Sidebar Sidebar
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

Discussion here sounds like people think Apple is taking 30% cut of Spotify's revenues? This is not true.

Apple cut is exactly 0: Spotify only sells Premium on web and do not pay a cut to Apple.

Instead Apple provides all their services and platform for free to Spotify.

Considering that Spotify is 3x larger than Apple for music streaming in Europe, it should be Apple complaining about the situation, not Spotify.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: gusmula, ksj1, Mescagnus and 6 others
narenh said:
I really hate this Apple vs EU narrative that results in people taking "sides." Like... maybe Apple has wayyy too much market power (and power over our lives in general) but also, the EU groups writing these laws and making these decisions aren't nearly accountable enough to their citizens. Also guess what Spotify is super evil too! Everyone is bad! What we really need is an artist-owned music streaming service based on radical transparency that doesn't involve the music labels at all.
Click to expand...
Dre started beats streaming and he sold it to Apple. Lol
 
Beautyspin said:
Why would I not want to inform my customers that cheaper alternatives are available so that I can get more subscribers? When Apple Music is $9.99 and Spotify is $12.99 due to Apple tax, customers are going to select AM even though it is inferior. If Spotify can tell the customers that they can get premium at $9.99 from their websites, will it not help them? Also, how many customers Spotify must have lost because of this Apple's anti-steering rule?
Click to expand...
It’s called run an ad like a real company — EU nanny state just makes you weak, Spotify 😂
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: gusmula, Mescagnus, iOS Geek and 3 others
Now it’s time for Spotify to step up and create an open 3rd party App Store for the EU and leave the iOS App Store FOREVER.

It will only cost them .50 per install per year.

And the loss of easy downloads from the actual App Store.

Oh, and they’d need some balls, so forget I said anything 😂😂😂
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: Mescagnus, iOS Geek, mech986 and 3 others
truthsteve said:
nope. it literally does not.

assume iPhone SE gross margin 30%. Operational expenses can't exceed $130 per device. looking at on-going costs
- 5GB of free storage for life + data transfers between device + iCloud for next 8 years
- Notification services for first party apps (including safari) at least the next 8 years
- Apple Maps usage
- 5 years of updates
- Warranty coverage for 1 year
- Tech support, Genius Bar visits for device
- HomeKit services
- Siri services
- Weather data/services
- Stocks services
- News (free tier)
- Find my services
- iMessage services
- FaceTime
- Gamecenter
- Translation services

list goes on. and that's assuming Apple just wants to break even at $130. likely they want to keep a net profit
Click to expand...
This is all completely irrelevant. It is anti-competitive if you can stream an artist at $x and everyone else has to be at $x+30%. As consumers we should all be enraged.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: Victor Mortimer and IllegitimateValor
Now that iPhones are literally half-siblings with new Macs and more powerful than some PCs, it doesn’t make sense that they’re all completely locked down and under Apple’s control.

It was great, but now the App Store is filled with garbage, abandoned apps and copycat junk. Brag about a million apps all you want- it’s time smaller developers could sell their apps with a more fair margin. You’ve got the install base. You can keep government and kiddie phones locked in App Store garden for obvious reasons, but we have too many screens in our lives for us to not be able to use every one of them with the same freedom as a laptop or a monitor. I feel like I’m taking crazy pills when I hear the arguments as if one screen we hold deserves to be held to different standards because they do R&D, development, etc.
 
  • Angry
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: iOS Geek, mech986, Victor Mortimer and 2 others
Naraxus said:
EU.....since we can't innovate & compete we'll just invent violations & fine far more successful American companies.
Click to expand...
Conversely a significant portion of that "American" success was a result of geographical and historical fortune, geopolitical bullying and enforced globalism.
Much as I am a centrist capitalist, the Apple ecosystem has turned into the "company town" and there needs to be a power balance between the consumer and the corporate interests.
Whilst I think parts of the EU case against Apple are disingenuous and to an extent sour grapes, I think there are significant moral, ethical and financial aspects (i.e. which therefore do form the basis of the laws against which Apple is judged) to the various EU complaints against Apple which do have merit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The-Real-Deal82 and Someyoungguy
Someyoungguy said:
This is all completely irrelevant. It is anti-competitive if you can stream an artist at $x and everyone else has to be at $x+30%. As consumers we should all be enraged.
Click to expand...
I haven’t paid for Spotify in years, but never paid through the App Store. Just paid on the site, downloaded the app and logged in. Does this still work? How would Apple get a cut in this scenario?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mescagnus and mech986
Jensend said:
Can you link to a source that compares how much of a Spotify subscription goes to the rights holders compared to the percentage of an Apple Music subscription?
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting
1) Spotify service is cheaper?
2) Spotify are paying more to artists per play than Apple?

