Spotify should pay artists better.
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 Legal Chief: 'Apple's Ability to Strangle its Competitors is Unprecedented'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Those supposed billions that you talk about came from you and I spending our money on iPhones. There is a monopoly and the US Government has stated so already. It's a question of what remedies are going to be put in place.
You will when Apple takes over everything and you have zero choice. How will you feel then?
He's all good with strangling artists though. What a sack of s***.
Great actually, they almost always offer the best alternatives.
I will feel the same as I keep buying music from Apple and Bandcamp like I do now.
So how is Apple going to take over Music services on Android?
I’m guessing that 30% and the chip shortage to name a few. But who knows.
If you owned a store would you sell a product where the manufacturer put a sticker on the box telling you to go somewhere else to buy it cheaper?
They may not be able to replicate it but let's not forget the Apple introduced the iPhone in an already crowded cellular market. They had Nokia, Samsung, Sony, etc to compete with. Apple knew the right type of phone that was missing from the bunch. That's Spotify's problem if they are too stupid to know how make a winning product.
It's only shady or unethical if one of the parties didn't know what they were getting into. Spotify, Epic, etc. has a full staff of lawyers that went over the contract very well before they signed. Now they are crying about it.
Why don’t all the whiners create their own phone company and compete with Apple
This is exactly was I was thinking of. They could start trying to make some kind of iPod Touch... The "Spotytouch" with spatial sound.
Oh the saviour Spotify. The one who pays artists virtually nothing and then complains they are the ones hard done by. ****.
I highly suggest you read some business books so you fully understand how ignorant your statement is.
Ahh, I’ve been speaking about this recently. NARROWLY TAILORED which, translated means “We want to use their platform for free, but please be careful not to extend this generally to ALL platforms because we don’t want Tidal or Apple to use OUR platform. If you could put some wording in there that the company name it’s targeted towards is 5 letters and starts with “A”, that’d be great.”
This is what Steve Jobs said about the App Store in 2008:
It’s obvious that Apple no longer needs 30% of digital purchases/subscriptions to cover the cost of running the App Store. It’s a profit center under Tim Cook. Hardware growth slowed and Tim Cook needed to find revenue growth somewhere. Now Wall Street expects services to keep growing. Also App Store under Phil Schiller is much more about the company believing it deserve a cut of someone else’s business because they created the platform. Except when that someone is big enough and might threaten to leave…then Apple creates a whole new app category for them so they can get around paying the 30%…even if it means a slightly worse experience for consumers (like not being able to buy books in the Kindle app). If Apple deserves 30% then does my ISP or cellular provider too? How much can you do on an iOS device without an internet connection? And how much would you pay for an iPhone if the only apps available were Apple’s first party apps? And if it really is about the cost of running the App Store aren’t there better ways of charging for that? The majority of the most downloaded iOS apps are free to download and if you can live with ads free to use. How much are Facebook and Google contributing to the cost of running the App Store when all their apps are “free”?
It’s obvious that Apple no longer needs 30% of digital purchases/subscriptions to cover the cost of running the App Store. It’s a profit center under Tim Cook. Hardware growth slowed and Tim Cook needed to find revenue growth somewhere. Now Wall Street expects services to keep growing. Also App Store under Phil Schiller is much more about the company believing it deserve a cut of someone else’s business because they created the platform. Except when that someone is big enough and might threaten to leave…then Apple creates a whole new app category for them so they can get around paying the 30%…even if it means a slightly worse experience for consumers (like not being able to buy books in the Kindle app). If Apple deserves 30% then does my ISP or cellular provider too? How much can you do on an iOS device without an internet connection? And how much would you pay for an iPhone if the only apps available were Apple’s first party apps? And if it really is about the cost of running the App Store aren’t there better ways of charging for that? The majority of the most downloaded iOS apps are free to download and if you can live with ads free to use. How much are Facebook and Google contributing to the cost of running the App Store when all their apps are “free”?
Apart from it being a money pit destined to fail in a 2 operating system dominated market? Nah, it’s a great idea lol. Or they could just focus on what they are better than Apple at.
OK but then they’d have to raise the price of an Apple Music subscription by 30%.
“Especially after you willingly wrap Apple’s fingers around your neck then, using your hands outside their hands, squeeze REAAAALLY hard. No one has allowed you to make them strangle you quite like Apple.”
Someone at the company looked up “winning” in the Spotify dictionary and, unfortunately read the definition for “whining” instead.
Except Apple doesn’t take a cut of everything. If they deserve a cut because of the time and money they invest in iPhone/iOS then why doesn’t Uber have to pay them 30% of every transaction? Why does Apple allow reader apps which don’t require IAP?
To that point, Apple could spin off its iOS app dev as a subsidiary and then charge the subsidiary the same fees as other devs. I think the whole argument by Epic and others is a waste of time. Apple does not do dominate the smart phone market. these devs just don't want to deal with the rules they agreed to. Funny, they don't go after Sony which only allows the PlayStation store. Is Sony not a monopoly? By the definition of these devs, it must be.