I figured that the Epic Store must have 0% fees, but I just checked and Epic charges 12%. I guess that is less than Apple takes, but how does he complain about Apple taking a cut when he also takes a cut? Seems disingenuous.
Do they also take 30%? Isn't their problem with the high %, not the cut itself?I don’t think it was ever even a significant portion. My thinking was that he was always going to end the Fortnite experiment on iOS devices and, since he was headed out the door anyway, figured he’d try to burn the house down on the way. If he was REALLY concerned about the amount of money he was paying out, what he’s sending to Sony, Steam, Microsoft, and Nintendo would have been far more beneficial for him to end.
According to Sweeney, 12% covers costs with a small profit. 30% is, in his mind, an obscene overcharge.I figured that the Epic Store must have 0% fees, but I just checked and Epic charges 12%. I guess that is less than Apple takes, but how does he complain about Apple taking a cut when he also takes a cut? Seems disingenuous.
Do you think this is about Fortnite for epic games? This is about forcing Apple to allow other game stores on theThis is really funny. The amount of money Epic Games lost because of fighting the 30% fee is way more than what they could earn with this. They have been missing out on the App Store for years already, to be more specific, since August 2020. It's almost 2024 here, in the corner.
A lot of people could download Fortnite, play, and enjoy it, and additionally, make purchases if they want to. A 30% fee is still better than earning $0 for them (Epic). Nothing will make up for over 3 years of lost earnings.
They're not going to win this. In 1-2 years, Apple will enable additional app stores anyway, but the additional hassle and potential security and payment issues won't be worth it for many people. The App Store is just secure and convenient most of the time. And if there's something fraudulent, Apple refunds it. Good luck with them.
Something like “Game distribution platform fee” is the term you want to use in a search engine which should lead you to the information. To me, their problem is they see a future where people are using hardware platforms (and their digital downloads) more and more, which reduces their ability to have a cut of that pie. As they weren’t making a huge amount from iOS, they figured they’d have their fight there and use a win in one arena as a precedent to force changes elsewhere.Do they also take 30%? Isn't their problem with the high %, not the cut itself?
One would THINK that they’d factor in how much it actually costs to run the business, but by giving away millions of games for free, they’ve shown they either don’t know what it means to be profitable OR don’t care about being profitable right now.According to Sweeney, 12% covers costs with a small profit. 30% is, in his mind, an obscene overcharge.
Speaking of, they just jacked the price of V-Bucks up.I guess all the money from Fortnite cosmetics is going into lawyer fees now, huh?![]()
I think you misread my comment. I was talking about Epic trying to use EU with some fake issue. The whole USB C has its merit and I understand why EU would push for a standard. Please don’t jump to conclusion. EU is merely the venue after the Supreme Court for Epic to drag this out.EU might support their cause, who knows. USB-C certainly not gonna be their last attempt to “tell business how to operate”, or as someone else put it, “dictate Apple”.
Epic would otherwise has to present its case to EU before EU can decide on anything, whether the issue is considered fake in EU’s eyes or not. That’s why I say “might”, rather than “may”.I think you misread my comment. I was talking about Epic trying to use EU with some fake issue. The whole USB C has its merit and I understand why EU would push for a standard. Please don’t jump to conclusion. EU is merely the venue after the Supreme Court for Epic to drag this out.
It may be good to remember, though, that Apple said lightning would be the connector for the next 10 years. That was in 2012. Having made good on that promise to those hardware vendors, they were primed to switch anyway, not anywhere close to something they “hate”. And, the rest of the industry already had switched. Thus, their crowing about “we made the industry do this” is just taking credit for what was already a foregone conclusion (and other countries with their just created ‘usb-c requirements’ are doing the same). That’s FAR different from trying to force the implementation of something the industry doesn’t find value in.My whole point is since EU spearhead the forced USB-C transition on smartphone for Apple, they are not going to be afraid of spearheading further changes to force Apple doing things Apple hate. Those changes may or may not have anything to do with Epic.
Well, we will never know the true internal discussion of this issue. And, assuming Apple does say lightning is for the next decade in 2012, wouldn’t it makes more sense to switch last year rather than dragging on for another year? Yes, they design their new device quite some time ahead of launch, but they should’ve known regardless.It may be good to remember, though, that Apple said lightning would be the connector for the next 10 years. That was in 2012. Having made good on that promise to those hardware vendors, they were primed to switch anyway, not anywhere close to something they “hate”. And, the rest of the industry already had switched. Thus, their crowing about “we made the industry do this” is just taking credit for what was already a foregone conclusion (and other countries with their just created ‘usb-c requirements’ are doing the same). That’s FAR different from trying to force the implementation of something the industry doesn’t find value in.