but here is an example. Check the link.
Spotify slides you about $0.003 - $0.005 per stream, while Apple Music hands out around $0.01​
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Mescagnus, ender78, wbeasley and 2 others
developer13245 said:
Cell phones have evolved into general purpose computing platforms. This evolution occurred because Apple wanted it to happen. If not they could have narrowly restricted the types of apps they approved on the platform, but this would have limited the utility of the platform and also sales.

Game platforms limit apps to games so as long as game platforms keep that gating criteria they have the right to control the ecosystem. Also don't think you'll be balancing your checkbook while driving your tesla, using the car's cpu.

But I was responding to a post that was whining about how much it costs Apple to distribute the Spotify App binary.
Click to expand...
No reason that general purpose computing platforms should be treated differently. I only bring that up because it's a common response to why Apple should be punished/fined. And general purpose computing platforms isn't even properly defined by a government body.

With a Tesla, I can be doing anything while I supercharge since it is downtime I must endure. I have posted to social media, watched YouTube, play games, read news, done zoom calls literally on the car's touchscreen. So why not open that up too?

developer13245 said:
No one is forcing Apple to be the exclusive distributor for apps on the platform.
Click to expand...

No idea why people keep using that as an argument. No one said Apple is being forced to. Apple made this business decision well over a decade ago. There were no laws about "general purpose computing platforms" being forced to be open. Seems very arbitrary that Apple is punished for being successful.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: Mescagnus, wbeasley, mech986 and 2 others
DelayedGratificationGene said:
That EU and Margareth whatever(not eye candy that’s for sure lol) are targeting US companies. It’s time for the US govt to take a stand and retaliate. This high profile case against the greatest American company in history is getting major attention and should be the catalyst to wake up our govt!
Click to expand...
Pathetic. “I don’t like the way some woman looks who’s in charge”. “It’s America Vs EU”. Do you have any thoughts on the merits?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Victor Mortimer and Jensend
Beautyspin said:
In the EU, the DMA specifies some companies as Gatekeepers. For now, Apple is one of them.
Click to expand...

I'm well aware of what that is.

Beautyspin said:
The definition of Gatekeeper could change later and more companies might be brought into the net.
Click to expand...


And that's the exact problem I'm describing. What EU is doing is seemingly arbitrary and not really based on logic.

At least when Apple comes up with a rule, there's sound reasoning behind the rule such as making exceptions for physical goods since it doesn't make sense for Apple to make 30% off of goods that have razor thin margins.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: gusmula, iOS Geek, wbeasley and 2 others
Someyoungguy said:
Pathetic. “I don’t like the way some woman looks who’s in charge”. “It’s America Vs EU”. Do you have any thoughts on the merits?
Click to expand...
Simple. The EU is looking after a company in the EU. I would suggest there is some under the table stuff going on here, but who would know. The point is, Apple are a business. The EU is a protection racket for EU companies. Apple need to address this, not the United States.

The EU can do whatever a corrupt government wants to do, and when it is no longer financially beneficial for Apple to be in that market, they can leave.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: gusmula, Mescagnus, wbeasley and 1 other person
JapanApple said:
No Spotify is the problem. They limit our access the free Contant to 12 hours or so a month. Apple has nothing to do
Click to expand...
I did not get it. Are you saying that Spotify offers free tier with ads which has some limitations and that's a problem, but you don't have a problem with Apple Music because it does not have ad supported option at all? As I see it, in this regard Spotify is way better than Apple Music but you want it to be even better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back