know that “you put more importance on a man’s level of education than most” or “The Lord of the Rings is the book liked most by the men you’re interested in.”

Your Dating Style – this shows how often (and how well) you are using the dating site, and provides tips on how to improve your experience.

It only makes sense that the online dating company would harness its own technology to offer daters insight into how they are dating, since they use it to match daters anyway. But they aren't the first.

OkCupid has used information gathered from its own users as well to shed light on how people date online. Co-founder Christian Rudder analyzed the extensive data the company collected to understand online dating trends and to provide its members with more services they want (for a fee) – such as the ability to rate dates and filtering out people who don’t physically match your ideal. eHarmony also provides insight to daters as part of its package of services, though it is more personalized. eHarmony offers a “profile book” once you have finished with its extensive questionnaire, where you can find out what your strengths and weaknesses are as a dater and in a relationship.

Helping daters understand the online dating experience and what they want isn’t new, but hopefully the more opportunities daters have to see this kind of information, the better their experiences will be.

For more about this service you can read our Zoosk review.

The FTC has filed its first lawsuit against an online dating company, accusing UK-based JDI Dating of luring customers to pay money through fake profiles the company created.

A settlement between the FTC and JDI Dating prohibits the company from using fake profiles and requires it to refund more than $616,000 to customers. JDI operates 18 websites including cupidswand.com, flirtcrowd.com and findmelove.com.

According to a press release distributed by the FTC on the matter, JDI was tricking customers by offering them a free plan and allowing them to set up profiles and upload photos. Once customers completed this process, they began to receive messages supposedly from other users, but were unable to respond until they bought a paid membership. Membership for the sites ranged anywhere from $10 to $30 per month.

Unfortunately, the profiles that usually attracted paying customers were often virtually generated, so once new members were paying for their subscriptions, they weren't able to communicate with the matches they thought they were getting - because they never existed.

“JDI Dating used fake profiles to make people think they were hearing from real love interests and to trick them into upgrading to paid memberships,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

The prevalence of fake profiles has long been an issue for online daters, but this new lawsuit is finally shedding some legal light on the problem. Because of this, more online dating companies will probably be re-thinking their freemium services (attracting users with free services and later asking them to pay for certain "privileges" on the site.) Freemium services are often based on how many members join the site - numbers are key in the online dating world, because high numbers attract more people. The more valuable a company's user database, the more likely people would be willing to pay for their matches, because they feel that they are getting more choices.

In addition to generating fake profiles, the FTC found that JDI was also misleading consumers about payments. The company did not inform customers that subscriptions would have recurring charges until the customer canceled the service (which was tricky to find on the site), so many people paid for the site after they stopped using it without realizing it.

Rich added, “Users were charged automatically to renew their subscriptions – often without their consent.”

Again, this is a common practice among online dating sites. Several do have recurring charges, and it's often difficult to figure out how and where on a site to fully cancel services and erase your profile. For example, free dating sites like Plenty of Fish have kept profiles of members who are no longer using the service without clearly explaining to customers how to fully delete them. Although they are not charging for their services, it could be misleading to other daters.

The FTC lawsuit is a positive step in helping companies in the online dating industry clean up their databases and be more honest with the services they provide. We'll see if other companies are named in the future.