Congress Reportedly Asks Spotify for Information on Apple's Alleged Anticompetitive Behavior

[Rob_2811]

As I have said here and elsewhere numerous times, I suppose if one is convinced that Apple is a big bully constantly out to fix the competition, then I suppose everything they do will seem that way, even when it isn’t.

As to the second issue, it has already been clarified earlier. An app developer tweeted what he believed was the issue (the sheer volume of stock iOS apps being deleted and re-downloaded led to the App Store search algorithm being skewed in its favour). When you think about it, it makes zero sense for Apple to favour its own apps when they come preinstalled on every iOS device, but confirmation bias can be a very powerful thing.

Likewise, Spotify isn’t available on the Apple TV, even though there shouldn’t be anything preventing them from putting it out. Makes you wonder just how much of what Spotify is complaining about isn’t so much that it can’t, but simply that it doesn’t want to, or just hasn’t gotten round to it yet.

I maintain that Apple is well within its right to compete with other apps in the App Store. This is really little different from a grocery store who decides where to stock each item, or to favour its own house brands by giving them preferential treatment.

If you think Apple doesn't use anticompetitive means to promote their own services you are truly in complete denial of the facts. Apple has frequently used push notifications to market Apple Music while banning third party services from doing so. That alone is giving their service an unfair advantage.

If you think the timing of things like this are a coincidence I don't know what to tell you..

The climate has changed for the major tech players, Apple is under investigation at home and abroad ,they know the game is up.

 

[Abazigal]

If you think Apple doesn't use anticompetitive means to promote their own services you are truly in complete denial of the facts. Apple has frequently used push notifications to market Apple Music while banning third party services from doing so. That alone is giving their service an unfair advantage.

If you think the timing of things like this are a coincidence I don't know what to tell you..

The climate has changed for the major tech players, Apple is under investigation at home and abroad ,they know the game is up.

It's rubbish.

Apple has built a "walled garden" that consumers choose to spend time in despite knowing there are alternatives available in the marketplace because of the many benefits this brings. If developers don’t want to go through Apple's gates to enter the walled garden, I don't see why the government should be the one to require Apple to tear down the walls.

From a consumer perspective, Android is a viable alternative to iOS. That the consumer has little desire to defect to Android (for whatever reason) is on them, not Apple.

Also, I don't see how the simple act of using push notifications to promote a service is grounds for anticompetitive behaviour. Maybe it did give Apple Music an edge, but if this alone is enough to tilt the scales in favour of Apple Music, then I guess that also says a lot about Spotify's marketing. Nor do I see how this would even work for Spotify. By definition, I can only get a push notification if I have the app installed on my phone, so there is no point in Spotify sending me an advert if I already have their app and am subscribed to their service.

If it's a fight Spotify wants, it's a fight they will get.

 

[Redhead1701e]

It's rubbish.

Apple has built a "walled garden" that consumers choose to spend time in despite knowing there are alternatives available in the marketplace because of the many benefits this brings. If developers don’t want to go through Apple's gates to enter the walled garden, I don't see why the government should be the one to require Apple to tear down the walls.

From a consumer perspective, Android is a viable alternative to iOS. That the consumer has little desire to defect to Android (for whatever reason) is on them, not Apple.

Also, I don't see how the simple act of using push notifications to promote a service is grounds for anticompetitive behaviour. Maybe it did give Apple Music an edge, but if this alone is enough to tilt the scales in favour of Apple Music, then I guess that also says a lot about Spotify's marketing. Nor do I see how this would even work for Spotify. By definition, I can only get a push notification if I have the app installed on my phone, so there is no point in Spotify sending me an advert if I already have their app and am subscribed to their service.

If it's a fight Spotify wants, it's a fight they will get.

I agree. The consumer knows there are options. But out of all devices operating on iOS Apple is the only one that is stable. For all their faults a stable platform is far easier to handle In My Humble Opinion

 

[Rob_2811]

It's rubbish.

Apple has built a "walled garden" that consumers choose to spend time in despite knowing there are alternatives available in the marketplace because of the many benefits this brings. If developers don’t want to go through Apple's gates to enter the walled garden, I don't see why the government should be the one to require Apple to tear down the walls.

From a consumer perspective, Android is a viable alternative to iOS. That the consumer has little desire to defect to Android (for whatever reason) is on them, not Apple.

