#39: Indian Bronson — Founding a Dating App

Alright, welcome to this episode of the Jason Levin Podcast, formerly known as the Cyber Patterns Podcast. It was getting confusing because I have Cyber Patterns, the newsletter, so I figured, you know what, let's do the Jason Levin Podcast. Today we have a very special guest on. His name is Indian Bronson, an amazing name. He is a pseudonymous creator and founder actually of an app called Keeper Dating, which is basically like a matchmaking app where you have to men have to pay to use it and they get matched with people. And it's, it's a really innovative solution. They raised venture funding and I just find it super interesting. And he has a lot of opinions about the world of dating. So we have a great discussion and I hope you enjoy. I guess got a lot of questions for you. And the first one that I want to ask is what is wrong with the dating market right now? And how are you trying to fix it?

Yeah, there's a great paper, by the way. I have this annoying habit where, you know, everyone has a phone, everyone has a computer. And so every so often I'll be like, just Google this thing, read this paper. And I'm going to start here. Google, I think Michael Rosenfeld, Stanford, um, Disintermediating Your Friends. It's a great paper. And one of the things that it examines is how people actually come to meet the people whom they marry, both actually for homosexual and heterosexual couples. And if you look basically from, I think, '40-something to today, what you find is that the ways in which people actually meet the people that they couple up with, they go from great interiority and closeness to family to like basically being strangers and from the earliest parts of life to later parts of life. So in 1940, over 25% of people who would actually couple up, and by the way, almost certainly get married, the marriage rate was strictly higher. They met in primary school, they met in primary, secondary school. These are people who not only were they getting married in their sort of like early 20s, like they had known each other their entire lives and they were from the same community. And their parents were from the same community and they met because they went to the same dances or whatever and stuff like that. Yeah. It's like less than 5% today. It's like, it just, it almost just doesn't happen. And beginning in the 1990s and the 2000s, you get meeting online just skyrocketing, right? But you see everything else falling away, meeting through family, falling away, meeting as neighbors, falling away. You see the rise and fall of things like meeting through coworkers or meeting through friends. We go from these contexts where we're relatively young, we belong to a community, people in that community are introducing us, and those people know us really well. And in fact, want the best for us. Match really, picking on them, makers of Tinder, Hinge, Match Group doesn't love you in the way that your parents love you. And they can't. It's like, it's tautological, but they probably don't. And 10-year-old you, who has been raised by, that's not true for everyone, but it's true for a lot of people, even an 18-year-old you raised by a mom and dad living somewhere. They know you really well, actually. They know you really well. And if they were living in a community where they knew other people well, and those people knew their kids, they know what's going to happen. As married people with a long experience of marriage, relationships of their own, grandparents know the kids pretty well too. Those sorts of situations, those kinds of social environments, those are ones where parents, family, friends, pastors, et cetera, making introductions. Those work out. People get married. It's actually still true today. It's just not so common because the rhythms of our lives and how we get along with people are now all filtered through screens. We take increasing— finally, I think it was in the majority in 2020— we take all of these young kids when they turn 18 and we're just like, okay, we're gonna, we're gonna move you like thousands of miles away to this place where you know nobody. And the adult that's supervising you in this dorm is 20 years old themselves. And that, that's what we've produced. And then people get jobs, they move. I've moved to different cities a couple of times. There's a common complaint, I think, among millennials. It's so hard to make friends outside of college. It's because it's an unnatural, weird situation and people complain, wow, it's so hard to meet somebody. It's so hard to get to know someone. It's yeah, because like, this is a totally weird way to do it. So I, that would be my answer. It's a long answer. I know I ramble a lot, but that would be my answer is that we have specifically removed the social mediation of people who care about us, the account to other people who care about us. And we've removed all of the context that means our preferences, our personalities, our dispositions are matched up nicely with someone else.

Got you. Totally understood. I actually completely understand that online dating did not have much success. I definitely went on dates, had a girlfriend here and there, but my fiancée now, we were introduced via a friend, which is like, when we told people, they're like, holy shit, people still do that?

Yeah.

And it's crazy, man. So really understand exactly what you're talking about. And the internet's been great for meeting friends for me just as an introvert, but most people don't use it like tech Twitter people do. Most people just use it to consume and get—

right.

And fall even deeper into a loneliness pit. And a lot of my work, a lot of my essays, I end, go make some friends on the internet, man. Like that's really— the internet's here and it's making us lonelier, so. It's up to you to go shoot somebody a message. So I want to talk a little bit more just about Keeper and, and what you're building and what dating apps look like in the future.

Yeah. Keeper began as a conversation between me and my co-founder, Jake Kozlowski. You can follow him on Twitter, Jake Kozlowski, J-A-Kozlowski. We were at this party and we were, we were both at different companies at the time. And we were thinking, we know all of these guys. Who are like smart, entrepreneurial. They take their health very seriously. They're doing a lot of stuff. And we know a lot of girls who, they're in the same boat, very smart entrepreneur. Everyone's, it's Miami. It's like, it's illegal to be fat. It's like, it's, it's like you'll get arrested. Every, everyone is, they seem to be doing all of the right things. You look around in this milieu and it's wow, look at all of these smart people who live charmed lives. It's like, how are all of these people single? What's going on? How come it's like rare for these to be in serious relationships? And by that, I don't mean, oh, can get dates or oh, can hook up with someone or whatever. That's, that's not really that interesting and not really that meaningful. You know, how come so few of these people are actually married or on track to being married? We were thinking about this and we're like, okay, it can't be that these people are unappealing. You meet these guys and gals and they're like the most appealing people in the world. So what is it? It's basically that they have this problem where there are too many options and there are too many options that you can only know superficially well. And there's no real iteration on the options and there's no learning involved and people are going too fast and they don't have enough information to make a good decision. And it's not obvious to them that if they could do this, actually they could just be married pretty quickly. And talking about this, we were going through a lot of the historical literature and kept finding these— I've been collecting these for years because this is a thing that I've been talking about, just like different magnets about how people get married in different cultures. And rereading through that, that paper by Michael Rosenfeld, what I realized is basically every culture has what I think we would now, uh, describe as arranged marriages. There's, I think there's the popular contemporary view because of like the matchmaking auntie show or something where it's like, there are these Indian arranged marriages where the people just get married and they don't even know each other. That's not really what's going on. Every culture, every serious civilization has a way to basically get the measure of its men and women and then say, okay, who should be introduced? And what are they looking for? What do they want? What do they not want? What are their personalities like? What is it that, you know, will actually do it for them to get them on a date, to get them on a second date, a third date? And those kinds of things are just not going to be done by regular dating apps. In a way, they can't be done by dating apps because the unit economics of a regular dating app actually requires the opposite. Match Group wants you going and engaging with this app over and over again. They want you buying Bumble, like, you know, Hinge roses or Bumble Boost or Tinder Boost or whatever, right? Like they want you playing a numbers game. They spend quite a lot of money in customer acquisition and they spend a lot to turn a non-paying customer into a paying customer. And then they're fine with you churning after that, but they have a very different objective in mind. And so we were like, okay, this is all fascinating, but how would you design it? How would you create something that maybe the matches don't come as quickly, but the matches are really high quality? Maybe matches, they require a little bit of iteration. They require some learning on the part of the matchmaker, but the second or the third introduction is actually really good. It's much closer to what someone wants. And we realized as we were going through all of this, it's not only are all of these things, but all of these things can be automated. And the field of matchmaking right now is like just not doing any of that. Most matchmakers, a little known fact, it's like a $4 billion $100 billion industry worldwide. And it's growing partly because of distaste with dating apps. It's hugely fractured between all of these people whose book of business is like sometimes as few as 10 individuals and they will get them married, but they'll charge them like $50,000, $100,000, $200,000 because it's a lot of work. You're like basically dedicating 2 years of your life to just learning all of this person's problems. And it's like guiding them through like different matches over and over again. It makes people go crazy. And so the really successful matchmakers people that have really high hit rates, they make marriages happen pretty frequently. They can't get to that many people and they can't get to that many people because it's just not a, it's not a tech-powered industry. So we were looking at all of this and we were like, we could just do that. In a way it's a solved problem. Civilizations have been getting people married for thousands of years. There's this domain of expertise that's still having success. And what it doesn't have is the technology to scale and it's let's, let's just do that. Like once, once we researched it thoroughly enough, we were like, this is obviously something we should do.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Completely understood. It's, it's strange, man. Like I have friends who are absolute catches, like amazing people, just like your friends who are single. And it's A, there's too many options and B, it's hard to find people on the apps in general. And it's also a combination of worrying that unfortunately TikTok and all these apps, we start comparing each other, comparing ourselves, doing all that kind of stuff. I don't I think you might've tweeted about this, or maybe I just wanted to ask you about it because it's been in my notes for, I guess, a month or two. I find the whole polyamory trend really just off-putting in general. And yeah, I, it's just not like good for the idea of, hey, raise a healthy family. And that's like where happiness lies, not in having sex with as many girls as possible. And I'm just curious what your thoughts are. And while we're talking about that, another controversial topic, but not really. I just heard the Moment of Zen podcast talking about this, but the idea of I'm not having babies because the world's such a bad place, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Wondering what your thoughts on both of those subjects are as well.

