You must be 10 years old if you haven't heard that expression before.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Accuses Spotify of 'Resorting to Rumors and Half-Truths', Sets Record Straight on App Rejection
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
People need to realize the subscription fee is because the subscription is being billed through apple, which requires more than just hosting an app for download. Apple is right to charge extra for this and is starting to charge less (e.g. 15%) after it has built up economies of scale.
The store analogy being used is not correct - somebody is asking a store to sell their product, bill their customer, collect money and send it back to them for free. Spotify needs to pay apple for this service in some way.
The store analogy being used is not correct - somebody is asking a store to sell their product, bill their customer, collect money and send it back to them for free. Spotify needs to pay apple for this service in some way.
This is the PR argument Apple should making (and sort of did in this letter). It's the one that carries the most weight IMO.
But Sony certainly could, even though they very likely didn't make the game themselves, aside from providing a platform (PS4) for that game to be played on and that additional content to be sold on.
And the marketing, r & d, and thousands of employees it takes to maintain the iPhone's, and thus, the App Store's, relevance. Spotify is shortsighted. Apple applies this rule to everyone, and just because Spotify is a big company, they shouldn't get special treatment. That's how things work with big government, not business.
I'd say that's pretty much the case. It's up to decks to decide if that access is worth it.
this was never an issue in the past, cause Apple did not sell their own products in the App Store, screwing over the developers.....
while Spotify is whinning, Apple is also being a douche bag here.
As an example , I'm sure any of you who have ever sold on eBay as a business , would be an uproar if eBay sold the same product without having to pay fees , meaning you could never beat them on price.
while Spotify is whinning, Apple is also being a douche bag here.
As an example , I'm sure any of you who have ever sold on eBay as a business , would be an uproar if eBay sold the same product without having to pay fees , meaning you could never beat them on price.
No, Apple IS the power company in this analogy. Spotify knows Apple has millions and millions of people already hooked up and using their "power", so they ask Apple if they will sell their refrigerators (let's say Spotify sells fridges) for them. Apple says of course we will, but since we are doing all this work and providing the power, we get 30%. Oh and also we sell fridges too (remember Apple was in music way before Spotify was even on the scene), so it's your choice if you want that competition. Spotify still chooses to sell fridges through Apple but they complain about the cut Apple gets for giving Spotify access to its millions of customers. So instead of starting their own power company (which will fail) Spotify comes up with what they believe is a pretty clever plan. The fridges they sell through Apple only gets to 45 degrees and there's no light bulb in there (free tier) but there is a note that says, "If you want a fridge that has light and gets cold enough (Spotify premium) please return this fridge to Apple and buy the same exact fridge from our website for 30% cheaper." Apple says "fine, we won't sell your fridges anymore." Spotify goes online to complain that "Apple is strong-arming competitors out of the business so Apple can make more money on their own fridges." Only a select few are stupid enough to fall for Spotify's accusations.
Last edited:
Other than me, lawyers don't code.
Apple is supplying Spotify with the means of getting their customers, keeping the application updated if Spotify follows the rules, collects any payments and passes them onto Spotify. In turn Apple charges a handling charge that is going to be cut in half. On my Natural Gas heating bill, more than half the payment goes to the Transmission company so Spotify is getting a good deal.
Can't we just stick to good old car analogies?
Exactly. They also provide billing and ease of use for app customers. If you want that convenience for your customers you have to pay. I can buy a two liter from Walmart for much cheaper than a two liter at a gas station, but I'm already there getting gas. I don't have an extra step to perform so I pay a premium.
No I don't think so. People would just start using alternatives. If Spotify disappeared from my phone I'd just use something else. I'm not going to go trade in my iPhone to get some other phone and an entirely new OS, import contacts, download all these apps, set all this stuff up, just because Spotify pulled out of the app store. Nobody is going to do that. Spotify isn't that big of a deal. Facebook might have an effect, or perhaps Google.
That is excatly how it is! Spotify has its own infrastructure. Apple was 30% of all signups from the app and Spotify is not allowed to send users to their own webpage for signups.
I think the terms are unfair, to me as a iPhone buyer, I am also free to try to make Apple change the policy. Not be like you, taking any unfair terms and just forking money over without any foresight for what that means for the future, which is being stuck with Apple only services. You see it all the time, Apple adds new service / feature and what-ever has been on the Apple Store until that point gets either booted out or strong armed out because they can't compete against a company that wants 30% of what-ever you earn while launching a service at the 30% lower price.
Apple is providing access to a customer base that is more likely to have paying customers.
It's their product on their platform and they allow open competition.
No but Sony very well may and that would be perfectly OK.
Likewise, download the Spotify app then go to the Spotify website to purchase a subscription and Apple gets nothing.
How does it matter that it is a utility? The terms are clear, you sign up for electricity using a app, apple gets 30%. They can't add a click here to signup. That is what they are doing.
Exactly, the billing being done through Apple is a huge part of the equation. The only question I really ask myself is should it be wrong to allow customers a choice within the app... Displaying "Sign up online" and "Sign Up Through iTunes" together doesn't seem wrong to me. I think if you want to charge customers outside of the app/iTunes, then simply have a rule that you must give users a choice to use iTunes billing seems fair.
Thanks, Spotify! I was trying to decide whether to keep my Spotify subscription or move to Apple Music. You made the decision much easier with your BS business tactics. Apple Music it is!
Even if it were that would be fine but given that the Apple App Store repeatedly does not turn a profit it seems that Apple's price point is not doing more than supporting the infrastructure, development, and maintenance.
Spotify isn't in a position to do that. They're losing hundreds of millions of dollars each year. They need paid users, not unpaid users, and the paid users are on iOS. If they pull out, the paid users can switch to any of the other competition. There's plenty.
Amazon has not released a prime app for appleTV (used it on my google TV all the time)
Its annoying, but i like my appleTV so much that I'm keeping it