Apple Requiring Patreon to Use In-App Purchase and Pay 30% Fee for Memberships

[BaldiMac]

If you think what Apple does is fine and don't see the difference to what Patreon is doing, we don't need to exchange arguments anymore.

Hah. If we agreed this would be boring. Conversely, if you can't acknowledge the similarities between what Apple is doing and what Patreon is doing, than we're not having a rational discussion. The main difference is one is a multi-billion dollar platform and one is a multi-trillion dollar platform.

Where you again conveniently cherry picked the rate for micropayments that very few creators actually use rather than lower the standard rate. Yet for Apple you picked the lower 15% cut to illustrate your point rather than the standard 30%.

"Up to" figures can be misleading.

Okay. I think that micropayments are more the norm from my experience, but let's go with this.

For less that $1 million in revenue, Patreon charges around 11 to 27% while Apple charges 15%.

Hard to say that Patreon is "much lower" for most creators. Which is the original claim that I responded to.

 

[zchrykng]

Hah. If we agreed this would be boring. Conversely, if you can't acknowledge the similarities between what Apple is doing and what Patreon is doing, than we're not having a rational discussion. The main difference is one is a multi-billion dollar platform and one is a multi-trillion dollar platform.



Okay. I think that micropayments are more the norm from my experience, but let's go with this.

For less that $1 million in revenue, Patreon charges around 11 to 27% while Apple charges 15%.

Hard to say that Patreon is "much lower" for most creators. Which is the original claim that I responded to.

You are forgetting to include the costs associated with developing an app from scratch + 99/year for developer account, etc.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

Hah. If we agreed this would be boring. Conversely, if you can't acknowledge the similarities between what Apple is doing and what Patreon is doing, than we're not having a rational discussion. The main difference is one is a multi-billion dollar platform and one is a multi-trillion dollar platform.



Okay. I think that micropayments are more the norm from my experience, but let's go with this.

For less that $1 million in revenue, Patreon charges around 11 to 27% while Apple charges 15%.

Hard to say that Patreon is "much lower" for most creators. Which is the original claim that I responded to.

Even if this wasn't a horribly skewed example, Patreon don't charge you an annual fee and insist on you buying their hardware in order to use their platform soooo there is that.

 

[Rogifan]

Let me guess….defenders will say Patreon wouldn’t exist without Apple and trying to skirt giving Apple 30% of their business is unfair to Apple.

 

[MilaM]

Hah. If we agreed this would be boring. Conversely, if you can't acknowledge the similarities between what Apple is doing and what Patreon is doing, than we're not having a rational discussion. The main difference is one is a multi-billion dollar platform and one is a multi-trillion dollar platform.

The difference is, that Apple and Google are a duopoly in the app distribution and digital services market. And Apple additionally has a monopoly on it's platform. Patreon on the other hand has plenty of competition because creators can choose who they do business with. And don't say Patreon could create its own smartphone, because that is not realistic. Who is going to buy and carry one phone or each service they are using.

 

[zchrykng]

Hah. If we agreed this would be boring. Conversely, if you can't acknowledge the similarities between what Apple is doing and what Patreon is doing, than we're not having a rational discussion. The main difference is one is a multi-billion dollar platform and one is a multi-trillion dollar platform.



Okay. I think that micropayments are more the norm from my experience, but let's go with this.

For less that $1 million in revenue, Patreon charges around 11 to 27% while Apple charges 15%.

Hard to say that Patreon is "much lower" for most creators. Which is the original claim that I responded to.

Also, I did some math and these are the base rates I'm seeing.

 

[Rogifan]

You can subscribe to Patreon folks through a whole ton of options, including the safari browser right on the iPhone!

Why does Apple need to provide this service for free?

Apple doesn’t get a cut of non-digital goods that are purchased through an iOS/iPadOS app. Is that a problem? Of course Apple isn’t handling the payments but I’m sure Patreon would handle in-app payments itself if it was allowed.

 

[BaldiMac]

You are forgetting to include the costs associated with developing an app from scratch + 99/year for developer account, etc.

I’m not forgetting. I was discussing platform transaction fees.

 

[Rogifan]

Personally I'm gonna head into Target, put up a few desks and start selling my stuff. No problem, right?

So what about all the non-digital goods one can purchase via an iOS/iPadOS app? What about purchasing an Uber ride or ordering from Panera? Is that like setting up shop inside Target and selling stuff?

