It's good that you know all the details of the claims.
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.
FTC Looking Into App Store Rules Regarding Subscription Services
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's good that you know all the details of the claims.
That is a very valid point. I do think Apple needs to tread carefully here and maybe they need to go ahead with the lower of the fees for subscription services.
I know you are trying to imply that I didn't read the article but I read it in full not only at this site but several others thank you. I just don't agree with the premise. I think the complaint is premature. Apple was already looking to reduce their cut of the app store subscription fee specifically for the Spotify's and Hulu's of the world.
You do realize apple receives the highest number of lawsuits from patent trolls compared to other tech companies right? No one is saying that the claims against apple should be ignored; it is however, important for the government to realize that these terms were laid out to developers and they agreed to them prior to selling on the app store. If the developers find it unreasonable, they are more than welcome to remove their apps from the app store. After all, apple does not hold a monopoly in the mobile industry, so there is really no anti trust issues.
And as for you, putting out one-sentence, illogical statement based on your bias against apple does not make you sound intelligent nor does it contribute to any discussion.
Right, so when you look at the numbers, Apple is sort of being uncompetitive:
Say, that both Apple and its streaming competitors are getting the same fixed xcosts from the producers. lets make a hypothetical assumption of 70% of their revenues are fixed contract costs.
That leaves 2.99 left for the streaming service.
Apple's cut is 30%.
so that 2.99 now goes to Apple
The only alternative they have in order to earn any profit at all, is to raise price to say, 14.99
however, Apple doesn't pay the 30% fee to themselves.
they can still continue to charge 9.99.
they have put themselves at a competitive advantage through monopolizing the App store. because you cannot install applications on i-Devices without the App store.
now, the question is, is Apple's marketshare in the phone market large enough for this to truly be anti-competitive? ehhhhhh, I think that's a stretch, considering in most markets, iOS isn't #1
If you are going to respond at least respond to my post. I never said Apple invented streaming or even implied it. I said their entry into that market made people download Spotify and it did. The numbers don't lie.
http://consequenceofsound.net/2015/...s-launch-spotify-just-had-its-best-week-ever/
Many people saw Apple Music as a validation of Spotify.
Google Apple hires patent troll and see what you find. Be careful with the insults, it's against TOS.
What people don't realize is that for ad supported and desktop streaming Spotify will remain king. For phones and tablets Apple will have its place.
You mean you can't reason with someone who doesn't worship Apple? I'm quite logical.
I agree, but they haven't ever made a profit. How long can that last? It would also be interesting to see if Apple can make a dime off this model as well
I'm one of those users who thinks the mobile apps for Apple Music are great but on the desktop iTunes is still iTunes with a few extra tabs. iTunes on the desktop just feels all wrong to me. The only thing Apple did to iTunes on the desktop is make it useable at all. I like Spotify's desktop interface more. However, Apple Music's discovery engine >>>>>> and that really is the biggest seller for me.
I wish Apple would've done a full reskin and called it Apple Music with an iTunes tab in it. Arguably I would've done the same thing for the mobile app. It feels like two apps on my mobile device doing almost same thing. I realize iTunes services more than just music but yeah you get the idea... Maybe call it Apple Media and Apple Music.
I signed up for Apples free trial but haven't really gravited to it yet. I'll have to spend some time on it to see how I like it. The problem is Spotify is so good as it is that if I want to listen to music it has become instinctive to turn to it. I feel I will listen to Beats One more than their streaming effort. I'll give it the full three months to make my choice.
Last edited:
All of this talk of wholesale prices... So should stores be taking 30% of all iTunes gift cards sold?
Apple's wholesale prices to retailers are notoriously slim. Less than 5%. Stores put up with it because it is a loss leader and gets people in the doors.
You can argue that the entire App Store is the same for Apple. Selling their high margin devices where they make the bulk of their profit.
Netflix isn't just lucky to be in the App Store, Apple is lucky that Netflix gives people a reason to want an iPad.
If I were an Apple shareholder I'd happily take ANY percentage of every Netflix subscription. But Apple knows they could release their own one day. Right now, the simplicity of their store's fees is probably a little too simple though.
Apple's wholesale prices to retailers are notoriously slim. Less than 5%. Stores put up with it because it is a loss leader and gets people in the doors.
You can argue that the entire App Store is the same for Apple. Selling their high margin devices where they make the bulk of their profit.
Netflix isn't just lucky to be in the App Store, Apple is lucky that Netflix gives people a reason to want an iPad.
If I were an Apple shareholder I'd happily take ANY percentage of every Netflix subscription. But Apple knows they could release their own one day. Right now, the simplicity of their store's fees is probably a little too simple though.
Do stores put up with it or were they begging to have access? My guess is the latter was going on. Stores don't have to give away much store space and can make a quick few easy bucks. People who have leverage don't give up their margins so easily generally speaking.
No harm in checking out the competition. Sometimes we find something we like better. You can't beat the free trial offer.
We never know what we might find. I think it's good to be open minded. Try Apple Music, and if you like Spotify better, stick with it. I'm sure plenty of people will choose Apple over Spotify too. Choice is good.
Absolutely... I tried Spotify, Apple Music, and Google Play in the past two months. Spotify's method for organizing your personal music is terrible. Apple Music was missing 1 out of every 5 songs I searched for and had my least favorite UI. Play music was way too radio focused.
If Apple Music can just match Spotify's catalog, I'll deal with the UI. I listen to a lot of smaller bands though.
I already tried Spotify several times and didn't like it. Im not a fan of Spotify playlists/radio stations or their search. Then I went to the Beats app and loved it instantly. I use Parrot Zik headphones and Jaybirds that the gym. Naturally I was thrilled when I heard Apple would be buying Beats. Apple Music probably rates at about an 7.5 - 8 for me in terms of initial satisfaction. It's about the same as I'd rate Beats app.
Google play has am amazing web interface. Its really well done.
All of which didn't cost Apple very, very little. They didn't spread word of Spotify across the internet, didn't make it somewhat of a household name. They provided the platform, ran it through a quality check, and gave it a spot on the front page of own app store. It was Spotify who had to negotiate licensing deals with all the various record labels, build the infrastructure to support potentially millions of people streaming millions of songs through their service without any hitches or hiccups, had to spread word of the service. That costs them considerably more, and Apple taking a perpetual 30% cut of their subscription fees, their lifeblood, isn't kosher in my opinion.
I can understand them taking their 30% off apps bought through the App Store, but subscription services are another matter entirely. Think of it in terms of iTunes and the iPod, which didn't become a massive success until it was made available on Windows. Does that mean MS deserves a 30% cut of all transactions made through iTunes? They're providing the platform after all. They're the ones putting it in front of what was then a much, much larger market than what it initially had. I'd still say no, because MS is merely providing a gateway, and iTunes added value to Windows at the time. It's the same situation for Spotify and Apple.
Now you know what's out there and what you like and don't like about each service. Without trying it yourself, you'd never have known. Being open minded is a good thing.
And here's an example where Apple wins over Spotify. I think it's nice to have a couple of viable choices.
Seems unusual enough in this case for the FTC to raise its eyebrows at this stage...
Also there is a difference between a retailer slapping their brand on something and manufacturing the item itself when it comes to wholesale cost.