Spotify CEO on Apple and Google: 'If You Want to Be the Referee, You Can't Also Be the Player'

[webkit]

Nuanced question.

Netscape, no, I don't believe they had any ground to stand on. Microsoft may have made their product the default but what was stopping anyone from installing Netscape? Right, nothing, except maybe ignorance of how to do so. Perhaps if Netscape had a better product or better marketing they would have done better. Better product equals consumer demand. Better education of consumers on how easy it was to install would have helped too but not many will take the time to switch without some benefit. Can't blame Windows for having a well adopted product. Apple was out there, Linux is out there, etc, only few wanted them.

Today, no arguments with Apple as I feel they represent a unique ecosystem of one stop shopping that I value. I would love it if every Mac app were in the official store just like iOS. If you don't care for that level of control you can go with Android.

Google is another animal and this is not just Google vs Apple hate.

Google controls internet searches.
Google controls internet advertising. (data mining)
YouTube controls video on the internet.

Alphabet is way too large, time to break it up.

Microsoft not only included IE on Windows and discouraged computer OEMs from offering or pre-loading Navigator but also gave away IE for free at a time when Netscape had largely been charging for Navigator. Do you not think Microsoft's action here was "predatory pricing"?

If you feel you "can't blame Windows for having a well adopted product" then why can you blame Google for having well adopted products? If it was ok for Microsoft, why isn't also ok for Google in search, video sharing, etc.?

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Analogy does not work in this case. Apple is not a monopoly, nor is it a trust.

Apple is far from a monopoly, as the comments section of any Youtube video on Apple products will demonstrate as all the "gamers" leave nasty comments about how their PCs are better.

I don't normally use Apple Music. I use Youtube Music and Prime. I think I've bought maybe one or two pieces of music from Apple in the entire time since they started iTunes and its purchase function.

Spotify is just whining because it's a bad business, by which I mean it has never figured out how to make money other than promising investors that one day it will be profitable.

This completely different depending on how a market is defined. And here the AppStore is having a dominant position. And the only relevant market is the iOS.

• The Commission’s investigation into Apple’s App Store rules found that Apple has a dominant position in the market for the distribution of music streaming apps and e-books/audiobooks apps on iOS devices in the EEA, as it controls the only source of native apps for iPhone and iPad users
• The Commission also found that Apple’s App Store rules may distort competition and harm consumers by requiring app developers to use Apple’s own in-app purchase system and preventing them from informing users of alternative cheaper purchasing possibilities outside of apps

The relevant market is limited to iOS and not including Android because the EU considers that iOS and Android are not substitutable or interchangeable for consumers and developers. The EU argues that iOS users are loyal to the Apple ecosystem and are unlikely to switch to Android devices, and that app developers have to incur significant costs and efforts to adapt their apps to different operating systems. Therefore, the EU defines the market for the distribution of apps on iOS devices as a separate and distinct market from the market for the distribution of apps on Android devices

 

[icanhazmac]

If you feel you "can't blame Windows for having a well adopted product" then why can you blame Google for having well adopted products? If it was ok for Microsoft, why isn't also ok for Google in search, video sharing, etc.?

Because of the breadth of categories they control. You really can't deny that what Alphabet controls today are far different from the Microsoft/IE example.

 

[Expos of 1969]

I tried Spotify a while back and it was kludgy.
Then again about a year ago. It was maddening how I couldn’t skip to the next song and couldn’t figure out the problem.
Until I discovered it was intentional, that full functionality would require some form of subscription.
Really? Charging for the most basic functions?

Much more than you can do on Apple Music without a sub. People that expect full features or any features in fact for free really amaze me, and not in a positive way.

 

[Piggie]

Oh please. There is nothing stopping you from starting a company offering streaming services.

So you run a bus company as a white male, and run all around the city moving people around to need to get places.
As you are a white male, you decide as it's your company and you can do what you like, only white males are allowed on your transit system.
Any black people or Women you have decided are not allowed as you only want white males.

Are you really saying that, the government should not step in, and force you to also accept these people you personally don't like using your bus's and system you have created.

And if Black people and Woman don't like it, then they are free to start their own business for themselves with different rules.

Thankfully we don't live in a world where companies are totally free to do this, but are forced to comply with certain rules and regulations.

"If you don't like it, then start your own company" is such a silly thing to say if you think about it.

 

[Hails09]

Nuanced question.

