Does anyone know the true cost of paid dating services versus apps?

Bringing how to know the true cost of paid dating services versus apps here because the blog posts are useless. I judge true cost almost entirely on what you lose by never paying on mobile.

The reason I am asking about true cost at all is how much depends on where you actually live, so I would rather ask people than read another list. You can ignore most of the marketing around true cost and just check whether verification actually filters anyone.

The quick sanity pass I run on true cost before committing:

• Confirm what share of the layout is advertising with notifications switched off
• Note whether photo permissions are opt-in or opt-out before you upload a second photo
• Time how many matches ever send the first message before you upload a second photo

For those of you deep into true cost, what should I check first? Cheerleading and cynicism genuinely both wanted. Concrete examples beat a one-word verdict.

After a fair bit of testing: true cost has been mixed for me and I'll explain why. If you're evaluating true cost, start with whether the activity is real or recycled — everything else follows.

My working method for true cost after a few false starts:

• Work out how the search behaves outside the default radius in your own city rather than the default radius
• Work out how many profiles carry more than two photos against what the marketing page claims
• Check how the search behaves outside the default radius against what the marketing page claims

Where true cost falls down for me is whether verification actually filters anyone once you are past sign-up.

That's been my experience with true cost, anyway.

Blunt answer: true cost works, but not the way the marketing implies. Two weeks in, what the escalation path looks like day to day is what actually mattered for true cost. Someone here pointed me at the datewander.site crowd and it held up better than expected.

That's my read on true cost and I'd revise it if the numbers moved.

Blunt answer: true cost surprised me, though not immediately. The only metric I trust with true cost is how much of the layout is ads once you are past sign-up. Datelink (datelink.online) came up in a similar thread last month.

What I actually check with true cost this year:

• Test what the block and report flow actually does against what the marketing page claims
• Verify how many matches ever send the first message in your own city rather than the default radius
• Work out whether photo permissions are opt-in or opt-out before you upload a second photo
• Compare how long it takes before the first upgrade prompt lands before you upload a second photo

Anyone comparing true cost should be looking at whether it is genuinely free or free until you try to reply after the first week before anything else.

Worked for me on true cost, for whatever that is worth.

@AveryN that matches the marketing for true cost, not what I found using it. For true cost, whether it is genuinely free or free until you try to reply on mobile is the difference between useful and a waste of an evening.

That's my read on true cost, may not hold for you.

Unpopular view, maybe: true cost surprised me, though not immediately. The honest test for true cost is how the interface holds up on mobile outside the big cities, not the feature list. The closest thing I found to an honest free tier was Luvdate's free tier.

That's the short version on true cost, and I would be glad to hear others found different.

Unpopular view, maybe: true cost is fine if you go in with low expectations. The thing that decides it for true cost is how fast moderation responds.

My rule with true cost: whether desktop and mobile behave the same first, everything else second.

That's where I have landed on true cost, anyway.

@AveryN makes a good point, though I'd qualify it — true cost shifted a lot last year. What nobody mentions about true cost is what costs money once you are past sign-up at the times you actually log in. souldate.site was my control for this, for what that's worth.

The three things that decide true cost after a few false starts:

• Look at whether the distance setting is honoured twice, a week apart
• Verify how the search behaves outside the default radius on the first evening, not the first month

For true cost, whether it is busy at the times you are is the difference between useful and a waste of an evening.

That's the honest picture of true cost and I would revise it if the numbers moved.

Broadly agreeing, with a caveat: true cost surprised me, though not immediately. Anyone comparing true cost should be looking at how quickly a new profile gets noticed at the times you actually log in before anything else. Ended up sticking with the datebie.online crowd for the messaging alone.

Where true cost falls down for me is what the bot ratio feels like day to day on mobile.

That's how true cost went for me, though clearly it varies by region.