If everyone starts to get greedy and copy what Epic games is doing, Apple might as well just not bother offering the App Store as a platform anymore tho it would of course be detrimental to the customer experience
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.
News Publishers Want the Same Discounted 15% Revenue Share Apple Offered Amazon Prime Video
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Considering that Apple gave this special treatment to Amazon already (who is in no need of more money) and considering that multiple publishers were lukewarm at the idea of staying on this platform because it isn't lucrative at all (maybe even the opposite), publishers are asking for a fair thing.
Edit : I thought Apple kept 50%. Did I confuse two topics?
www.macrumors.com
Edit : I thought Apple kept 50%. Did I confuse two topics?
Publishers Reportedly Struggling to Monetize Privacy-Centric Apple News
Over the last month we've learned that Apple is readying an Apple News service that will provide access to paywalled news content and magazines...
www.macrumors.com
yea, soon Apple will ask for 50% of revenue they don’t deserve. Money grabbing is Apples new business model.
Disagree. iOS wouldn’t be much of anything if it was nothing more than Apple’s first party apps. I think they both enhance each other.
They didn’t. But what’s special about The NY Times iOS app? Does it do/offer something you can’t get on their website?
adobe only takes 9 percent from my sales in their marketplace
Disagree. The iPhone didn't explode into popularity until the App Store & third party apps came along. Without Apps, be it first or third party, any platform is Dead Platform Walking
Because this isn’t preferential treatment. This is a deal between companies, similar to how Google pays to be the default search engine. Any developer can try to negotiate a similar deal.
No, they're trying to keep Apple from taking more of their slice...
That's so true. I'm actually starting to get embarrassed to be an Apple fan. I feel like I need to wash my mouth out with soap sometimes, it just feels so icky.
You mean Apple? Talk about money grabbers. Why is it ok for Apple to have the highest margins in the industry and make piles of cash each quarter, but publishers asking for fair treatment are greedy?
The greedy pig in the room is the new “services” obsessed Apple who thinks they’re somehow entitled to a huge chunk of everyone else’s hard work.
Do you have any clue how ridiculous that sounds? Virtually no developer stands a chance of negotiating better terms with Apple. Only a massive corporation with leverage could make that happen. Suggesting that some mom and pop developer can negotiate with Apple is absurd.
That’s exactly the subject of the thread
if others are denied the same deal, that is preferential treatment. By definition
getting all semantical won’t refute the basic facts and observations
nice try
That’s kind of my point. It’s technically not a lie that Apple treats every developer equally (as long as you have enough market clout) in that they aren’t going to deny a developer outright. Not trying to defend Apple, just explaining what Tim Cook probably meant in the testimony.
No, the conditions required to obtain such a deal are not known: that's what the publisher want Apple to clarify actually.
The request is reasonable: it basically boils down to "we see it's possible to have such a deal: what do we need to offer to obtain it?".
I know of enough people personally that will buy it anyway they don’t even download 3rd party apps just imagine worldwide is it enough to make a business? Maybe not...
But it is definitely public pressure “ballpark” and would call many devs that are either greedy and forget without Apple they no business to begin with or devs that are silent seeing what opportunities arises to senses...
15% 10% why not 5% hey card companies take less how about 2% and while you are at it how about lowering the Apple developer program we can’t be paying money to make money, it’s not reasonable... (it will never end and with it the quality of apps are going to decline when Apple offers less)
Two questions
why publicly? why not do it like amazon did cleverly and silently I guess they might have not wanted it to be publicized but I somehow find it odd...
are they fine with/prepared to get no? Apple was mentioning that this was for streaming services like amazon prime video...
P.s. I mentioned before that if I ran Apple I would consider to shut down the App Store
many people forget that marketplace is maintained and developed by Apple it was created by Apple and they also forget that if they are driven to the point it could really be degrading in quality and or cut off especially with Apple renowned for cutting things “too early”
but hey this mostly an opinion my opinion
Except the questions those are questions
Last edited:
You know that’s what negotiating a deal is all about: leverage. If you don’t have anything extra to offer, why should you get different terms. That’s the point.
It’s like if you’re making a movie, and one of the name actor is asking for more money than some others. Their fame is their leverage, as it would potentially bring more people to the movie. The filmmakers decide if the expense is worth it or not. As an unknown actor you can’t expect to have the same paycheck as Jennifer Lawrence; she has leverage, you don’t.
That’s exactly the subject of the thread
if others are denied the same deal, that is preferential treatment. By definition
getting all semantical won’t refute the basic facts and observations
nice try
A deal goes both ways. Amazon got something out of it (the 15%) and Apple got something out of it (Amazon Prime Video on Apple TV, it seems). If any other company could offer Apple the same thing (and let’s be clear, that would be a streaming service with the consumer base and the quantity/quality of content the APV has) and yet Apple refused to give them 15%, then THAT would be preferential treatment. To claim there is preferential treatment, the circumstances need to be the same. Netflix, Hulu, Disney+; those might have the leverage to get better terms for themselves, if they wanted to. Would they try? Depends if they see value in it. Seems like they value iOS consumer base more so than a potential reduction of the 30% cut (unless they have a deal we don’t know about). That could change.
Last edited:
First it is going to be the percentage. (and I agree with them, Apple could simply drop it to 15% for subscription starting year 1, without any issues, it's not like their "cost" is bigger on year 1 than it is in the following years). But then it is going to be customer information and data. And THAT will be the main issue. THAT is where stuff will be interesting. If, in an alternative universe, Apple is forced to allow third party App stores, the main difference will be "prices" but in reality how much customer data the "other" App stores harvest in order to keep prices down and revenues up.
There is zero problem legally asking Apple to reconsider. And if the companies do not like the deal they can all cancel the contract and see who benefits or who doesn't. I think this is completely normal.
What isn't normal is government intervention in a dispute between companies where there is no monopoly, no bullying, no collusion etc... And also where it cannot be proven that customers are getting a raw deal from this contract. It is not as if these developers and media outlets are in the business of giving discounts to customers where they dont need to. Every firm seeks to extract maximum revenue from each transaction, balancing that up with demand.
Can all these companies stop trying to pretend that this is David and Goliath and using the public as leverage. A public that doesnt really understand how business really works.
What isn't normal is government intervention in a dispute between companies where there is no monopoly, no bullying, no collusion etc... And also where it cannot be proven that customers are getting a raw deal from this contract. It is not as if these developers and media outlets are in the business of giving discounts to customers where they dont need to. Every firm seeks to extract maximum revenue from each transaction, balancing that up with demand.
Can all these companies stop trying to pretend that this is David and Goliath and using the public as leverage. A public that doesnt really understand how business really works.
The idea is that the deal should follow fair, transparent requirements which apply to all developers. Of course Apple can do ad-hoc deals with this or that developer, but doing that would go against their own narrative that they reserve equal treatment to all developers.
You’re correct, that was in the beginning. Now, it’s quite different and goes the other way round. If you want your app to have good reach, you need to publish for iOS as well.