Interesting. I am curious where your definition of fair comes from? So "fair" is 10% for Apple but all other app platforms continue to charge 30% as they currently do? No, what they all do is "unfair", so all platforms should charge 10%. Who gets to decide to enforce that change? Should the government be responsible for determining what the "fair" price is for products that are clearly not essential should be? But what if the business model shows that is unsustainable? Should companies be forced to stay in a market for non-essential services that is not profitable to sustain the "fair" rate.
How is that "fair"?
I have said it before on this forum, I wish everything was magically cheaper. I, however, have little faith in magic. Things cost what they cost because people are willing to pay the cost. Look at iPhone 12 sales: the more expensive iPhones are significantly outselling the smaller (and cheaper) iPhone because the expensive phones have what people want. The argument that Apple would sell more small iPhones if they were cheaper might be true but would the growth in sales offset the lower price? Given consumers' clear demand for bigger phones it seems unlikely, which is exactly the calculation companies like Apple do when setting prices in the first place.
Folks, I get that we all want to pay less for everything while getting paid more for the hard work we do (think about that for a moment). And there are certainly imbalances in the current structure, there are victims of our economic system. EPIC is NOT a victim and we need to stop thinking they are.
