Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
There's no evidence that developers/publishers would be charging less if they didn't have to pay Apple 30%. And there's actually evidence right here to the contrary: Fortnite is charging only 20% less for direct payments, meaning they're pocketing the 10% difference.

I think the evidence points to developers and publishers wanting to raise prices due to increasing development costs. That's the line that's being used for $70 retail prices for games being teased for the PS5 and Xbox Series X. I'm sure it wouldn't take Epic very long to use that same line for raising the price for Fortnite even if they did pay less for Apple's store cut, i.e., "we passed along the savings for as long as we could, but our dedication to quality and rising development costs require a new pricing structure".
 
$10 Apple bans Fortine. At this point, the Unite States needs to take control. MSFT is siting back and laughing since they got F****ed by the US Gov't in the '80s. The stock went on 30Yr no movement stock. What I call the ruler stock.
 
Trust everyone has done the decent thing and reported Epic to the police and immigration as well as Apple?
 
Last edited:
The problem is you're conflating the internet and App Store as the same thing, when they're really very different.

1. Bricks and Mortar > high % cuts surrendered to distribution and retailers
2. Internet > very low distribution costs, direct-to-consumer sales requiring miniscule overhead > 95% revenue straight to the creator
3. App Store > Apple's monopoly on enabling software to run on iOS leads them to rent-seeking behavior where they take 30% (note their distribution costs are miniscule, same as internet DtC)

Nice too see someone has a grasp of rentier capitalism.
 
1597338994409.png
 
This is going to be very interesting. Fortnite is huge, ejecting them from the AppStore would cost Epic dearly in the beginning but could cost Apple a lot more in the long run.
Considering a large percentage of fortnight players are children who don’t buy their own phones and often use hand me down devices. It’s interesting to see if the market pressure is there
 
  • Like
Reactions: cyberddot
Actually the evidence is right here. Fortnite IS charging less. Just because it is not the full 30% markup is charging doesn't matter. The consumer is still paying less.

The consumer is paying less because Fortnite is trying to make a point, and is interested in the long game. If Apple were forced to allow payments, Fortnite would remove IAP as an option, and jack up the price to $9.99, and pocket the entire 30%. There is simply no reason not to.

These developers are not your friends. Epic made over $700 million last year on 4.6 billion in revenue, and their sole interest is to pad their pockets even more, not lower prices for consumers.
 
What's the over under on this being shut down by Apple? I'm honestly surprised after 3 hours it's still live. $50 says it won't last through tomorrow.
 
A lot of people here like to point out that Apple's cost of running the app store, servers, bandwidth etc are very low compared to what they earn from the app store, but I've never seen any actual proof of it or the opposite, does anyone happen to have a link to prove it either way?

What's the difference? There is no law or moral obligation to limit profit to a certain percentage. Even if Apple had zero costs, it is entitled to charge whatever a free market will bear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darth Tulhu
What's the difference? There is no law or moral obligation to limit profit to a certain percentage. Even if Apple had zero costs, it is entitled to charge whatever a free market will bear.

I haven't said anything like that, I'm just interested as the argument is used a lot here.
 
There's no evidence that developers/publishers would be charging less if they didn't have to pay Apple 30%. And there's actually evidence right here to the contrary: Fortnite is charging only 20% less for direct payments, meaning they're pocketing the 10% difference.
if they are using a payment processor like PayPal, Epic is making something like 47 cents more in the example provided in this article. PayPal takes a 53 cent cut, and the customer pays $2 less.

So no, Epic only keeps about half of the 10% difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nickgovier
Hopefully for Apple, they are too large. This App Store monopoly has to end and hopefully we should be able to install apps outside of the App Store.

Yeah, let's openly welcome malware, adware, and other scam apps into the iOS app ecosystem! What a wonderful idea! And then blame Apple when users are spied on and become victims of massive financial fraud!
 
A lot of people here like to point out that Apple's cost of running the app store, servers, bandwidth etc are very low compared to what they earn from the app store, but I've never seen any actual proof of it or the opposite, does anyone happen to have a link to prove it either way?
I don’t think Apple would share data like that unless they were forced to. But based on comments Apple execs have made in the past this 30% isn’t just about the cost of running the App Store. Apple execs think if you’ve built a successful digital business in part (or whole) with an iOS app then they deserve a cut of that business. But how far do you take that? Should every iPhone supplier get a cut because without them there’s no way Apple could build and sell the iPhone? Should carriers/ISPs also get a cut since without connectivity/internet none of this would be possible?
 
The consumer is paying less because Fortnite is trying to make a point, and is interested in the long game. If Apple were forced to allow payments, Fortnite would remove IAP as an option, and jack up the price to $9.99, and pocket the entire 30%. There is simply no reason not to.

These developers are not your friends. Epic made over $700 million last year on 4.6 billion in revenue, and their sole interest is to pad their pockets even more, not lower prices for consumers.
Do you have an example of when this has happened? If you sign up for Spotify it’s $9.99. When they did offer IAP they were charging $12.99 in-app.
 
I haven't checked, but assuming this direct purchase really is possible in the currently released iOS Fortnite client Apple will have to remove it from the App Store for breaking their rules. Not doing so would send entirely the wrong message at a time when they've been making a big deal about treating all developers the same (with an asterisk).

I'm just surprised they haven't already. Tim and Tim must be busy figuring out which vidchat app to use to talk this through.
 
Do you have an example of when this has happened? If you sign up for Spotify it’s $9.99. When they did offer IAP they were charging $12.99 in-app.
Spotify isn't really a fair example, because they are paying a licensing fee per user. If, for example, Spotify was paying the record companies $7.50 a month per user to license their music, they'd be losing money selling at $9.99 and giving Apple a 30% cut.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ervingv
Spotify isn't really a fair example, because they are paying a licensing fee per user. If, for example, Spotify was paying the record companies $7.50 a month per user to license their music, they'd be losing money selling at $9.99 and giving Apple a 30% cut.
I don’t know the economics of Spotify. My point was you’re paying less than you did when they had to give Apple a cut. Do we have examples of apps that stopped offering IAP but continued to charge the same price?

Maybe when the App Store first started one could argue the developers owed their success to Apple. I don’t think that can be said any more. I think both Apple and the developers equally benefit from each other. I would much rather Apple charge developers for the cost of running the App Store not because they think they deserve a cut of an apps revenue stream. But then exempt certain apps because they’re big enough Apple can’t afford to lose them or because Apple directly competes with them. Indie developers are the ones who get screwed the most.
 
Last edited:
The consumer is paying less because Fortnite is trying to make a point, and is interested in the long game. If Apple were forced to allow payments, Fortnite would remove IAP as an option, and jack up the price to $9.99, and pocket the entire 30%. There is simply no reason not to.

Maybe, but that is just speculation. It is also possible that Epic finds that they sell 40% more of this item at this price. Since the marginally cost of this item is effectively zero a 40% increase in sales @ $8 is better than 0% increase at $10.

I wouldn't be surprised if Epic has large amounts of data on the price elasticity of their items.

These developers are not your friends. Epic made over $700 million last year on 4.6 billion in revenue, and their sole interest is to pad their pockets even more, not lower prices for consumers.

Isn't that what Apple does as well? Try and maximize profit? I thought that was a good thing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: nickgovier
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.