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

Apple Requiring eBook Apps With External Purchases to Also Offer In App Purchasing

baleensavage said:
This is a really stupid move for Apple. Just taking a quick glance over the top 200 apps on the Apple store shows a whole bunch of apps that could fall into this category...
Facebook, Pandora, Netflix, Skype, Farmville, Redbox, Hulu, etc. Not to mention all the eReader apps and the many magazine or newspaper apps that require subscriptions. Personally, if they kill the Kindle app on my iPod, I may start looking at Android phones a little more seriously. I love my iPod touch but I'm not rebuying eBooks on a different platform because Apple wants a cut of the profits.
Click to expand...

Dude... NOTHING CHANGES! All they are saying is if your going to offer in application purchasing you have to give the choice of buying through iTunes too (as in addition to going to their web site).

Yes... it will cost more through Apple, but you will have the choice to keep doing what you're doing.
 
BC2009 said:
I suppose Amazon can always offer the eBook for twice the price on iOS to simply deter in-app purchases and encourage customers to buy through their web site. But who does that benefit?
Click to expand...

You're not thinking like Steve here. :)

It won't cost twice as much. If Amaon wanted to protect their net profits, it would cost 30% of the net price more. But I think they'd be idiots not to sacrifice profit margin for the increased sales volume they get by reaching 160 Million new iOS users.

B&N, Sony, and Amazon all had the best of both worlds for a long time, and Apple has had enough. They have a competing product that they can deliver to massive audience they didn't have access to without iOS. Margins can suffer a bit for volume.

At the end of the day, price conscious consumers can continue to purchase directly through their web store. However, those who are either ignorant or ambivalent, preferring convenience, will just purchase in app for a slight markup.
 
iOrlando said:
I highly doubt there are many people who bought iPads solely because they can get kindle books on it...

alot of commenters here are really over reacting on this.

as a consumer...it is easier and better to just have everything billed to one account using one card.
Click to expand...

You'd be very surprised then. A great many tablet purchasers are replacing or supplementing an eReader purchase.

If you're replacing the eReader purchase, you can have 3+ eBook apps installed for free, and shop around for the lowest price on a particular book if you were so inclined.

If you're supplementing the eReader purchase, of course you want the same content available regardless of the device you chose to pack.
 
Ha. Just jack up the "in-app" content by 50% in price. Would love to see what that does to the sales numbers...
 
So when you click purchase, just show 2 options with explanation of each.

In-App Purchase - 30% cut goes to Apple and 70% to the publisher/author

Publisher Direct Purchase - 100% goes to publisher/author

Now, the question is, if the in-app purchase only passes on 70% to the publisher, will the author still get the same amount of money? I guess it would depend on their contract with the publisher.
Only the publisher knows that and they could use that to their advantage by stating that the author will make more from a direct purchase if that were the case.
If I were a buyer, I would be more inclined to click the link that gave the author more money. I doubt there is anything in Apple's agreement that would stop them from putting a description to the two buttons. If Apple wants it that way, then let the buyers decide based on the facts.
 
saxamoophone said:
Now you could say Netflix and Amazon both get *free* services from Apple since Apple hosts the App Store and lets users download their services for free.

In that current structure apple makes NOTHING.

But can you blame Netflix or Amazon?

They code the iOS apps.
They provide the content.

And they have no other way of giving iOS customers their content besides THROUGH the app store.

Why can't I just go to Netflix.com on my iPhone and download their app outside of Apple?

Why can't Apple work with Netflix and offer them a special "in-app" purchase deal that isn't 70/30, but maybe like 90/10?

I hate how everything is black and white, YES/NO, OPEN/CLOSE.

The consumer should be given options. We already "paid" apple.
Click to expand...

Netflix doesn't sell anything trough their app. There are no in app purchases. You would already have service with Netflix. They are just offereing another device to view it on. Same thing with ATT UVerse
 
Last edited:
iOrlando said:
I highly doubt there are many people who bought iPads solely because they can get kindle books on it...

alot of commenters here are really over reacting on this.

as a consumer...it is easier and better to just have everything billed to one account using one card.
Click to expand...


with apple if i want a free book i have to go to project Gutenberg, download it, add it to itunes and then sync it. with amazon/google and others i just "buy" the free book and sync it to my iphone. if i have free time i will go through the free kindle books and "buy" a few dozen at a time for later downloading to my iphone.

a lot easier than the apple way
 
Another issue I don't think has been raised yet is that in-app purchases are handled through Apple's servers. So not only would Amazon need to upload the entire Kindle library to Apple, they will also not be informed of who has purchased the book (remember Apple doesn't pass *any* purchases information to the developers beyond raw numbers).

So, you buy a nice shiny Kindle book through the in app purchase option on iPad and Amazon doesn't know you bought it, which means you can't download it to your real, actual Kindle.
 
saxamoophone said:
Great points. But my main problem is the lack of choice. I already paid apple for their "services" through the iPhone cost.

If I want to go through their AppStore for the "ease" of everything, great!

But I should have the option of going directly through Amazon, downloading the App from them, and using their payment options.

HTML5 is not the answer to *everything* ;).

I'd like to think there would be an alternative besides just not *buying* an Iphone/Ipad.
Click to expand...

