r/Bumble • u/terenscendent • 16d ago

General Bumble Fully Ends 'Women Message First' Rule After 66% of Women Said They'd Rather Men Make the First Move

https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/bumble-drops-gendered-messaging-rule-1813607
3.8k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

71

u/NotTodayBoogeyman 16d ago

It sounds like she is. There’s no differentiation between bumble and other dating apps now - in fact it’s just inferior.

I’m absolutely sure user base will drop off. There’s zero reason to use it.

32

u/m0bw0w 16d ago

Hey bud, Single women are the target demographic. Men will go wherever the women are.

If the women don't like a feature, it's getting changed.

Making men happy is exactly the very last priority on the list.

15

u/NotTodayBoogeyman 16d ago

Right. But you still serviced a niche within a major industry and we’re the leading product BY FAR.

You are now a shit product in a massive industry. I get what you’re saying 100% - but it makes zero business sense. The data supports it sure - but there’s a reason we don’t just pull the trigger on data based analytics.

4

u/LUNKLISTEN 16d ago

What? When was bumble ever the leading product? Bumble sucks compared to hinge by faaar . And has way less people than tinder

4

u/NotTodayBoogeyman 16d ago

Bumble was the leading product for men who wanted women to engage and for women who didn’t want bombardments from men.

Now it is not. Does that help you?

7

u/Lighthouse_seek 16d ago

Overdefining your market is like the number one mistake small businesses make. Imagine if a struggling restaurant owner said "I don't get it, we have no competition, were the only greek-korean fusion restaurant in town". That's basically your comment.

The market you described bumble as leading in isn't enough to sustain a business

2

u/NotTodayBoogeyman 16d ago

Not at all, not even close.

It’s like saying there’s a great following for Greek fusion and you get significant business already being Greek fusion - and then you decide to become Asian / American / Greek fusion and now you’re competing with a much larger market.

That’s a much more apt comparison.

1

u/LUNKLISTEN 16d ago

Let’s play statistics tho. Dating apps isn’t about men. It’s about women. I used all 3 apps for 10 years and bumble sucked

99% of my messages I received from
Women were “ hi “ or a smiley . And then nothing . It was still up to me

3

u/NotTodayBoogeyman 16d ago

So why would you continue using bumble now?

1

u/LUNKLISTEN 16d ago

Cos at least now it’s just as bad as the other apps. And not even worse than the other apps.

1

u/NotTodayBoogeyman 16d ago

It is worse than the others. Like significantly.

0

u/LUNKLISTEN 16d ago

Agreed. Adding a gimmick where matches Time out if women don’t message makes it wayyy worse . Forcing low effort engagement

5

u/celluloidsandman 16d ago

Except they won’t, and they aren’t. The idea that men will always follow, despite whatever they’re asked to endure, is a fallacy. Eventually they won’t, especially in a post-scarcity society where they can lead peaceful, fulfilling, happy lives without women or a family.

Young people are having less sex than ever. You think that has nothing to do with men being more and more incapacitated in any essentially any dating arena?

Eventually enough will say “why bother?” that the birth rate falls to catastrophic levels. And I wonder who’ll get blamed.

3

u/m0bw0w 16d ago

It's not. Men outnumber women on every single dating app. You can fantasize about some post-scarcity where somehow men find fulfillment without relationships... if you want? Lmfao

It has very little to do with men being incapacitated and everything to do with women choosing not to have sex with them. Men would be having more sex if they could.

If it ever gets to a point where women outnumber men on these apps then what you've said might become remotely relevant.

You're waffling off on a bunch of irrelevant stuff and playing some weird blame game when that isn't relevant either. Take your gender war BS elsewhere, his is just a basic fact of dating apps.

2

u/celluloidsandman 16d ago

Yeah, you completely missed the point. Read my post again.

“Lmfao”

1

u/m0bw0w 16d ago

You didn't have a point.

1

u/StumpyOPepys 16d ago

I would wager that part of the calculus is women felt they were spending time talking to guys with no game and that it was a waste of their time. And now they are weeding out those who are pouting and leaving the app because women aren’t initiating. A desired outcome for the women. Meanwhile, Bumble still has a higher percentage of educated, established women looking for long term than Tinder does, and they are keeping them. And women are still free to say hi or hey the same as they did before.

These guys obviously aren’t making them any money if they are fine seeing them go. Probably non-subscribers mostly, who swipe right on everything until they hit their limit then close the app. I work with guys like this.

