Elon Musk Wants Apple to Lower Fees for 'X' Creators

[Arran]

He screwed up Twitter. Now he's trying to redirect the spotlight onto another company. He wants to look like the good guy. Do you really buy into all his bull***t?

That’s it exactly. He wants to paint himself as the hero by spending other people’s money. And when they tell him to get lost, he points at them like they’re the bad guys.

A entrepreneur creates value. If he was serious about social media he‘d make real improvements to twitter and have all his creators raking it in. Instead, his platform is wilting and he expects handouts.

 

[Surf Monkey]

A entrepreneur creates value.

Right. But what this clown did was casually destroy several billions of dollars worth of brand equity that Twitter built up over many years. “Tweet” has become a ubiquitous term. Squandering that is beyond stupid. It’s reckless and defies any kind of reason.

 

[junkw]

a NON-PROFIT for "scaring away advertisers" when they tell the truth about how you invited racists, bigots, and liars back on the platform.

that "non-profit" is an anti-white organization like many others using a fake "anti-racism" branding to push anti-white ideologies.
They never condemn anti-white racism originating from non-whites.

 

[tripsync]

Straw man rendering this comment irrelevant. Please stick to what I actually said.

"How can they make money on a platform they no longer participate on"

Simple. You don't. If you don't participate, you don't make money. I really shouldn't have to spell this out. Have a good one.

 

[tripsync]

It’s literally a fallacy. It’s impossible to disagree with that. It’s like saying “32 degrees is the freezing point of water? Uh, agree to disagree.”

Wrong, it's not literally fallacy. You cannot say with 100% certainty of what MacRumors members would say in that event which makes this issue subjective and I personally believe it's true that members would say something to that effect.

Your analogy is a false analogy as one is proven and the other is not proven.

Argue all you want, but from my perspective there's no point in continuing. Have a good one.

 

[tripsync]

That’s it exactly. He wants to paint himself as the hero by spending other people’s money. And when they tell him to get lost, he points at them like they’re the bad guys.

A entrepreneur creates value. If he was serious about social media he‘d make real improvements to twitter and have all his creators raking it in. Instead, his platform is wilting and he expects handouts.

Revenue share is absolutely valuable. I give it a year or two before Meta starts doing the same assuming Threads is still alive.

 

[0339327]

He started as an apartheid era South African trust fund baby from a family of white emerald mine owners with mines filled with Black miners digging them riches.

Read my prior post wherein I quote from his Wikipedia page.

 

[tripsync]

Apple helps drive traffic to Twitter/X at least a couple of ways.

One way is by actively posting/reposting/replying on Twitter/X through its multiple accounts.

Another is by allowing the X app in the App Store. Apparently, around 80% of Twitter/X users view content via a mobile device and Apple is a major player in the mobile space.

I am sure if Apple removed all of their Twitter/X accounts and banned the X app from the App Store (not that they should or would want to do either), it would notably impact traffic going to Twitter/X.

There's not really grounds for Apple to ban Twitter. Apple has to follow their own rules that they set up so Apple doesn't really deserve credit for driving traffic to Twitter through that reasoning.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

Twitter is an example of a brand that is s famous that it does not really need the app store of Apple. It could offer the app for download on its own website, if Apple would not keep its ecosystem so closed. The only reason that Apple does not allow that is making money. Apple does not own your iPhones. So it does not have the right to prevent you from installing whatever software you want from whatever source. My notebook actually contains much more private information than my smartphone.

Imagine they did they same for Macs. Would you still defend that practice with the same arguments, if you could only install software from the App Store on a Mac and would have to pay a 30% fee to Apple? Would it be okay for you to pay a 30% fee to Apple, if you use your future Apple Car as an Uber?

 

[jingbugle]

Time Elon created an alternative.

 

[Ctrlos]

So just charge via the website like YouTube does.