Also, I don't see how the simple act of using push notifications to promote a service is grounds for anticompetitive behaviour. Maybe it did give Apple Music an edge, but if this alone is enough to tilt the scales in favour of Apple Music, then I guess that also says a lot about Spotify's marketing. Nor do I see how this would even work for Spotify. By definition, I can only get a push notification if I have the app installed on my phone, so there is no point in Spotify sending me an advert if I already have their app and am subscribed to their service.

If it's a fight Spotify wants, it's a fight they will get.

There is no reason that Apple couldn't have given users the ability to use third party services by default with Siri years ago (it might have actually made Siri a bit more useful) they just didn't want the third party services to be able to compete on a level playing field with their own it is as simple as that.

As for fighting, it doesn't look like Apple is putting up much of a fight at all tbh. They have back tracked from some of their anticompetitive behaviour quicker than a kid caught with its hand in the cookie jar as soon as Spotify filed their complaint.

Why change things? Why now? If they think they've done nothing wrong then why not argue their case? Because they know the complaints against them have merit and they know they are in the crosshairs of antitrust investigators.

Your arguments hold Apple to no level of accountability whatsoever. Telling a major digital service "if you don't like it go to Android" when Apple hold significant market share in lucrative markets is the very definition of anti competitive behaviour. They know that would be damaging to Spotifys business.

Spotify is merely asking Apple to play by the rules they have to abide by in the App Store.

 

[Rob_2811]

You spent years developing an ecosystem only to have a greedy freeloader come in to use it to make money for them but find ways to minimize how much money you get on the platform you made? I side with Apple on this. Spotify can build their own platforms and ecosystems.

Yeah all the third party developers who created apps for the platform didnt contribute towards that ecosystem at all.

Without third party applications nobody would use iPhones. Third party applications have made iOS the platform that it is.

 

[gnasher729]

I am rooting for Spotify on this one.

Get them a-h*les!

I cannot believe how people does not find anticompetitive that Apple does not allow them to tell users they can subscribe outside of their own system. It is already arguably unfair that they even have to pay to develop and publish the app in iOS (without existing an alternative store).

They cannot tell users _from within the app that Apple distributes free of charge_. Spotify could advertise on MacRumors for example.

 

[gnasher729]

Spotify is there but conditionally. They can't bill me directly or even direct me to their website to subscribe. Does it make any sense to you? To me, it looks like racket.

They can advertise on macrumors.

 

[tito2020]

Unless Apple Music starts working on far more than their own platforms (yes they have an Android app) I really doubt that Spotify will lose. The market wants ability to use streaming on all their devices (Roku, etc) not just Apple. Meanwhile Spotify and Pandora seem to have apps for everything

Music is dead

 

[realtuner]

If someone writes an application that works on Windows, do they have to pay Microsoft 30% of every sale?

Apple is doing a bunch of nonsense and are greedy as hell.

The App store is nothing new. On Linux you have repositories that is even completely free decades ago.

If you want your App in the Microsoft Store you pay 30%. Though they recently changed their terms so it could be 5%, 15% or 30% depending on the type of App and how they found it (affiliate link).

Nobody cares about Linux so why are you bringing them up here?

 

[realtuner]

If you think Apple doesn't use anticompetitive means to promote their own services you are truly in complete denial of the facts. Apple has frequently used push notifications to market Apple Music while banning third party services from doing so. That alone is giving their service an unfair advantage.

If you think the timing of things like this are a coincidence I don't know what to tell you..

If you have ever developed for Apple you know they are slow as molasses. Developers are always asking for Apple to open up their devices to add functionality. And Apple usually gets around to it eventually, though not nearly as quickly as developers would like.

You want to see some conspiracy in Apples decisions (they’re only doing it now because of antitrust issues) where I see it as the typical Apple, taking their damn sweet time to open things up for developers. Like they have for as long as I can remember.

 

[threesixty360]

Yeah all the third party developers who created apps for the platform didnt contribute towards that ecosystem at all.

Without third party applications nobody would use iPhones. Third party applications have made iOS the platform that it is.

Do you realise that Apple spend billions a year in advertising alone to make sure that consumers know what this is the right platform for them to buy into? Without Apple's development and continued investment in the platform their is no third party app situation. And if its so easy to do, where is windows phone? palm? blackberry?

I think you've put the cart before the horse here.

 

[realtuner]

The climate has changed for the major tech players, Apple is under investigation at home and abroad ,they know the game is up.

The game is up? That’s just wishful thinking (at least for Apple).

The worst thing that could happen to Apple is to change their policies ever so slightly. My prediction is they will allow Apps to direct users to outside signups (for subscriptions only, all other Apps will require IAP and a 30% cut). If they want to use IAP they might even drop the fee to 10-15% permanently (instead of 30% first year). But that’ll be it. It would have a small impact on their revenues and life will go on.

