Patreon Planning iOS App Update to Skirt In-App Purchases

[MacRumors]

Patreon plans to update its iOS app with new functionality that will allow creators to accept payments from followers without having to pay Apple's in-app purchase fees, a Patreon spokesperson told The Verge.

This is a huge moment for creators and their businesses. The iOS app is the number one platform for fan engagement on Patreon, and we believe this ruling allows creators to get paid without giving Apple 30 percent. As a first step, we will submit an app update for review by Apple to enable payments outside of IAP so creators keep more from iOS based fan payments.

In 2024, Apple forced Patreon to adopt support for the in-app purchase system, which meant that Apple started taking a 30 percent cut of all payments made to creators. Patreon gave creators the option of increasing their prices in just the iOS app, or absorbing the fee to keep prices the same across all platforms. Creators had to raise prices in the iOS app, lose money to pay Apple's cut, or encourage customers to subscribe on the web.

As of right now, Apple is still collecting a 30 percent App Store fee for all memberships purchased via Patreon for iOS, and for other digital goods purchased from Patreon shops.

Patreon does not have a timeline for when it plans to submit its app update with out-of-app payment options, and Apple also hasn't outlined exactly when it will change its App Store rules.

Apple has been ordered to stop restricting developers from informing customers about purchase options outside of an app in the U.S., and from collecting fees for out-of-app purchases.

The court said that it "will not tolerate further delays" and that the ruling, which was issued yesterday, was effective immediately.

Article Link: Patreon Planning iOS App Update to Skirt In-App Purchases

 

[Capeto]

That was fast! Good for them

 

[Aeronauts]

Good for them. Most independent app developers don’t make much money from their apps so I like to see them keep more of that money rather than giving to Apple.

 

[WilliApple]

Apple is giving me a hard time with their subscription system right now (I am trying to add a subscription to my app, and they keep rejecting it for "same subscription icon as the app" for example), so as soon as I bring my account system to my most popular app, I am converting to my own subscription system.

 

[jole]

Require them to comply with 1.1.4 to stay on store?

 

[cocky jeremy]

The CEO must live in section 8 housing, wanting everything for free.

 

[Living the Dream]

All Apple had to do was NOT be greedy; now they may lose all access to app money.

 

[turbineseaplane]

This is one I absolutely approve of.

What Patreon is charging of creators, and for what, and that entire relationship, has nothing to do with Apple and they should get no cut of it at all.

 

[cocky jeremy]

All Apple had to do was NOT be greedy; now they may lose all access to app money.

30% is hardly greedy considering none of these developers would make a penny without Apple.

 

[Devyn89]

All Apple had to do was NOT be greedy; now they may lose all access to app money.

Apple don’t be greedy challenge: impossible.

 

[klasma]

The CEO must live in section 8 housing, wanting everything for free.

Maybe you are missing that they’re passing on the savings to the creators — who are the sole reason anyone uses or pays for Patreon in the first place.

 

[mattopotamus]

So if everyone goes outside of the app store, what incentive does apple have to keep an "app store" outside of their own apps? I imagine exposure would go way down for a lot of these 3rd party apps.

 

[klasma]

30% is hardly greedy considering none of these developers would make a penny without Apple.

Without Apple, these developers would be making apps for other platforms. And in that situation, not many people would prefer to buy Apple devices. Apple would only make a fraction of their revenue without the app developers. It’s a mutual relationship, but Apple isn’t treating developers as equals.

 

[TechWhisperer]

Greedy Apple gets rightfully sucker punched!

 

[DocMultimedia]

Oh good, go have your credit card info stolen from a low quality payment system. 😂

 

[klasma]

So if everyone goes outside of the app store, what incentive does apple have to keep an "app store" outside of their own apps?

The incentive would be for people to still buy Apple devices.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Oh good, go have your credit card info stolen from a low quality payment system. 😂

Total nonsense.

Patreon are just going to bring the pricing in line with what they charge on their website directly.

That's where I ended up going to do my various Patreon subs.

(had to go out of my way just to avoid Apple trying to steal a cut they don't deserve in any way at all)

 

[I7guy]

Stay tuned for the ctf fee coming soon to the US.

 

[spazzcat]

All Apple had to do was NOT be greedy; now they may lose all access to app money.

You are assuming this is going to work for them. I will not be looking for my wallet to get my credit card out to buy an app for my phone. If I can't buy from the app store, you lost that sale.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

30% is hardly greedy considering none of these developers would make a penny without Apple.

You've got it wrong. The developers wouldn't make a penny without iPhone users. Apple made their money when they sold the phone to the user. Any transaction between the user and the developer should not involve Apple. Not to mention, developers pay a fee to Apple to be a developer.

 

[xmarcuswildx]

Apple bout to get dried up on services.

 

[smulji]

30% is hardly greedy considering none of these developers would make a penny without Apple.

Forcing developers to pay 30% for apps purchased and paid for outside of the App Store is greedy and good on the judge for hammering Apple over this issue.

 

[iOS Geek]

You are assuming this is going to work for them. I will not be looking for my wallet to get my credit card out to buy an app for my phone. If I can't buy from the app store, you lost that sale.

Bingo. Greedy developers don’t seem to understand that a 70/30 split with Apple on any given purchase from any given customer is still more profitable to them than no sale at all to said customer.

EDIT: Those of you who “disagreed” with this, I would love to see your explanation for why you disagreed with what I said. It’s simple math. If I make a purchase and the developer has a 70/30 split with Apple for that purchase…the developer STILL ends up getting more money than they would have if I didn’t make the purchase at all. There’s really nothing to “disagree” with here. 🤷‍♂️

 

[Capeto]

You are assuming this is going to work for them. I will not be looking for my wallet to get my credit card out to buy an app for my phone. If I can't buy from the app store, you lost that sale.

That is not what this is at all.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

You are assuming this is going to work for them. I will not be looking for my wallet to get my credit card out to buy an app for my phone. If I can't buy from the app store, you lost that sale.

You will be able to buy it still - it will either stay the same price as it is now in the App Store (but discounted directly through developer w/CC payment) or it will go up in price (in which case the developer decided to be greedy and raise their App Store price to make more money). I doubt many software's will leave the App Store.