Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
EU Plans to Let Spotify Direct Users to Other Payment Options on iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And why would they do that makes no business sense.
When they will eventually get what they want
I agree. I just don't agree it's about cost. The only issues that I see on iOS are the ways that Apple favors Apple Music. And Apple has been addressing some of those issues. They need to do more particularly around Siri.
Apple doesn't need to subsidize Spotify's business just because they compete with them.
Below are details (Spotify's side) regarding what they and users can and can't do in the app:
How Consumers Lose Out - Time to Play Fair
timetoplayfair.com
Five Fast Facts
Facts that show Apple doesn't play fair
The Apple App Store….a platform that houses some of the world’s greatest and most innovative apps, all in the palm of your hand. Truth be told, at Spotify, we are big fans of Apple. You will find their hardware across our offices, in the hands of thousands of our employees. We also love having the opportunity to be on a platform where we can offer our services to millions of our fans around the world. But Apple makes it harder and harder for companies like Spotify to bring the best we have to offer to our fans — all for the sake of tilting the field to favor its own services and disadvantaging those it is playing against. Here are four fast facts that show Apple doesn’t play fair:
01
Apple Charges a Discriminatory Tax:
Apple requires that certain apps pay a 30% fee for use of their in-app purchase system (IAP). However, the reality is that the rules are not applied evenly across the board. Does Apple Music pay it? No. Does Uber pay it? No. Deliveroo? No. Apple does not compete with Uber and Deliveroo. But in music streaming, Apple gives the advantage to their own services.
02
Apple Won’t Let Us Share Spotify Deals We Know You’d Love:
If we choose not to use IAP (the only payment option on iOS), Apple, in turn, bars us from communicating directly with our customers who access Spotify via Apple platforms. Apple won’t let us share awesome deals and promotions—like 99¢ for three months of Spotify Premium. And we’re not just talking about the app. Worse yet, they often block us from emailing after you register your account, claiming we are circumventing their rules.
03
Apple Doesn’t Allow You to Upgrade to Spotify Premium With Ease:
If users want to upgrade from our Free service to Premium, great, we’d love to have them! But Apple bars us from offering that option in our app—instead, forcing users to take the multiple steps of going to a browser or desktop. Some of our users don’t even have a desktop. And to top it off, we can’t even tell users that, or point them in the right direction. You have to figure it out all on your own.
04
Apple Doesn’t Allow You To Purchase an Audiobook within the App:
Users should be able to complete an audiobook purchase in a single click. We’re pretty confident you want it this way, too. Unfortunately, Apple sees things differently and, similar to with the Premium experience, iOS users must take the multiple steps of going to a browser or desktop. And we aren’t even able to tell users where to go or how to navigate this convoluted process. But this isn’t the case for audiobooks on the Apple Books app.
05
Apple Rejects Our App Enhancements:
We love making improvements and introducing new features to Spotify. But where Apple thinks our app doesn’t abide by their unilaterally imposed restrictions, they routinely reject our bug fixes and app enhancements that would improve user experience and the app’s functionality—leading fans to believe our app and tech abilities are subpar. Nothing could be further from the truth. And of course Apple never puts any obstacles in front of their own Apple Music app.
These rules Apple unilaterally imposes exist for one reason only: to give Apple an unfair advantage over the many other services that are working hard to compete for fans. For competition to work and innovation to thrive, Apple needs to play fair. To see how this has played out over time, check out our timeline here.
I'm sure most users are happy with the new app. It's just this trend of big business eating up small business market share. Surely there will be less people searching for a journaling app on the app store and devs have to spend more money on ads to compete with it.
Very interesting that they don't apply the 30% fee everywhere they get to pick and choose who pays and who doesn't. Why doesn't Uber pay their 30% fair share since they're using the multiple benefits of being hosted on the app store isn't that the excuse I often hear on macrumors ?
On the other hand many new iPhone owners get sometimes 3 to 6 months of Apple Music for free. It's unfair but I understand Apple, they really wanna dominate the music streaming business by all means necessary.
Yes it is about being free! Spotify wants the cake and eat it too. They want Apple to host the app prominently and drive tons of traffic to their service through iPhones and iPads but not pay them a dime to do it.
If Apple charges some to host and pay for a store front, no one is forcing Spotify to not just lower the price they charge through IAP to hit the same end-price for the consumer.
Why do people think its some sort of gotcha that a company charges for ice cream but offers yogurt for free?
Spotify also offer a 3-6 month free trial of Spotify Premium. Why is that unfair?
Unfair that they can't offer promotions on the app store. My comment was in response to this context 👇
That's just spin by Spotify. They can offer promotions on the App Store just like other apps do... if they use IAP like other apps do. They want special rules for them like they got from Google.
You made it sound as if Apple's terms are subject to market forces of offer and acceptance, rejection and adaption.
There are few signs of that - Apple rather sets them unilaterally and has basically kept them (especially where they benefit their own business model against competitors).
Given that they're are for-profit business, it is indeed (reasonable).
What's not reasonable is governments letting them get away with it at their current rates and with their current practices in what's virtually a duopoly market. Users converge on one, two, sometimes three competing operating systems/platforms for digital content - and governments should put legislation in place to keep these oligopolists in check.
Spotify is so well-known, I doubt they need any "prominent" display or Apple driving traffic to them. They'd be quite happy if their app is available on the App Store when requested / searched for and they didn't have to pay commissions or weren't prohibited from advertising on their app.
Going back to point number one: ...only if they commit to paying Apple's discriminatory tax.
They are.
There are plenty of signs. As I said, many terms and policies of the App Store have become more developer friendly over the years.
Glad we agree.
Since you ignored my response to this argument the first time, I'll just link back to it.
I'm sure they'd be quite happy for Apple to continue subsidizing their business without restriction.
I believe Apple's rule is that the 30% fee only applies to things purchased and actually used within the app. Physical products and tangible services therefore wouldn't apply. With Spotify, you are using the product within the app while a food product or rideshare service is only ordered through the app but used/consumed outside the app. Whether or not that is fair is where the debates come in...and Spotify's complaint.
I think it's fine for Apple to be able to offer free or discount subscriptions. Putting restrictions on how others can or can’t do the same is Spotify's issue.
That's just loaded language. There is nothing discriminatory about charging for ice cream and giving away yogurt.
Point number one is dishonest. Spotify implies that Apple only charges apps that it competes with. That is a misrepresentation.
So long as Apple allows alternative app stores hosted outside of their control then I have no problem with your idea. I'll just not shop on the Apple App Store if their prices are not competitive. Remember that it's Apple who insists that ALL apps be hosted on their own app store. I'm sure there are plenty of cloud companies who would be happy to shoulder the app hosting "burden" if Apple made that possible.
When I use Spotify Connect to stream to my wireless Sonos or KEF speakers, I consume outside the app.
It literally is discriminatory (finely differentiating) in the original sense of the word.
No, it is increasingly accurate and is - or has become - broadly true:
As I stated elsewhere a few days ago, one can't help but notice Apple in all those "big" categories in which they are charging competing apps for in-app purchases: video streaming, music streaming, eBooks, games... even virtual fitness courses. Yet they're competing in none of the categories where they do not charge third-parties: No hotel rentals, no transit ticketing, no ride sharing - even though they let you find hotels and directions in their Maps app (so would be well-positioned).
Ok, admittedly there's no Apple ❤️ dating app. And you could argue that Apple has been an early mover in the digital music market (with their iPods and iTunes Music Store), well before music subscriptions, mobile app stores and even the iPhone was really a thing. But eBooks, video streaming, gaming... they were late to the party and are trying to muscle their way in through their installed device base and self-preferencing their own services by their discriminatory in-app purchase policies.
Last edited:
Not exactly.
Right now the only choice is to pay through the Spotify website. There is no more paying through the App Store.
There's actually less choice.
But if this is what Spotify wants... let 'em have it. I just want them to stop complaining.
You have an odd definition for "complaining". Here Spotify is taking an active role in fighting for what they feel is right. Your comment on the other hand with just a quip of a rant would most certainly fit the true definition for complaining.
I have only passingly heard about their new Journal app. Iet alone tried it out - I'm just in the process of updating my iOS devices.
But I given how new that app and , I wouldn't be surprised if just data silo designed to vendor lock-in people to their iPhones.
I'll see about that in a couple minutes.
What are you even talking about? Do you even know what communism is?
Look, your car company analogy would only be equivalent if that company insisted that only they be allowed to sell tires, other accessories and fuel. Of course you could expect the prices of all of those items to skyrocket in that scenario. Capitalism benefits people when there is an open and competitive environment. When regulation, patents and other obstacles prevent new entry into a market then you end up with a duopoly or monopoly controlling everything. Preventing one company from controlling everything is keeping capitalism alive and healthy.
They each reap what they sow.
Spotify doesn’t have a sustainable business, underpays its artistes, squandered $1 billion on an advertising network that went nowhere, and recently fired over 1000 employees in the most ignoble manner possible.
But I am apparently supposedly to root for them over Apple, who for some unfathomable reason, is perennially 1 flop away from irrelevancy?
I guess Abazigal CAN in fact imagine being a cheerleader for one of the worlds biggest corporations.
Well, it’s just the reality where being right about Apple often feels synonymous with cheerleading for them. Can I help it if Apple gets things right more often than not?
you said services. now suddenly subscription services. moving goal posts. lol.
but either way, yes. professional services cost a referral fee which is a percentage of the service cost. even amazon has an App Store that takes 30% of ongoing subscription cost.
and?
great? sounds like you approve of the free market system. letting apple having control.
sounds like a great system.
Yep. Apple saw the free market system at work. Developers got on board. If it was a terrible system, Spotify would have never developed an app.
Sounds like you agree the free market system made the App Store system flourish.