Correct. Spotify isn't a competitor, they're a customer. If your whole business model is contingent upon another company's model changing to suit you... then you don't have a sustainable product.
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 wonder... does Spotify let music studios and artist stream to customers on their platform without Spotify getting a cut? Do they allow advertisers access to Spotify’s users without taking a cut?
The problem is there is a huge base of installed Apple devices, and the companies can't offer their apps in another way.
If you have most of the market and start acting like a monopoly, you're probably a monopoly. Apple either needs to reduce their take or open iOS to alternative app stores.
That's not accurate. The only limitation is not using the iOS app to advertise and push people off the platform. Apple doesn't allow any developer to do so, and only an idiot company would allow that. Just like Amazon doesn't allow me to use my Amazon listing to advertise how to buy the product outside of Amazon's system. Spotify can, and does, advertise heavily that you can sign up elsewhere.
Spotify has no unfair disadvantage over Apple Music unless Apple decides to lower their price to lower than $9.99. It's up to the customers to choose if they like Spotify or Apple Music or Tidal or Amazon Music and etc. there are so many choices. If Apple decides to stop offering Apple Music that doesn't change the fact that Spotify still have to pay 30% for using their platform. But I do agree that a service requires monthly subscription Apple with millions of users should have a discount like 20-25% but still that's Apple's decision.
I feel like Apple's hold is about to come crashing down. What worries me is the drop in services revenue this will produce. Why do I care about that? Because Apple will end up shifting more focus towards other services to make up for the shortfall, instead of building quality hardware and software like they used to.
This is what happens when you focus more on what Wall Street wants and not enough on what consumers want. This is why Steve Jobs didn't care as much about the Wall Street game. He knew profits would come if they were a good company that made good products that people wanted to buy. Steve's angle was "How can I change the world?" Tim's angle is "How can I keep my job?" It's the difference between a fearless man and a fearful man. Fear is what holds us back and stifles innovation and progress.
This is what happens when you focus more on what Wall Street wants and not enough on what consumers want. This is why Steve Jobs didn't care as much about the Wall Street game. He knew profits would come if they were a good company that made good products that people wanted to buy. Steve's angle was "How can I change the world?" Tim's angle is "How can I keep my job?" It's the difference between a fearless man and a fearful man. Fear is what holds us back and stifles innovation and progress.
Ah yes, thank you, that’s right! Can’t believe I forgot about that app, I think I even used it for a brief time lol.
We should always look at the "Magazine bought at a Walmart" analogue. If you buy a magazine for $5.00 at Walmart then Walmart takes a sizable cut. The magazines all have an adverts for subscriptions which you can buy through the web or via US mail. Walmart does not get a cut of that subscriptions which are paid through other means. However, if every month you buy a magazine from Walmart then they get a cut every month. Apps like Spotify, Netflix, Hulu, HBO etc. should be able to advertise discounted subscription pricing in their apps and direct these customers to a web site. Apple is being a butthead and should either voluntarily alter their pricing or should be forced by anti-trust action. I subscribe to HBO via the IOS app but would have no problem cancelling and resubscribing thru my browser for a slight discount. I understand why Apple has it's pricing scheme - Apple is a for profit company and can do it so it does. It shouldn't do it and needs to be forced not to do it.
It's about time someone stood up to Apple over their rules. I get having a mark-up, but IMO 30% is too high. And not allowing to even mention the word free in their marketing materials is absolutely absurd.
I did and sadly I can not unread it. I think reading it made me dumber. Total nonsense.
Many people in here are missing the point that Spotify CEO is trying to make. If your business is a potential competitor to Apple, you get hit with the 30% commission fee, if your not then it's free, hence why the CEO refers to Uber and Deliveroo, who do not get charged any Apple commission. It should be a fee for all or no fee for all.
It maybe Apples app store but they still have to treat everyone equally, and the EU have some pretty tough anti-competitive trust laws.
It maybe Apples app store but they still have to treat everyone equally, and the EU have some pretty tough anti-competitive trust laws.
The solution is simple. Spotify should develop their own OS and ecosystem of products to support their music service.
SpotPod, iSpot, SpotPad, HomeSpot, Spiri
Then they can save on commission fees and charge competitors whatever they want! Wouldn't that be fair?
"Hey Spiri, play my faves on my SpotPod!"
SpotPod, iSpot, SpotPad, HomeSpot, Spiri
Then they can save on commission fees and charge competitors whatever they want! Wouldn't that be fair?
"Hey Spiri, play my faves on my SpotPod!"
I'm pretty appalled at how many people are blindly taking Apple's side on this issue.
I like Apple and their products overall, but feel that they've been irresponsible with the amount of control they hold over the platform. A 30% transaction fee to use what is basically a payment service is utterly insane to start with, and then on top of that placing restrictions on being able to even MENTION alternative payment methods? This is pretty scummy behavior.
Stop with the blind loyalty to Apple. They are a corporation; they can do plenty wrong. They're always skirting the line of barely acceptable behavior and don't need your cheerleading.
I like Apple and their products overall, but feel that they've been irresponsible with the amount of control they hold over the platform. A 30% transaction fee to use what is basically a payment service is utterly insane to start with, and then on top of that placing restrictions on being able to even MENTION alternative payment methods? This is pretty scummy behavior.
Stop with the blind loyalty to Apple. They are a corporation; they can do plenty wrong. They're always skirting the line of barely acceptable behavior and don't need your cheerleading.
Yeah.
You know, like literally every other operating system in the industry. Including the Mac.
No they're and always have applied it to subscription services which normally is pushed onto the user who subscribes through the app store.
#Preach
We throw the phrase monopoly around far too easily these days. Apple grew their iOS installed base organically through great products and great marketing. To now expect the courts to penalise them for ultimately being succesful could set a very dangerous precedent.
That said, I think there is some strength in the arguments that question if the flat fee of 30% is still the right model. It would perhaps make more sense for Apple to charge 30% on inital app purchase costs, but a smaller fee, more inline with credit card handling charges for in-app subscriptions/purchases. So if an app costs $10 to buy, Apple gets $3. But if an app costs nothing to buy, but requires a $10 monthly subscription, Apple gets somethling like $0.50 a month.
On the flipside. You do have to ask Spotify what access to that target audience is worth. Like they said, Apple is essentially hand delivering them 1 billion potential customers. Not wanting to pay Apple 30% is a bit like employing the services of a marketing agency to create an ad campaign which ended up being very lucrative and then refusing to pay them.
You didn't have to sell it through a retailer, and you could wholesale a product to retailers for anything you wanted to, and then retailers set the price. But Electronics Boutique, EggHead, BestBuy, etc (remember EggHead?) could all then set the price wherever they wanted. These retailers also didn't sell their own software. This is where the difference comes in.
This is actually irrelevant. In reality how about the credit card processing fees, the bandwidth and servers for the millions of app downloads every month from new installs and updates, the management infrastructure to handle all of this.
A lot of developers like the complain about the 30% cut Apple gets but forget these little details that they don't have to worry about with the App Store vs. if they had to do this all on there own with the way it was before the App Store. The Spotify app on a iPhone XS Max is 90 MB so for just a million installs thats 90 TB of bandwidth someone has to pay for and have infrastructure to deal with. With install base Spotify has they are transferring petabytes a month in bandwidth that they are not paying for.
Does Spotify not think they should have to pay Apple something for this? Because the $99 developer membership did not cover this cost for sure.
So when Apple decide to not allow porn apps in their store that is also an abuse of monopoly power that should be regulated?
Take your time with your answer....
How much you paid for ios/the platform? Can you give me a number? with evidence?