Apple and Google Given Mid-October Deadline in South Korea for Filing Plans to Allow Outside Payment Systems in Apps

[TVOR]

Let's look at the big picture. Apple is getting assaulted on multiple fronts about their payment system and app store. They got a HUGE win with the recent decision that stated they weren't a monopoly. Now they have some precedent, in the US at least.

In Korea, they are facing an ultimatum, open up to other stores. They basically have two choices, capitulate (the details don't matter), or leave. If they stay, they have to allow other payment systems stores and will quickly have to do that in every country. They lose some money, but probably not a lot and open the platform to more bad players, scammers, and malicious software. If they leave, they lose money, but every other country will pause and wonder if Apple will leave when the screws are put to them.

The reality is that the vast majority of consumers don't care about this, they just want to be able to buy their stuff and for it to work. If suddenly, they can't purchase an iPhone at their local store because the government scared off Apple, they're going to be pissed at the government, not Apple. Will Apple lose out if they leave and the stock take a hit, hell yes. But, Apple may see leaving as the lesser of two evils as it keeps their lock on the platform intact, regardless of the short term loss in market share. And if Google follows suit, the Korean government will backpedal in an instant.

I agree...and in particular with "The reality is that the vast majority of consumers don't care about this". The problem is that it is the devs complaining about the percentage, not the consumers (for the most part). And complaints are being made (again, by the devs for the most part) that this "bad for the consumer"...that somehow the consumer will benefit from Apple not being able to charge a commission on sales. Which would be fine if those cost savings would be passed down to the consumer...which I would be willing to bet they won't be!

II wonder what would happen if Apple said "OK, we will remove our commission...but your profit has to stay the same...so your $10 app now becomes $7...for the consumer...right?"...I have a feeling that you would then have a sh*tstorm of complaints from the devs along the lines of "You can't tell us what price we sell our apps for!!"...thereby arguing in favour of Apple being able to do whatever they want in terms of pricing...unless, of course, you believe that the rules should be different for Apple...just because...

 

[TVOR]

The joke is saying the developers pay NOTHING, when the simple fact is, they do.

In the posts that I have read from you in this thread...all you seem to do is repeat what the person you are quoting said but change the ending...somebody says "Anybody with a brain stem would....A"...and you reply "Anybody with a brain stem would...B". Sorry dude, but it's coming across as really quite childish and as if you are incapable of actually making your own arguments...sorry...but I'm sure you would be more convincing if you didn't do the "No YOU are a so and so" like a kindergarten kid would...

 

[TVOR]

Umm this has nothing to do with fees.. It has to do with using 3rd party pay systems and not just $pple 100% of the time.

It absolutely has to do with fees! By allowing other payment systems you are asking Apple to "stock" the product, but allow somebody to just "walk out" with it without you earning, and that may be cool in San Francisco, but it's not cool in most places...I believe it's called "Shoplifting"!!!

Seriously though...if Apple stock the product (server space and bandwidth) then why should they not be entitled to charge for a sale? You don't walk in to Walmart...pick up a product...walk out...and then pay the store across the street for it. What other online stores allow you to choose the payment processor? Does Amazon give you a choice of the payment processing provider when you check out?

 

[TVOR]

I think the real question is "what is a fair cut?". Those of you who defend Apple 30% fee, would you also accept 50% or why not 70%? Who stops Apple to take a larger share? No one can do that because there is no real competition.

I think it is ironic that the most strong defenders of Apple business practice also hates governments and especially EU because these seem to misuse their powers. The irony is that Apple as well as governments both introduce fees/taxes from a position of strength which seems unjust.

Apple is in a position of strength and they should be careful how they use that power.

What stops Nike charging $10,000 for a pair of sneakers? Market forces...

 

[TVOR]

Nice try, but in this example I am free to sell through other services ie; Gumtree, FB marketplace, etc

Yup...and you lose access to the HUGE number of Ebay users. Maybe FB has a similar number...like...maybe...Android? So go develop for Android...just a thought.

 

[laptech]

Apple forcing developers who want to have in-app purchasing to use Apple's payment system can be seen as a way of Apple being lazy in their app checking procedures because they know that there own system is secure, any app using it does not have to be checked properly but if 3rd party payment systems are to be allowed it would force Apple to do full comprehensive check of every app that will use a 3rd party payment system because as it stands, Apple finds 1000's upon 1000's of malicious apps and removes them from the store. With 3rd party payment systems it would be very easy for criminals to make a malicious app that uses a 3rd party payment system to fool people into paying the criminals. To prevent such apps from getting into the store, Apple would have to increase it's app security checking which would force Apple to put more effort and manpower into specifically checking apps that use 3rd party payment systems because if such a malicious app was to get through Apples security check, Apple could be liable for any losses occured by customers who used the malicious app.

More security checks and more moderating costs money and companies know this, hence why when the EU demanded social media companies do more to protect it's users, the companies fought back. Google, Facebook, Instagram, Youtube all fought back against increase in moderating because they know it will cost them money and eat into their profits. I have no doubt Apple will be adding it's name to the list of complainers.

 

[PC_tech]

I think the real question is "what is a fair cut?". Those of you who defend Apple 30% fee, would you also accept 50% or why not 70%? Who stops Apple to take a larger share? No one can do that because there is no real competition.

I think it is ironic that the most strong defenders of Apple business practice also hates governments and especially EU because these seem to misuse their powers. The irony is that Apple as well as governments both introduce fees/taxes from a position of strength which seems unjust.

Apple is in a position of strength and they should be careful how they use that power.

and you are free to sell your services in places other than the Apple Store. There is Google Store, Any of the Android stores that anyone is free to open (80% phone market share right there), Microsoft Stores for PC's, Any store you want for the Mac, Any Store you want for Linux, Them you have the playstation store, Microsoft Xbox stores, plus many more. Every developer going in knows Apple's rules, if you don't like those rules, then don't program for it.

No one is going to tell me how to run my store, tell me I have to put up signs to buy direct for a better price, or tell me what payment processor I have to use. If my customers don't like what I have to offer, they don't have to come here anymore. If the companies that have items in my store don't like what I have to offer, they also are not welcome here. If Apple's customers don't like how they have things set up then they don't have to buy Apple. This is what the free market is.

As much as it not being an ideal situation either way, I believe both Apple and Google need to tell South Korea that if this law is not rescinded in 3 days (just as unreasonable a timeline they gave them) they are closing up shop. Caving in to these governments is setting a bad precedent for every store owner in the world. I am sure the people of South Korea will be hammering their politicians in an instant if this happens and the law will be rescinded quickly and they will be back in business in no time. It will also show other governments and politicians that if they wish to keep their jobs, don't mess with people's phones.

The government will tell you how to run your business if they see fit….

 

[PC_tech]

OK...what's your point?!? I was suggesting that they make the fee on a "per app sold" basis. Changes of business model happen all the time...see both Adobe and Microsoft (as proof that BIG companies do it) moving from a purchase to a monthly SAAS model.

I’ll make my point one more time and I’m done, the developers aren’t getting anything free, they pay yearly, it’s as simple as that.

 

[PC_tech]

Right...so if your boss (assuming you are employed) said to you "PC_tech...I am reducing you wages to 1% of what they previously were...see you Monday"...you would be OK with that? Because...you are "being paid"...right? Of course not!

You put a value on your services as an employee and you have a minimum that you will accept for your time. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that! But when Apple does it, and when they are clear about it upfront, and developers accept the T&Cs, and make money (sometimes huge amounts), Apple are evil and wrong for setting their own prices?

As many others have said here, if the devs don't like it then they can always leave the platform. They will lose out on all the income but that's their choice. In the same way that if I worked at Company A, and I wanted to earn more, and I asked for a raise, and they said no, then I am always free to give my notice and resign. What I should not have a right to do is somehow be able to appeal to Government to force a company to pay me WHAT I WANT...that's insane!

Yawn, the silly analogies are just that, silly 🙄🙄🙄

 

[I7guy]

I’ll make my point one more time and I’m done, the developers aren’t getting anything free, they pay yearly, it’s as simple as that.

The $99 annual subscription fee is totally irrelevant in the context of this conversation. For what the developer gets, it might as well be considered free.

• More Paying Clients
• Great Consumer Experience
• The Apple Interface
• Reach To Tech-Savvy Audience
• Allow To Penetrate Developed Countries Markets
• Provide High Security
• Low Fragmentation And Easy Testing
• High ROI
• Benefit From Apple’s Market Image
• Secure Transactions

Developer is free to chose initial payment, which can be free and or decide to charge IAP. So while $99 is NOT FREE, and while $.01 is NOT FREE either, it's a veritable bargain and costs virtually nothing. That is not to say being a dev is without investment, time and effort and a computer is needed. However the Apple part is virtually if not technically free.

As far as IAP, it's going to be interesting if Apple enforces, as the court has noted in the ruling it's fair to Apple to collect for the use of it's intellectual property, the fee/commission on external IAP---if the link comes from the app.

 

[TVOR]

I’ll make my point one more time and I’m done, the developers aren’t getting anything free, they pay yearly, it’s as simple as that.

OK...then let me be the first to make a complaint that the annual fixed fee of $99 is unfair for smaller developers as it makes up a larger proportion of their revenue than for a larger developer. So we need to campaign to abolish the UNFAIR fixed fee!!! Why should smaller devs have to pay a larger proportion of their income for the SAME tools as the bigger devs...on that basis how can they be expected to compete when their costs are SO much higher proportionally...Apple are SOOOO anti-competitive and their pricing models are predatory against smaller developers...the outrage!!

(Sarcasm...in case it wasn't clear!)

 

[TVOR]

Yawn, the silly analogies are just that, silly 🙄🙄🙄

OK...fair enough...fair enough...

While this is an assumption based on your user name, but if you are - in fact - a PC Tech, I do actually need an IT Guy...so can I hire you? Remote working is cool...and I shouldn't need more than a few hours a week on average. $99 a year an acceptable rate for you? Cool...when can you start???

(Edited for typo)

 

[PC_tech]

OK...then let me be the first to make a complaint that the annual fixed fee of $99 is unfair for smaller developers as it makes up a larger proportion of their revenue than for a larger developer. So we need to campaign to abolish the UNFAIR fixed fee!!! Why should smaller devs have to pay a larger proportion of their income for the SAME tools as the bigger devs...on that basis how can they be expected to compete when their costs are SO much higher proportionally...Apple are SOOOO anti-competitive and their pricing models are predatory against smaller developers...the outrage!!

(Sarcasm...in case it wasn't clear!)

Yawn 🙄

 

[TVOR]

The government will tell you how to run your business if they see fit….

Gotta love that smooth, creamy Fascism! Tastes goooood doesn't it?? 🤣

And in case you are feeling that the label doesn't apply...from Wikipedia:

"Fascism is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy, which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe."

On the one hand...authoritarian, dictatorial power and strong regimentation of society and the economy...on the other "The government will tell you how to run your business if they see fit….". I mean...if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck...

 

[bcortens]

The point was $99 is a paltry fee to make millions, potentially. It’s not a fee or commission it’s a license subscription.

Netflix and Youtube pay an insignificant fee and make millions-billions by enabling their platform on iOS ...

 

[aevan]

They simply would get fined and fined and fined till their bankaccount shows a big 0.

More likely they would get fined and fined and fined and it would be like pocket change to these companies.

 

[Rowdy07]

And neither does Apple take a percentage of everything you buy online using their "computer" forever...stop being over dramatic! Apple takes a percentage of everything you buy from their store. If you use their phone to visit Amazon or Ebay or Walmart then they don't take a fee...but if you use their store then they do. In the same way that if you buy a computer off of Ebay...they earn from that sale...and if you then by headphones from Ebay...they earn from that sale. Are they actually doing any kind of fulfilment? Nope! So in a sense they are even less "entitled" to earn than Apple...yet people don't insist that Ebay shouldn't earn a percentage of all sales from their platform? Why are people not demanding that Ebay charge only an annual fee and then no percentage on sales? Perhaps because people know what they are getting into when they decide to sell on Ebay, they accept the terms and the percentage of sales as a "cost of business", they calculate if they can make what they need/want to based on those terms, and then - assuming that the cost/benefit analysis works - they crack on and make money.

Once you download an app from the app store it's no longer in their store. It's on my home screen. They shouldn't be allowed to constantly get a % from every transaction made in that app. It's no longer in the App store.

 

[hans1972]

Isn’t astonishing how people don’t understand this?

Yes, but I wish I could use only one payment solution for everything and just entering in my details once in my entire life.

 

[hans1972]

The app isn't Apple's property, and neither is the product or service it offers, only the store which it's distributed on. This can also be reinterpreted as Apple dictating to developers what they can and can't do with their property (the app in question).

Important to remember that all the programming APIs the app is using are also Apple's property.

 

[Altivec88]

The government will tell you how to run your business if they see fit….

Sorry to hear you live in a fasciast country and that you support governments meddling/micromanaging private businesses.

 

[hans1972]

I think the real question is "what is a fair cut?". Those of you who defend Apple 30% fee, would you also accept 50% or why not 70%? Who stops Apple to take a larger share? No one can do that because there is no real competition.

It's up to Apple when they have a huge market share. If Apple wants to charge 1 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000% would be OK by me.

So would 1%.

 

[hans1972]

Do they not ALREADY pay for those tools with the yearly fee? I’m sure they do 🙄

The yearly fee is a membership fee for being part of the Apple Developer Program.

Even if you do no programming at all, you have to pay the fee if you're a member.

 

[svish]

Waiting to see how Apple will respond. Besides I prefer not giving my card information to all the the individual apps. Prefer paying through Apple.

 

[Altivec88]

I’ll make my point one more time and I’m done, the developers aren’t getting anything free, they pay yearly, it’s as simple as that.

All I can advise you is to read the whole thing when reading a contract. Did you stop reading at the $99 annual fee and miss the part where you must also pay the appropriate commission on revenue. The commission part is what subsidizes the low annual fee. You can't speak about one without speaking about the other. The reason Apple did this was to lower the point of entry and lower the risk to smaller developers. They can very well get rid of the subsidy and just charge a $100k annual fee if they want. Apple, like any other store operator has the right to set the terms of entry for their store. They don't have to be reasonable or fair and developers are not entitled to be in their store. If they don't like what they see, then don't sign the contract and go somewhere else. very easy to understand and works the same for every other free market industry.

Cherry picking one phrase in the contract and stating that the $99 fee entitles you to not pay commission makes you look foolish. I pay for my Costco membership so that means I can put anything in my cart and walkout the door without paying anything else. Right?

 

[pmasters]

It is not just $99.... there is 15-30% commission fee

But if a developer using an outside payment system then Apple gets NOTHING other than the $99 developer tools fee. Thanks for making the argument for me.