3 ms·

> Why single digits? What's is their cost? When you look at an ebook Apple makes more money then the Author of a book. Most developers don't make a profit but

by baldfat 10y ago

> Why single digits? What's is their cost? When you look at an ebook Apple makes more money then the Author of a book. Most developers don't make a profit but Apple is guaranteed a profit form each purchase. http://alltopstartups.com/2016/03/30/do-apps-still-make-money/ http://alltopstartups.com/2016/03/30/do-apps-still-make-mone... When the creator makes less then the deliver there is a problem. When the deliver makes money from purchase 1 and the developer might never see a penny after thousands of purchases there is a problem. A developer makes an app that cost her $10,000 and she must sell $14,300 to break even and not make a dime. Apple will make $4,299.

abakker 10y ago
well, that's not necessarily fair. Apple has done an incredible amount of work to give devs and content creators an audience in the first place. Their rules are no different from many others. The economics of a "good business" need to take into account the delivery costs. Just because those costs are borne by a 3rd party (apple), does not mean those costs aren't real. Yes, shifting the costs more on apple would change the economics for app developers, but as long as the economics remain great for apple, they keep developing better services, devices, and platforms for devs to use (and, they give some of that away for very cheap or free).
- baldfat 10y ago
  I know quite a few App Store Developers and I don't think a single one would say that Apple does the following: > they keep developing better services, devices, and platforms for devs to use (and, they give some of that away for very cheap or free). Follow the money and Apple, Google and Valve are making a killing off the backs of creators. The cost of delivery is what 1% if that?
  - CountSessine 10y ago
    Follow the money and Apple, Google and Valve are making a killing off the backs of creators. The cost of delivery is what 1% if that? Well, if the cost of delivery and maintenance of these platforms is so low and the charge to developers is so high, why not arbitrage this? Create your own trusted multi-billion hardware/software platform with expedited payment and protection from cheating, and you can cut developers a better deal!
    - baldfat 10y ago
      Twitch is, gog.com, gamersgate.com, humblebundle.com, and etc. etc. etc.
  - ryanwaggoner 10y ago
    I'm an iOS developer and I'd definitely say that. I think you should forget about "hard" costs. They're completely irrelevant to how valuable something is.
    - abdulmuhaimin 10y ago
      You're right. This is something that annoys me me when people evaluate thing. The values of something is of much more important thing than just cost. Its like punishing poeple who optimize things to reduce cost
  - vacri 10y ago
    Apple, Google, and Valve are creators, and they're also providing the service of being middlemen for you. They deal with hosting, serving, taking payments, so on and so forth. There are AAA companies that have found Steam so much better for distribution that they no longer sell any other way (look at Paradox Studios, for example). And while you're locked into Apple (not that anyone is forcing you - and Apple basically created that whole industry), with Google and Valve, you're free to run your own setup and deal with all the middleman stuff yourself. 30% to hop onto their infrastructure and let them deal with bad payments is a pretty good deal. In short, you can always tell the people inexperienced in business in these conversations, because they think that 30% is a crushing 'take'. 30% is actually pretty damn good - normally in retail it's what you'd get, rather than what they'd take.
  - scarface74 10y ago
    In the case of Google and Valve, if developers think that the commissions are too high they could always try to sell the software on their own site.....
  - eastWestMath 10y ago
    They make the hardware and the operating system!
wklauss 10y ago
I know math. But my point is that no solution will ever be satisfactory. Is 9% too high? 6%? 3%? Also, think on the reverse situation. Apple currently makes 0$ on the sale of free apps but obviously these apps have a cost in storage and distribution. ¿What is the "fair" proposition in that case?
- baldfat 10y ago
  > Apple currently makes 0$ on the sale of free apps That is 100% not true and probably right now Apple makes most of their App Store money from free apps. 98% of Google Play income is from free apps. https://www.smartappmarketer.com/how-do-free-apps-make-money/ https://www.smartappmarketer.com/how-do-free-apps-make-money...
  - wklauss 10y ago
    Apps that use in-app purchases are not free apps, they are priced apps that defer payment. There are millions of real free apps in the AppStore.
    - Karunamon 10y ago
      That's a bit of a broad brush statement. An IAP could be any one of: * An upgrade of some sort (often ad removal) * In-game currency (which may or may not be a defacto requirement) * A tip to the developer with no added functionality Neither of those carries an implication for the pricing status of the title. It's all context-dependent.
  - stevefeinstein 10y ago
    Apple makes at least $99/yr for each free app (Developer's program fee)
    - jstanley 10y ago
      Apple makes $99/yr for each free app developer. There's nothing stopping any developer from releasing multiple apps.
Steko 10y ago
> What's is their cost? Cost isn't relevant, the commission is because Apple brings X hundred million credit cards to your door and presumably increases sales by at least that much. > Most developers don't make a profit Because most apps are garbage? > but Apple is guaranteed a profit form each purchase. When the creator makes less then the deliver there is a problem. When the deliver makes money from purchase 1 and the developer might never see a penny after thousands of purchases there is a problem. A developer makes an app that cost her $10,000 and she must sell $14,300 to break even and not make a dime. Apple will make $4,299. Except Apple eats all the credit card fees, server fees (hosts free apps for free), built the platform with an install base of hundreds of millions with a demo that spends more than other platforms etc.
- matheweis 10y ago
  > Cost isn't relevant, the commission is because Apple brings X hundred million credit cards to your door and presumably increases sales by at least that much. Except that developers have demonstrated with real numbers that that is not always true: https://weblog.rogueamoeba.com/2017/02/10/piezos-life-outside-the-app-store/ https://weblog.rogueamoeba.com/2017/02/10/piezos-life-outsid...
  - Steko 10y ago
    Aside from the fact that I didn't claim it was a universal rule, are we drawing big conclusions from sample size n=1? How about looking at the amount of money developers made from app store vs google play by year? http://bgr.com/2016/07/20/ios-vs-android-developers-profits-app-store-google-play/ http://bgr.com/2016/07/20/ios-vs-android-developers-profits-...
- jclardy 10y ago
  If we still lived in 2008 this is relevant. But it is now 2017, server costs are so close to zero for an app binary download, and credit card transactions can be had for 2.9% + 30 cents with Stripe. App visibility used to be a bonus, but today your app will get seen by literally no one if you just upload it just because of the sheer number of apps being released every day. And that is only mentioning the "good parts" of being on the App Store. The bad parts: - No customer data, this is fine, except for when the expectation is that you will host the application for that specific user indefinitely. But this leads into the next point... - No ability to do customer support - Want to refund a user? We have to tell them to go to Apple. Want to give a user a free subscription month? Can't do that, as subscriptions will just continue to auto-renew on apple's servers. Want to give an existing user a discount on a new app? Can't do that without some super awkward app bundle. Want to even know that a user purchased your app in the first place? I hope you collected an email when they signed up... - Arbitrary app review process - my company has had an app stuck "in review" for two weeks. We pulled it and resubmitted and it was available later that day. What? - Search. And now Search Ads. Search highly favors volume over user satisfaction. Have a small user base but impeccably high retention rate? Who cares, we have another app with 10x the downloads and a 2.5 star rating that will rank above you. Also your competitor is buying your app name as a keyword to also bump you down one more slot. - Subscriptions: They pushed these really hard last WWDC, but in iOS 10.3 users still have to find the subscriptions page buried in settings and use a crappy web view emulating iOS to cancel. So for "all that" Apple takes 30%... I appreciate all Apple has done in creating the market, but they need a way to make it actually sustainable for things that aren't SaaS or candy crush clones with in-app currency. Paid apps are dead along with anything wanting to be "pro" level on the iPad. My main issue is that almost all of these things can be fixed with some small changes to how things work. Responding to reviews was a definite step in the right direction, but they still have a ways to go to actually be worth 30% in 2017. There is a reason you can't sign up for Spotify Premium in the iOS app anymore.

