Though I don't think they can successfully argue 30%. And Google dropped theirs to 15% starting immediately. I think 15% is much more reasonable.
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
Them leaving would actually make AM have even more subscribers than Spotify when it comes to paid.
Or not from the same country as you? I've never heard that expression, and I'm 20 years old.
You mean like Amazon does right now?
They see a successful product that sells well on their marketplace, and then proceeds to sell same product 'sold and shipped by Amazon' for less
This is exactly right. They are forcing Spotify to sell their services APPLE's way instead of how they want to.
Lets use Walmart again as an example:
They have an app in the app store. If I order something using that app does Apple get a 30% cut of the product I ordered from Walmart? Of course not. Thats just stupid.
Apple is 100% making an exception for Spotify. Its just not in Spotify's favor, its in Apples. Apple gets more disgusting every day...
So nobody would sign up for Spotify if they were web only? And why does this only apply to digital content if it's about access to a lucrative customer base?
100% this. One study said iOS users are 3x more likely to subscribe to something on the app store. This did not happen by accident. Apple targets their devices/software to people who do not mind paying for things. Apple made this market. Spotify wants to ride coat tails on this market and use apples store with out paying anything. Sorry that's not how this works.
You really think people would change phones en masse just to use an app?
I mean, I'm sure some would, but…you really think that?
Can't we just stick to good old car analogies?
I prefer 17th century Dutch botany market analogies myself. They just don't apply to a broad enough swath of topics.
But Apple is only taking a cut of the customers Spotify obtained directly through the iOS platform. So how much of Spotify's subscriber base is attributable to iOS? Probably the exact amount that Apple is charging 30% for.
No iOS developers were harmed in writing that letter. Maybe Spotify was Stupefied, but that's all.
All digital goods that are ordered though an iOS app for use on iOS need to use apples order processing, period. This is across the board
Probably because one of it's 'lawyers' wrote the letter, you know, those strange creatures of the night that go to a court and claim someone copied their colours of black and white oh and they copied a oblong with round corners and then demand half a trillion dollars in damages...
The issue is Apple is taking 15% for the life of the subscription, if they instead said we will take 30% for the first month, that would be fair. But really they aren't hosting the subscription, they shouldn't be compensated for anything beyond marketing that the App store provides.
People in this forum often confuse a competitive advantage with an "unfair" advantage. Apple gained an advantage by creating a popular platform. That's not unfair.
I'm with Spotify on this one. Most people's comments here, I've noticed, are based on their own personal notions of fairness and right versus wrong. And while there certainly is a public relations aspect to these discussions, there's also an important legal piece. Apple's behavior is highly anti-competitive, and contrary to the opinions espoused by many, that is not their right.
A bunch of law firms will ultimately make a lot of money battling this one out (and I don't mean just Spotify v. Apple), but at the end of the day, Spotify and other companies who take this position have a pretty strong legal argument.
A bunch of law firms will ultimately make a lot of money battling this one out (and I don't mean just Spotify v. Apple), but at the end of the day, Spotify and other companies who take this position have a pretty strong legal argument.
I get why Apple does it. Beyond the money (yes, Apple likes money), it's simple and understandable. It provides a level of confidence for users that payment will be handled properly, not a scam, etc.
But I think Apple is too strict. Here's what I'd like to see them do:
Provide a link to subscribe/buy media. (This is ONLY for digital media, no game stuff, no unlock a full program, etc). When a user clicks on it, they get an alert saying that they are leaving the Apple environment and going to an external store. Proper warnings that the normal protections may not apply. Users can click OK to go through to the website and pay there, or cancel and stay where they are.
One other alternative would be to allow the purchase of subscriptions/digital media with Apple Pay for a lower amount (maybe 5%) Still relatively secure for the user.
But I think Apple is too strict. Here's what I'd like to see them do:
Provide a link to subscribe/buy media. (This is ONLY for digital media, no game stuff, no unlock a full program, etc). When a user clicks on it, they get an alert saying that they are leaving the Apple environment and going to an external store. Proper warnings that the normal protections may not apply. Users can click OK to go through to the website and pay there, or cancel and stay where they are.
One other alternative would be to allow the purchase of subscriptions/digital media with Apple Pay for a lower amount (maybe 5%) Still relatively secure for the user.
That's a convoluted analogy. It's more like Spotify is selling CDs on Amazon.com's marketplace and doesn't want to pay Amazon's percent selling fee for the sales.
Apple has never followed their own guidelines. And how would they" add $3 to each subscription just to pay themselves?
Apple has to pay for people managing the App Store, all the servers, developers updating iOS, App Store, iTunes Store.
I struggle with this argument as I'm sure most of it is automated no? Are their a fleet of Apple employee's dealing with these transactions every day? I do believe if you have any issue with an app you contact the developer and NOT Apple. But perhaps I'm wrong?
Where did I say nobody would? If 8m people moved from Spotify to AM, AM would be ahead in paying customers. I'm arguing that, nothing more. I don't get the point of your second questio. They're providing access to iOS devices and asking a cut from everything.