Compare this to OkCupid.

When IAC acquired OkCupid in 2011 for $50MM, OkCupid had almost as many users as Tinder does now, but Tinder's valuation (according to IAC) is literally 100x more.

Not saying a 5B valuation makes sense, but I think Tinder is employing the thin edge of the wedge strategy [1] (like Instagram did with photos) and is using their huge success with dating to become a more generic social network.

They've already been public with vague plans to move beyond dating. Also, their new verified accounts for celebrities make a lot more sense with a generic social network than with a dating app.

[1] http://cdixon.org/2010/12/27/the-thin-edge-of-the-wedge-stra...

Dating is a giant business.

10m daily users is an amazing stat.

Doubling their users at that scale in <5 months is earth shattering.

I know these things make for rational arguments.

And still my brain has trouble processing that valuation, especially in the context of "worth almost as much as IAC".

A friend said something that struck me yesterday:

"The fed has literally been dumping billions out of helicopters. Billions don't matter anymore."

I am not commenting on bubble / no bubble but it will be interesting to see what happens when $$$ tightens @ the top.

I was just about to post this. Anyone else find this shocking? I mean I know it's popular and all but...

The article is very confusing about the numbers, but if they do hold up to scrutiny, the people cashing out are smart.

Tinder's user engagement can be modeled as a wave. Due to the social graph, when you first get the app, people in your cohort are likely to be using it as well.

During this time, there is more value than just the dopamine rush of flipping through pictures and getting matches. A match is much more likely to be actionable.

The downside of this is that once the addiction wears off for you, it's likely starting to wear off for the people in your cohort. So user "unadoption" is just as viral as user adoption.

How many people here have used the app beyond a couple months? How many have deleted it once they stopped using it?

Most dating businesses are inherently conflicted because a successful outcome (relationship) is a lost customer. Tinder, in the "short term" relationship space, has a unique ability to have happy, repeat customers. 5B still seems like a lot. I wonder if there is a control premium baked into the price; IAC was rumored to have a majority stake already, but it's possible that those rumors were incorrect.

Edit: Sam Yagan says the valuation was not 5B

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2014/04/11/no-tind...

I hate to be THAT, guy, but Nasdaq did not look good last week. :)

New reports saying the valuation was actually much closer to $500M. Now that makes a lot more sense to me

Like Snapchat with its ephemeral "snaps", Tinder has practically invented a new mode of interaction (swipeable cards). They're hugely popular and growing, so it makes sense that they're going to command a huge valuation.

This has gotta be a reporting mistake (both parties say value much lower). The $500m valuation sounds much more reasonable. With a 1x or 2x liquidity preference, maybe it's higher.

undefined