Yeah. Yeah. There's a lot of literature about this. It's like an active field of research. Sociologists, economists study this a lot. And yeah, two married parents in the home, a mom and a dad raising a kid, that's associated with far better outcomes in the aggregate than say a single family or weak connections between two kind of non-custodial parents and grandparents. That's better than, you know, children who are— lots of people get divorced. I'm not trying to demean anyone, but the kids in the aggregate of families that stay together have just an easier time of things than children of divorce. Children of divorce will tell you this, right? It's like, it's like not easy. And it's why is that? And it's because the biology is set up that way. It's not a coincidence. It's like a lot of these, a lot of these outcomes are, you could, you can just intuit them from how like our biology works, how our history, tradition, civilizations have been set up. And it's just not the case that poly-cule collectively raising kids, you know, or weird custody battles between third and throuples makes for happy childhoods, makes for, first of all, happy marriages. And second of all, the product, happy childhoods. It's just, it's just not the case. And there are people who will, they'll say stuff like, but really high IQ and really high openness people, they can live much better lives if they have these sort of alternative arrangements. And maybe that's true, but I think the revulsion that most people feel when they encounter these things is that's a pretty good tell. And that, that's what I have to say about that.

All right. Fair enough. So I want to just ask a little bit more about how's the founder life going and any advice raising money, that kind of stuff. A lot of my listeners are founders and creators who are working with companies and other founders and investors and all that stuff. Yeah. What was that process like?

Yeah. So when we go to raise money, like we've, we found that you can raise, and it sounds like bullshit, you can get $100,000 in the space of a 5-minute conversation. Conversation. That's not hard. What is hard is knowing who to talk to and like meeting the people that get what it is that you're doing. That's the difficult thing. Once people understand what you're doing, like people who understand what you're doing and buy into what you're doing and want to make money doing it, those are those, you like just only talk to those people. Right now.

Yo, right now as we're DMing. Yo, right now before this conversation, I started DMing with Twitter, Twitter God in the startup world, and it looks like I might be getting investment for my, for the newsletter and company surrounding it, the agency, which is like literally DMing right now. And so it's so funny. Yeah, this is crazy. This is absolutely wild. Yeah.

Yeah. It's, if, if you were trying to sell a product, whether it's an investment opportunity or if you were trying to, if you're just trying to know whether or not something would work out, imagine someone who shares none of your content, doesn't have the same values you have, wants different things than you want, and has low risk tolerance. Don't talk to those people. Yeah. You should. And if you just don't do that and you talk to people who get what it is that you do. And so a lot of this, I think, comes down to, you know, people will blame VCs. People will be like, oh, they're just, these are all private equity guys. They're all just following market trends. They outsource their thinking to, to whatever they see on Twitter about risk and valuations. And yeah, some of the time that is actually true. Like there are There are people in venture capital who like don't have a high risk tolerance and it's my man. What do you think portfolio management is about? Why do you think it's venture capital? Like why not just go to public markets? So that 100% exists and it's like, you can tell immediately, by the way, you can, it's very obvious. Yeah.

100%. It's the same thing. Like you can't sell somebody on Twitter. Like you can't sell somebody like if they don't see the value of Twitter and what it can do for somebody's career. You can't sell somebody, they have to find—

Yeah. You know, the conversation you want to be having is not, is this a good idea? The conversation— this, I think this is just true in general— conversation you want to be having is what is your plan to execute on this such that there is a venture-sized return? And in this fund where I'm making a bunch of different bets, most of which will probably fail, but some of which will win really big, are you the right person to execute on this? How do you think you're going to execute on this? What risks do you present? That's more of the conversation you want to have and not, so this idea, tell me about it. And just have, they just get caught up in what it is. They should get what it is that you're doing really quickly. So you want to find those people. And the nice thing is that a lot of people in, in venture, they have realized this. And so they talk about how they think about the world. It's like the thing that VC Twitter is known for doing is talking about how they think about the world. So you should pay attention to that because you can see, oh wow, this person really have done their research. They know their industry very, very well, and they're aware of what opportunities exist They just don't know that I'm working on the thing that exploits those opportunities. And if you just talk to those people, I think you'll find that even, even post 0% interest rates, I think you'll find that even post market collapse, there's actually, there really is, it's a hackneyed term. There really is a lot of dry powder out there. There are people who are willing to cut big checks. Really like a dozen, you need maybe even 5 and a lead. You don't actually need that many people for early stage fundraising and It's out there.

Yeah, completely agree, man. It's been really cool. I was so mystified by everything. And then all of a sudden, like Spencer hit me up in an NFT group chat and we hop on a phone and he starts telling me about how he has funding for his project. I'm like, wow, there's a lot of people. He's become a close friend and it's really cool, man. Another question, uh, thoughts on the network state. Again, I think you probably tweeted about this a while ago and that's why it's in my notes. And I'm obviously a big Balaji fan and everything that he's doing and How does the network state relate to dating as well? How do they tie in together?

Yeah, so I do think about this a lot. To have, I think every exited founder or VC who's been, I'm being cruel, has been taking the management fees. A lot of people in this world, they're looking for like the next thing. And one thing that seems pretty obvious is the next thing is insulating yourself from bad government and finding or creating places that have good government. And maybe that government isn't like explicit governance. Maybe it's more private commercial associations. What you get is a better life. Life, right, for being part of this club. And what are the clubs that you're going to find or join? And one, being more reliant on that club than being reliant on like the state or like the formal polity. And one thing is that any kind of organization, any kind of city, any kind of institution that can't reproduce itself is just doomed to failure because what it becomes dependent on is recruitment and like injections of energy and capital. It can never really survive on its own power. Paul Graham has this line about companies. They have to be in a default alive state. Without any extra support, they should be able to continue on in the world. And that should be true, I think, of any kind of node, any kind of decentralized project. Like it should be able to move under its own power. And if it can't, that's a bad sign. And one like indispensable component of that is it's actually, it's literally its own reproduction. Do people associating with this thing have fam or do they like, Or are they unable, or even more not able, because family formation is pretty low already, to have families? Or is the result of their association with this thing that they have families? If you can't answer that explicitly about like a charter city or a network state project, or would-be city-state, I think that's a bad sign. My favorite modern politician of all time is Lee Kuan Yew, the founder of Singapore. Truly its founder. And one issue that occupied a lot of his attention more and more in his older age, and he would mention it at the National Day rallies is, is the issue of Singapore's reproductive rate, because they noticed that a lot of people just aren't getting married and they aren't having kids. And are we— what are we going to do? We're just going to import more and more Singaporeans? Seems, it seems like a bad thing. So yeah, the way I think about it is in the United States, if you want, you can set up your own police force. Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport has its own police force. Many universities have their own police force. If you want, you can set up your own banks, your own credit unions. You can create your own private clubs. You can create your own hospitals. You can create your own towns. Ave Maria, Florida, and Kiryas Joel, New York, are like almost ethno-religiously created master communities. You can do quite a lot in the United States and just have your own private governance to a degree. Right. And you can have it today without any legal changes, without any political elections being run and won or lost. What you can't do as a matter of like law and just like easy mechanistic possibility is have that community reproduce itself, have a guarantee that in 2 to 3 generations, there are 2 to 3 more generations and the whole thing is still going. That's the tricky part. The other stuff is actually kind of easy. It's not so— people can complain, but living in the United States is not so bad. I would much rather be a person with interesting political ideas in America than in China. It's, I'm not They're not going to be disappeared to some dirty basement for tweeting @PresidentBiden. You can do a lot of these things, but if you can't sustain the community, it's like, what are you doing even trying to build it? So I think this is one of the, this is like the biggest thorniest problem, but it's such a core problem that I think any network state solution that hasn't thought about it or doesn't have a way to reliably solve it should really evaluate things.

Yeah. So I'm going through your top tweets right now. I'm for banning porn, but it's a little bit like when people see Japan and they think America should ban guns.

Yeah, this is every so often I'll see, I mean, very sympathetic. Like I'll liken it to this circumstance. When I was a kid, I remember for kid, when I was a young man, I remember the big line from Republicans is we wanna repeal Obamacare. And studious little Bronson reading his AEI was like, look, Avik Roy points out the Swiss system. We should totally repeal Obamacare. We should have this mixed. And I was like, yeah, we should repeal Obamacare. And it was like, you know, Eric Cantor and Boehner and Paul Ryan are gonna repeal Obamacare. And it turns out after 7 or 8 years, when the Republicans win a majority and like they're in a position to repeal Obamacare, like they have no plan whatsoever. Like they haven't even thought about what the healthcare system should— it's just, oh my God. And this is— I often feel that when conservatives say, we want to ban porn, I'm like, no, I want to ban porn. You want to say that you want to ban porn. It's mostly a pose. And I think it's a pose because very few of them express other ideas. That I think would indicate that they're serious. And it's, okay, porn is bad for a young person to watch. Why? Why is it bad? I agree that it's bad. I think it's, I think viscerally we should understand it's bad. And they're like, because it warps young people's minds into having weird expectations about the opposite sex. It destroys romantic development. It turns people into these sort of commoditized pleasure objects, et cetera, all of this. And that's all true. So what does, what, what does serial monogamy do? What does a huge youth and young adulthood of acquiring and discarding sexual partners do? Does that do less of those things than watching porn? Probably not. Probably racking up a body count of 20+ is not doing some good things. But that, that's, that would be going too far, right? Because that would be, that would be reactionary. That would be possibly even misogynistic. On close examination, maybe even racist. That's a very problematic thing. And I look at conservatives talking about banning porn and I for the most part, I see people who are like really unserious and like they're, they're saying that, but they don't even really mean it. And they're not thinking about the deeper core issues where it's, why does anyone even have to look at this shit? Like, why would this even be appealing? Beyond like the immediate hijacking of our limbic systems where we see sexually attractive people and we're like, ooh, monkey brain goes off. Beyond just that, it's why would this even proliferate? Do you think you could really foster a massive porn industry in a world where most people are married married mothers and fathers, husbands and wives early in their life, and they're happily married? Probably not. And maybe we should actually focus on that rather than this sort of pie in the sky thing, which is never going to happen. Republicans are full of these ideas that are never going to happen.

