This thread and it's ongoing debate is a clear example of why Apple will always have the power it has and earns the billions it does because even when Apple make the error of showing just exactly how much percentage they need to process payments and services which is less than 5% proving they are in the wrong, people still defend them for setting the fee at 30% and saying they are right in doing so. It's true that we live in a mad mad world.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Collect 27% Commission on Third-Party App Payment Systems in the Netherlands
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I believe that they are entitled setting the fee to they feel the need or can over their assets and services. Like any business is entitled to.
Yet don’t think they are entitled to fees over revenue shares that operate on other entities assets by controlling access to their customers and or suppliers in whatever condition. Supplying components as the reason for such conditioning is even fishier. More so when the conditioning is based on peoples the use of devices as important to the digital economy as are smartphones, personal computer and the Internet.
Some people might ask “what is then the incentive in investing on the innovation of these devices?” … we’ll look at Apple … a trillion dollar business based entirely on that capacity. So I would say that the incentive is already huge without these entitlements. One needs to have lost touch with reality to think otherwise.
Yet don’t think they are entitled to fees over revenue shares that operate on other entities assets by controlling access to their customers and or suppliers in whatever condition. Supplying components as the reason for such conditioning is even fishier. More so when the conditioning is based on peoples the use of devices as important to the digital economy as are smartphones, personal computer and the Internet.
Some people might ask “what is then the incentive in investing on the innovation of these devices?” … we’ll look at Apple … a trillion dollar business based entirely on that capacity. So I would say that the incentive is already huge without these entitlements. One needs to have lost touch with reality to think otherwise.
Last edited:
I would say it also depends on what I am getting for that 30%. Knowing what exactly the breakdown is isn’t particularly meaningful if I know there’s no chance of it being lowered anyways; it’s purely an academic exercise. What’s more relevant right away is the utility I get for that 30%, and whether it results in a net benefit overall.
Not to mention that this 30% drops to 15% for smaller developers and subscription-based apps.
For example, if the App Store can promise me more downloads, between lower piracy rates, a more affluent user base to market to, and features like Sign In with Apple making it easier to create an account (and thus improve the odds of onboarding someone), to the point where I get to earn more from 70% of sales on iOS compared to say, 100% of sales on android or some other third party App Store, I will say that’s more than fair. Especially when software usually doesn’t entail marginal costs, and so my profit per app doesn’t quite matter as much as the money I can make as an absolute number.
I think people also need to realise that the App Store does not exist for developers; it exists for the consumers.
So, because Epic is grandstanding by running part of their business at break-even prices, others should too?
Epic selling their services at cost is them saying that their added value is zero.
This thread is a clear example of the hypocrisy as it exists around criticising Apple. I don't see a hue and cry to force fees down on any other for profit business (maybe except for google). Yet somehow people take umbrage that Apple collects a fee for its service. People who have no skin in the game. It's amazing.
it exists for both because without each other there is no app store. The app store also needs to be fair to both, which at the moment it is not. Apple should not screw over the app developers so Apple can keep it's customers happy.
Show me where "general purpose computing platform" is a legal term.
The only reason the Xbox isn't one is because Microsoft keeps it that way via software. There is no reason why I couldn't, or shouldn't be able to load a full version of Windows on Xbox hardware and use it as a PC, other than MS doesn't license their IP for me to do that.
You've missed the point. Epic make a healthy yearly profit with those values, values you deride but yet Apples values are double, even triple that of Epics meaning you can clearly see the huge divide in the differences between Epics idea of making a profit and Apples idea of making a profit.
If it exists for both, then where is the consumer’s voice in all this? Don’t we too get a say in how we would like to see the App Store being run, especially if it runs counter to what these larger developers are clamouring for?
How exactly is Apple screwing over the developers, who agreed to opt-in and give Apple the $99? Did the terms change since they opted-in. Well yes, they have gotten better. Maybe developers should walk if they feel they are getting the bums' rush.
Customers will only get a voice if Apple pass on any fee changes to it's customers, otherwise no because it's currently an Apple v app developer issue.
In case you didn’t get the memo, Apple also collects a fee for other entities service.
