South Korean Bill That Could Allow Third-Party Payment Methods on the App Store Gains Support Ahead of Vote

[Krizoitz]

I said governments could go after Apple using antitrust laws if Apple were to suddenly start charging app developers a per app download fee, something which Apple is currently NOT doing, if governments ordered Apple to open up their app store to 3rd party payments as a way to recover lost revenue.

Under what grounds would that be an anti-trust violation? Charging someone based on their usage of a resource is utterly standard and normal. It’s how electricity bills work. It’s how water bills work. It’s how rent works. It’s how restaurants work. It’s how gas stations work. It’s how mobile phones companies work. There is nothing remotely anti-trust about charging someone more for using more resources.

 

[Krizoitz]

You seem to be unaware of the existence of anti-trust laws. And nobody said they have to offer their development resources for free either. However, their current business models are under a high level of scrutiny. What you're advocating for is that large, popular, and successful developers subsidize the small or unsuccessful ones. You think that is somehow fair? Why should other developers subsidize the small developers rather than Apple themselves? Apple actually benefits from having as many apps on the app store as possible. On the other hand, how does Epic benefit from a small-time developer coming out with their own app, which Epic themselves helped subsidize? They don't.

I am fully aware of anti-trust laws, and that Apple isn’t doing anything that approaches them.

Apple has created a device and brought an audience, and they are allowing other companies the opportunity to take part in that. They don’t have to. There is ZERO laws that require Apple to allow ANY 3rd party apps. Apple could have locked the iPhone down completely. Apple could have done what game console companies and previous mobile phones did for years and allow only a select few developers to provide apps, or they could have done what Android did and allow a free for all. Instead they chose a middle ground that they believe was the most advantageous. They set out the terms, the fees, the policies, and developers were and still are free to decide whether that is worth it to them. No one is forced to subsidize anyone else. Everyone from Epic on down to a kid named Erik is free to choose whether to make and sell iPhone apps or not. No one is compelled. No one is forced. If you want to develop for the iPhone you have to pay certain fees, which are disclosed up front. There are zero surprises. Epic et. al. knew from day one what it meant to develop on the iPhone. They knew what the fees would be. Apple didn’t raise those fees after the fact, in fact they have been lowered in multiple ways. And Epic is even free to sell VBucks online where Apple gets zero cut but they can still be used in games ON the iPhone.
No coercion. No lies. No tricks. No forced subsidizing. Epic knew what it was getting in to. If it didn’t like those terms it should not have developed for the iPhone. If it doesn’t like the terms anymore it should stop developing for the iPhone. But forcing Apple to change its rules? Nope, sorry. That makes no sense.

 

[krewger]

So amazon is next right? You don’t have the right to mark up product or take a percentage of the sale as profit for yourself because it’s not a brick and mortar store?

 

[FrozenDarkness]

Umm @ checkout, you are allowed to use cash, debit, credit cards.

Ummm @ Apple checkout, You can also use debit / credit cards.

 

[freedomlinux]

If your app file is so huge and it gets 10 million downloads every week... or you bang on Apple's servers every minute with constant IAP payments... then you should pay more than a hobbyist developer in their bedroom who barely gets any downloads.

And that's exactly how it works now.

Kinda? A free app that has 10 million downloads *but no IAP* only pays $99/yr. I hardly think that is fair.

Or there could be, like you say, some dividing line between small/medium/large developers. But that will certainly generate controversy, too. It's a mess.

I agree. Just like the "15% of IAP for small developers" the decision on where to put that threshold or to have some kind of sliding scale is a problem.

Another option... Apple could charge a flat monthly rental fee like a store in the mall... does $10,000,000 a month sound good? And you get to keep all the money you make after that? [...]

But you just eliminated every small developer. There's no way some guy will create the next great calculator app if there is a $10 million buy-in. Per month.

Literally no one is saying that or suggesting that. A $10m entry-level fee is obviously ridiculous. You are putting words in my mouth.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Literally no one is saying that or suggesting that. A $10m entry-level fee is obviously ridiculous. You are putting words in my mouth.

I wasn't quoting you about the rent part. I know you didn't say that.

I was just exploring other potential (and absurd) solutions. I was riffing, basically.

Sorry for the confusion. You may now spit out those words...

 

[freedomlinux]

I wasn't quoting you about the rent part. I know you didn't say that.

I was just exploring other potential (and absurd) solutions. I was riffing, basically.

Sorry for the confusion. You may now spit out those words...

Alright, all good.

I agree that the current setup, in the average case, seems to work OK. But there are a few high-profile cases *cough*Amazon Epic Netflix*cough* that make me think about subsidies and paying for actual costs.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Alright, all good.

I agree that the current setup, in the average case, seems to work OK. But there are a few high-profile cases *cough*Amazon Epic Netflix*cough* that make me think about subsidies and paying for actual costs.

Yeah it's definitely a tricky situation for some of those companies.

Epic had Fortnite on the App Store. It was a big game that was downloaded millions of times. And it had regular updates that all had to go through App Review.

But the app was free. The app itself didn't make Epic (or Apple) any money.

Where Epic made their money was from selling digital virtual currency. And because of Apple's rules (which Epic agreed to!) Apple got $3 every time someone bought $10 worth of VBucks.

But it's simply a currency conversion. It's literally taking real dollars from your digital bank account and turning them into fake dollars in Epic World. It happens in the blink of an eye in a datacenter somewhere. It requires almost no work at all.

And if you buy $100 worth of VBucks... Apple gets $30. But it's the same amount of work as the $10 purchase.

It's those kinds of purchases that are making people question the flat-fee IAP approach.

Same for Amazon Kindle. The app is on the App Store and is downloaded millions of times. But the app is free. And the books are coming from Amazon's servers... not Apple's.

Amazon didn't want to pay the 30% fee on every digital book... so they went a different route.

Same for Netflix. The primary product (streaming video) comes from Netflix's servers... not Apple's. So Apple was basically just handling the payment yet they wanted their full cut. And of course Netflix said "no way" and people now must find their way to the Netflix website to sign up.

Same for Spotify for the reasons above.

So yeah... maybe Apple needs to make a different set of rules and fees for digital items and/or monthly payments. Something has to change.

I know that subscriptions purchased through the App Store drop to a 15% cut after the first year. But even that sounds a little high. Many of the huge developers still have a problem with that.

It'll be interesting to see how it all shakes out!

 

[MrDerby01]

Apple should pull the app store from South Korea then. People are happy that Apple is forced to give away services? Maybe those same people should work for $1/year.

Umm? Yea.. So Apple does have a factory that people are forced to work for low wages and are forced to work and live.. Would you be willing to put your family in that forced situation? Apple is making money hand over fist not only due to manopolistic practices but also through "work programs" such as the one stated above..

 

[I7guy]

You responded to an old thread.