The companies who should be very worried about all the investigations into tech are Google and Facebook. I find it abhorrent they that have been allowed to vacuum up ridiculous amounts of data on pretty much everyone (even if you don’t use their services). I’m surprised it took this long before the government started to take notice. If governments start passing laws restricting data mining (or giving consumers a way to completely opt out of data collection) it will be a serious blow to Google/Facebook who literally make almost all their revenue monetizing that data (advertising).

 

[ipponrg]

The companies who should be very worried about all the investigations into tech are Google and Facebook. I find it abhorrent they that have been allowed to vacuum up ridiculous amounts of data on pretty much everyone (even if you don’t use their services). I’m surprised it took this long before the government started to take notice. If governments start passing laws restricting data mining (or giving consumers a way to completely opt out of data collection) it will be a serious blow to Google/Facebook who literally make almost all their revenue monetizing that data (advertising).

I actually think all tech companies would be affected by this. Even yours truly is doing data mining “anonymously” thru inferencing. Couple that with your ISPs, local governments, and other factors, it will have a cascading effect.

Apple right now doesn’t have as much of an impact on the global internet as to those you’ve mentioned. It’s why they aren’t getting as much attention as others

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

You spent years developing an ecosystem only to have a greedy freeloader come in to use it to make money for them but find ways to minimize how much money you get on the platform you made? I side with Apple on this. Spotify can build their own platforms and ecosystems.

Yeah, right... Providing the operating system should entitle the provider of said OS to a 30% (or 15%) share of every software run on it. Great idea!
What‘s even better, is the suggestion that everyone should build their own plattform. 😂

BTW: Microsoft just lowered their fees to 5% half a year ago on their optional (!) store. Which is a fair amount.
Apple and google are taking advantage of developers. The irony here is, that iOS would be completely useless without 3rd party apps, since the OS has almost 0 builtin features and Apples own Apps are a joke. Mail doesn‘t even support push mail in 2019, doesn‘t properly format mails and so on.

 

[realtuner]

Yeah, right... Providing the operating system should entitle the provider of said OS to a 30% (or 15%) share of every software run on it. Great idea!
What‘s even better, is the suggestion that everyone should build their own plattform. 😂

BTW: Microsoft just lowered their fees to 5% half a year ago on their optional (!) store. Which is a fair amount.
Apple and google are taking advantage of developers. The irony here is, that iOS would be completely useless without 3rd party apps, since the OS has almost 0 builtin features and Apples own Apps are a joke. Mail doesn‘t even support push mail in 2019, doesn‘t properly format mails and so on.

Your post is being dishonest. Microsoft fees are 5%, 15% or 30%. Games are 30% and haven't been lowered. If a customer finds your App through the Microsoft Store or any other Microsoft property you pay 15%. If the customer finds your App through a direct link separate from Microsoft you only pay 5%.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

Apple uses loopholes to reduce how much tax they pay, why can't Spotify use "loopholes" to pay less apple tax?

Spotify uses the same loopholes in world tax laws. This is contract law between to parties who agreed to the terms.

 

[Abazigal]

Apple uses loopholes to reduce how much tax they pay, why can't Spotify use "loopholes" to pay less apple tax?

Yeah they are certainly welcome to try. Doesn’t mean they will succeed.

 

[falainber]

They can advertise on macrumors.

But not on my phone?
[automerge]1570327973[/automerge]

Did you even read the article you posted? That was for one quarter, and Spotify expects to slide back into a loss afterwards.

The problem here isn’t Apple, but Spotify. More specifically, Spotify simply does not have a sustainable business model. They face a huge variable cost (the payout to labels rises as more people use their service), which makes it next to impossible to benefit from economies of scale.

Considering that iOS likely makes up a small part of their total subscriber base, I don’t think doing away with the 30/15% cut will improve Spotify’s bottom line in any significant way.

I suspect we will eventually see Spotify be acquired by another company, possible Microsoft or Amazon or some other media brand, and probably sooner than later.

Did you read your own post? You said Spotify was never profitable. Obviously, you were wrong.

 

[Lalatoon]

People defending Apple on this matter seems to forget that iPhone will be pretty boring and useless without developers. Aside from Apple hardware and iOS, the App Store/developers is one of the strength and selling point of the whole product. I don't think people will be encourage to buy iPhones if only Apple software is available in the App store.