 

[DCIFRTHS]

Twitter is an example of a brand that is s famous that it does not really need the app store of Apple. It could offer the app for download on its own website, if Apple would not keep its ecosystem so closed. The only reason that Apple does not allow that is making money. Apple does not own your iPhones. So it does not have the right to prevent you from installing whatever software you want from whatever source. My notebook actually contains much more private information than my smartphone.

Imagine they did they same for Macs. Would you still defend that practice with the same arguments, if you could only install software from the App Store on a Mac and would have to pay a 30% fee to Apple? Would it be okay for you to pay a 30% fee to Apple, if you use your future Apple Car as an Uber?

I guess that depends on whether or not Apple marketed my services as an Uber driver and payed for the storage and distribution of the “Apple Car”. I would have to do the math if that scenario ever comes to fruition…

 

[grovian]

I hope Tim Cook tells Elon Musk: Find a different platform and get rid of the "X" app from the App Store.

Apple just made an exception for X to let them name their app with one letter only, something the rest of us developers cannot do so what Tim Apple is going to tell Musk: "we need your app and you need our platform so let's do business".

 

[redbeard331]

The headline could say:

Elon Musk discovers the cure for cancer and makes it free for everybody

Macrumors users:

Omg could you believe this ego maniac POS trying to play god, who does he think he is?

This is a hysterically ridiculous straw man that discombobulates the situation with Musk.

It’s pretty clear his fans will listen to no logic, no matter what he does they will praise him. And you know, it isn’t just about Musk, our society is ruled by billionaires who are above the law, there are many who are far far worse than Musk.

Unfortunately most people probably can’t even name 5 of the oligarchs that run the United States, musk is the only one who has put himself in the public eye and made such a fool of himself though. These people deserve every bit of criticism they get, to put it mildly.

 

[hagar]

Wonder how many creators make that much with X? And how?

I am as surprised as you are. I always assumed Twitter is where celebs put short p*rn videos for their OnlyFans. And journalists and politicians tweet updates about the world.

Oh, and I almost forgot the endless stream of unmoderated racist content, misogyny and bickering.

Mixed with some animal cruelty (no pun intended).

Impressive some manage to turn that into a creative outlet that generates an income.

 

[Shirasaki]

This thread is entertaining and exhausting…

I just want social media to fade away. It causes more harm while isolating each other. 1’s and 0’s will never and should never replace genuine human interaction, it’s the only way we’ll advance as a society. Otherwise, it’s divisive rhetoric and propaganda that’s easily weaponized to create discord and destruction.

Tripsync - I don’t know who you are but clearly you have a problem with people who disagree with you. Notice I said not one thing about Musk who you’ve been arduously defending yet you disagreed with me regarding social media IN GENERAL being destructive. That says a lot.

Over the time, companies have successfully built this mindset to almost everyone: free of charge = free of everything, when “free” account only mean the account registration and usage is free of charge (well, mostly anyway). Now they want to charge every user while maintaining what they have enjoyed to this day.

I don‘t know what to say. Maybe one day AI CEO can replace Elon Musk and that AI would run Twitter (not “X”) better than Elon Musk himself. By the way, why Google/Apple/Microsoft/Amazon not replacing their CEO with AI? Very interesting.

Musk sure seems to have a lot of things he doesn’t want. He doesn’t want to pay rent on X’s office buildings, he doesn’t want to pay X employees the promised severance package, he doesn’t want any of his employees working less than 80 hours a week, he doesn’t want Apple to collect fees from X creators…

Which means one thing, him having billions of dollars want to freeload everything while leeching resources from everyone else. I am shocked he can still survive to this day. And I am damn sure SpaceX and Tesla will operate just fine without him anyway.

 

[junkw]

I am as surprised as you are. I always assumed Twitter is where celebs put short p*rn videos for their OnlyFans. And journalists and politicians tweet updates about the world.

Oh, and I almost forgot the endless stream of unmoderated racist content, misogyny and bickering.

