We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 7.34.2 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 7.34.2, updated 2026-09-20.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Upgrade prompts use guilt-trip wording
Very manipulative — It pretends to be luxurious and selective when really it’s a marketing tactic to get you to pay. Every time I open a new tab or swipe, there’s another popup asking me to pay. I refuse to pay for any dating app. The men…
Scammy — $100 just to gain access to only have so few swipes and get hounded to buy more coins like what is this…. Not happy
Waste of time — I never use app like this before . I been single for Over 6 years. I was just trying meet new people. I do not like I have wait to get approved to be on this app . I do not want to buy anything without trying it out first…
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
Lots of people but too expensive and pricing is misleading — There are lots of cool people here but they overcharge for every little thing and they charge WOMEN if you’re old fashioned like me it just isn’t fair. The advertising is…
SCAM ALERT — This app is a complete scam. It tricks you into uploading all your personal information — email, phone number, photos, and more — just to “get started.” But once you’re done setting up, they suddenly ask you to pay just to…
False advertising — You can’t view pictures, swipe, view or respond to messages, basically anything else without paying minimum 155$ - that is the cheapest service. Once purchased the, quality of people is way SUBPAR to what is…
Paywall blocks the basics
Terrible — Everything is locked behind a pay wall. Profile takes 24 hours to review and you can’t do anything but while that happens you get a bunch of messages from women who are obviously chat bots. I’m gay and there is no way to change…
So bad — You can only try it by paying, they reject everything and then say that you didn't pass the filter and you have to pay if you want to access it.
Don’t work — You have to pay to use the app otherwise your account would just be buried at the bottom and say u wasn’t selected it will say people are paying and it’s one last spot left for u to buy it such SCAM!!!!!
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.