Apple to Be Fined Over $500 Million in EU Music Streaming Probe

[wbeasley]

Spotify operates under competition in a competitive market - as evidenced by the market share distribution in the music streaming market. Including Apple Music itself, having reached a no. 2 position in the market, despite only being about half as old as Spotify.

That's inconceivable in the mobile OS market for smartphones, which has considerably decreased in competitiveness over time. Having lost large and important competitors (Microsoft, Blackberry, Symbian) and basically converged into a duopoly (in developed markets).

Spotify should deliver the hi-res music they have talked about for years.
Many other streaming services do and for the same fee.
I'm tired of waiting for an empty promise to be delivered.
Apple even pay artists more for Spatial Audio tracks.

Microsoft, Blackberry and Symbian (and Nokia) all disappeared because of bad business decisions.
Microsoft hardware was fine. But trying to make a desktop OS work as mobile didnt work.
Blackberry over-estimated the usefulness of a physical keyboard to most people when screen real estate became more important for media consumption and gaming. Symbian was very bare bones feature wise when new players entered.

The PC market is mostly a duopoly and has been for decades.
Microsoft over the past two years has held 70-75% market share and Apple 15-20%. Both account for just over 90% of the market currently. Effectively a duopoly with a clear leader. Most people find little benefit running ChromeOS (unless they want something cheap) or Linux (which suits businesses and tech heads). Each has a place but not market leading.

 

[steve09090]

perhaps i might change how i pay for Spotify.

currently i do it direct...
might upset them more if i do it thru Apple app payment system

I don’t think you can. You certainly can’t in Australia. They’ve have used their market choice. The one that the EU said that didn’t exist, thus making it illegal. Even though they did.

Ah, but you see, here comes the big difference:
How many streaming music services can you list?
Spotify
Apple Music
Youtube music
Amazon music
Tidal
Deezer
…and more

Now list available mobile platforms:
Google
Apple

See the difference?

I think that’s pretty irrelevant.

But let’s look at that list.

• Apple. Has Apple Music on iOS and Android with in-app purchases. Plus you can subscribe directly to Apple
• Google. Has Youtube Music on iOS and Android with in-app purchases. Plus you can subscribe directly to Google/Youtube
• Amazon has Amazon Music on iOS and Android with in-app purchases. Plus you can subscribe directly to Amazon
• Tidal. Has Tidal Music on iOS and Android with in-app purchases. Plus you can subscribe directly to Tidal
• Deezer. Has Tidal Music on iOS and Android with in-app purchases. Plus you can subscribe directly to Deezer
• Spotify. Refuse to allow in-app purchase for iOS but has in-app purchases for google play because they made a secret deal with Spotify to charge them only 4%. Plus you can subscribe directly to Spotify.

Spotify are the only outlier and they made a choice. They are just spitting the dummy because Apple wouldn’t give them an under-the-table bribe like Google. So they turned to their protection racket (The EU Commission) to penalise Apple.

But Spotify are still thriving pretty well.

 

[bollman]

no streaming app needs to have in app purchasing.

they can have a link to their website. explain there how to upgrade your account to ad free

but they might lose the casual purchaser... trade offs

Ah, but you see, they can't.
Yes, they can use external purchases, but even then, Apple require them to pay 30%
From the guidelines: "Apps in this section cannot, within the app, encourage users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase". So no, they are not allowed to inform their users that there are options available, at least not accessible from the app.

 

[bollman]

I think that’s pretty irrelevant.

But let’s look at that list.

• Apple. Has Apple Music on iOS and Android with in-app purchases. Plus you can subscribe directly to Apple
• Google. Has Youtube Music on iOS and Android with in-app purchases. Plus you can subscribe directly to Google/Youtube
• Amazon has Amazon Music on iOS and Android with in-app purchases. Plus you can subscribe directly to Amazon
• Tidal. Has Tidal Music on iOS and Android with in-app purchases. Plus you can subscribe directly to Tidal
• Deezer. Has Tidal Music on iOS and Android with in-app purchases. Plus you can subscribe directly to Deezer
• Spotify. Refuse to allow in-app purchase for iOS but has in-app purchases for google play because they made a secret deal with Spotify to charge them only 4%. Plus you can subscribe directly to Spotify.

Spotify are the only outlier and they made a choice. They are just spitting the dummy because Apple wouldn’t give them an under-the-table bribe like Google. So they turned to their protection racket (The EU Commission) to penalise Apple.

But Spotify are still thriving pretty well.

You seem to be missing my point.
Artists not happy with the deal they get at Spotify can choose from quite a few big players, and even more small.
An app that wants to make it in the mobile world have exactly 2 players to choose from, AND since choosing only one side makes you say no to a lot of potential customers.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Do you think people listing their properties on AirBnb should be allowed to list their contact info for booking directly so they can bypass any payment to AirBnb ?

Does AirBnB require exclusivity when listing their platform?
Does AirBnB control access to 20 or 30 percent of customers as their only booking platform available?

