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's App Store Subscription Policies Raise Antitrust Issues as Content Providers F
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Except that would be dumb as Apple is not adding a 30% charge to their customers.
First page and the post that sums up this entire BS. Basically Apple are forcing everyone to give them 30% flat. No ifs or buts, 30% on every sale and every sale from within the app which you MUST provide to sell your app in the store.
Now just think about Gameloft etc offering in game purchases, are they going to raise costs? As the sums are so small maybe but I can see a lot of the big names being very pissed at this change of rules. And I can also very easily see Apple ending in the European Competition Commissions court, they will get screwed in it just like Microsoft and MS was done just for including IE!!
I'm sorry but I am very against this very greedy move by Apple, and it is just pure sheer greed, they have no overheads that can possibly justify 30% cut, not one.
Well, everyone will just go to MS and Android now, it's not like the App store and iToy are the only options for them. Apple needs to put it's big headed arrogance to one side and remember that little fact for a moment...
From Apple's press release: "Apple does require that if a publisher chooses to sell a digital subscription separately outside of the app, that same subscription offer must be made available, at the same price or less, to customers who wish to subscribe from within the app".
So Netflix has to provide an in-app purchase option and then lose 30% revenue. How is that "all well and good"?
You might as well give up trying to talk logic to Apple fanboys. Apple was paid when I bought my iPhone and when NF, Amazon, whoever paid their $100 to be an app developer. After that Apple should be out of the loop. If they want to complain about having to host a 5MB app then open up the device so users can install an app off NFs website.
Would people be supporting Apple if they changed the EULA in OSX that they now get a 30% cut of all sales of OSX software? Oh wait, they are already heading down that road.
Apple is walking a fine line of extorting all the money they can from the people who actually make their products valuable without also pushing those same people away. It's a shrewd business move, but one that could easily backfire and cause them to lose the content that makes their platform so compelling.
The hypocrisy spewed from the mouths of people who defend Apples every move. People want to say I am naive. Get real. Steve Jobs is robbing you right under your chin just like every other billionaire big business person. Hes not a savior, he doesn't give a damn about anyone but, himself and money. That said. I love the iPhone and I love Apple. I hate what both are becoming.
30% of every subscription seems high, high enough that it is likely to discourage content providers from entering the market.
What I would propose is that Apple take 30% of the initial subscription period, then a lesser cut of renewals, something like 10%. This fairly compensates Apple for bringing the customer to the content provider. However, Apple's contribution to subscription renewal is simply in billing and content delivery. Customers are only going to renew when the content providers do a good job.
What I would propose is that Apple take 30% of the initial subscription period, then a lesser cut of renewals, something like 10%. This fairly compensates Apple for bringing the customer to the content provider. However, Apple's contribution to subscription renewal is simply in billing and content delivery. Customers are only going to renew when the content providers do a good job.
Are you under the impression that other retailers take a smaller cut than 30%? If you think Apple's action here is unconscionable, I have bad news for you--time to start growing your own food, sewing your own clothes, and buying books straight from the writer (DEFINITELY not from Amazon).
Its all about customer private information
Customer information is no longer involuntarily available for magazines and newspapers. Their business model will need to change and become similar to TV where audience is tracked entirely differently and statistically.
Its not cost, its not restraint of trade, its not customers getting less value, etc., its all about getting customer private information.
This sounds like a great thing for consumers. Finally, a way to manage privacy rather than being hostage to magazines and newspapers.
Note this is the IE, Mozilla, and Google opt out of tracking announcement. Guarantee magazines and newspapers will rarely honor this. Just follow the money.
Customer information is no longer involuntarily available for magazines and newspapers. Their business model will need to change and become similar to TV where audience is tracked entirely differently and statistically.
Its not cost, its not restraint of trade, its not customers getting less value, etc., its all about getting customer private information.
This sounds like a great thing for consumers. Finally, a way to manage privacy rather than being hostage to magazines and newspapers.
Note this is the IE, Mozilla, and Google opt out of tracking announcement. Guarantee magazines and newspapers will rarely honor this. Just follow the money.
