As others have repeatedly mentioned, Spotify pays Apple nothing except for their dev account.
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 Lauds $2 Billion EU Fine, Says Apple Has 'Muzzled' Streaming Music Services
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, they eliminated new in-app subscription payments in 2016 (a year after Apple Music launched) and eliminated legacy in-app subscription payments in 2023. Legacy subscriptions were less than 1% of their iOS subscribers at the time of their complaint to the EU as well. The EU never really cared about that stuff though which was always kind of odd.
So you're saying that Apple gets a break on the 30% and instead pays it to the artists.
Your post falls flat because it is not about consumers going out to find the best deals, it is about consumers being prevented from knowing deals exist in the first place. If a manufacturer has a deal but a registered dealer of the manufacturers product has a better deal but the manufacturer prevents the registered dealer from telling customers due to T&C's that the manufacturer and the registered dealer have together, how is that good for the customer? being made to think that the manufacturers deal is a good one when the customer is being prevented from knowing that a better deal exists elsewhere but is being prevented from being told of the deal.
As Spotify points out Apple is not playing by the same rules. Spotify and others are not allowed to inform their users via the app that offers and promotions are available outside the app. If you have followed this issue you will have known that Apple has said that Spotify and others are to use email to inform app users of offers and promotions but as Spotify again points out, Apple is not bound by those same rules. This therefore makes it unfair competition.
A good post but it will not work because people will still argue that Apple is right and the EU is wrong.This blog post may help Americans understand the EU a little better.
Facing reality, whether it's about Apple or the EU, is a core requirement for good management
Web dev at the end of the world, from Hveragerði, Icelandwww.baldurbjarnason.com
And yet Spotify specifically chose to end new in-app subscriptions for iOS in 2016 and continued to experience rapid growth despite the lack of in-app communications. As their own financial statements showed, 99% of iOS subscribers were paying via the internet at the time of their complaint to the EU. So 99% of their iOS business was subject to 0% commission without communicating in-app.
I posted earlier that the author of that article fails to explain how a market cap works with the single market idea. It's a contradiction. Every company has to follow the USB-C standard but not every company has to follow the DMA.
Yes? They provide a lesser service for a lower fee. If the record labels don't like that, they shouldn't agree to those rates.
Called up four of my friends in the music industry and they confirmed, their artists are paid more from Apple Music than Spotify. You be you, I’m done.
Exactly how has Apple "muzzled" Spotify? They are in the news almost daily making claims that Apple is not treating them fairly. How much money has Apple made for Spotify and how much cost has Apple helped them avoid by providing a robust and secure delivery and payment solution? Spotify better be careful because they may get exactly what they want and their ability to manage it is questionable at best. They have not been able to post a profit in their entire business history despite having the largest market share of any streaming music service. How exactly is this Apple's fault? What disadvantage are they dealing with if they are nearly twice the size of Apple's service? This is a complete joke brought on by people who do not understand what Apple has built and the amount of money they are making for people.
No it wasn't. People who have no idea how the technology and business works should not be allowed to state opinions that are based on ignorance.
I personally do not believe that Mac marketshare would have skyrocketed had they forced iPod users to use the Mac. I certainly would have never had an iPod and started using iTunes had it not come to Windows. However, iTunes on Windows in the early days was the application that made me want a Mac.
As it applies to iPhone and Spotify though, I believe that Spotify‘s presence on the iPhone is good for the platform. I prefer Apple Music personally, but I prefer iPhone having a diverse market. For a software maker to not be allowed to let users know all payment options is simply not user or developer friendly. Yes, it is Apple’s platform, and overall I like the Apple ecosystem and have no desire to leave it. But I still feel free to disagree with Apple’s stances as I do not treat my choice in devices or ecosystems as a requirement to love all of their policies.
Where in your previous post did you indicate your problem was with multiple languages? You made a generalization how AM performs with two genres. I listen to two languages and haven’t had any issues. Multiple genres.
For some reason I have never walked into a shop and went to purchase something only to see an ad on that something (in the shop!) that says I can get it cheaper if I buy direct from the manufacturer. I may see ads elsewhere that say that, but definitely not in the store I just walked into.
This is just a shakedown.
This is just a shakedown.
Yes so it’s the same as hanging a sign in front of a neighboring store that says “I have that widget cheaper” and then crying foul that the neighbor wants to remove your sign. Apple needs to turn off all services to the EU and when the prime minister’s of a dozen countries can’t text, or use any apps maybe they’ll rein in their out of control hatist commission who obviously can’t see that the rest of us like this platform and the safety it provides over open source malware plagued android. If you don’t like the way we do business, don’t buy our products and we can surely reciprocate!
Ahhh i see there is a bit of wording manipulation going on here so it fit's your argument. Here is an article from 2016 that indicates why Spotify stopped in-app subscriptions and it is all to do with Spotify not wanting Apple to take 30% of Spotify subscription fee or in-app purchases.
Spotify says Apple won’t approve a new version of its app because it doesn’t want competition
“We cannot stand by as Apple uses the App Store approval process as a weapon.”
www.vox.com
Just goes to show that people can manipulate wording to suit their narrative of Apple is good and Spotify is bad. Not in this case though.
I respect your personal experiences, and I think it's fair that forum members recognize mine too, especially when I'm sharing screenshots to back it up. If you check out my posts, you'll see I've mentioned several times that this issue pops up in many languages. I use six languages myself. Plus, I've shared a few posts recently about how frustrating Siri can be in languages other than English.
I'm amazed by how much effort some people put into defending Apple when there are clear issues with some of their products that affect many of us. And remember, I'm saying this as someone who actually pays for their products!
My argument is that XBOX and PlayStation and Switch should have to open up their devices too. I originally wrote that opinion into my rant, but I erased it since I don’t keep up on their ins-and-outs to have made that part of my post.
It all reminds me of HP getting away with subscriptions to print on your own printer. Tractor makers locking down tractors so you can’t repair them yourself. This country has a lack of enforcement issue (and a lack of modernized legislation issue) when it comes to holding back all the anti-consumer tendencies of companies.
Software is software. Any device that can run software should be legally permitted to run software approved by the user, except (as I noted) in the case of government-issued and child’s devices.
Seems like EU just wants to write a law that says when Apple enters any new market segment, they can no longer claim commissions/fees/etc. from any competitors that are already in that space in order to create an even playing field that fosters competition on merit alone. This would bring back sign ups and billing for Spotify, Netflix, etc. Apple is just going to keep growing into new markets, so this isn't a bad solution. They just need to weigh the outcome of is there more revenue to gain than what they might give up by "Sherlocking" another company's services/software/product.
The EU probably didn't care about it because, at 1%, Spotify probably didn't care about it enough to include in the
Funny coming from Spotify, who muzzles artists and podcasters, and deny them a fair compensation for their music/content.