Yeah, it's impossible to just have everybody be perfectly married and happy. And they're always—

I think it's much easier to get more of our society married earlier and forming families than it is to politically ban porn in the United States. United States. I think the political and legislative road, just the whole— to change the U.S. government, our speech laws, win enough Senate seats, enough presidential elections, Supreme Court justice appointments, to do all of that and then somehow ban porn, that's a very tough row to hoe. Whereas I think making the marriage rate look more like it did in 1980, I think that's easier, actually. I think that's much easier.

Yeah. Yeah. Looking at your tweet right now, this is how all male friendships work if you no longer live in the same place. That was hilarious.

Yeah, that was a quote tweet. That was a quote tweet of someone who was asking, I think, an innocent question. I always feel bad when I quote tweet people because it feels like I'm dunking on them. This is someone who asked like an innocent question. What is the name for a friendship where you no longer talk to each other, but you feel like you could just start it up if you didn't, if you ran into one another? And it was a woman asking. I just made the observation, like, that's how men— that's how male friendships work. That's how men regard one another when they're friends.

Yeah, definitely. I— it's funny, I have a lot of good friends in cities all over. We hop on the phone every 6 months and see each other every few years, and still some of my closest friends.

Yeah, yeah. I guess my follow-up tweet to that, which, which I think is true, I think it's the reason, is that before— certainly before plane travel before telecommunications were common, I think the ranges at which human governance existed— tribe, empire, things like that— meant that men who are friends or who are related would just have to— there would be a strong advantage if they were capable of remaining friends and regarding each other affectionately, even if they weren't hanging out all the time, because the coordination that's possible over long ranges, the loyalties that exist that sort of eliminate the need to coordinate, if you can sustain those over a long period of time at great distance, you can just get a force multiplier of your governing power. So I think that's why that has possibly arisen in men.

Gotcha. Um, how has Keeper been going so far?

Good. So we, I think he said his name. I don't want to say, I don't want to say both of their names because one of them is an anon. But yeah, so we, we move slowly with matches, but we make high quality matches and we have an engagement that we can We talk about, announce, we're very public about it. We have a few more like very solid relationships in the pipe where we've either, we think that there's going to be an engagement or there are plans. So yeah, like our view of this is that we don't want to be making lots and lots of matches just to collect revenue. We want to make a lot of revenue when we make a good match. It's like a, it's like lower volume, higher margin. Got you.

How does the business model work exactly?

Yeah. So we, when, you know, men and women come to the site, they give us their preferences and their criteria, their must-haves, their deal-breakers, et cetera, all of that for someone they would marry. And this is not, this is not like someone I would go on a date with. This is for someone I would marry. And the reason you want to do that for guys, you want to have guys, you know, we have, I don't want to be coarse. There are a lot of women that a man would sleep with that he would never marry. Say it that way. And this is just unfortunately true. Sorry, ladies. I think they probably know that. Maybe they don't. It's worth saying. And so what you don't want to have is you don't want to have guys agreeing to see women or date women that they have no intention of marrying. And from the female perspective, it's every single guy that we introduce a woman to, he's serious about her for marriage, not for just like a fun date or something. And on the female side, like, you want to have women also think about like the kinds of guys that they would marry, because broadly speaking, women are maybe a little bit choosier. There are other risks involved. It's like they have to, they It's good for them to have a high standard. In fact, if there's anything that I could ask, it's that there should be higher and more concretized standards involved for everyone. So we get this information from both, and we use a process that's partly automated and partly manual. We're increasing the extent to which it's— that kind of looks through all of these and says, oh, here are some candidates and you should investigate these candidates more thoroughly. That's a lot of back and forth with each of them. And when we think that there's a match, we present the man to the woman. His profile essentially. And we're like, would you want to go on a date with this guy? Is this a guy that you're interested in? If she says yes, then we present the woman's profile to the man. We're like, hey, here's some information about this. She's checked you out. She's interested. Do you think this is someone that you would want to go on a date with? Is this someone that you would like to meet? If he says yes, we show him the full profile and we invoice him. And that it's, I think we originally started out with $250 a match. Now it's a little bit more like B2B pricing where it's based on the complexity complexity of the preferences, the matchability of the people involved, the, that we have to do is now a little bit more reflective of the price. Some can be lower, can be higher. And the guarantee to a second, to a second date, this has gotta be someone that each party should find each other so compelling that they're like, I want to go see this person again. And if that doesn't happen, it's money-back guarantee. So yeah, that's how the business model works. It's, it's much higher margin than the ARPU of say Tinder, but there are fewer matches involved. Involved, right? So like, you know, Tinder, it's trying to— what it does to women is it produces too many matches. They're overwhelmed with options. They have a thousand decisions to make with very little information. And for guys, what they'll do, except for like top guys who are getting like hundreds and hundreds of matches, what they're trying to do is they're trying to bully you into buying these upsells to get more visibility and play better.