Basically Best Buy pays the expense to operate the store as a free showroom for them.

Why though?

👉🏻 Why doesn’t Best Buy simply charge their suppliers a „Core Showroom Fee“? Even on sales that Best Buy don’t participate in as a party?

The analogy to the current EU law is even worse. Not only can you use Best Buy as a free showroom but they are required to allow signs to be posted in their store on where to get a better price.

Does Best Buy require exclusivity on their suppliers products?
Can consumers buy the products displayed at Best Buy elsewhere?
Can Best Buy’s suppliers make direct sales to consumers without Best Buy charging their Core Showroom Fee and/or commission?

 

[AppliedMicro]

Microsoft hardware was fine. But trying to make a desktop OS work as mobile didnt work.

Their software was fine, too.

Windows Phone 7 and 8 definitely weren’t desktop OS (except, admittedly, kind of in their brand name). They didn’t make it for a lack of established third-party app ecosystem.

The PC market is mostly a duopoly and has been for decades.
Microsoft over the past two years has held 70-75% market share and Apple 15-20%. Both account for just over 90% of the market currently. Effectively a duopoly with a clear leader

And we tolerate that duopoly, because these duopolists aren‘t behaving like leeching rent-seekers that control access to end users and seek a two-digit commission on every third-party digital product or service. And control what is allowed to be communicated between developer and end user in third-party apps.

 

[wbeasley]

You seem to be missing my point.
Artists not happy with the deal they get at Spotify can choose from quite a few big players, and even more small.
An app that wants to make it in the mobile world have exactly 2 players to choose from, AND since choosing only one side makes you say no to a lot of potential customers.

Not much choice to leave Spotify:

7. Spotify is the dominant music streaming service with 180 million subscribers.​

According to Midia Research music streaming platform statistics, Spotify has the highest music streaming market share with 31% of the market. (1)

Although the competition among music streaming apps is fierce, Spotify added more subscribers during the 12 months leading up to q2 of 2021 (latest data) than any other competitor.

The research suggests that there’s no risk of Spotify losing its leading position anytime soon.

Spotify	Apple Music	Amazon Music	Tencent Music	YouTube Music
31% mkt. share	15% mkt. share	13% mkt. share	13% mkt. share	8% mkt. share

Interestingly enough, YouTube Music was the only Western digital service provider (DSP) to increase global streaming market share during this period. (1)

According to Spotify data (2022), Spotify has 180 million subscribers and 406 million active users. In addition, Spotify is available in 184 markets with 82 million tracks. (8)

 

[wbeasley]

Their software was fine, too.

Windows Phone 7 and 8 definitely weren’t desktop OS (except, admittedly, kind of in their brand name). They didn’t make it for a lack of established third-party app ecosystem.


And we tolerate that duopoly, because these duopolists aren‘t behaving like leeching rent-seekers that control access to end users and seek a two-digit commission on every third-party digital product or service. And control what is allowed to be communicated between developer and end user in third-party apps.

bottom line is you and I disagree on what type of tool a phone is

you obviously use both.
pick the one that gives the best experience for what you need to run.
and in many instances, a phone isnt the best interface...

there werent a great deal of third party apps for Windows phone. some but not heaps.

 

[bousozoku]

What's weird is how EU never goes after Google, who have been doing the same thing, or other in the same space as Apple who will pull the same stunts Apple does. It's almost like the EU is using Apple as their cash cow and turning a blind eye to others in the same space.

If I were Apple I'd just pull a Trump and not pay it. What are they going to do, try to divest Apple from itself or themselves from Apple? Fat chance.

You must be unaware of what's happened to Microsoft, Google, and Facebook in the EU.

 

[steve09090]

Ah, but you see, they can't.
Yes, they can use external purchases, but even then, Apple require them to pay 30%
From the guidelines: "Apps in this section cannot, within the app, encourage users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase". So no, they are not allowed to inform their users that there are options available, at least not accessible from the app.

So do Google require a payment... Unless they make an under the table, secret deal like they did to that company who underpays artists.

And I am pretty sure every single store I go into, does not have advertising for alternative stores. That includes in person and online. Why should Apple be required to tell someone else to go elsewhere? Would you? < rhetorical, because I know you wouldn't >

You seem to be missing my point.
Artists not happy with the deal they get at Spotify can choose from quite a few big players, and even more small.
An app that wants to make it in the mobile world have exactly 2 players to choose from, AND since choosing only one side makes you say no to a lot of potential customers.

Yeah it seems "See the Difference" does not a good point make....

But here's the thing.
You are right. An artist can use multiple "stores'. And they will automatically be available in both Operating Systems by virtue of being in those stores.

There is nothing stopping any music streamer from not being involved in those stores and there is nothing stopping them from using a store that has no Apple Tax or Google Tax. Spotify are doing it already.

So your point either makes no sense or you need to spell it out in bigger phrases than "see the difference". Maybe explain what you mean.