That is exactly how it works and why Apple takes a cut. Developers have no connection to refund anyone's purchase.Yep. I faced an issue with an App and I contacted Apple....not the developers....for a refund. Now how is that person I talked to getting their salary?
That’s my point as to why Apple has a cut baked in their agreements. But people here just think Apple does nothing and shouldn’t get a cut.That is exactly how it works and why Apple takes a cut. Developers have no connection to refund anyone's purchase.
I am very happy Apple does all my payments/refunds/ customer support. Makes my life much easier and I gladly pay for that.That’s my point as to why Apple has a cut baked in their agreements. But people here just think Apple does nothing and shouldn’t get a cut.
Unfortunately (for Epic) it's not quite that simple; there are a lot of moving parts.I keep waiting for Epic to stop extended court battle with Apple and just start porting games that run on AS Macs that don't need to use the Apple Store like many PC based games and make a small fortune selling digital skins and other goods all they want to.
Well, we do know that Apple did not “hate” USB-C as it was already being used on many devices. Plus, the EU said all smartphones must have USB-C by December 28, 2024.Well, we will never know the true internal discussion of this issue. And, assuming Apple does say lightning is for the next decade in 2012, wouldn’t it makes more sense to switch last year rather than dragging on for another year? Yes, they design their new device quite some time ahead of launch, but they should’ve known regardless.
Nevertheless, unless the internal discussion record got leaked out, forced by the court (exceedingly unlikely), or somehow Apple decide to release, the true reason behind 2023 USB-C switch will forever be a mystery.
Well, we do know that Apple did not “hate” USB-C as it was already being used on many devices. Plus, the EU said all smartphones must have USB-C by December 28, 2024.
(“Hey, Apple, we want to take credit for having you switch, when are you planning for USB-C?”
“2023.”
“Ok, we’ll say 2024 so just in case you can’t make it, we can still claim that we made you do it.”
”Fine. But this is the date we’ve been planning for years, so, yeah.”)
Now, I’m curious when were all other smartphones in the EU using USB-C… must be a way to find that. Because if everyone other than Apple has been on USB-C for 3 or 4 years, it could be said that the EU was dragging their feet. Either that or, waiting for Apple.
If this was something Apple “hated”, we’d be getting USB-C next year, right before the deadline.
It won’t forever be a mystery, folks involved are just waiting until they retire to release the book they’ve been writing.![]()
Does hold some merit. How do you make sure folks are less likely to be perturbed about finally turning off the lights on lightning? You make sure that there’s a very wide number of non-Apple USB-C products in the marketplace. By now, everything is either USB-C or has a USB-C cable. Sure there’s the compatibility thing to wade through, but that’s nothing for someone who really wants to take advantage of the port.Actually… come to think of it, Apple may be involved in pushing for the USB-C design standard.
I guess I could be misinterpreting the rules, but they way I read it was that newly introduced smartphones had to use USB-C by that date and older models were grandfathered and could still be sold, which would mean Apple didn’t even have to switch until the 2025 models. No matter what date they switched, though, both sides would complain because, even more than cat videos, that is what the internet gives people most!Well, we do know that Apple did not “hate” USB-C as it was already being used on many devices. Plus, the EU said all smartphones must have USB-C by December 28, 2024.
(“Hey, Apple, we want to take credit for having you switch, when are you planning for USB-C?”
“2023.”
“Ok, we’ll say 2024 so just in case you can’t make it, we can still claim that we made you do it.”
”Fine. But this is the date we’ve been planning for years, so, yeah.”)
Now, I’m curious when were all other smartphones in the EU using USB-C… must be a way to find that. Because if everyone other than Apple has been on USB-C for 3 or 4 years, it could be said that the EU was dragging their feet. Either that or, waiting for Apple.
If this was something Apple “hated”, we’d be getting USB-C next year, right before the deadline.
It won’t forever be a mystery, folks involved are just waiting until they retire to release the book they’ve been writing.![]()
As you suggest, actual motivations are often speculative, at least until the "tell-all" book is released -- but then again, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. So, which "cigar" are we looking at in this case?... If this was something Apple “hated”, we’d be getting USB-C next year, right before the deadline. ...
We do know, for sure, that Apple didn’t decide, in 2022, to release a USB-C smartphone in 2023, these decisions are made years ahead of time (especially considering that USB3 support is built into the A17 Pro chip). Based on what we know from past releases, we’re talking about a 3-4 year lead time, maybe more. So, by the time the EU said “Two years from 2022”, Apple was already locked into a 2023 release.Even given that they ultimately beat the deadline by over a year, I'm still not convinced that this so readily matched up to their existing plans.