Wall Street Journal and Kobo Pull Direct Content Sales From iOS Apps

[Porchland]

Reality is, in the Movie industry, Theaters' success is dictated by the studios because you can't find another Transformers to play in your theater for a cheaper price unless China starts replicating movies too. In the app world, you can go develop for other platforms. That means developers will probably have to raise prices for in-app purchases, to offset the percentage Apple's eating, or just flat out abandon the platform.

Whether apps will leave iOS or not is a reflection of how much the app makers need iOS and how much market power Apple has with app makers. If Apple sets the terms too favorably for itself, app makers will not make a profit, go to other platforms, and hurt Apple in the process. If app makers develop for various platforms but determine they can't make money on iOS, they will abandon the platform.

My point was simply that markets are good at finding equilibrium and that forcing Kindle to drop the link is a good outcome. With the link, Apple is subsidizing Amazon by giving it a free platform, free publicity, and a path free sales that compete with Apple's own product on its own platform; without the link, Amazon is still getting the free platform and publicity, and you can still buy and sync content through Amazon's web site.

I generally agree with Apple's reasoning about the links and in-app content: If your app is a value-added feature to another service -- Hulu, Netflix, the New York Times, whatever -- you don't depend on, i.e., need, the link in your app or in-app purchases. If you do depend on a link or in-app purchases to cash flow your business, you should compensate the platform that delivers those sales.

Can you imagine Angry Birds deciding to stop selling games through iOS and expecting Apple to allow users to unlock its games with codes that you buy from Angry Birds' web site? If you were Apple, would you consider that a fair outcome?

 

[NebulaClash]

And how this applies to Amazon or B&N?

Same principle, they just already have more info about you in general because of their prior relationship with the customer.

 

[Oletros]

Same principle, they just already have more info about you in general because of their prior relationship with the customer.

Ah, and how Amazon or B&N wouldn't know all the info when the iTunes and Amazon/B&N accounts must be linked if they want the books sync between devices?

Or do you think that iTunes purchases would't sync to other devices or viceversa?

 

[NebulaClash]

Ah, and how Amazon or B&N wouldn't know all the info when the iTunes and Amazon/B&N accounts must be linked if they want the books sync between devices?

Not sure what you are objecting to. I agreed that Amazon and B&N already have more info about the customer than most places.

 

[Oletros]

Not sure what you are objecting to. I agreed that Amazon and B&N already have more info about the customer than most places.

I was objecting that Amazon or B&N have pulled the links because consumer info

 

[djrobsd]

I'd like to extend a huge middle finger to Apple for their short sightedness, their greed, and downright arrogance. I, for one, will make sure I do all my purchasing and signing up for services OUTSIDE of the app so that Apple doesn't see a dime of my money. Apple should NOT be taking money from other companies just because the app was installed in the app store, that is just down right greed and I hope the FTC and the DOJ get involved in this at some point.. Hello Google, you have BILLIONS of cash, so why don't you sue them???

 

[macsmurf]

I'd like to extend a huge middle finger to Apple for their short sightedness, their greed, and downright arrogance. I, for one, will make sure I do all my purchasing and signing up for services OUTSIDE of the app so that Apple doesn't see a dime of my money. Apple should NOT be taking money from other companies just because the app was installed in the app store, that is just down right greed and I hope the FTC and the DOJ get involved in this at some point.. Hello Google, you have BILLIONS of cash, so why don't you sue them???

For what? Making Android look good?

 

[NebulaClash]

It's amazing how many people get fooled by propaganda that is designed to make Apple look bad. They get people riled up at Apple, so I guess it works, but I do wish people would learn to reason.

 

[AppleScruff1]

I'd like to extend a huge middle finger to Apple for their short sightedness, their greed, and downright arrogance. I, for one, will make sure I do all my purchasing and signing up for services OUTSIDE of the app so that Apple doesn't see a dime of my money. Apple should NOT be taking money from other companies just because the app was installed in the app store, that is just down right greed and I hope the FTC and the DOJ get involved in this at some point.. Hello Google, you have BILLIONS of cash, so why don't you sue them???

Apple should get a cut of everything every company sells. It's only fair. After all, we're not talking about any old company here, this is Apple.

 

[AidenShaw]

Apple should get a cut of everything every company sells. It's only fair. After all, we're not talking about any old company here, this is Apple.

If you have an Apple, you should have to give them your credit card information for every session - a reasonable charge would be $25/hour for every hour that you're logged into your Apple. $600/day seems like a reasonable Apple tax.

 

[AppleScruff1]

If you have an Apple, you should have to give them your credit card information for every session - a reasonable charge would be $25/hour for every hour that you're logged into your Apple. $600/day seems like a reasonable Apple tax.

Absolutely. I don't understand what these other companies are thinking. The WSJ is nothing without Apple. Ditto for the Beatles and Amazon. They all owe Apple big time and 30% is a small price to pay to have your company associated with the Apple elite.

 

[marksman]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_4 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8K2 Safari/6533.18.5)

"We remain concerned that Apple's own subscription would create a poor experience for our readers, who would not be able to directly manage their WSJ account"

Translation: Even though Apple provides an excellent experience for our readers, it provides a lousy experience for the WSJ since we don't get access to our reader's personal data which we can then sell for lots of money.

That is the long and short of it. They spend more than 30% for the equivalent services in other sales channels.

These papers can't be these dumb. 30% is a steal for the newspaper business. Too bad they are really just in the consumer data aggregation business.

 

[marksman]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_4 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8K2 Safari/6533.18.5)

It's a completely dickish move and anyone who approves of Apple of doing this is completely blind and biased.

Or knows how businesses work.

 

[314631]

This is great news for all customers. I applaud Apple for driving these necessary changes home despite all the criticism.

 

[NebulaClash]

That is the long and short of it. They spend more than 30% for the equivalent services in other sales channels.

What I find amazing is how many people think Apple is being greedy by charging 30% which is, as you note, less than the content providers are used to being charged. But who knows that except industry folks? No one. So they moan and groan about Apple being greedy, and clueless individuals pick up their propaganda and spread it far and wide. They have no idea what they are talking about, but hey, it's easy to call Apple greedy and it feeds into the narrative that the jealous industry created for Apple.

 

[marksman]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_4 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8K2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Why would you buy a Kindle rather than just go to Amazon's site in a browser, buy your book, and have it sent to your iPad?

I buy my Kindle books on Amazon's web site and have them delivered to my iPad. Apple won't be getting any in-app purchases from me for newspapers and books until they stop this insane policy of shaving off 30% from already-thin margins.

So that other businesses get more than 30% of your wsj subscription just for singing you up matters not. Reality matters not.

It would help if people understood how these businesses worked before becoming ignorantly indignant.

 

[carinatauk]

Anyone checking to see if the prices have / will /are increasing in the stores / apps? It's all market dynamics and margin retention, someone has to pay and it's likely to be the consumer.

Apple recently made me sit up and think about the app store pricing when it all changed [the UK app prices increased significantly ]

At the moment, it would seem that Apple are putting themselves into an all controlling position for Mac / Iphone etc users; it will be interesting to see if they eventually block the loading of books, software etc from external sites.

Somehow I see Apple being challenged in court over their "monopoly"