Mixed with some animal cruelty (no pun intended).

Impressive some manage to turn that into a creative outlet that generates an income.

demonizing the (mostly female) creators of OnlyFans content is misogyny. And you are denouncing misogyny.

 

[Shirasaki]

Exactly! Free market! If the FBI doesn't like the security of the iPhone, they can sell their own FBIphone.

Yeah sure, free market has done anything good without any intervention from anyone, not to mention the total misunderstanding of what free market is and the consequences. (Yeah I know, every action has good and bad consequences, new concept to some)

The FBI is a government agency, so no. Not a good analogy.

Not a good analogy in general regardless. Basically exist to deflect the true argument and derail the discussion.

 

[svish]

Apple will certainly not be lowering from 30%

 

[patlee2000]

Wonder how many creators make that much with X? And how?

Bingo! They have a new ads revenue sharing policy for select creators. Based on what I read so far, the most pocketed by a creator was around $40k. So essentially Apple would get $0.

I think Elon’s play here is to use Apple’s name to promote the new ad revenue sharing policy to bring back creators. He knows Apple will say know, then he will keep the conversation going to continue the free promotion.

Sneaky but smart

 

[Gudi]

Isn't it ironic, four years ago the former president tweeted Boeing should "FIX & REBRAND" the 737 Max and they did indeed strike the Max from its name. And by now Twitter itself has rebranded to X, because the new CEO caused too many plane crashes within a microblogging company.

 

[ZZ9pluralZalpha]

My ‘Old Man Yells At Cloud’ moment: what did the term “creators” do to deserve being associated with every idiot who pinches off a tweet, selfie, or meme on social media?

 

[PBMB]

He screwed up Twitter. Now he's trying to redirect the spotlight onto another company. He wants to look like the good guy. Do you really buy into all his bull***t?

You overestimate his social skills.

 

[bogg]

Isn't it ironic, four years ago the former president tweeted Boeing should "FIX & REBRAND" the 737 Max and they did indeed strike the Max from its name. And by now Twitter itself has rebranded to X, because the new CEO caused too many plane crashes within a microblogging company.

The Max name was never dropped, they stopped publicizing it for a short while in fall 2020 but never dropped it. It's still alive and kicking...

 

[Ozid]

Well, first off? How about not? I recently ditched my 2019 Tesla Model 3 because the recent price drops and tax credits have devalued it so badly from what I paid, I couldn't get out from being underwater on the loan! I'd send in an extra $5000 on the principle to put a dent in it, and Elon would knock $10,000 off the price of the new Model 3's! And now he's talking about a body style revision by the end of the year for them, too. Imagine what THAT would do to my resale value of the car. I decided to cut my losses and trade it in towards an almost new Chevy Volt Premier edition a local dealer had on their lot. It's no Tesla but it saves me $300/month in car payments on a car that won't devalue the way the Model 3 did. (I didn't even buy it for as much money as my Tesla devalued already!)

But second? I don't care about ANY of this "who pays content creators what" debate, really. Apple built their App Store and the devices that use it. It's their ecosystem or "playground", ultimately, and they can price things as they see fit in it. Musk also has the right to complain about their pricing if his product is distributed through that channel. But ultimately? Apple will do whatever they want with this stuff, and if they're too unreasonable? It just moves more people over to the Android platform. (My daughter is a good example. Always had an iPhone but now wants an Android simply because of restrictions iOS places on Discord with some of its forums and what can be used on them with iOS devices. Apple's philosophy they'll ban anything not fully "family friendly" in the App Store is definitely costing them users. And ironically? They've never been able to make a trouble and bug-free product for the purpose of controlling what kids or teens can see/do on Apple devices. ScreenTime has issues now but so it their previous parental control controls for MacOS.) If they could at least get THAT right, they wouldn't need to enforce blanket bans on the other stuff.

Cars. Are. Not. An. Investment.

You agreed to pay a price for what was available at the time.