I mean, if you were told that to ship a €100 software program you had to pay 30% on top I wonder if you would. Heck … it more expensive than shipping a par o nickers by air and land. I bet you would go somewhere else to get it.
Yes, in return for selling their wares within Apples space. Same as Costco gets a fee for selling products they didn't manufacture.
As for your example...sure. If I didn't want to pay Microsoft for Microsoft Office, there is always the free Linux version an office suite. Maybe on google store the same application is selling for 85 euros based on a 15% commission. That is the market at work.
Well Microsoft Windows right now.
- 5% fee on every apps on windows store that aren’t a game
- 12% for games on windows store
- 5% for in app purchases
- 0% if developers use their own in app payment option.
- 0% for stores such as epic store or amazon store in the windows store
Epic:
12% for everyone
0% for 3d party in app purchases
5% UE5 fee over 1 million
Games in epic store using UE5 pays
12% fee
Revenue over 1 million=
7% store fee and 5% license fee
12%
Last edited:
Actually the reason why is that the hardware isn’t compatible with windows. And there isn’t any drivers available. You are free to try if you want. But it’s just as hard as installing android on an iPhone.
Same reason you can’t install windows on a PS5. Drivers aren’t available and hardware isn’t compatible.
Otherwise someone should have hacked the Xbox or PS5 OS to run on a normal Pc ages ago. It has nothing to do with licensing
Wel who else should we talk about? We haven’t defended other for what apple does.
Microsoft have changed. Epic is the same.
Google at least allow side loading.
Xbox have fees and is moving to a 88/12 model.
Nobody have defended Sony Or Nintendos Practice’s. And Xbox can improve etc etc
Apple has changed.
I haven't noticed a difference in the last 10 years. As a windows user the commission that Microsoft was charging is irrelevant to me in day to day usage, which was the point in a post above.
Epic is worse, they are a hypocritical company.
And? It is Google's business model, not Apple's. Those who want sideloading can purchase android phones.
And how has that benefited you as a consumer? Have game prices that are being bought from Microsoft been trending downward?
Plus apple is the one who is asking for 27% not the others currently. And we will equally lambast them for it, as I did with googles fee.
And I own apple stock so am invested in that sense outside of a healthy market to improve my customer experience.
I compared to you would gladly pay apple as little as possible. And 100% to developers. So if I can use apple IAP solution or 3d party solutions paying apple nothing I would.
If I can go on their website I would for any service I consider greedy or anti consumer I will not support.
The price is the price. If one doesn't like the service, product or price vote with your $$$. Ferrari and iphone have something in common. Nobody *needs* either. I can't image someone going into a Ferrari store and telling the sales person, I'm not going to buy a Ferrari, but your markup is too high.
As an apple stock owner, I agree with what Apple is/has been doing. Sideloading and the rest of the conversation that goes along with it, will not make for a healthier ecosystem. IMO, it will be a race to the bottom, should that happen.
Okay, so as a shareholder your are espousing that Apple should give away their ecosystem for $0. I disagree.
I don't care. I want an app to perform a service at the best price for the best quality. Nobody said alternative payments will give me the best price.
Ok.
In consumer friendly ways?
Well it’s relevant if it offer competition. Commission was lower in the end of 2021
They embraced right to repair.
the surface PRO 3 and 4 is infinitely easier to repair than the MacBooks since 2019.
How are they hypocritical? They allow third party payments as they advocate for with 0 fees. They allow third party stores with 0 fees such as ITCH.. so they allow the same thing they advocate for.
sure, it’s still more consumer friendly to allow choices.
How? Developers get more money to make greater products and Xbox haven’t started using 88/12 yet so we will see. And the windows store new low commission have just existed for a few months.
Windows store offering 5% commission for every app or 0% commission with in app purchases make it possible for Apple Pay to be available in the future. will incentivize more developers to exist in the windows store so I don’t need to download from random websites.
Windows and epic having a 12% commission on games putts pressure on steam to improve their services so we will see how it develops. and it gives game developers and Indi-studios more profits. That’s very good
Yes shops sell things they haven’t manufactured, but the least of the least have the things they sell in Store / Catalogue right?
Tell us where is App Store the selling dating arrangements, avatar costumes, photo filters, movies, books and so on? Where is the App Store distributing these kinds of things? Can’t find any of this in their catalogue neither evidence they distribute these things.
