Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Pulls Match.com iOS App over External Subscription Links

nuckinfutz said:
Why? in-app purchases give you the ability to enable extra features in an app without having to blindly buy all the features. It's giving you choice.

As for Apple taking a cut of the transactions that makes sense. They've cultivated the app stores and have millions of users with Apple ID backed via credit cards. Why would they let companies come to the table ..get free marketing and cut them out of the process.

The choice is rather simply. Gain access to millions of customers who are proven to spend on technology for a 30% fee or take your business elsewhere.
Click to expand...

In App purchases is a rip off to the dev.
If you read the requirements the devs are required to support everything for uploading the new content to the iOS device or have it built in enabled in the app.

Apple is taking 30% to be nothing more than a credit card processor. Tell you the truth they are worse than a credit card processor because they block even more information for the supplier.

30% is way out of line for nothing more than a bad payment processor. Credit cards take 2-3%. So Apple charging 5% would be much more reasonable rate for what serve they are offering.

If Apple allowed you to use outside payment collection then it would be fine. They would then at least provide options but the current system is pretty much a Apple being like the Mob demanding a huge cut for "protection"
 
Rodimus Prime said:
In App purchases is a rip off to the dev.
If you read the requirements the devs are required to support everything for uploading the new content to the iOS device or have it built in enabled in the app.

Apple is taking 30% to be nothing more than a credit card processor. Tell you the truth they are worse than a credit card processor because they block even more information for the supplier.

30% is way out of line for nothing more than a bad payment processor. Credit cards take 2-3%. So Apple charging 5% would be much more reasonable rate for what serve they are offering.

If Apple allowed you to use outside payment collection then it would be fine. They would then at least provide options but the current system is pretty much a Apple being like the Mob demanding a huge cut for "protection"
Click to expand...

Increasingly sounding like the lone voice in the wilderness . . .
 
nuckinfutz said:
This makes absolutely no sense. DO OVER





Why? in-app purchases give you the ability to enable extra features in an app without having to blindly buy all the features. It's giving you choice.

As for Apple taking a cut of the transactions that makes sense. They've cultivated the app stores and have millions of users with Apple ID backed via credit cards. Why would they let companies come to the table ..get free marketing and cut them out of the process.

The choice is rather simply. Gain access to millions of customers who are proven to spend on technology for a 30% fee or take your business elsewhere.
Click to expand...


Apple is just serving as a CC processing department at that point. The app itself was marketed. The end user was already sold. If they buy in-app after that - it's not really Apple's "selling."

I do understand Apple wanting a take. However for developers (especially publishers or monthly re-curring type charges) it's a rawer deal because they do not have access to the specific subscribers. Apple doesn't release that data. So it's not JUST that they lose 30%. It's that they lose that and one of the most important things they can ever own in their business. Their "list."
 
When you start talking about transaction fees things get a bit murky.

If you look at a companies biggest bills you see a couple of standout areas that consume a lot of finances.

1. Payroll
2. Marketing

The actual transportation of goods or services is relatively cheap. The App Store isn't going to help your payroll. That is what it is but the App Store is about Marketing. Millions of users coming to the same central store where you have the opportunity to sell your goods is a potential gold mine.

That's where the 30% is paying off for good developers. They don't have to expend as much money to market their product. A few good reviews and being included in New and Noteworthy are enough to propel sales.
 
ivladster said:
It's called Capitalism.
Click to expand...

Microsoft should have used tht excuse in the 90s, oh wait they just made it slightly annoying for other companies to get a program preinstalled, unlike apple who makes it 100% impossible to even get access, unless you pay their extortion fee. I wonder what would have happened if Microsoft started to demand a 30% cut of every program sold that runs under windows....
 
samcraig said:
Apple is just serving as a CC processing department at that point. The app itself was marketed. The end user was already sold. If they buy in-app after that - it's not really Apple's "selling."

I do understand Apple wanting a take. However for developers (especially publishers or monthly re-curring type charges) it's a rawer deal because they do not have access to the specific subscribers. Apple doesn't release that data. So it's not JUST that they lose 30%. It's that they lose that and one of the most important things they can ever own in their business. Their "list."
Click to expand...

But they couldn't just drop the fee down to nothing. Otherwise developers would just deliver free programs and then make everything in-app purchases skirting the 30% and only paying the CC processing fee. That clearly isn't going to happen thus 30% across the board.
 
nuckinfutz said:
But they couldn't just drop the fee down to nothing. Otherwise developers would just deliver free programs and then make everything in-app purchases skirting the 30% and only paying the CC processing fee. That clearly isn't going to happen thus 30% across the board.
Click to expand...

They could also not allow free apps to HAVE in-app purchasing thus requiring users to pay first for an app. Or take a sliding scale based on the purchase price.

IE - 30% .99 - 1.99; 20% 2.00 - 2.99, etc...

But again - the 30% is only 1/2 the issue. A big reason publishers and monthly subscription based apps hate having to go through apple is they lose information about their subscribers.
 
leroypants said:
Microsoft should have used tht excuse in the 90s, oh wait they just made it slightly annoying for other companies to get a program preinstalled, unlike apple who makes it 100% impossible to even get access, unless you pay their extortion fee. I wonder what would have happened if Microsoft started to demand a 30% cut of every program sold that runs under windows....
Click to expand...

