Maybe you heard about epic vs apple where epic tried to define a market as one way but the market was ultimately decided to be another way. The definition of a market is malleable.
In iOS ecossystem you have multiple buyers, one seller using multiple suppliers. That is how a shop works, not a market. As I said this is easily verifiable though looking at the invoicing. App Store policies and the reasoning behind becomes way more clearer, as they would make no sense in the context of a Market.
I took time to give an example of a place that works both ways. As a shop and a market.
I believe it so simple that you know and understand this.
Now, you are saying to me that the reason why you used wrongly the term is someone else's fault. Ok. But I don’t care what Epic does nor what Costco does in this context. Maybe they also lie about what defines a Market. Any first year economics child know the difference between a Market and a Shop.
Now if you say the term it’s malleable, than I assume that a lie is consciously being told. An exercise of diffusing the term yet not its common public perception.
If you use the term Market, as of Apple created a Market you are implying something distinct from what it is. A level a freedom and self protection that suppliers of a shop and customers of a single shop don't have if they want to keep being suppliers and using their products ... unlike a Shop or Buyer in a Market. You want to establish what it implies, a market dynamics, as a fact and create all sorts of concepts on top. But it does not have such dynamics of course. The reasoning behind such shop policies become way clearer for what it is.
Not interested in debating things in those terms. I find it intellectually dishonest.
It becomes a fight of words, not actual issues.
Cheers.
