Hacker News Reader

Comment by prepend | Hacker News Reader

> For $1,000 a month on Rich Kids, you’re guaranteed to only see photos from other wealthy patrons. Similar to the check marks that denote verified Facebook and Twitter accounts, the app’s prohibitive monthly fee ensures that everyone who uses it is certifiably wealthy.

This is such poor people logic. “Spend money on a cheap thing to prove you’re rich. Btw, that’s my business model.”

I think it’s way more likely that it will be people paying a few grand on their credit card to pretend to be rich and/or golddig.

View on HN

There is a bunch of filtered communities for rich/influential people, like yacht clubs, golf clubs, country clubs, wef, etc. Often the main filter is the fact that the communities are not known to others, but of course many have a bunch of filters on top of that. Sometimes that filter is via money, like one cup of tea costing 50€. Sometimes that filter is via something that is distasteful to a large chunk of the population, like say many types of modern art: the fact that many frown at it is often times the point. Sometimes the filter is via requiring specific universities, like various alumni organizations of the ivy league (the main purpose of the ivies is the network, not even the quality of education, as there is many non-ivy schools with similarly good education).

These clubs exist on all sorts of levels of rich people, but the filter does not have to be perfect. All the clients are looking for is a group of people that share relatable stories and problems, and maybe provide business opportunities.

Those filtered communities provide a value though- a marina for your yacht, a good golf course to play on, etc etc.

The issue with this is that they don’t provide any value beyond the filter. So it seems as useful as a yacht club that doesn’t have a marina, it’s just people who claim to have yachts to talk with each other.

There is a still a threshold. To even be able to spend 'a few grand' on such things means you have at least that much disposable income, which many many people do not. So you may not necessarily be 'rich', but you are most certainly not 'poor'.

I disagree. There’s a lot of consumer debt.

People go into debt to rent houses and cars just to post instagram photos.

Id say this proves you have at least credit to charge $1,000 or $12,000 for a year.

If I was rich, I would not value such a service that has such a bullshit filter. Especially one they is so easy to scam.

I expect there are real services that have ways to vet members for actual wealth.

I also expect they have PR firms working to stay out of articles like this. But if you want fake rich or people who want to look rich, then you want this kind of PR.

Sounds like you wouldn't use this service regardless of whether you were rich or just had good credit (and neither would I) but that's not the point I was making. It's that having $12k a year (either debit or credit, it doesn't matter) that you don't need to spend on things like food and rent is still a luxury for a great many people. People who would never be able to use this app no matter how much they wanted to. This fee is therefore an effective barrier to entry for a considerable segment of the population as intended.

Or $12k is just a cost of doing business to scam or market. And not a good filter at all.

I’m not against spending $12k/year on luxury items. But I’m against spending $12k/year on pointless things.

Their iOS app got taken down by Apple. I doubt many super rich folk use Android as well. So the user base is probably not optimal.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com