30%! When you think greed, think Apple. I'm just glad that I'm not in the fold anymore. Sitting on a huge pile of cash and not making a difference (other than getting behind gay marriage, which I supported Apple for doing) in the world doesn't make for such a nice company in my book. Take that on top of treating customers like a number and that's why I stopped using Macs and the iPhone. I pray that Google does the same thing to Apple that Microsoft did to Apple with the OS. I'm just not a fan anymore… sorry.
The hypocrisy is in pretending that Apple is in this instance doing something uniquely outrageous, when they're doing what every other retailer does except with terms that are friendlier to both the customer and the content creator than any other outlet.
If it isn't naivete, it's dishonesty. Take your pick?
You're very literally only a number to Google. That number is ad views. Be careful what you wish for.
I think you are wrong. Thats my opinion and it is echoed by many here and also many others in the tech blog world.
Um they are. Apple wants a 30% cut. Where do you think that 30% is going to come from? You think companies are just going to take the hit? ROFL. No, they are going to raise prices for consumers. I hope they somehow can skirt around Apples rules and make it clear to consumers that your price went up on the device you already paid for because Apple decided they want more money from you even if you don't buy anything else from Apple.
Want to use that Kindle ebook on iOS? It will cost another 30% (or as others have pointed out a bit more) even though you can already read that book on every other device you might have. Funny how people have always talked about the Apple tax on HW, and now they are working to tack it onto software too!
The 70 percent developers cut is the industry standard....across all App Store platforms..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_digital_distribution_platforms_for_mobile_devices
Unless other app stores change the percentages...this will be what it is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_digital_distribution_platforms_for_mobile_devices
Unless other app stores change the percentages...this will be what it is.
Apple has no rights to do this by giving only 2 options:
1) Dictate market prices outside of their ecosystem by forcing the prices of ebooks, subscriptions, etc up everywhere in order for the content providers to compensate for the 30% loss;
or
2) Force those content providers off the iOS platform alltogether, in order for Apple to maintain a monopoly.
So we as the consumer are the ones who will lose out the most because you know content providers will not stand to lose that much profit. It will mean that we will either see prices go up significantly both inside and outside of the iOS ecosystem meaning prices will be higher even if you shop on your laptop, or we will lose those content providers all together on the iPhone/iPad... and I think this is the likely outcome since I really can't see Amazon, Kobo etc. raising the prices of every eBook by 43% across the board, affecting customers who don't even own an iPhone or iPad at all. They just won't do that.
If Apple does not change the rules of this, or at least the part about needing the in-app price to be lower or the same as outside, then I have no doubts, we WILL see all of these content providers leave because I highly doubt that iPhones and iPods are their biggest priority.
If either outcome comes to fruition, I won't be able to stay with iPhone. I won't pay 43% more than I am now for my ebooks etc., even ones that I don't use on my iPhone... that's just not fair. And if the more likely scenario happens and those content providers just leave, then the iPhone will be pretty boring and useless as a smartphone really... and I will leave it behind. And along with it, Mobile Me will go too because the only reason I have Mobile Me is to sync my Macbook Pro to my iPhone.
1) Dictate market prices outside of their ecosystem by forcing the prices of ebooks, subscriptions, etc up everywhere in order for the content providers to compensate for the 30% loss;
or
2) Force those content providers off the iOS platform alltogether, in order for Apple to maintain a monopoly.
So we as the consumer are the ones who will lose out the most because you know content providers will not stand to lose that much profit. It will mean that we will either see prices go up significantly both inside and outside of the iOS ecosystem meaning prices will be higher even if you shop on your laptop, or we will lose those content providers all together on the iPhone/iPad... and I think this is the likely outcome since I really can't see Amazon, Kobo etc. raising the prices of every eBook by 43% across the board, affecting customers who don't even own an iPhone or iPad at all. They just won't do that.
If Apple does not change the rules of this, or at least the part about needing the in-app price to be lower or the same as outside, then I have no doubts, we WILL see all of these content providers leave because I highly doubt that iPhones and iPods are their biggest priority.