Arguing that you already paid Apple for the "service" is like arguing everything on the internet should be free since I pay a monthly fee. ;-) Not really a good way to look at it.

Maybe I am missing something here on your next point, you would still have the option to do just what you said above. Buy from Amazon or buy from Apple, both in App, but to use Amazon, you would have to go to there site and set up a separate credit card account before buying or buy from Apple and just put in your password.
 
DarwinOSX said:
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...reader_kindle_in_danger_on_ios_app_store.html

Back in the real world...
Click to expand...
It is the same story, just spun the Dilger way. It boils down to Apple wanting these apps based on third-party ecosystems to also offer in-app purchases (presumably at the 30% cut) within their apps. That may be fine for some business models, but in a business model where the company (e.g. Amazon) is already selling someone else's content with competitive profit margins this is a big deal and could potentially result in a company like Amazon pulling out from iOS. Who loses in this case? The customer.
 
Winni said:
There is an awfully simple solution for this: Open iOS so that others can start their own app stores for the platform. Problem solved. And I firmly believe that Apple should be forced to do this with a court order.
Click to expand...

Why should they be forced? Those companies can just stop selling their applications and use other platforms if they don't like Apple's rules.


If you think that is what should be done, then it should be done to every company, not just Apple. You can't purchase games from another store (like Steam if they could be allowed) on Wii/Xbox/PS3. You can't purchase books from another bookstore on the Kindles, Sony Readers and so on.
 
Can We Say...

Can we say Honeycomb????


This is the kind of crap that pisses me off.... Apple doesn't deserve 30% of any other e-stores profits... Case closed!

Android may not be as polished, but atleast I won't have to worry about this kind of ***** on my Xoom!
 
I guess Apple has decided their own ebook store is a failure and instead they are going to switch to leaching off of other ebook store sales.
 
Who said Apple's 30% rate would apply to something like eBooks, provided by a middleman (like Amazon)?

Apple certainly doesn't make 30% on songs they sell in iTunes. I seriously doubt they would be charging Amazon a transaction fee of 30% for content retailed and hosted by Amazon.

I think everyone is getting worked up into a lather over nothing. What Apple seems to be saying is they don't want their platform used as a retail delivery service without their option of a cut of sales. Which is entirely fair.

You think Microsoft or Sony don't take a cut of downloadable games sales? And without providing an alternative channel, mind you. At least Apple provides the retailer the option of Web-based sales, unlike some other vertical platforms.
 
This is the exactly one of the reasons why people develop for Microsoft, apart from it being the most used OS.. Apple is way to restrictive, too many rules with everything.. Apple has always been closed source.. Although they've always claimed that they are open source.. :p
 
iOrlando said:
I highly doubt there are many people who bought iPads solely because they can get kindle books on it...

alot of commenters here are really over reacting on this.

as a consumer...it is easier and better to just have everything billed to one account using one card.
Click to expand...

Overreacting? Easier perhaps for the consumer, but more expensive, and completely unmangeable. Imagine if every app selling anything had to offer the consumer a means of purchasing through Apple?

- That would mean waiting for Apple to confirm payments on eBay purchases.

- That would mean no last-minute airline or hotel books on the Expedia app.

- That would mean Netflix billing going through Apple and higher prices.

Suppose the in-app price is much higher. Then its just clutter since anybody with any sense will purchase outside the app.

If Apple is going to have a policy like this then they need to spell it out and make explicit rules. For example:
- Must only apply to digital media or additional application features
- Does not apply to hard goods
- Must be for content purchases (not membership fees like Netflix)

I fully believe that this is a misstep by Apple in trying to resolve their contract with the folks at News Corporation for TheDaily versus apps that have outside purchases and subscriptions.

Apple needs to just realize that more content will mean more sales. They need to be very friendly to content providers. Apple has not done that and they are now making it worse. This effects tablets more than anything, and Apple should realize that locking up some major-league content before Honeycomb has seen the light of day would go a long way to squashing Android's prospects in the tablet arena.

What Apple should be doing is making some exclusive deals for content and offering favorable terms to publishers. This is a bad move -- I don't have a good answer unless its just Apple going back to News Corporation and saying "it's okay, we don't really need a 30% cut".
 
bigcraig01 said:
This is the kind of crap that pisses me off.... Apple doesn't deserve 30% of any other e-stores profits... Case closed!

Android may not be as polished, but atleast I won't have to worry about this kind of ***** on my Xoom!
Click to expand...

Good idea! Switch to a platform that is entirely funded by learning everything about you and selling advertising to companies based on that personal data.

Great option. :rolleyes:
 
Are Apple going to try and force these people to set the same price levels for in App and out of app purchases?

Can they even legally do that.

Ok, then can say they will take 30% from you for the benefit of using their in app system.

But can Apple then legally tell another company they cannot charge what they want for their product on their own web site?

The answer seems simple, just increase all in app prices by the 30% Apple Tax and keep the prices on your website the same, and let the customer choose where they buy from.
 
Yamcha said:
This is the exactly one of the reasons why people develop for Microsoft, apart from it being the most used OS.. Apple is way to restrictive, too many rules with everything.. Apple has always been closed source.. Although they've always claimed that they are open source.. :p
Click to expand...

See Xbox. See Zune. See Windows Phone 7. Then try again.
 
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