curious, why do you think 30% is greedy? Are you basing this on a belief that the entire 30% is profit for Apple? Apple does not operate the app store without costs. I don't know if they detail their expenses in a way that would make them attributable to the store itself. But regardless, they have infrastructure, overhead, etc. that is paid for out of this 30% cut. At the end of the day, Apple's net on this fee is probably closer to the 15-20% range, maybe even lower. Server farms and huge solar fields to keep the power hungry server farms running is not cheap.
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.
Ridley Scott Comments on Epic Games' Parody of His '1984' Ad
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
He didn’t give a take on the fundamental debate on App Store policies.
He basically told Epic they were selfish and petty to waste the remake on a crass business reason, when it could have been used for something with some real meaning... put to better use, that is.
Basically he is saying the video is technically well made, but the message is bull****.
I’m reminded of Will Strafich’s Guardian app and their recent success in changing App Store rules to allow a single day pass for VPN apps. I think there was another VPN app that benefited from that, too? Seems like Epic could have just resubmitted their app with the proper fixes in place and THEN challenged Apple’s 30% cut, maybe even bringing in a few other larger-stake companies to argue on their behalf. Maybe bringing the situation to the media’s light so much so that Apple is then in a position to look bad (or worse than they do already, depending on perspective). The App Store and Apple’s processes got some flack right before WWDC2020 and could have gotten even more flack just before their Fall iPhone event. Maybe Epic could have gotten somewhere, and then so many more could have benefited. Apple could also have been seen as being generous or whatever you’d want to call it. Win for Epic, win for Apple, win for everyone making more off the App Store, and a win for everyone that still wants to play a game.
Exactly. I’m sure the money spent on making that video could have been better spent on lawyers to fight for them. Instead of just having a parody video at the ready.
Not that everything hasn't already been said on this topic, but while you can certainly argue that 30% is a too big cut, it is what everyone else seems to have agreed upon. Steam, GOG, Apple, Sony, Microsoft (who themselves hilariously have publicly complained about the cut being too big), Google and so on, all use 30%.
And it's not like Epic is doing this for the customers, they are doing to improve their own margins.
And it's not like Epic is doing this for the customers, they are doing to improve their own margins.
I am not saying that people on the forums do not have the right to comment. Of course they do. I am saying it is just a bit silly to elevate people (make a headlining article) who really have nothing to do with this debate one way or another.
This makes no sense at all. Following that logic, Apple could have used the original commercial to bring awareness to issues that were affecting the country/world in the early 80's. Instead they chose to use the opportunity to advertise their computers. That's not a knock against Apple. That's just an acknowledgement that the commercials, both Apple's and Epic's, were there to serve a different purpose.
I mean, nothing stopping Scott from creating something with gravitas.
That’s one of their positions.
Another position they took a few weeks ago is that even though they’d like to take advantage of Apple’s hardware and ecosystem you mention, they think Apple deserves exactly 0% for that.
0% for access to 1.2 billion devices and their owners who spend lots of money, 0% for developer tools like Xcode, and 0% to license access to Apple's API’s.
0% for customer service for those having problems installing Fortnite or trouble with using an IAP, 0% for hosting and bandwidth for downloading and updating the game, and 0% for everything else bundled into apples 30% fee.
Seems fair to Epic.
Epic wants to run their game store on iOS so developers can pay Epic instead of Apple. That is the crux of their argument.
I personally think they should be allowed to do that - but it’s not about ”punishing” costs - Epic has earned billions while paying those fees. They want to add an extra zero to their already insane profits.
Epic have violated the App Store rules and face consequences. I'm not sure why you feel the need to repeat this.
You've hit the nail on the head with Epic's own store, where they take a humungous 12% commission on third party games sales. That is a far more reasonable take than Apple's 30%. You have to ask yourself the question: If Epic can sell apps on their store for 12%, and make a handsome profit, why does Apple's store have to be so much more expensive? The answer is that it's an easy cash cow for Apple and there's no competition for iOS app sales.
It's a bit disingenuous though since he did the exact same thing you're describing. The original was made for business reasons. Selling computers. Scott put the topic to no better use than Epic.
Well Steve Jobs had a way of convincing people the Mac would change the world.
I think it did, others would disagree I’m sure.
