5 ms·

That's not how the rule works. You can sign people up. They can upgrade on your own site. As long as you don't tell them they can do that in the app. Spotify

That's not how the rule works. You can sign people up. They can upgrade on your own site. As long as you don't tell them they can do that in the app. Spotify don't. They were communicating the promotion via email, outside the app, where Apple has no jurisdiction. A tonne of companies aren't paying Apple 30%. It's basically on a case by case basis -- if Apple likes you or not. They don't like Spotify.

developer2 10y ago
The rule and the fee are complete bullshit. 30% isn't even remotely viable. They should be charging equivalent to transaction fees, which would tally below 5%. Hopefully one day someone will find a law with which they can challenge the fee's insanity in court. Anti-competitiveness seems like the appropriate avenue; we just have to wait for a company to try their hand at it. At a bare minimum, apps must be allowed to explain to users in-app that they can reduce their payments by paying outside the app.
- markonen 10y ago
  Isn't viable for whom? The $14 billion transacted through App Store payments to date would suggest that plenty of buyers and sellers have opted in to this market. They must realize that credit card processing isn't the only thing Apple is selling here.
- rycfan 10y ago
  Why would they charge the equivalent of transaction fees when they (Apple) pays those fees? How would they make any money if they only charged transaction fees? I've run the numbers on products like this before. In order to absorb transaction fees, build your own product, and support it, fees need to be in the 10-15% range. Also, note that almost no companies charge less if you pay out of app -- the company just keeps more for themselves.
  - denzil_correa 10y ago
    > I've run the numbers on products like this before. In order to absorb transaction fees, build your own product, and support it, fees need to be in the 10-15% range. Apple does charge 10-15% for Spotify like apps viz. apps that sell subscriptions for more than 1 year. https://developer.apple.com/app-store/subscriptions/whats-new/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/subscriptions/whats-ne... After a subscriber accumulates one year of paid service, your revenue increases to 85% of the subscription price, minus applicable taxes. All current subscriptions are eligible.
    - mcphage 10y ago
      That's a brand new rule, just going into effect.
      - denzil_correa 10y ago
        So is Spotify's letter.
gshulegaard 10y ago
> They don't like Spotify. They don't like competition. FTFY
orkj 10y ago
No, this is not true. At the company I work, we have an app for a customer where you can purchase things on their site. For a long while you could sign up in the app until one day where apple literally said (on a super minor bugfix upgrade): "If you are signing up users in your app, we are contributing to your revenue. We do not want to do that, unless you are using in app purchases". This particular app could not use IAP for technical reasons, so we had to remove sign up from the app. That is how the rule works edit: Although, your point about the case by case basis could apply here, although this is not on a spotify scale, I assure you :)

developer2 10y ago

The rule and the fee are complete bullshit. 30% isn't even remotely viable. They should be charging equivalent to transaction fees, which would tally below 5%. Hopefully one day someone will find a law with which they can challenge the fee's insanity in court. Anti-competitiveness seems like the appropriate avenue; we just have to wait for a company to try their hand at it. At a bare minimum, apps must be allowed to explain to users in-app that they can reduce their payments by paying outside the app.

markonen 10y ago
Isn't viable for whom? The $14 billion transacted through App Store payments to date would suggest that plenty of buyers and sellers have opted in to this market. They must realize that credit card processing isn't the only thing Apple is selling here.
rycfan 10y ago
Why would they charge the equivalent of transaction fees when they (Apple) pays those fees? How would they make any money if they only charged transaction fees? I've run the numbers on products like this before. In order to absorb transaction fees, build your own product, and support it, fees need to be in the 10-15% range. Also, note that almost no companies charge less if you pay out of app -- the company just keeps more for themselves.
- denzil_correa 10y ago
  > I've run the numbers on products like this before. In order to absorb transaction fees, build your own product, and support it, fees need to be in the 10-15% range. Apple does charge 10-15% for Spotify like apps viz. apps that sell subscriptions for more than 1 year. https://developer.apple.com/app-store/subscriptions/whats-new/ https://developer.apple.com/app-store/subscriptions/whats-ne... After a subscriber accumulates one year of paid service, your revenue increases to 85% of the subscription price, minus applicable taxes. All current subscriptions are eligible.
  - mcphage 10y ago
    That's a brand new rule, just going into effect.
    - denzil_correa 10y ago
      So is Spotify's letter.

gshulegaard 10y ago

> They don't like Spotify. They don't like competition. FTFY

orkj 10y ago

No, this is not true. At the company I work, we have an app for a customer where you can purchase things on their site. For a long while you could sign up in the app until one day where apple literally said (on a super minor bugfix upgrade): "If you are signing up users in your app, we are contributing to your revenue. We do not want to do that, unless you are using in app purchases". This particular app could not use IAP for technical reasons, so we had to remove sign up from the app. That is how the rule works edit: Although, your point about the case by case basis could apply here, although this is not on a spotify scale, I assure you :)