I'm surprised I haven't seen any push by a dating app to do the modern version of an old-fashioned matchmaker. Heck, it'd be a great space for AI buzzword stuff and not even all that unethical if LLMs can do a better-than-random success rate at matching up profiles.
Yes, and they're expensive. Often they don't have access to a secret repository of top quality clients but they still work for filtering out people who are investing minimal effort into finding someone. If you spend $500 to get three matches, you're going to put in a lot more effort into setting up a date, showing up for it, and following up (provided they weren't tossing red flags everywhere) than you would if you got the same three matches on a free dating site. The same goes for the matches. If they also put down $500, they're much more invested in trying to make something of value come out of it because they've already sunk in money. And it filters out the bots, the attention seekers, the social media clout manipulators, porn site promoters, etc. that thrive on the low cost of connection.
From what I've seen, it works well for people who just needed something to get both parties to take finding a relationship seriously while it ends up being a bitterly disappointing waste of money for those who think because it costs 100x as much as an online dating site, they're going to get matches that are 100x further up the dating hierarchy.
Yes, they exist but often for men they are a complete waste of time. Unless you’re an exec, wealthy, and generally handsome - most matchmakers will not take you up. It is simply because they know you will not be able to match with any women they provide or find in the wild. They don’t want to get bad reviews and so they only take clients that they are confident they could match.
It is somewhat ironic since people they are confident they could match are the people who need a matchmaker least of all.
