Healthy does not mean or imply greedy or freaking expensive.
Suppose, you'r real developer and not an apple (paid?) "fan", just murmuring something to spread their "args" to create a feeling of common opinion. You say, you've made "this much money" from an app, and I know manies that made not. Some of them really failed in aspects of usability & etc. But some just got stopped by the 30% barrier 'cause their apps were costly to maintain, so once again, to comply with apple policies (those apps required moderation for user content uploads).
There's always a balance between safety & its costs. It would be 99% safe to live all life "in a closet", but you don't. 30% fee is not for safety, it's for raking in shekels.
The question is: why did their apps fail? What alternatives are there for these developers that would have been better?
Complaining that Apple gets 30% of their revenue makes no sense for two reasons:
1. For what Apple provides, If Apple didn’t provide it, what would those devs be doing instead? How would they be distributing their apps globally and with all the other benefits (see farewellswilliams’ post I’ve replied to above) without Apple doing it? What other costs, man hours,etc. would they be incurring instead of Apple’s 30% fee to get even some of what that fee provides?
2. And this is the real clincher. For Apple to get 30% of anything means the devs are actually making sales. And that’s what’s so great about this business model. Without it, you have to pony up all the hosting, distribution, etc. wrote you make a single sale. If you don’t sell enough you lose all that cost. Apple provides a virtually risk free environment. They share your risk. If your app sells you get 70% of everything. If your app doesn’t sell Apple gets 30% of nothing, while still providing you all they provide.
(Incidentally, actually they only get 25%-27% because of what they - not you - pay the CC companies for processing).
So... how should they bill it instead? Should they charge you for all of that based on some flat fee or something else before you even sell a single copy/license? Good luck with that.
What exactly are you really complaining about here? What really is the issue/problem. How else should they do it?
And “they should just charge less” is not an answer. Yes, I wish everything in life was cheaper but reality doesn’t work that way. Unless we switch to communism or something then we pay what the market bears and the market is having absolutely no problem bearing this 30%.
If you want to say to Apple “Your service sucks because you charge too much, how about your boss says to you “you charge to much for what you do at your job, AU should pay you less.” Or how do you feel if your customers say you charge too much for your app?
So all you people complaining about this stuff, stop being victimS and give a straight answer. What’s actually the real world issue here and what should Apple do instead that’s actually better but still fair to everyone?
[automerge]1594157096[/automerge]
Yes I am. And I know that this is either not relevant for most developers or should be paid on an as-needed basis.
Nobody said that $99 is too much for what you get. On the contrary, this should be much more expensive. The problem is that successful apps with relatively little infrastructure requirements are forced to subsidize unsuccessful and free apps.
What a stupid thing to say. How does anyone know BEFORE they submit or even develop their app if it’s going to be successful or not. Making the $99 a lot higher and the 30% lower only pushes potential developers out.
I’m sure there are plenty of great apps on the App stores that wouldn’t exist if the up front cost was high enough to even remotely offset a lower amount than the 30% - because the developers who made them wouldn’t have risked it.
How is any of that good for anyone?