 

[OTACORB]

They getting greedier by the day. It insulting to companies working with them trying to make a living that they always nickel and dime everyone to death. I hope the DOJ takes their ass to the cleaners. They need it. Getting a little too big for their pants these days.

 

[BaldiMac]

Also, I did some math and these are the base rates I'm seeing.
View attachment 2405386

Thanks!

 

[dannys1]

That's where this kind of thing is likely to go.

When you are a bit player among many bigger & smaller fish, you can get away with stuff like this. When you are "richest in the world" and "king of the capitalism hill" you must evolve your business practices or GOVs will come for you. You can't keep playing the "maximize, maximize, maximize!" every nickel & dime game and get away with it.

As King, it requires a kind of benevolency change in which you lift all boats... much more win:win partnering instead of "us or the highway" power plays. Else, GOVs will come... as they have all throughout history... whenever others have been at or near king of the hill and continuing to flex their much greater muscle at that level in overwhelmingly self-serving ways... as if they are still a little fish in a much bigger pond.

GOV is coming. It's just a matter of time now... UNLESS... Apple decides to alter their choices and be a different kind of "king of this hill." The easy money is a massive temptation but they can hang onto the crown and evolve too. Or not... and then face more and more GOVs making them evolve. It will be much better to do it themselves but- if they don't- they'll just have to deal with bureaucrats making decisions for them. History clearly illustrates that this only goes one way without meaningful changes in the way "Kings" at the top do business.

And this is an issue because governments don't understand technology. So whilst trying to enforce changes to stop obviously incorrect things like this - they'll roll out a bunch of other restrictions and regulations that end up hurting the end users as well (see delays to Apple AI in the EU)

I think it would be fair if the fee was 10% and they continue to get subs on their own site. Most people using Pateron are tech savvy I imagine, almost all of them will just subscribe in a browser.

For those that want convenience of using the app and having Apple manage the sub - 10% that is absorbed by Patreon I think is fair. Apple hosts the app, puts it in their marketplace, handles download bandwidth, processes the payment, handles sub renewals and subscriptions. They'd expect to pay 3% card processing anywhere (and will be with their card payment provider on web) and Apple is providing more than a standard card processor, it's more akin to Walmart putting a product on their shelves in a store they have to run and maintain - they have an average profit margin on goods sold of 23.5%

 

[GizmoDVD]

They getting greedier by the day. It insulting to companies working with them trying to make a living that they always nickel and dime everyone to death. I hope the DOJ takes their ass to the cleaners. They need it. Getting a little too big for their pants these days.

...so only companies not called Apple can charge fees for using their services? How dare Apple give them a platform with BILLIONS of potential customers and make them pay a fee! Ridiculous! They should really just delist their App

 

[rockosmodurnlif]

I’ve used Patreon, subscribe to some creators and did not know they had an app.

 

[dannys1]

I’m sure Patreon would handle in-app payments itself if it was allowed.

But it wouldn't be them, it'd be a payment provider like Stripe, Adyen, Global, Fiserv, TSYS etc. So i'm not sure why Apple would open it up so other payment providers can do the checkout for an app they're providing bandwidth and downloads for to host in the AppStore.

Sure no a 3rd party app store where Apple aren't involved at all (except for vetting the 3rd party app store app) they can do what they want (and do in the EU) but for Apple's own I don't think they should open it up as it'd leave them at a loss. It's either that or they charge the app maker a flat fee for hosting the app in the app store.

 

[ProbablyDylan]

...so only companies not called Apple can charge fees for using their services? How dare Apple give them a platform with BILLIONS of potential customers and make them pay a fee! Ridiculous! They should really just delist their App

Supporters that spend money on Patreon aren't Patreon's customers. You're getting wires crossed here. Those supporters are the customers of the Creator they subscribe to.

That's all to say that Apple is not taking 30% of Patreon's money. They're taking 30% of the money that supporters have pledged to creators. It would be like if Apple charged a 30% commission on payments made via the PayPal app to purchase digital goods.

 

[BaldiMac]

Supporters that spend money on Patreon aren't Patreon's customers. You're getting wires crossed here. Those supporters are the customers of the Creator they subscribe to.

That's all to say that Apple is not taking 30% of Patreon's money. They're taking 30% of the money that supporters have pledged to creators. It would be like if Apple charged a 30% commission on payments made via the PayPal app to purchase digital goods.