Bro, just me already.

Yeah, yeah. It's very gross. We don't like it. You can look up where match executives live. There are a lot of services that will sell addresses move dates. I'm not implying anything should be done, but it's a very anti-human thing. And we don't want to do that. We would much rather have someone wait a month, 2 months to get a match that's very good than try and titillate them with, ooh, it's the first day that you've signed up. Here's some people like that. That's bad actually, if that's happening.

Yeah, dude, I'm really excited for what you're building and have tried talking a couple friends into doing it. They were a little turned off by the price point, but yeah, I think some of my friends would be down. Some of the people are making a little more money.

Yeah. Yeah. So one thing to say is that women never pay. This is one of our— we're willing to be— we have a sex differentiated UX. It's not the same experience for men and women. We're not— one way to think of it as Tinder and Hinge and Bumble, they created a same sex and UX. It's like the worst product that could be unisex, but that really goes to like the core of everything. Women don't pay for matches, but if a woman turns down a match, like she has to tell us why and she has to be thoughtful about it. She has to tell us what she's really looking for, what wasn't good enough enough, things like that, because we don't want to waste her time, but we don't want to waste Guy's time either. The pricing that's involved, it's— look, this isn't for a stream of kind of like casual dates or partners. This is about solving the problem of who you will get married to, right? It's a different thing entirely. And I think one thing that dating apps have done is they've coached people to have basically very low expectations. And if you have low expectations, you shouldn't be paying that much. Actually, if you're eating dollar pizza, it should cost about a dollar, but that's not what this is. We are not trying to get you like just a fun, interesting date. We're trying to introduce you to someone that you will marry or that is someone that you would consider marrying. Like it has to be that.

So do you guys have an affiliate program? Cause I'm about to send the link to my friend.

We do. Yeah. Yeah. I'll give you, I'll give you the contact and the link for, for our affiliate program. So we have referral codes for signups. We get people married and you sent them to us, you get a cut of the business. And we also have affiliate partnerships with different, like, sort of improvement solutions. So like, you know, you know, maybe someone needs to hit the gym. Maybe someone needs to take care of their wardrobe. Maybe there's some things with their hair, their skin, cosmetically that they could improve and probably should improve. Maybe there are other things that— there are a lot of services that are built around these things. And when they're like actionable, useful things that someone can do, we'll refer them to those. Them so that they, it's easier to match them. They're putting their best foot forward.

That is sick. I really like that. I feel like there's no, obviously there's no apps where you get real feedback.

Yeah. This is one of those things that's, this is the social mediation part. Part of the advantage of having high social mediation by people that care for you is that you, you used to have the older brothers or the moms or the friends who are like, hey, I wouldn't wear that shirt. You really need to exercise more. These things existed and they actually help. This is why people do that. And Tinder's not gonna do that for you. Hinge is not gonna do that for you. We will do that for you though.

Got you. Yo, this has been a pleasure. I have a call in, in 10 minutes with a startups guy and gotta grab some coffee beforehand, but this is, this has been really nice. The conversation's gonna go live on Saturday and I just ask that you share it and just really, really grateful for your time.