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.
Spotify CEO Daniel Ek Speaks Out on Dispute With Apple Over App Store Policies
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I figured it would be pretty easy for you, an expert in anti-trust laws, to explain considering Apple is in blatant violation of those laws. I have done some research on it and I am not seeing any clear laws being violated. Oh well.
Wrong. Spotify already operates outside the store to an extent. I pay Spotify directly. Spotify is whining is it’s much easier to sign up for Apple Music using your iTunes account, than it is to create a separate account on Spotify’s website. The 30% cut only comes into play when using the iTunes subscription infrastructure.
This is the best analogy I've seen. Honestly, thank you.
But as we can see with this there are people who are just completely blinded by fanboyism or just still can't see it.
Again wrong. Spotify does not need iTunes accounts. They could have created new Spotify accounts and arrange payments from within their app but Apple does not allow that. It is a racket any way you look at it.
Exactly. Spotify stopped IAP and pointed customers to sign up for premium via their web site. Apple still provides the platform (App Store) for customers to download the Spotify app. Would I prefer to have iTunes bill me for Spotify each month like it does for Netflix and HBO Now? Absolutely. But it's obviously wasn't a deal breaker for me since I generally feel that Spotify is leaps and bounds better than Apple Music. Thus, I don't mind at all paying for Spotify each month outside of the App Store.
I get what Ek is saying and I originally agreed with him. But this is getting a bit ridiculous. Although I'm curious to see where this goes.
If they are selling them out of a Ford dealership, yea probably.
Nothing of the sort, poor comparison.
Apple is the only method to native iOS apps.
Add: Spotify pay a fee to have their app on the AppStore - they aren’t complaining about that.
Apple is the only method to native iOS apps.
Add: Spotify pay a fee to have their app on the AppStore - they aren’t complaining about that.
This "proper" analogy is terrible. An optometrist clinic in Walmart uses Walmart's hvac, it's water, electricity, it's space. In other words, it costs Walmart something to have it there. Spotify costs Apple nothing except for transaction fees (just like Apps like Uber, but they don't have to pay them...just because). And Spotify doesn't even want Apple to handle it's transactions but it won't even let Spotify tell its customers about alternatives.
But isn’t that exactly what Lyft and Uber are doing as outline in the story? I think Spotify just wants some rules fairly and equally applied to developers. That’s not too much to ask for.
But that is not the situation outlined in the story that you are commentiong on. Instead, Apple is making some pay the cut, and others not.
Last edited:
No. But when Apple finally releases Apple car they will do it.
Why isn't Apple entitled to compensation for developing a trusted, easy-to-use app marketplace? The App Store isn't free for Apple, it's a cost.
When qualcomm does this it's baaad in so many ways. But when apple does the same it's exercising its rights.
There is no monopoly. Amazon doesn't have a monopoly either.
So, what do you propose? Apple leave the digital streaming space? Not charge the 30% subscription fee (essentially giving Spotify different terms than other competitors)? How does Apple equalize terms, in your mind?
Apple forces all iOS devs to use Apple's iOS app store. That is like Ford forcing all car parts manufacturers to sell in only Ford stores. Oh yeah, Ford wants a 30% cut for using the credit card processing, and shelf space.
Oh, absolutely they are! We agree on that much. If apple wants to take a cut of the cost of selling an app, I think it should absolutely be able to do that, just like retailers throughout history have taken a cut from the products they sell. They should not however be able to take a cut of of the services those products provide, as Apple has nothing to do with the creation or delivery of those services.
Last edited:
Give all developers the same options to provide account signup to the developer's system through the app, just like they do with Uber now. Any developer that actually wants Apple to handle the revenue collections and remittances would be free to do so through in-app purchases and pay Apple whatever the agreed fee is for doing so. Others, like Spotify, Netflix, Amazon, etc. would be free to code in access to their own account systems to handle subscriptions, payments, and all other aspects of content delivery and completely bypass in-app purchases if they want to.
That way all developers are treated the same. Uber would continue to initiate ride scheduling, payment, and tips through the app, but handled by their own processing network and not pay Apple the 30% transaction fee (it's not a subscription fee because it applies to all digital content including one-time purchases). Amazon, Netflix, Spotify could do exactly the same thing.
Spotify CEO Daniel Ek elaborated on his company's complaint against Apple with the European Commission in a speech today at the International Conference on Competition in Berlin, according to Variety and The Hollywood Reporter.
