Tinder Is Phasing Out Higher Prices for Users Ages 29-Plus

The new study recruited 96 Tinder users per country in Brazil, India, the Netherlands, and New Zealand, in addition to the U.S., between May and September 2021. The study also recruited 48 users in South Korea; researchers say they recruited only heterosexual-identifying users in that country to avoid potential risks to participants.

Users then documented the price they were quoted for a one-month subscription to Tinder Plus, which unlocks extra swipes and an undo button.

Different participants saw widely varied prices, both within countries and across borders. Such pricing “is likely achieved through an algorithm, using a combination of data points to determine what price to offer to each individual consumer,” according to the study, which was conducted by Consumers International (a consortium of organizations that includes Consumer Reports) and the Mozilla Foundation.

Seven in 10 Americans oppose personalized pricing, 49 percent “strongly,” according to a nationally representative survey of 2,341 adults by Consumer Reports (PDF) conducted in September 2021.

Such pricing appears to be widespread online, but companies rarely inform consumers when they are being charged different amounts for the same products. Experts say that lack of transparency can give companies an unethical advantage.

“It’s unfair because consumers don’t know that it’s happening,” says Jeffrey Moriarty, the executive director of the Hoffman Center for Business Ethics at Bentley University in Waltham, Mass. "They’re playing the game by rules that you don’t know about and have not agreed to because they’re doing it without your knowledge.” 

Certain variations in pricing, such as student and senior discounts, are legal, but some other forms of price discrimination are against the law. “Typically it’s been found to be illegal when price discrimination is based on things like race, gender, age, religion, marital status, national origin, or disability,” says Robert Weiss, a partner at the law firm Barnes & Thornburg in Chicago who specializes in information technology law. 

The latest research follows two studies that found similar price differences on Tinder, one conducted in Australia in 2020 and another in the U.K. that was released about two weeks before Tinder announced its pricing policy change. In a press release, Tinder says it had offered price discounts “to make Tinder affordable for those in school or early in their careers.”

In most countries covered by Consumers International’s study, people in their 30s and 40s were quoted higher prices than any other age group. In the U.S. their average price was 42.4 percent higher than the price for adults under 30. 

People older than 49 saw slightly lower prices on average—much more than 20-somethings, but a bit less than folks in their 30s and 40s.

The age gaps were even higher elsewhere. Dutch Tinder users ages 30 to 49 were quoted more than twice as much on average as younger users in the CI study.

When Tinder Plus launched, age discrimination for the subscription wasn’t a secret. In the U.S., swipers older than 30 paid $19.99, while younger users paid $9.99.

Following the rollout, a Tinder user sued the company for age discrimination under California state law. Tinder eventually agreed to settle the class-action lawsuit for $24 million; the terms of the settlement were recently overturned by an appeals court. Tinder didn’t admit wrongdoing, but it promised in 2019 to stop the practice for users in California.

The Consumers International study found no statistically significant evidence that gender or sexual preference were related to pricing. However, in the U.S., men who participated in the study saw an average price 6.5 percent higher than women. Americans outside of major cities were quoted 11.5 percent more than people in major metropolitan areas.

In the U.S., prices were barely different at all for people with different sexual orientations. However, in the Netherlands, Dutch users looking for opposite-gender partners were quoted prices 10.6 percent higher than people seeking partners of the same gender. 

The study also found that overall prices for Tinder Plus varied by country. Dutch users saw the highest average price at $16.46, while Brazilian users saw the lowest at $3.49.

Computer scientists say algorithms can use a vast array of ever-changing data points to set prices, and can yield effects that the companies using them didn’t intend. According to the study, “​​Even assuming gender or sexual preference are not deliberately factored into Tinder’s pricing algorithm, there is potential for unintentional discrimination if specific demographics are consistently being charged more than their counterparts.” 

Tinder says that no social demographic information has ever been used to set prices on the platform. “The allegations that Tinder uses gender identity and sexual orientation to set prices is absolutely false,” says a Match Group spokesperson.

Companies often keep the inner workings of their pricing decisions secret. Consumers International recommends that companies and regulators work to make those decision-making processes public. “Businesses must make it clear to consumers when and how personalized pricing is being used, while governments and regulators must establish and enforce such transparency requirements,” the study says.