You must be unaware of what's happened to Microsoft, Google, and Facebook in the EU.

Can you pass on a link to how Google are being brought to the EU over Spotify? I can't find one. Or is it that they aren't going after them because Spotify made a sweetheart deal and have told the EU not to. The EU are simply the 'protection racket for Spotify'

 

[wanha]

My understanding is that Spotify passes the extra charge to the customer, and the issue is Apple not allowing Spotify to say "you can get it cheaper somewhere else"

Allowing Spotify to say "you can get this cheaper elsewhere" is the equivalent of Apple collecting 0% on the transaction, which is why Apple won't allow it.

 

[hagar]

EU are like the Terminator. They absolutely will not stop. Ever.

It’s nice to have a government that gets things done 🙃

 

[Techwatcher]

Just leave the EU

 

[Samplasion]

Apple isn’t forcing anyone to [...] shop in their app store

Yes, they are. They're too concerned with profits to allow a sensible implementation of third-party app stores.

 

[MilaM]

Allowing Spotify to say "you can get this cheaper elsewhere" is the equivalent of Apple collecting 0% on the transaction, which is why Apple won't allow it.

Exactly, becuase they act like a modern day robber baron. These practices are hampering innovation and costing consumers money by preventing competition.

 

[MilaM]

This is a prime example of Orwells ”newspeak”.

Fun fact I learned yesterday. Orwell called himself a "democratic socialist". I wonder what he would have to say about Apple's business conduct if he were alive.

 

[Samplasion]

It’s not and shouldn’t be up to the government to tell a company they don’t like a perfectly legal business model.

Who do you expect to define what "legal" means if not the government?

 

[wbeasley]

Who do you expect to define what "legal" means if not the government?

But the EU arent telling Apple (or anyone) what is legal or not.

They wanted a standard USB C charging cable. Not Lightning. For power.
They forgot that cables also carry data.
So while Apple might be playing hardball and using USB2.0 speeds with a USB C cable on cheaper phones, it meets the request for the plug.

This is what happens when non IT people start specifying things.

Given how much tech changes are we now stuck with USB C connectors from here on?
Or will the EU dictate that USB D (or whatever) are a new standard in 5 years time?

A plug is a plug. Apple dont really care that much.

The alt app store though is an arbitrary rule.
What other retail store is dictated to on how they accept payment?
Or having to tell customers their goods might be cheaper elsewhere?
Buying software for a games console is exactly the same yet noone is pushing for that to be opened up.

There's dirty politics behind this.
And that always leads to money.

 

[Samplasion]

But the EU arent telling Apple (or anyone) what is legal or not.

They are passing new laws and regulations. That is declaring what's legal and what's not. You're being disingenuous skirting around definitions of words like that.

 

[H2SO4]

politicians should not be deciding what kind of port Apple should use in a phone, because they don't know ****.

You think politicians are just people that sit there all day and just make decisions about stuff they are untrained in?
You don't think that some might have an economics, medical, mathematics/military background, (which would kind of refute your baseless allegation)?
You've fallen deep into the cliche trap. Good luck getting out of it. Maybe Apple should lend you some Zeiss inserts to help you see more clearly.

 

[wbeasley]

They are passing new laws and regulations. That is declaring what's legal and what's not. You're being disingenuous skirting around definitions of words like that.

perhaps it is disingenuous for the EU to be retro fitting new laws on something that has worked for most consumers for 14 years...

and the application of those laws is so narrowly targeting one successful company...

laws are meant to apply to everyone.
this isnt.

the EU might exist for longer if they concentrated on a little skirmish in Ukraine rather than fiddling while Rome burns with iPhones

 

[MilaM]

You think politicians are just people that sit there all day and just make decisions about stuff they are untrained in?
You don't think that some might have an economics, medical, mathematics/military background, (which would kind of refute your baseless allegation)?

I think some people have a very biased view about how "government" operates. I can't say how it works in other parts of the world. But in this case the procedings were very transparent and various interest groups were invited to participate in the discussions.

 

[MilaM]

has worked for most consumers for 14 years...

It worked quite well for some time. But circumstances change. If Smartphones were a niche product like gaming consoles, I would agree. Just let them do their thing. But today Smartphones have become the center of every citizens digital life. It has become essential to function in society an to have access to many services and core to the business model of a very large number of companies. This is not only about Spotify, it's much larger issue than that.

 

[NagasakiGG]

THIS is a blatant LIE. Hope no one falls for it…

If you think so. I guess you’ve never been to Europe, otherwise would see different

 

[wbeasley]

They are passing new laws and regulations. That is declaring what's legal and what's not. You're being disingenuous skirting around definitions of words like that.

Charging devices: Can new EU law clear the path to a unified experience?

The EU will require devices to be USB-C compatible by 2024, so DXOMARK recently tested the current state of the cross-charging experience.

www.dxomark.com

even charging is an industry-wide nightmare the EU law changes arent addressing.
the end user may still not see fast charging with all the different (and sometimes proprietary) "standards".