If the app makes money using Apple’s servers and services Apple should get a cut. Their business would not exist if Apple wasn’t doing the heavy lifting. The gaming industry standard was 70/30 before Apple opened the App Store. The difference was the developer got 30 percent instead of 70. Maybe they should go back to that.
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.
Facebook Claims Apple is Damaging Small Businesses by Collecting Fees From Paid Facebook Events
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Come on people, Facebook is it. Nothing is more trustworthy. Whatever they say is honest.
Lol. I want to be as pale and rich as Zuckerberg. Everyone wants information, some use it in different ways. Whatever. I'm old. Count me out.
Lol. I want to be as pale and rich as Zuckerberg. Everyone wants information, some use it in different ways. Whatever. I'm old. Count me out.
I have a hint for the sheeple who use the Facebook app to view these important, paywalled video cons: Facebook works just great in Safari on iOs and iPadOS, too. In fact, it's the only way I use Facebook. I can filter out ads and analytics that way.
It seems there are really two questions here: a) does it make sense for Apple to make anything? And, if so, b) what is an appropriate amount.
Apple, is providing value, otherwise developers would simple not use them, so I think it’s fair to say that, a is yes.
B is obviously more complex, it under the assumption that a free market will find a balancing point of value and cost, the presumption must be yes, unless there is a solid argument otherwise.
Given that developers can charge more via iOS, this becomes a consumer question. In that context, I think the closest I’ve heard to a solid argument is that Apple has a monopoly on the iOS market. But, in my mind, that is an artificial segment. They do not have on the mobile device market. Consumers have free choice to choose a non-Apple phone and have a comparable experience.
Lacking a solid argument to the contrary, it is appropriate for Apple to charge as much as they see fit. If a consumer feels those extra costs are not worth the value of iOS, they should choose a comparable non-Apple option. Developers should pice their options within iOS according to their needs.
I also see some parallels to the “license Mac to 3rd parties” movement a few decades ago. What a disaster that turned out to be... Turns out when you let other people mess with your pride and joy, they don’t treat it with the level of respect you would...
Deleting FB from the App Store will instantly guarantee a trillion-dollar regulatory fine on Apple... that lawsuit will be supported by hundreds of millions of Facebook-addicted users.
Apple knows they can't get rid of FB. It's the largest tech cult in the world today.
I was thinking the same thing. It's easy for Facebook to "waive the cut" because you are the product. So Apple could make an interesting test by saying "We will allow you to sign up for these paid Facebook events without a Facebook profile. We will auto-generate a randomized, untrackable FB profile for you, get in contact with the host of the event, and sign you up based on your Apple ID bypassing Facebook's tracking."
If Toyota would equip all Priuses with a payment terminal, handle all the transactions, generated nice reports by country for the driver, advertized his ride-sharing company right on toyota.com and in each of their dealerships, handled cashback and disputes, hosted and facilitated reviews for the ride-share providers... I think a certain cut is more than reasonable. Whether 30% still is is debatable (that number was based on an industry standard back when software was still sold in cardboard boxes) but it's definitely not rent-seeking or anti-competitive.
Things which are bought in an app which are products or services consumed outside of the app can use Apple Pay, which takes a fee from the bank.
Things which are bought in an app which are products or services consumed _within_ an app use in-app purchase, which uses iTunes billing and which apple gets a sizable cut of.
As long you give the _option_ to purchase things in-app, you can also consume products and services bought elsewhere. Spotify for instance had an in-app subscription option, but if you went to their website you could sign up - at times for a cheaper price than in the app. All that is fine.
There is a program specifically for media apps where you can use an existing account for billing of in-app purchases, as long as you give the option to set up an account in-app which uses Apple's in-app purchasing. I believe this also runs at a reduced rate of 15% (and is what people are talking about when they say Amazon negotiated a lower rate).
AFAIK, the Facebook service in question was not consumed in-app, they would not need to use in-app purchasing. Email a link that opens in the browser? They can do all the payment processing via Apple Pay, which is no more expensive than other credit card options.
Probably that the Google Play store allows what Apple is doing?