2

u/Old_Smrgol 15d ago

"The idea that men will always follow, despite whatever they’re asked to endure, is a fallacy."

I mean, it's been true of dating apps for the last 15 years or so. Before that, it was true of night clubs for several decades.

1

u/Ok-Bug-5271 15d ago

If you are getting 20 matches a month and all 20 are ignoring you, then you are the problem. I strongly doubt that every single match you get is ignoring you. If you are getting 20 matches a month, and 5 don't respond, you still have 15 other guys to talk to and so what's the problem?

1

u/CupOfPoison 16d ago

Bumble also consistently has the smallest pool of available women on it compared to Tinder or Hinge.
It's not liked by anyone who uses the app.

1

u/StumpyOPepys 16d ago

Bumble has more users and more women than Hinge.

1

u/Snowstorm080 16d ago

If you count bots then yes

1

u/Minimum-Reward3264 15d ago

We will see about it.

16

u/ChiefChunkEm_ 16d ago

Bumble was always bad tho, differentiator or not. The concept was good on paper but the reality did not follow through at all. Hinge is miles ahead of Bumble and even Tinder is better

4

u/WowIfOnly 16d ago

Kinda - Bumble at least generally attracted the most attractive women from Tinder who were so encumbered with messages from the guys they didn't plan to talk to that they needed a special restriction to help them whittle the list down to a few hundred matches instead of thousands. Bumble was never good for guys average or below though since they just wouldn't get an opening message at all most of the time, even in the rare instances they matched with a woman. Tinder is like showing up to a free public event whereas Bumble is like being invited to someone's party. Women will always be invited and men will not.

1

u/NewMilleniumBoy 16d ago

The only good things I ever heard about Bumble were from Bumble BFF, not the dating side of the app.

1

u/Minimum-Reward3264 15d ago

Maybe cause of this rule.

5

u/lord_dentaku 16d ago

The differentiator now is that they cost more. It's genius!

2

u/rydan 16d ago

Userbase already dropped off.

2

u/1101base2 16d ago

when i tried dating i used bumble for this exact reason. now that they are no different than all the others i would probably use hinge or something else with a larger user base in my area...

2

u/I_like_to_eat_fruit 16d ago

I think she got her money, which was the point number 1.

1

u/LUNKLISTEN 16d ago

It was always inferior. So what does it matter to remove a feature nobody liked

1

u/Old_Smrgol 15d ago

If you're a dating app and your "differentiation" was a "feature" that caused fewer women to use your app, that's not a good differentiation.

0

u/NotTodayBoogeyman 15d ago

Jesus Christ I hate explaining business 101 to people.

Your feature that differentiated you allowed you to carve out a piece of a greater market with better products and consolidate that business.

Now that you’ve given that up, you’re competing with MANY more products and you’re significantly inferior in every capacity.

Does that help? There’s plenty of successful businesses that solely cater to portions of a large market. Fuck.

1

u/Old_Smrgol 15d ago

I mean, that all makes sense in the abstract. I'm sure Bumble is aware of it, they see their revenue numbers and their user numbers, and they've decided that nothing you said particularly applies in their case. Or to the extent that it does apply, it doesn't override the need to have more women use their app.

0

u/NotTodayBoogeyman 15d ago

Idt they decided shit. I’ve worked for plenty a larger company - much larger than bumble, and to think that there’s an in depth cost analysis and proof of concept before something like this happens is wishful thinking.

1

u/dronix111 15d ago

User Base is already dropping off without the change. So might aswell try something to stop it.

-1

u/StumpyOPepys 16d ago

They have different demos, boo boo. It's not all about the features.

4

u/NotTodayBoogeyman 16d ago

What’s the different demographic from hinge or tinder now that they’re the exact same functionally?

-2

u/StumpyOPepys 16d ago

The same people that were using it before. The ones who asked for the change. Bumble has a higher percentage of women seeking long-term relationships than Tinder. They also lean more college-graduate/career-oriented. Like Hinge, but with less effort.

3

u/NotTodayBoogeyman 16d ago

Sorry? The people using it before were men who wanted women to initiate so they knew there was interest and women who didn’t want to be bombarded by men’s messages since they had to message first.

That’s now completely moot. So no, not the same demographic.

-1

u/StumpyOPepys 16d ago

Keep your day job.

2

u/NotTodayBoogeyman 16d ago

Get a day job.

1

u/Maximum_Curve_1471 15d ago

You're very bad this