That’s certainly Patreons spin. In reality, customers pay Patreon. And Patreon pays there suppliers while keeping fees on top of their advertised cut.

 

[MilaM]

It would be like if Apple charged a 30% commission on payments made via the PayPal app to purchase digital goods.

Another loophole that needs to be plugged ... 🤡

 

[_apple_apple_]

If you had to monetize an app-distribution platform, there's not that many clean ways to do it:

• Take a cut of the initial sale — Everyone would just switch to "free" app with internal payments.
• Take a cut of all money that changes hands via the app — Feels oppressive, spend $$$ chasing down all the people trying to subvert this. Hurts apps with frequent charges more than others.
• Subscription fee like Apple Music/TV+ — Hard to determine how much to pay each creator.
• Platform itself is free, costs are covered/subsidized by other products/means — burdens everything else the company sells, would have to implement some kind of limiter to prevent infinite costs.

Approach #2 is certainly the most profitable, so Apple can't really switch to a less profitable approach without shareholders revolting.

 

[ProbablyDylan]

That’s certainly Patreons spin. In reality, customers pay Patreon. And Patreon pays there suppliers while keeping fees on top of their advertised cut.

Right - just like Paypal, who also keeps a % of payments for goods and services. Even direct wire transfers have a fee if you want to send the money directly to a creator's account.

 

[Passthru]

That’s certainly Patreons spin. In reality, customers pay Patreon. And Patreon pays there suppliers while keeping fees on top of their advertised cut.

"Patreon's spin." You obviously don't use Patreon. People don't use Patreon because they think it has a really nice-sounding name. Supporters use it because someone somewhere is doing something really cool, and the supporter wants them to keep doing it, and gives them money to do so. Like a patron in the old sense of the word. Apple isn't taking Patreon the company's money, they're taking money from artists and musicians and other people trying to bring something special or beautiful into the world. Many of whom are barely scraping by. That's just scummy.

 

[BaldiMac]

Right - just like Paypal, who also keeps a % of payments for goods and services. Even direct wire transfers have a fee if you want to send the money directly to a creator's account.

I think most people understand the difference between a digital content platform and a payment processor.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

And this is an issue because governments don't understand technology. So whilst trying to enforce changes to stop obviously incorrect things like this - they'll roll out a bunch of other restrictions and regulations that end up hurting the end users as well (see delays to Apple AI in the EU)

...which is why I make a little case for Apple to deal with it PROACTIVELY vs. carrying on "business a usual" until multiple GOVs come knocking. History shows how this goes. The companies who climb to the top of this hill seem intoxicated on growing bigger still as fast as possible and the GOVs MUST come knocking to reel them in. Apple should look to history, see what happens EVERY TIME, and "think different."

Apple has won the Capitalism game. They are richest or near richest at any given time... often King of that hill or very close to king of it. As King, how they choose to operate now needs to evolve to benevolent king instead of scrappy player trying to grow, grow, grow at almost any cost. Raise all boats instead of propping up only their own. Engage in much more "win:win" partnerships vs. putting ever-tighter squeezes on partners to maximize for themselves. Etc.

Else, more GOVs will come and Apple will ultimately comply because nobody is big enough to beat the GOVs on these kinds of issues. We see that continuing fight but also concession after concession vs. the EU laws... which will only continue with more concessions until they are finally embracing both letter and spirit of that law. The same will play out in many other countries unless Apple evolves as "King." How do I know? History shows it. I know of no Capitalism King in the last 200+ years who climbed to the top and then flexed self-interest muscles harder & harder and the GOV just ignored them and let them keep doing it. None.

 

[BaldiMac]

"Patreon's spin." You obviously don't use Patreon.

You obviously don’t know what you are talking about. I like and use Patreon…

People don't use Patreon because they think it has a really nice-sounding name. Supporters use it because someone somewhere is doing something really cool, and the supporter wants them to keep doing it, and gives them money to do so. Like a patron in the old sense of the word. Apple isn't taking Patreon the company's money, they're taking money from artists and musicians and other people trying to bring something special or beautiful into the world. Many of whom are barely scraping by. That's just scummy.

But that doesn’t mean I believe their spin or like that they add fees onto their advertised price. They’re a multi-billion dollar content delivery platform with reasonable pricing.

 

[toobravetosave]

cool now charge 30% on everything I order from amazon app