The analogy of a shopping mall has come up a few times during the Epic v Apple discussion.
Well... the idea of a "store within a store" is exactly like a shopping mall.
A store inside the mall has their products and their customers. It's a business on its own.
But... the store pays rent to the mall owner. You don't get to have a store inside the mall without paying for it.
So does Epic expect to build an app store within the App Store for free? Or what if Apple lets them have their store... but the "rent" is at or near the 30% they're already paying?
Or what if it cost some crazy amount like a flat $50,000,000/month to have your own store inside the App Store? To a company like Epic... who sells hundreds of millions of dollars worth of virtual items with nearly 100% profit margin... it wouldn't be so bad.
But a small developer couldn't afford pay that much "rent" to have their own store inside the App Store... especially if they don't have the sales to cover it.
So that's why the flat fee of 30% is much simpler. You only have to pay a percentage of the sales you
do make.
I dunno... this whole thing is a mess. I'm glad I'm not in charge of it...