Netscape, no, I don't believe they had any ground to stand on. Microsoft may have made their product the default but what was stopping anyone from installing Netscape? Right, nothing, except maybe ignorance of how to do so. Perhaps if Netscape had a better product or better marketing they would have done better. Better product equals consumer demand. Better education of consumers on how easy it was to install would have helped too but not many will take the time to switch without some benefit. Can't blame Windows for having a well adopted product. Apple was out there, Linux is out there, etc, only few wanted them.

Today, no arguments with Apple as I feel they represent a unique ecosystem of one stop shopping that I value. I would love it if every Mac app were in the official store just like iOS. If you don't care for that level of control you can go with Android.

Google is another animal and this is not just Google vs Apple hate.

Google controls internet searches.
Google controls internet advertising. (data mining)
YouTube controls video on the internet.

Alphabet is way too large, time to break it up.

You’re missing the point it’s about Apple’s use of inapp purchase & because they don’t allow companies to use a link to purchase their product that’s why it’s anti competitive.
There is a case going on right now about google & the internet with how they use some questionable practices as well.

 

[Hails09]

1. Spotify doesn't pay Apple 30%. They pay them nothing except possibly a few legacy subscriptions at 15%.
2. Store brands exist and there is nothing fundamentally anticompetitive about them.

But this is anti competitive because as Spotify say we where happy to pay the 30% & charge 12.99 but Apple has made a competing app & deliberately made it cheaper because they are not bound to the 30% charge. This is what it comes down to the in app practice there is no legitimate answer as to why Apple won’t allow a company a link to other payment methods. That’s why every case regarding this Apple is losing.

 

[mrochester]

You’re missing the point it’s about Apple’s use of inapp purchase & because they don’t allow companies to use a link to purchase their product that’s why it’s anti competitive.
There is a case going on right now about google & the internet with how they use some questionable practices as well.

Collecting a commission on sales of digital goods made through apps downloaded from the App Store is how Apple makes money from the App Store.

If you prevent Apple from being able to do that, they’ll have to switch where and how the App Store makes money (maybe something like higher up-front fees, or a per-download fee or something like that).

The question as a consumer is, which would you prefer?

 

[Hails09]

Collecting a commission on sales of digital goods made through apps downloaded from the App Store is how Apple makes money from the App Store.

If you prevent Apple from being able to do that, they’ll have to switch where and how the App Store makes money (maybe something like higher up-front fees, or a per-download fee or something like that).

The question as a consumer is, which would you prefer?

Unfortunately that’s just the way the big ball bounces.
I know it’s very difficult to stick up for the richest company in the world.
But some of their policies are anti competitive.
The difference is now these companies that make these apps are big enough to say NO your restrictions are to much.
That governments are looking into how they operate.
Why does it actually matter if Spotify has a link to another payment option?
Just don’t download the app.
This isn’t about the App Store it’s about Apple keeping the status quo.

 

[mrochester]

Unfortunately that’s just the way the big ball bounces.
I know it’s very difficult to stick up for the richest company in the world.
But some of their policies are anti competitive.
The difference is now these companies that make these apps are big enough to say NO your restrictions are to much.
That governments are looking into how they operate.
Why does it actually matter if Spotify has a link to another payment option?
Just don’t download the app.
This isn’t about the App Store it’s about Apple keeping the status quo.

You are missing my point which is that Apple will continue to monetise the App Store and as a consumer do you prefer the way Apple currently monetises or would you prefer another option?

The reason it matters if Spotify can link to an outside payment but still be present on the App Store is that it cuts Apple out of the transaction. And if Apple are forced out of that part of the transaction, they will insert themselves back in again somewhere else, and do you prefer that to what we currently have?

 

[Hails09]

You are missing my point which is that Apple will continue to monetise the App Store and as a consumer do you prefer the way Apple currently monetises or would you prefer another option?

I don’t actually care that much because I know Apple won’t put a charge customers to use the App Store anyway not good business practice.
All this comes down to is the big wealthy company wants to make even more money.

 

[mrochester]

I don’t actually care that much because I know Apple won’t put a charge customers to use the App Store anyway not good business practice.
All this comes down to is the big wealthy company wants to make even more money.

Well you should care about the potential impact it could have on your experience using the App Store. You may be happy to accept whatever the consequences are as long as Spotify can accept outside payments to bypass Apple’s commission.

 

[Hails09]

Well you should care about the potential impact it could have on your experience using the App Store. You may be happy to accept whatever the consequences are as long as Spotify can accept outside payments to bypass Apple’s commission.