This makes no sense either. Desktop OS have never required a curate store and thus there's no point in charging fees. Mobile platforms are different because they are connected to networks owned by companies like Verizon, ATT etc. This means that there needs to be more controls in place and malware and virus are unacceptable. You're getting your contexts all messed up.
 
When the MacRumors webpage loaded for me, I first thought the headline read that Apple pulled iTunes Match. Whew.
 
iEvolution said:
While I think it (30%) is a pretty large cut its well within Apples right to do it as it is their App store.
Click to expand...

It's not a large cut. If it were large, app developers would be peddling their apps from outside the App Store. Using the App Store costs less than most any other alternative, or it wouldn't be used or so successful.

This is a free market, Apple is not demanding that apps only get sold and distributed through their store. Developers choose it because it makes financial sense (i.e., more Profit).

----------
ivladster said:
It's called Capitalism.
Click to expand...

No, it's call a free market. Developers are free to choose any distribution system they want. Those that choose the App Store need to follow the App Store rules jast as they would for any other distribution service.
 
Lordskelic said:
I still think this whole in-app purchasing thing is a raw deal and frankly, it sucks.
Click to expand...

How? Its using the popularity of the app store to lure Apples customers to their website. Apple spent much time, effort and money to setup their ecosystem only to allow a third party to take their business?
 
Rodimus Prime said:
30% is way out of line for nothing more than a bad payment processor. Credit cards take 2-3%. So Apple charging 5% would be much more reasonable rate for what serve they are offering.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Almost all CCPs charge a percentage AND a transaction fee of around 30 cents. That's one of the reasons that iTunes consolidates its credit card transactions whenever possible. Since most apps and in-app purchases are relatively small, this is a large percentage. There is also the factor of chargebacks which are rare in the app store i think.

Also, do you know that malls charge a percentage of sales in addition to the rent? They do that because they provide a value to the tenant in terms of attracting buyers. The same principles apply.

Why does the AppStore model work so successfully, yet the shareware model that had basically in-app purchases not perform as well? Why do so many AppStore apps have instore purchasing but normally apps generally don't?

Apple brings value to AppStore developers. That is why 80% of the revenue from mobile device app marketplaces comes from the AppStore.

----------
Oletros said:
Ah, you can install apps in iOS devices from outside the App Store?
Click to expand...

No, Oletros. As you pointed out last night, they can go the Android ecosystem, which you claim will give them more money in the end. Good luck with that.
 
JHankwitz said:
It's not a large cut. If it were large, app developers would be peddling their apps from outside the App Store.
Click to expand...

Care to explain how a developer can peddle their app on an iphone without the App store?

Second I have done some work with Gameloft and they have said flat out they charge a dollar more per game because of the huge apple cut. They charge 6.00 dollars and apple gets 1.80, they have stated they would like to keep games under the 5.00 dollar mark but can't because of apples huge cut.

JHankwitz said:
Using the App Store costs less than most any other alternative, or it wouldn't be used or so successful.
Click to expand...

Once again could you please explain to me the the other alternatives you are speaking about? Unless I am wrong I thought the only way to get an app onto the iphone is through the app store.
 
Originally Posted by nuckinfutz
But they couldn't just drop the fee down to nothing. Otherwise developers would just deliver free programs and then make everything in-app purchases skirting the 30% and only paying the CC processing fee. That clearly isn't going to happen thus 30% across the board..
Click to expand...

Why don't you work for nothing? That way your company could deliver product at less cost, skirting the excessive overhead you create.
 
nuckinfutz said:
This makes no sense either. Desktop OS have never required a curate store and thus there's no point in charging fees. Mobile platforms are different because they are connected to networks owned by companies like Verizon, ATT etc. This means that there needs to be more controls in place and malware and virus are unacceptable. You're getting your contexts all messed up.
Click to expand...


Actually, desktop software was primarily, until recently, sold by retailers. This involved a significant markup by both distributors and the end retailers. 30% including financial handling is not unreasonable.
 
JHankwitz said:
Why don't you work for nothing? That way your company could deliver product at less cost, skirting the excessive overhead you create.
Click to expand...

There would still be heavy marketing costs even a company had essentially free labor.

cire said:
Actually, desktop software was primarily, until recently, sold by retailers. This involved a significant markup by both distributors and the end retailers. 30% including financial handling is not unreasonable.
Click to expand...

Good point and if people think getting your app in the App Store is expensive try a retail shelf.
 
nuckinfutz said:
Good point and if people think getting your app in the App Store is expensive try a retail shelf.
Click to expand...

I just looked up Ebay. They charge 9% of a transaction, plus an insertion fee whether it sells or not. And that is not including CCP or delivery or additional marketing schemes they have. On a $5 item it would be like $1.20 including CCP. Apple charges $1.50. Not outrageous.
 
nuckinfutz said:
This makes no sense either. Desktop OS have never required a curate store and thus there's no point in charging fees. Mobile platforms are different because they are connected to networks owned by companies like Verizon, ATT etc. This means that there needs to be more controls in place and malware and virus are unacceptable. You're getting your contexts all messed up.
Click to expand...
Ah right, his context is messed up because there are not now and never were any smartphones that let you install whatever app you choose or purchase in-app without being forced to use the phone manufacturer's store/services.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back