Apple already profited from selling iPhones and iPads and App Store is supposed to be an incentive for buying the hardware, after all no one will buy phones with just stock apps installed. Now, the developers are already paying Apple yearly but hey Apple still wants a cut to whatever the developers will be gaining in its in-app purchases from its customers and their excuse is security and that is plain BS. Basically, Apple is a leech on this case. Leeching on whatever the developers are able to sell to their customers. With millions of iPhones and iPads users their is a huge market in the App Store and Apple is capitalizing this. It's just like Apple is advertising that they have a huge market in App Store and if you want in on this you will have to give Apple a cut to whatever you will be earning from their customers. In this context the "our customer is not our product" is another BS by Apple.

Without another app store, Apple can basically demand whatever it wants from the developers. Now, people will argue that if they don't want how Apple do business then they should go somewhere else. People who has this opinion are naive and arrogant. They don't understand that like them, developers are people who needs to earn to live and buy what they need and want in life and one way to earn is the App store. In this situation Apple with its tons of money can sit and wait around while on the other hand the developers are desperate to earn something that they are willing to submit to whatever demands Apple has. This is analogous with the Mafia, small stores are being bullied and extorted by the Mafias before and they can't just close shop to avoid that because they need to earn a living and so they just accepted the fact that this is how their life is with the Mafia. In this context Apple is a bully.

In summery, this whole situation suggest that Apple is both a leech and a bully.

 

[Expos of 1969]

Keen to see how this plays out.

 

[Abazigal]

Did you read your own post? You said Spotify was never profitable. Obviously, you were wrong.

Fine, with exception of one quarter, Spotify has never been profitable.

What does this change about its financial situation exactly?

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

Your post is being dishonest. Microsoft fees are 5%, 15% or 30%. Games are 30% and haven't been lowered. If a customer finds your App through the Microsoft Store or any other Microsoft property you pay 15%. If the customer finds your App through a direct link separate from Microsoft you only pay 5%.

The difference between the 5 and 15% is essentially marketing, i.e. having your website with the store-link coming up on top of search results.
Games always have been special... => If we discuss games we have to consider competition such as Steam, gog, and so on. IMHO the game market is currently in a quite messed up state with everyone starting to run their own store and having exclusive games. Or buy a game on Steam and still have to create a Ubisoft account.
Also, I could imagine games come with a lot more administrative efforts than the average app... i.e. review the game for illegal mechanics (gambling, compliance with loot box laws,...), in-game purchases and complaints resulting in requests for refunds,...

 

[realtuner]

Did you read your own post? You said Spotify was never profitable. Obviously, you were wrong.

They aren't profitable. A single quarter with creative accounting doesn’t make a company profitable. Spotify even said in the article you linked that they’d post a loss for the next quarter and the year overall.

What’s next, taking a single busy week out of a quarter to claim a company is “profitable”?

The difference between the 5 and 15% is essentially marketing, i.e. having your website with the store-link coming up on top of search results.
Games always have been special... => If we discuss games we have to consider competition such as Steam, gog, and so on. IMHO the game market is currently in a quite messed up state with everyone starting to run their own store and having exclusive games. Or buy a game on Steam and still have to create a Ubisoft account.
Also, I could imagine games come with a lot more administrative efforts than the average app... i.e. review the game for illegal mechanics (gambling, compliance with loot box laws,...), in-game purchases and complaints resulting in requests for refunds,...

What it comes down to is games are the largest revenue generator, and Microsoft isn’t going to cut fees to 5% for the largest money maker they have.

 

[bobmepp]

I don't understand what all the fuss is about. I like both Apple Music and Spotify and subscribe to both. As a classical music listener, I find that I use both apps together to get maximum discovery of new and obscure music. It took me a total of 3 minutes to subscribe to Spotify on its website, download the app, and then enter my Spotify password into the app. This is the same thing as with Amazon Prime video, where you have to leave the app and go to the web version of Amazon to purchase or rent a video. It is all the inconvenience of tapping a link or clicking a mouse. Really, this is no more than a tempest in a teapot. Both Apple and Spotify should focus on the myriad of bugs, user interface complications, and missing features such as a hi-fi option, in their apps, rather than carrying on a silly fight.

 

[jimbobb24]

Many people seem to assume that there are users who don’t understand that Spotify is more than an app and they can sign up online. While I hesitate to underestimate the confusion of many people I am dubious about this. I think most people know they can subscribe elsewhere.

Apple needs to get paid for making their architecture and platform. Not sure how that is best done. But it does feel like Apple Music is hurting Spotify and they are lashing out.