Please help. I’ve search the App Store for by Steve Jobs By Alter Isaacson and could not find it … where is it in the App Store?
Cheers.
Last edited:
As the app store is responsible for selling the things the developers upload?
The app store is providing the distribution platform for services a developer may offer. Sometimes a developer may offer these services for free, sometimes not. In exchange for providing free hosting and management, Apple is asking devs whose apps provide services to share in the revenue stream. Hope that answers the question.Tell us where is App Store the selling dating arrangements, avatar costumes, photo filters, movies, books and so on? Where is the App Store distributing these kinds of things? Can’t find any of this in their catalogue neither evidence they distribute these things.
Please help. I’ve search the App Store for by Steve Jobs By Alter Isaacson and could not find it … where is it in the App Store?
Cheers.
Yes. Looking at right to repair options, SBS, recycling, green, environmentally friendly etc.
They are allowed to be a legal monopoly.
Macbooks, imo, are infinitely better engineered computers.
They are a two faced company that engaged in a purposeful deceit.
Sure and google and android phones offers all of the things some want on these forums.
Developers should raise the prices and let consumers vote with their dollars. There is always android to develop on. Apple is providing a nearly free platform for distribution of services and still it is not enough.
Good for windows store. I have a strong feeling the developers won't be incentivized. If Microsoft wants to give up their profits bully for them, they aren't in the phone business and they couldn't make it in the phone business.
Maybe steam will become the predominant game platform. But I believe you are over-aggrandizing this.
Please answer my question. You said that the App Store operates like Costco so I assume that the products that the App Store sells are at least in the catalogue. That is how Costco operates.
I’m still waiting for clarification of this one … provides some products that Apple charges a fee for their sale in app but can’t find them in their catalogues. Please provide evidence that it operates the like it.
Don’t know, are they? Where are suppliers uploading the things I mentioned to the App Store? Because I can provide you evidence the App Store requiring charges in app for these things. Please provide evidence of developers uploading the things the App Store charges for.
Doing a search on the App Store catalogues all I see are software programs serving multiple purposes. Where is the App Store supplying a distribution platform for services such as eBooks, Videos, TV, Digital Newspaper, Dating Arrangements, Emails, Music Lessons … but iOS software programs, binary files .. please.
I can provide evidence of the later, but the first kinds of distribution platforms can’t find evidence. I would like some evidence of your so called distribution platform for digital services. Do you even know what is a distribution platform for say eBooks, Videos, dating arrangements, whatever … so on and so forth? What is required for it to operate? Do you think that a platform to distribute software programs qualifiers as a platform to distribute say video streaming services like Netflix does?
Your definition of free looks funny. Can you please explain how something you said it is free becomes a demand of revenue share of another thing? That does not look like free to me.
I’m just trying to clarify what you said with so much certainty and assurance. Please explain or provide clear evidence of your claims.
I’m still waiting for clarification of this one … provides some products that Apple charges a fee for their sale in app but can’t find them in their catalogues. Please provide evidence that it operates the like it.
Don’t know, are they? Where are suppliers uploading the things I mentioned to the App Store? Because I can provide you evidence the App Store requiring charges in app for these things. Please provide evidence of developers uploading the things the App Store charges for.
Doing a search on the App Store catalogues all I see are software programs serving multiple purposes. Where is the App Store supplying a distribution platform for services such as eBooks, Videos, TV, Digital Newspaper, Dating Arrangements, Emails, Music Lessons … but iOS software programs, binary files .. please.
I can provide evidence of the later, but the first kinds of distribution platforms can’t find evidence. I would like some evidence of your so called distribution platform for digital services. Do you even know what is a distribution platform for say eBooks, Videos, dating arrangements, whatever … so on and so forth? What is required for it to operate? Do you think that a platform to distribute software programs qualifiers as a platform to distribute say video streaming services like Netflix does?
Your definition of free looks funny. Can you please explain how something you said it is free becomes a demand of revenue share of another thing? That does not look like free to me.
I’m just trying to clarify what you said with so much certainty and assurance. Please explain or provide clear evidence of your claims.
Last edited: