Have you heard of a device called an XBox? They are quite popular, I understand.
How do you think Microsoft makes money from it?
C.
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.
U.S. and European Regulators 'Looking At' Apple's App Store Subscriptions Program
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Have you heard of a device called an XBox? They are quite popular, I understand.
How do you think Microsoft makes money from it?
C.
so you feel its ok for amazon netflix and the rest of the subscriptions services to prop up apples break even store? as thats what your saying.
spotifys business model works fine on all platforms and will do so on apples till the 30th june when apple changes the rules making unworkable.
this move by apple isnt about the customer its about money for them and getting other people who have the same/similar offering either out of the app store or selling there products at a much higher price.
So, in your view a business model which only gives you 29% pure profit is a lame duck?
Had Borders made 29% pure profit, they wouldn't have gone bankrupt.
I really think you picked a fitting avatar.
From what I understand, Spotify's revenues are only 5% of their turnover, and their profits are less than that.
It's sort of obvious that a business model that can only succeed with entirely free distribution is only fit for entirely free distribution. For most ventures, paying 30% for access to market is very cheap indeed.
Spotify doesn't sound like it could survive on Android's subscription model either.
C.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Walmart must be a complete failure then as it's profit margin is only 3.5%
Walmart must be a complete failure then as it's profit margin is only 3.5%
From the article you linked: "Publishers are also able to market their apps outside of the App Store, in order to bypass the commission fee, at the same (or lower) price."
That small part is what makes Apple's rules ridiculous...
It's too early to see if Google's model takes or fails. (Too early for Apple too).
But it's clear that Spotify could not survive, with anything other than free distribution.
Its business model is predicated on getting its access to market for free.
C.
Exactly, Google doesn't force to implement their system, Spotify can use their system
And it's a sound model, ALL OS' up until now, allowed users to install software on their devices. And after that, the user was free to deal with the app maker directly...
Even Apple has been doing that until(apparently) the end of June...
There are two different models for monetization.
There's the Windows / OSX model, where we pay for the hardware. And buy the software and services directly from the vendors.
And there's the XBox / Kindle Reader / iPad model, where we buy the software and services through the hardware vendor. And they take a share.
The question is; is the world shifting from the first model, to the second?
C.
No, Xbox premium users have with their service access to Netflix.
And I repeat, Netflix doesn't pay anything to MS
I can't find any evidence if they do or do not.
Regardless, MS benefits by charging its customers to access the service.
C.
No, MS doesn't benefits from the users accessing Netflix, ms pays Netflix to offer their premium user the service
MS does not give access for free. Users have to subscribe to Gold. This is how Microsoft derives benefit.
C.
If you do not pay MS, you can't stream Netflix on an xbox.
I was given an xbox, by someone who upgraded to a newer model. I intended to use it as only a netflix player in one room but it turns out that it doubles the monthly cost of my Netflix subscription because of the "gold fee". Its the only netflix streaming device I know of that adds an extra fee. I guess if you are using the xbox gold for other services, the the cost for streaming netflix to the xbox is just a fraction of the gold fee then. But still that's ridiculous and certainly not my case.
If selling your app makes you 35% pure profit, you would need to sell it to five times as many iOS users as Android users to make the same kind of profit after Apple and Google have taken their shares. When Google gets everything in order developers will, due to the larger number of Android phones and the lower share Google wants start to develop for Android primarily, and iOS will be a secondary choice.
I see Spotify, NetFlix, Rhapsody, etc as apps that makes consumers choosing to buy a certain smart phone, or more accurately, choosing NOT to buy a certain smart phone if it lack these apps.
I guess Apple saw it that way too, that's why they were allowed in the first place without any 30% AppleTax. With enough consumers having bought iPhones and iPads Apple is now ready to move to the next step, which would mean replacing those with Apple's own through the AppleTax.
These companies will never make huge profits due to their business models, so a better way here would be a percentage of actual profit and not a percentage of sales.
Apple is shooting itself in the foot.
In typical digital sales, when you own content, there is no cost-per-sale. All that matters is the cost of production. And the revenue gained when selling it.
So all you are really interested in is the size of the market.
70% of a very large pie is much better than 90% of a very small pie.
http://www.tuaw.com/2011/02/18/apples-tops-mobile-markeshare-but-sinking/
And of course, there's nothing to stop you eating both pies.
C.