Spotify could make better use of its time by focusing on providing a premium service that’s actually worth $9.99.
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 to Investigate Apple Over Spotify's Antitrust Complaint
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Spotify could make better use of its time by focusing on providing a premium service that’s actually worth $9.99.
Well it woul be a silly request, on both sides....
As I was pointing out, it is a silly answer.
Then sue Amazon for unfair Prime Member music benefits. Bundling and echo systems are an advantage. Spotify, compete or or away.
If anyone with an iPhone wants to get a Spotify subscription not using apples payment system, they can through Spotify, most iPhone users don’t.
If you want to use apples app Store account for a subscription, apple will take a cut, 30% the first year, 15% each year after that. Just like on android.
No subscription, no fee on the App Store.
If they don’t want to pay the fee they shouldn’t be on the App Store.
You can’t have a Spotify account and subscribe through Spotify’s website?
Yes, using a disability as part of an insult is derogatory. In the UK that can actually be reported.. no snowflake about it.
Haha
Wow, disability talk
Nevermind then, I guess whatever I say, no no no, shhhh, sorry, comments not allowed.
Did you know that time also melts snowflakes?
And your still wrong,
(My what is wrong? No, you are wrong, at least your basic spelling is)
last time I checked people using Spotify in the UK don’t sign into their Canadian accounts, and as I don’t live in Canada and use a Canadian account then I was right with my point, as so could you be.
(Thank you for warning me about UK’s big brother and that I may be in trouble, using sarcasm in UK (a home land for an English language sarcasm)
And as I do not live in UK, which proves you wrong again
I use my Canadian account while in Canada. Now using my wife’s account, while in here, at home, still having these ads (just in different language) maybe I shall do a recording for you. Might be easier to understand, if your Japanese is not too rusty.
You forgot to mention that your argument was based on Canadian laws and regulations, those things apps and advertising have to abide by and which differ country to country...
(are they, really? So which of the countries have, by law, a free tier of Spotify, with no ads in them. Please, full list)
next time you make a point you should remember to add that fact into your post, makes it easier to understand where your coming from then
(You mean facts, like that I get ads after a few songs, telling me subscribe on Spotify.com?
Sorry, tried that a few time, didn’t seem to work)
Last edited:
That is exactly NOT Spotifiy's position. Spotify wants to be treated no better and no worse than another maker like Uber that distributes their app through the store for free and handles all financial transactions themselves. The distinction is one drawn by Apple; digital purchases (books, music, games, etc.) are required to go through Apple's in-app purchase method while other purchases (ride shares, cabin/condo rentals, etc.) are not. App makers can do subscriptions outside the app but they can't link to an external account signup or even tell users it is available. It is no coincidence that the digital purchases are also a market where Apple is competing directly with the app makers.
I can see the EU holding Apple's requirement all digital purchases go through Apple's payment system to be an anti-competitive advantage and make Apple allow developers who are able to handle their own transactions to do so and be treated no differently than an app developer like Uber.
Honestly I have no issue myse;f with companies like Spotify having to pay a fee for using the App store.
Now, whether 30% is the right fee for a subcription service that's another issue.
Personally that seems wrong to me.
Yes, for a simgle 1 off purchase then, ok, I could just about be ok with 30%, ideally a little less, but hey.
But I don't feel 30% is acceptable for subscription payments as that's long term on-going.
If it was 25% 1st payment (like when you buy an app) then 5% for long term subscription payements, then I'd feel that as resonable.
You got your money for the purchase at the start, but it seems wrong to want to take the same cut just for the follow up payments.
However, all that aside, what I di feel is wrong, is, then limiting how you can use Spotify on Apple products if you don't buy vie the app store. That smacks of doing something just out of spite, and is working against the benefit of Apple consumers in general.
Just my 2 cents anyway
How are so many people uninformed about what Spotify pays? Like everyone else, Spotify only pays 15% on any subscription that lasts a year or longer.
The most disappointing part of all this is how little effort Apple puts into competing with Spotify by improving the Apple Music application. It's miles behind Spotify in a lot of areas.
I'm sure they would if it was as easy as hitting a subscribe button inside the app and going to Spotify's payment method but it's not that easy since you'd have to sign up thru the website then log into the app, most people are going to take the easy route and just do it the Apple way.
If Apple doesn't want to play by the EU laws, they don't have to sell in the EU. See how that works? Debate aside, we'll see how this plays out and I'm honestly hoping Apple loses.
Let's consider what would happen if Apple allowed a "purchase" link, as you suggest.
I would expect that *vast majority* of apps would, very quickly, do this. It's a fairly simple thing to launch Safari from an app. And it's not that much harder to jump back into the app after successful purchase. So, just saying "Apple should just allow developers to put in a 'purchase' link" is kind of silly. Apple would be cutting their app-store revenues down to a fraction of what they are now. There's no way they're going to intentionally throw away all that money.
Probably so, just like users of apps like Uber, Airbnb, Travelocity, and any other providers that don't sell digital items are able to do. And that is why Apple is likely to lose in the EU. Apple is treating a particular set of content providers more restrictively, and it happens that Apple is competing against them as well. That's one good thing about the EU, you don't have to be a monopoly before they can do something, they only have to find you are engaging in activities that harm competition.
Spotify is deceiving the pubic and most of those sympathetic to them have fallen for their deception
#1- Spotify was only too happy to take advantage of the App store and grow to be the biggest music streaming business IN THE WORLD, by far.
*Spread the Truth*
#1- Spotify was only too happy to take advantage of the App store and grow to be the biggest music streaming business IN THE WORLD, by far.
- Spotify dwarfs Apple Music and just hit 100 MILLION paid subscribers and 217 MILLION TOTAL
- Now that they are #1 in the world, after using the App Store to become #1 (The App Store has downloaded over 300 Million downloads of Spotify!), Spotify wants Apple to continue to spend billions maintaining the App store platform and bringing Spotify access to over a billion customers but pay nothing!
- The majority of Spotify's customers use their free, ad-supported product, which makes no contribution to the App Store, yet Spotify gets all the benefit!
- The tiny fraction of Spotify's subscriptions where Spotify has to pay the App store a cut are primarily 15%, not 30%, since the 30% is just for the first year.
*Spread the Truth*
Fair enough...although clearly those two guys (who I have never heard of to be honest) had a lot of weight to throw around if the deal is incorporating those numbers. For the average artist/band, you simply don't have that kind of leverage against the labels. Still interesting though...
Please explain the differences between Spotify and Uber as far as the app store goes.
Apple gets absolutely nothing from Uber's app distribution or the services sold within their app either. Uber revenue for 2018 was $11 Billion. If you assume users of the iOS app accounted for half the revenue that would mean Uber generated $5.5 Billion through Apple users. That is going to absolutely dwarf the sales Spotify had through its iOS app, yet Apple is perfectly content to allow Uber to do so without paying a dime.
Hitting a subscribe button in the app
Store costs 30% the first year and 15% after that, just like on android.
Of course people would rather do it the apple way. Apple takes a cut for making everything easier for both the app developer and the user.
If Spotify doesn’t want to charge anything, apple isn’t going to charge them a fee.
Your completely right apple, should stop app subscriptions in Europe.
I’m sure all the other European users and app developers would be more than upset with Spotify. See how that works.
Pretty sure Spotify doesn’t want that.
No surprises there.
Some people hate apple, yet still claim to buy apple products.
Never really understood that.
Sorry, but their argument, and yours, is the absolute worst.
You know all those gift cards in physical stores, often that can be had for less than the face value?
Yeah... they pay Blackhawk Networks 20% of the loaded value to sell those. Are they next? Or does Spotify’s business model just suck? They can’t afford to offer the free tier, that’s their problem. Not because they have to pay Apple 15%.
[doublepost=1557152711][/doublepost]
The difference is Apple is processing the sale and payment of the monthly recurring charge at their cost with their Merchant Services account. They’re the ones selling the subscription, collecting the payment, and paying the transaction fee to the payment network.
Uber and Lyft are charging for a service rendered in their own app, with their own Merchant Services account. Uber and Lyft are the ones selling the service, collecting the payment, and paying the transaction fee to the network.
Last edited:
The supermarket analogy breaks down when you consider that in the "name brand" products can offer their products at any retail outlet of their choosing - simply negotiate the deal and get it done. However, in the iPhone/iPad world, there is only a single "retailer" - the AppStore. Not being in the AppStore absolutely does mean that Spotify cannot get their app and their service on iPhones or iPads.
Personally, I pay through the Spotify website, but I am not really sure where I stand on this issue... both have valid points.
Spotify is asking for the same ability to use their own Merchant Services account to process payments outside the app while linking to an account signup within the app, just like Apple allows Uber to do. Spotify is not getting Apple to process the recurring charge voluntarily. Spotify is only using Apple's in-app purchases because Apple requires them do either do so or not reference any payment method in the app at all.
Again, why should Spotify be held to a completely different standard than Uber?
Last edited:
What are you going on about? You can use Spotify on Echo devices with no problem, can you use Spotify or any other music service on Homepod? What about on the Apple watch? Can Spotify tie into Siri like it can Google on Android and Google Home, or Alexa and Cortana? Nope.
I wonder how residents of the EU would feel if Apple packed up and left? Or how Spotify would feel if they were required to put a link to Apple music in their iOS app? Or if a ruling against Apple were to be applied to physical stores? The EU may well rule against Apple, that doesn't mean it makes sense, or is right, or will benefit anyone at all.
A lot of rappers seem to be doing it these days, no one should ever let a record company own something or take majority stake in something they didn't make, that's just mad.
I think they would feel like a plateauing smartphone platform that had just turned its back on 500 million people doesnt really have a particularly bright future.
Apple gets absolutely nothing from Uber's app distribution or the services sold within their app either. Uber revenue for 2018 was $11 Billion. If you assume users of the iOS app accounted for half the revenue that would mean Uber generated $5.5 Billion through Apple users. That is going to absolutely dwarf the sales Spotify had through its iOS app, yet Apple is perfectly content to allow Uber to do so without paying a dime.[/QUOTE]
One more time, since it's inception, the App store only charges for DIGITAL GOODS that are processed through the App store. If you want to sell something, like a service, e.g., Uber, or physical goods, you can do so, but you can't use the App store to purchase it and since Apple doesn't process it, you don't have to pay them to do so.
A company can also use the App store for free (minus the $100 annual fee), if they don't want Apple to process and handle the customer. That's why a trillion dollar company like Amazon generates billions, but doesn't pay anything. Ditto with Netflix. It's why 85% of the millions of the Apps in the App store PAY NOTHING TO APPLE!
It's why Spotify is trying to deceive people. They can and do have you sign up directly with them and Apple gets nothing. It's like a company that sells directly to consumers on line wanting to sell something in Walmart stores, but not wanting to pay anything for Walmart to sell it and give them access to their customers and stores!
One more time, since it's inception, the App store only charges for DIGITAL GOODS that are processed through the App store. If you want to sell something, like a service, e.g., Uber, or physical goods, you can do so, but you can't use the App store to purchase it and since Apple doesn't process it, you don't have to pay them to do so.
A company can also use the App store for free (minus the $100 annual fee), if they don't want Apple to process and handle the customer. That's why a trillion dollar company like Amazon generates billions, but doesn't pay anything. Ditto with Netflix. It's why 85% of the millions of the Apps in the App store PAY NOTHING TO APPLE!
It's why Spotify is trying to deceive people. They can and do have you sign up directly with them and Apple gets nothing. It's like a company that sells directly to consumers on line wanting to sell something in Walmart stores, but not wanting to pay anything for Walmart to sell it and give them access to their customers and stores!