I think digital prices on games are a big rip off. If you look at games on the PS or Xbox digital stores it is actually cheaper to buy a physical copy of new games, which makes no sense.
Digital prices should be drastically lower because there is no need for packaging, manufacturing, delivery etc.
In reality Apple receives the game from Epic and they upload it onto a server for customers to buy. I don't think that's worth 30%. But then developers can choose whether to not to sell on iOS.
Digital prices should be drastically lower because there is no need for packaging, manufacturing, delivery etc.
In reality Apple receives the game from Epic and they upload it onto a server for customers to buy. I don't think that's worth 30%. But then developers can choose whether to not to sell on iOS.
Why do you think Apple has to match Epic? This isn’t a race to the bottom.
If Epic had a platform that was as valuable to developers as Apple’s, I’m sure they could get at least 30%, if not 40 or 50%. Maybe even 70% like Amazon takes for their Kindle 🤷♂️
Nobody is forcing Epic to sell to iOS users. Android actually has the larger market share to sell to.
Last edited:
Is the epic store making profits? Because their CEO said it might make a loss the last time they talked about it. PC game developers prefer Steam - where the fees are 30% - and mostly avoid Epic.
And the App Store is not a “cash cow” for Apple. It’s more like deciding to pickup every quarter they happen to spot on the pavement. $120b paid to App developers over a decade, which means less than half that much for Apple - that’s a few weeks of revenue on a good quarter for Apple, and it was spread out over a decade.
Imagine if Microsoft used that argument during their antitrust trial...
"But Your Honor, if computer users don't like us bundling Internet Explorer with Windows OS, then they can build their own computers and create their own OS and browser."
Some people still don't get it.
Microsoft tried—REALLY HARD—and failed. If Microsoft cannot create a profitable new phone, phone OS or a phone App Store, then this proves Apple and Android have an impenetrable monopoly over phone consumer devices.
So your argument falls flat in the face of evidence.
If you can’t beat ‘em, join them, is really the only choice everybody—EVERYBODY—has.
30% does seem like a lot, but it's the same percentage that everyone else charges. If Apple were some sort of outlier, it seems like they'd have a stronger argument. The worst they can really accuse Apple of here is not leading on this issue.
TBH, as a non-app software developer, the crazy thing about the app store isn't the percentage on zero margin goods, it's the idea of having a third party gate keeper over whether I can sell my product at all. I recognize that there's value in the revue process, but it's just hard to wrap my head around.
Apple are known to have large profit margins. Some companies absorb a little bit of costs to keep prices stable and reasonable. Apple always pass costs onto the consumer.
I believe iPhones have a profit margin of like 40% this could easily drop to 30% in order to lower iPhone prices, which are currently on the ridiculous scale.
I'm sure the 30% App Store fee is way above what they actually need to make a healthy profit and cover overheads.
Apple didn't seem to have any problem breaking a contract with Qualcomm when Apple decided the royalties were too much.
If Apple didn't like the contract terms for royalty payments, then Apple should have stopped selling iPhones with Qualcomm's IP.
Last edited:
I personally don't mind Apple reviewing apps that come into the store, I like that its a secure platform and I can download apps with peace of mind.
One thing I don't like is when they block certain apps for various other reasons. If the app is safe and from a trusted developer they should just put the app in the store behind a big warning of the content it contains.
Also I don't agree with them refusing Microsofts Project XCloud. That was clearly Apple being anti competitive. Its essentially a Netflix for games and they had no issue putting Netflix in the store.
Last edited:
People keep using this argument, yet there are thousands and thousands of free apps on the Apple app store.
How is Apple recovering their app store operating costs from them when the apps are free or when Apple doesn't get a cut of the subscription service fee like with the Netflix app?
38% gross profit margins are not large margins at gross, when talking margin rate. One of the reasons why people think its huge is due to Apple's scale. 38% gross on a $1000 device is $380. But when you sell 50M devices, the dollar amounts are large. Not to mention that Apple only lives on gross margins in the public's eye. The more important numbers are the net margins, the true profit. Those are closer to 23%. So in theory, reducing your margins on phone by 10% without taking any other costs out and operating normally would mean Apple's net margin drops to 13%. There is no reason to even consider doing this while the demand for your product is still high. Apple's phone prices are in line with Samsung and others. But that's not the point.
The point being is the notion that the 30% fee for the app store is "greedy".