This seems to be more for the immediate PR benefits. Facebooks looking to make money the same as Apple, they see something advantageous in the short term that will compensate for any long term fallout.
Everything about this wreaks of strategy. What is going on?
It would make for an interesting thought experiment though.
People thought that iOS users wouldn't be able to do without google services either. Today, Apple has replaced google maps with Maps, while google pays Apple $9 billion to keep search default on safari. We have reached a weird inflection point where android may have the larger market share, yet the most lucrative user base use apple products.
I also see what Apple is doing. They are strengthening their ecosystem and making it more sticky, so people have to think twice, maybe thrice before leaving for another platform. And even if Facebook were to leave iOS, where would they go? iOS is still its most lucrative platform, I am willing to bet that Apple would be able to weather the hit in the short run (people are not going to thrash their phones and jump to android overnight and just leave everything else behind), and Facebook just continues to lose money day after day after day.
Meanwhile, Apple can continue to hit Facebook where it hurts - their tracking algorithms and advertising revenue.
If anything, all these events that have been going down the past few weeks just help make the case for Apple to not only continue to strengthen their ecosystem, but to also not shy away from replicating competing services and products where necessary. The best example would be spotify vs Apple Music. I would say that at this point, spotify poses the least threat to Apple because if they do exit the iOS App Store, Apple has a ready substitute for its users.
This way, Apple reduces the risk of finding itself hostage to an influential app. They may not be able to replicate every app in its entirety, but at least enough to offer an interim solution, and this buys Apple time to react accordingly.
Things don't look good for Apple, but I will say that Apple is in a lot less precarious position than the naysayers believe.
Lol no. I know many users who don't even own a computer, just an iphone. Have you tried using facebook via mobile safari lately?
Anther one...
This argument of 30% is not helping... But for starters businesses go into this knowing very well what Apple does..
I'm starting to think they go in, then come back later to argue their point better. They wait until someone goes after them like a committee, then they all start rushing to one side.
That's all my parents do
This argument of 30% is not helping... But for starters businesses go into this knowing very well what Apple does..
I'm starting to think they go in, then come back later to argue their point better. They wait until someone goes after them like a committee, then they all start rushing to one side.
Lol no. I know many users who don't even own a computer, just an iphone. Have you tried using facebook via mobile safari lately?
That's all my parents do
Apple does subsidize the tooling and hosting of the App Store, hosting all the app resources through CDN (which is a massive amount of data and data transfer), and reviews along with other services like fraud prevention, billing, and dispute resolution. They have also historically had more expensive payment systems (such as gift cards - the merchant who sells the card does not do so for free) and at least used to run affiliate programs.
I would be very surprised if Apple was able to break even at 10%, unless they change the App Store so that app purchases and subscriptions no longer subsidized free apps. Facebook might find that in return for a rule change that allows them to wave these event fees, they have to pay for terabytes of bandwidth of the constantly updating Facebook and Messenger apps.
Sure there is. They use those fees to subsidize other services, so it is not a 30% "processing fee". If apple does have to restructure due to regulatory pressure, my chips are on it costing the likes of Netflix and Facebook equivalent or more money - because now they will have to pay directly for the massive amount of services and bandwidth their free-to-download apps consume on Apple's platform.
Fortunately nowadays anyone can create a private social network - all it takes is a decent server, WordPress and a social networking plugin - I should know, my company makes one 😉
facebook ios ipad soo buggy. ya using safari to surf facebook.Lol no. I know many users who don't even own a computer, just an iphone. Have you tried using facebook via mobile safari lately?
Facebook are just upset they can’t justify adding their own % charge on top of apples 30% as it’ll be too high.
Whilst 30% is a bit steep I can’t exactly blame Apple. These businesses are using a secure and widely adopted store front to easily sell their products without significant overheads. If the 30% is that steep they should try building their own from scratch and see how it goes.
Whilst 30% is a bit steep I can’t exactly blame Apple. These businesses are using a secure and widely adopted store front to easily sell their products without significant overheads. If the 30% is that steep they should try building their own from scratch and see how it goes.