If either outcome comes to fruition, I won't be able to stay with iPhone. I won't pay 43% more than I am now for my ebooks etc., even ones that I don't use on my iPhone... that's just not fair. And if the more likely scenario happens and those content providers just leave, then the iPhone will be pretty boring and useless as a smartphone really... and I will leave it behind. And along with it, Mobile Me will go too because the only reason I have Mobile Me is to sync my Macbook Pro to my iPhone.
Most of the 30% is duplicating costs that the company already has. It is just not 30%. People don't seem to understand what Apple does here, or what costs they incur to provide all this infrastructure, and billing management.
It is not just some arbitrary 30% for nothing. They provide substantial service for that 30%.
Saying it is just a tacked on 30% is entirely ignorant.
Amazon is not going to raise the prices of all their ebooks for the kindle and kindle app by 30% because of this move. It is ridiculous that some of you think that... On top of that Apple sells books too, so if Amazon did that, they would sell much less books. Amazon can't just charge 30% more for IOS users. That is the whole point here. Apple wants to provide a convenient way for their customers to access the content providers have... Unfortunately Apple knows that the content providers would try to soak their customers for the privilege, so Apple is cutting them off at the pass.
Apple is providing a one touch single payer mechanism for all your content needs on all IOS devices, and are working to protect prices for their customers as well... People who think this is a bad thing are simply not thinking it through.
People think it is okay that Amazon and Netflix and others make millions of dollars on Apple's back, and that is fine.. but god forbid Apple actually charge for the valuable service they provide these companies.
I'm not interested in "opinions" in the echo chamber. I'm interested in poking holes in disingenuous corporate propaganda. To take one example, Amazon's eBook licensing is a matter of record. It has the same 30% cut, and usurps many of the creator's ownership rights (which the iOS agreement does not). Is this true, or is it false?
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/01/amazon-macmillan-an-outsiders.html
If Apple tries to enforce this, big players are either going to ignore it, or pull their apps from the official app store.
It is simple math...if iOS sales aren't enough to offset the loss in non-iOS business (Minus 30% of iOS business) after costs, then you'll make more money by pulling out and leaving your prices the same at other distribution points. With the exception of the giants of iOS (like angry birds, or exclusives like iLife), Apple's new model will simply send developers elsewhere. Right now amazon and netflix and rhapsody and dozens of other developers are running the numbers, and even assuming continued massive growth (something that shouldn't be assumed if the ITMS sales from 2010 are anything to go by), they aren't going to make sense. Maybe we'll see jailbroken apps from Amazon or netflix. Maybe. Otherwise, something's gotta give. If Apple gets away with this change, then say goodbye to Kindle for iOS/Mac, say goodbye to netflix streaming on iOS/Mac, say goodbye to any subscription-based service from any company that has a significant non-iOS presence in the marketplace.
I have a pretty strong suspicion that companies like Amazon and Netflix are just going to ignore the new rules and lett Apple pull the App if they dare.
It is simple math...if iOS sales aren't enough to offset the loss in non-iOS business (Minus 30% of iOS business) after costs, then you'll make more money by pulling out and leaving your prices the same at other distribution points. With the exception of the giants of iOS (like angry birds, or exclusives like iLife), Apple's new model will simply send developers elsewhere. Right now amazon and netflix and rhapsody and dozens of other developers are running the numbers, and even assuming continued massive growth (something that shouldn't be assumed if the ITMS sales from 2010 are anything to go by), they aren't going to make sense. Maybe we'll see jailbroken apps from Amazon or netflix. Maybe. Otherwise, something's gotta give. If Apple gets away with this change, then say goodbye to Kindle for iOS/Mac, say goodbye to netflix streaming on iOS/Mac, say goodbye to any subscription-based service from any company that has a significant non-iOS presence in the marketplace.
I have a pretty strong suspicion that companies like Amazon and Netflix are just going to ignore the new rules and lett Apple pull the App if they dare.
lets see how many people stay on iOS when there is no pandora, hulu, netflix, kindle and other popular apps. in the meantime they are all on Android phones and devices
Factually incorrect. Apple's actual edict was that all subscription content that runs through iOS apps has to be available through the iTunes subscription store. For example: the netflix app will not be allowed unless you can subscribe to Netflix in-app.
Very very very different from what you misunderstood the new rules to be.
Apple Press Release said:
Last edited: