Apple Loses UK Antitrust Lawsuit Over App Store Fees, Faces £1.5 Billion in Damages

[germanbeer007]

Does not matter, my point still stand.

I'm saying your point doesn't hold up well.

Have a good one.

 

[germanbeer007]

It is nothing like the others. There 2.2 billion active iOS devices, while Sony’s lifetime PS4 and PS5 sales are 200 million devices combined; aka there are at 2 billion fewer PlayStation consoles in use than iOS…

Setting an artificial threshold of X number before a platform must be opened up doesn't make sense to me. Should be on principles, regardless of marketsize as long as there is competition (Android is the competitor in this case).

 

[Pezimak]

Please explain where I can walk into a brick and mortar store and buy a game for my digital only PS5 that avoids paying Sony anything.

For an argument like that to work, you would have to have a situation where you ONLY have digital games available, and we all know that is not the case with the games console market. Both Microsoft and Sony and Nintendo offer physical media for their systems. Maybe the next gen will be comparable, but currently it is not.

 

[surferfb]

For an argument like that to work, you would have to have a situation where you ONLY have digital games available, and we all know that is not the case with the games console market. Both Microsoft and Sony and Nintendo offer physical media for their systems. Maybe the next gen will be comparable, but currently it is not.

My PlayStation has no disc drive. One cannot be added after the fact. Even if one did, buying a physical disc still results in a 30% cut to the platform owner.

So again, how can I buy a game for my PlayStation and avoid paying Sony 30% (spoiler alert: I can’t.)

 

[Pezimak]

My PlayStation has no disc drive. One cannot be added after the fact. Even if one did, buying a physical disc still results in a 30% cut to the platform owner.

So again, how can I buy a game for my PlayStation and avoid paying Sony 30% (spoiler alert: I can’t.)

Firstly yes you CAN add a disk drive to ANY PS5 slim or Pro, that is a fact, and if you buy a game off eBay or from a second hand store, nothing goes to the platform owner. So again your point is not valid, the games market and the iOS App Store market are NOT the same.

 

[surferfb]

The Play Store is the only app store that ships with basically every android phone. They have monopoly control over the Android market even if other app stores do exist.

How would iOS being “forced open” be any different? If the goal is to increase competition or lower prices, the evidence from Android suggests that won’t happen. The Play Store remains dominant, its fees haven’t dropped meaningfully, and the supposed openness hasn’t translated into tangible consumer benefit, and in fact led to their detriment in the form of malware. Meanwhile, forcing Apple to open iOS would introduce all the privacy and security downsides of sideloading while taking away the closed, curated ecosystem that millions of users specifically choose.

Those who prefer an open ecosystem already have Android. Why remove the closed option for those who value it?

Furthermore, Google Play Services is a monopoly fully controlled by Google. Any phone without it (and outside of China) is effectively DOA. They have been shown in court to leverage Play Services to a) ensure their app store is installed by default and that some competing stores are not similarly installed.

Competition to the Play Store exists, but it’s far from free and open, and isn’t significant enough to introduce competitive pressure toward lower fees. Much like Macs existing has never prevented Windows PCs from being a monopoly… questions actually have answers if you investigate them instead of just asking.

The reality is that, despite years of “competition” from Samsung, Amazon, and others, prices haven’t dropped. If even Amazon (one of the most cutthroat companies on earth) couldn’t lower them to gain share, that tells you these fees reflect the actual market rate, not some made-up monopoly tax. Forcing iOS open won’t change that. All of the security and privacy downsides with no benefit to consumers.

But good news everyone! Spotify won't have to pay for using Apple's intellectual property! Now if only regulators would let them not pay those pesky artists for THEIR intellectual property, Spotify would really be in business.

Don't worry, your prices won't go down though.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

My PlayStation has no disc drive. One cannot be added after the fact. Even if one did, buying a physical disc still results in a 30% cut to the platform owner.

So again, how can I buy a game for my PlayStation and avoid paying Sony 30% (spoiler alert: I can’t.)

Well you can’t you say?

How would iOS being “forced open” be any different? If the goal is to increase competition or lower prices, the evidence from Android suggests that won’t happen. The Play Store remains dominant, its fees haven’t dropped meaningfully, and the supposed openness hasn’t translated into tangible consumer benefit, and in fact led to their detriment in the form of malware. Meanwhile, forcing Apple to open iOS would introduce all the privacy and security downsides of sideloading while taking away the closed, curated ecosystem that millions of users specifically choose.

Those who prefer an open ecosystem already have Android. Why remove the closed option for those who value it?



The reality is that, despite years of “competition” from Samsung, Amazon, and others, prices haven’t dropped. If even Amazon (one of the most cutthroat companies on earth) couldn’t lower them to gain share, that tells you these fees reflect the actual market rate, not some made-up monopoly tax. Forcing iOS open won’t change that. All of the security and privacy downsides with no benefit to consumers.

But good news everyone! Spotify won't have to pay for using Apple's intellectual property! Now if only regulators would let them not pay those pesky artists for THEIR intellectual property, Spotify would really be in business.

Don't worry, your prices won't go down though.

The prices have come down. The commissions have lowers on multiple places. Epic has now 0% for everything untill a million, 0% for stores or your own payment system, Microsoft store has 0% on apps, 15% of they use their commerce platform instead of their own and 12% for games.

But indeed on iOS there’s no store competition so nothing to push the prices down🤷‍♂️

 

[surferfb]

Well you can’t you say?View attachment 2572231

Doesn’t work on mine:

And again, retail sales result in a 30% cut to Sony. Are you ok with Apple getting 30% of sales from the Epic game store? Is Tim Sweeney?

The prices have come down. The commissions have lowers on multiple places. Epic has now 0% for everything untill a million, 0% for stores or your own payment system, Microsoft store has 0% on apps, 15% of they use their commerce platform instead of their own and 12% for games.

They’re not down on the PlayStore. Just because Epic is subsidizing unsustainable commissions with Fortnite profits doesn’t mean prices have gone down elsewhere.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Doesn’t work on mine:
View attachment 2572237

And again, retail sales result in a 30% cut to Sony. Are you ok with Apple getting 30% of sales from the Epic game store? Is Tim Sweeney?


They’re not down on the PlayStore. Just because Epic is subsidizing unsustainable commissions with Fortnite profits doesn’t mean prices have gone down elsewhere.

Well shame then. Hopefully it gets rectified.

I’m okey with Apple getting 30% if epic and others use apples payment and advertising services. It’s abid hard to compete with a store whern you end up with most of the revenue for the developer just taxed away by every layer in the tower before even the 25% VAT. So 30% to Apple then 15% to Epix and the VAT before tax pl the profit occurs… sad really.

Most in app subscriptions and purchases are cheaper on the developers webpage by 10-30% ,

 

[diddl14]

That's like saying all the products built for Tesla should be sold by Tesla and people should go to Tesla stores to buy them. I don't see Tesla doing that.

Maybe they should. It would be interesting to see how that business model works out for Tesla. Until governments, of course, start interfering and have them pay huge fines for being anticompetitive.

 

[Pezimak]

Never Mind…

 

[surferfb]

Well shame then. Hopefully it gets rectified.

I’m okey with Apple getting 30% if epic and others use apples payment and advertising services. It’s abid hard to compete with a store whern you end up with most of the revenue for the developer just taxed away by every layer in the tower before even the 25% VAT. So 30% to Apple then 15% to Epix and the VAT before tax pl the profit occurs… sad really.

I mean, I understand where you’re coming from, but it’s not like your local game retailer is using Sony’s payment and advertising services. But Sony still gets their cut, the retailer gets their cut (usually an additional 20-30%), packaging and shipping aren’t free, etc. and the end result is developer/publisher is left with in a lot of cases, significantly less than half the retail price. Which is why the App Store charging 15% to almost all developers is actually a really good deal!

Most in app subscriptions and purchases are cheaper on the developers webpage by 10-30% ,

And if they can get people to sign up on their website then that’s great. But the conversion rates on an in app purchase are significantly higher than a website, and that’s value created by the platform owner. It’s only fair they be compensated for that value. I’m all for allowing the developer to say “$15 in app, but you can get it for $10 on our website” in the app.

But I firmly believe the universe where every app requires you to download an alternate store or go to their website and create an account, hand over payment details, etc. isn’t actually better for customers.