Spotify has accused Apple of unfairly applying its 30 percent App Store commission. While a 70-30 revenue split applies to most apps, including Spotify, others like Uber and Deliveroo are exempt since Apple's commission does not apply to "goods or services that will be consumed outside of the app."
Ek doubled down on this issue, referring to Apple's commission as a "competitor tax":Spotify Premium normally costs $9.99 per month, the same price as Apple Music, but if Spotify were to offer that price on the App Store, it would only receive $6.99 of that amount after Apple's cut.
Spotify did experiment with offering Premium for $12.99 per month through its iOS app starting in 2014, netting it $9.09 per subscriber after Apple's cut, but this put it at a competitive disadvantage since Apple Music is $9.99 per month. Spotify has since stopped allowing upgrading to Premium through its iOS app.The issue doesn't end there, as Apple's App Store review guidelines preve
Spotify CEO Daniel Ek elaborated on his company's complaint against Apple with the European Commission in a speech today at the International Conference on Competition in Berlin, according to Variety and The Hollywood Reporter.
Spotify has accused Apple of unfairly applying its 30 percent App Store commission. While a 70-30 revenue split applies to most apps, including Spotify, others like Uber and Deliveroo are exempt since Apple's commission does not apply to "goods or services that will be consumed outside of the app."
Ek doubled down on this issue, referring to Apple's commission as a "competitor tax":Spotify Premium normally costs $9.99 per month, the same price as Apple Music, but if Spotify were to offer that price on the App Store, it would only receive $6.99 of that amount after Apple's cut.
Spotify did experiment with offering Premium for $12.99 per month through its iOS app starting in 2014, netting it $9.09 per subscriber after Apple's cut, but this put it at a competitive disadvantage since Apple Music is $9.99 per month. Spotify has since stopped allowing upgrading to Premium through its iOS app.The issue doesn't end there, as Apple's App Store review guidelines prevent Spotify from letting users know that they can subscribe to Premium for $9.99 per month on the web or other platforms. The guidelines also prevent Spotify from advertising discounts and other promotions in its iOS app.Ek concluded with a ping-pong metaphor:On a new website titled Time to Play Fair, Spotify also says it is not allowed to be on the HomePod or Siri, along with other accusations.
Spotify is aiming for all apps to be subject to the same fair set of rules, including Apple Music. Spotify also believes consumers should not be "forced to use systems with discriminatory tariffs such as Apple's" and that Apple should not be able to place "unfair restrictions" on marketing and promotions.
Article Link: Spotify CEO Daniel Ek Speaks Out on Dispute With Apple Over App Store Policies
Apples pays almost 70% more to labels per stream.
Owning a product does not mean Apple can do whatever it wants. These platforms have a big impact on nearly all industries. Therefore, there are competition rules applied.
You are just advocating Apple by saying Apple can do whatever it wants because Apple owns the platform and the App Store. If putting SALE, DEAL signs on the door of the store whose owner is mall developer but prohibiting putting signs on competitor stores is a fair act because owner can do whatever he/she wants in the mall, I don't know what is the definition of an unfair act.
I am sure we will see Apple will be in trouble on this one. In the end, customers will benefit from it, not Apple. In this situation, only side who gets profit from it is Apple, not customers or Spotify. If fair competition rules are applied, everybody will win in the long run. Only thing I see here is Apple acting unfairly to gain market share until it passes Spotify.
If there is European government intervention, they aren't going to make apple lower their compensation. No one says apple is not allowed to make money. The gov will make apple allow alternative app stores, then the marketplace will decide. Right now, apple is forcing all iOS devs to use Apple's iOS app store.
Apple has no involvement in making 3rd party iOS apps. Apple forces iOS devs to use apples store and now apple is involved and wants a 30% cut.
An app IS a service, you can't separate the app from the service it provides. Uber can't operate without an app, otherwise it would be called a Taxi.
[doublepost=1552594127][/doublepost]
Web apps have always been allowed, in fact many apps on the App Store are simply a front-end for a website. Apple's App Store is unique, which I think many people aren't understanding. The curation, the integration, the safety, the trust that users of the App Store have can't be found in competing app marketplaces.
I do not know any retail stores that actually sell subscriptions. They only sell individual issues.
Not quite the same thing.
The magazine analogy is kind of interesting because retail stores don’t prevent magazines from putting subscription cards in them, which Apple is doing basically to Spotify.