Well I don’t actually see anything changing in regards to the App Store format.
As Apple aren’t going to charge the customer a fee to use it as that makes no business sense.
As I said just don’t download the app
If you have a problem

 

[mrochester]

Well I don’t actually see anything changing in regards to the App Store format.
As Apple aren’t going to charge the customer a fee to use it as that makes no business sense.
As I said just don’t download the app
If you have a problem

Well if Apple switches to a per-download charging model we are potentially talking about free apps going away. Or existing apps getting more expensive As the charging model becomes more admin intensive. These are all consequences you the consumer might have to contend with.

But like you said, you are perfectly happy with whatever happens.

 

[Hails09]

Well if Apple switches to a per-download charging model we are potentially talking about free apps going away. Or existing apps getting more expensive As the charging model becomes more admin intensive. These are all consequences you the consumer might have to contend with.

But like you said, you are perfectly happy with whatever happens.

Your free apps won’t go away as that is not a good business model and they won’t switch to a per download model either.
Your just pushing project fear that’s something Apple wants to push because they want to keep their bottom line.
As I said before nothing will change in the App Store regarding how it’s structured.

 

[mrochester]

Your free apps won’t go away as that is not a good business model and they won’t switch to a per download model either.
Your just pushing project fear that’s something Apple wants to push because they want to keep their bottom line.
As I said before nothing will change in the App Store regarding how it’s structured.

Considering the potential consequences is not ‘project fear’. This sounds like the Brexit debate.

 

[Hails09]

Considering the potential consequences is not ‘project fear’. This sounds like the Brexit debate.

Apple aren’t going to charge the customer directly what’s more likely to happen is they will raise the developer fee for said companies & that will likely get passed on to the consumer of said app & then it’s your choice if you want to pay for said app by that company.
Or they will put their advertising price up to make up the short fall in revenue.
It’s the same thing every company does if the price of sugar goes up then Coca Cola will just raise the price of said product.

 

[mrochester]

Apple aren’t going to charge the customer directly what’s more likely to happen is they will raise the developer fee for said companies & that will likely get passed on to the consumer of said app & then it’s your choice if you want to pay for said app by that company.
Or they will put their advertising price up to make up the short fall in revenue.
It’s the same thing every company does if the price of sugar goes up then Coca Cola will just raise the price of said product.

It begs the question as to what the benefit to the consumer is.

 

[Hails09]

It begs the question as to what the benefit to the consumer is.

It’s about thinking you get a good deal
At the end of the day all these companies are out to make as much money as possible. Where that being Apple or Spotify whoever.
People need to look at it from a money side of things why is Apple strongly trying to keep this in place money & why is Spotify having this disagreement money.
That’s all it come down to Spotify app is not going to be cheaper if the 30% cut was removed & Apple aren’t going to make their phones cheaper it’s all about who can make money.

 

[mrochester]

It’s about thinking you get a good deal
At the end of the day all these companies are out to make as much money as possible. Where that being Apple or Spotify whoever.
People need to look at it from a money side of things why is Apple strongly trying to keep this in place money & why is Spotify having this disagreement money.
That’s all it come down to Spotify app is not going to be cheaper if the 30% cut was removed & Apple aren’t going to make their phones cheaper it’s all about who can make money.

Right so theres no consumer benefit to any of this.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Well you should care about the potential impact it could have on your experience using the App Store. You may be happy to accept whatever the consequences are as long as Spotify can accept outside payments to bypass Apple’s commission.

It begs the question as to what the benefit to the consumer is

Right so theres no consumer benefit to any of this

The question isn’t just for Spotify, but for 100% of music streaming services that compete with Apple Music.

 

[Hails09]

Right so theres no consumer benefit to any of this.

In this case Apple v Spotify it fundamentally comes down to money that’s all.
But when it comes down to for example Netflix v Disney plus it’s in the company’s both interest to make it appealing to customers.

 

[Mimiron]

you don't like app store or google play good, stop using them oh you can't because your app is on them, but you aren't the one making rules, so less qq more pew pew, spotify.

 

[Hails09]

The question isn’t just for Spotify, but for 100% of music streaming services that compete with Apple Music.

And what are the consequences going to be? A poorer App Store experience very unlikely as iOS is all about how nice & good it looks. The App Store won’t change because it would not make good business sense for Apple to start charging to use the App Store or get rid of free apps that’s just not going to happen. Will will end up happening is they will probably raise the developer fee for certain apps & make the money back this way.

 

[Hails09]

you don't like app store or google play good, stop using them oh you can't because your app is on them, but you aren't the one making rules, so less qq more pew pew, spotify.

Unfortunately that’s not how life & business works. Their are rules & regulations you have to abide with.