by baldfat 10y ago

abakker 10y ago

well, that's not necessarily fair. Apple has done an incredible amount of work to give devs and content creators an audience in the first place. Their rules are no different from many others. The economics of a "good business" need to take into account the delivery costs. Just because those costs are borne by a 3rd party (apple), does not mean those costs aren't real. Yes, shifting the costs more on apple would change the economics for app developers, but as long as the economics remain great for apple, they keep developing better services, devices, and platforms for devs to use (and, they give some of that away for very cheap or free).

baldfat 10y ago
I know quite a few App Store Developers and I don't think a single one would say that Apple does the following: > they keep developing better services, devices, and platforms for devs to use (and, they give some of that away for very cheap or free). Follow the money and Apple, Google and Valve are making a killing off the backs of creators. The cost of delivery is what 1% if that?
- CountSessine 10y ago
  Follow the money and Apple, Google and Valve are making a killing off the backs of creators. The cost of delivery is what 1% if that? Well, if the cost of delivery and maintenance of these platforms is so low and the charge to developers is so high, why not arbitrage this? Create your own trusted multi-billion hardware/software platform with expedited payment and protection from cheating, and you can cut developers a better deal!
  - baldfat 10y ago
    Twitch is, gog.com, gamersgate.com, humblebundle.com, and etc. etc. etc.
- ryanwaggoner 10y ago
  I'm an iOS developer and I'd definitely say that. I think you should forget about "hard" costs. They're completely irrelevant to how valuable something is.
  - abdulmuhaimin 10y ago
    You're right. This is something that annoys me me when people evaluate thing. The values of something is of much more important thing than just cost. Its like punishing poeple who optimize things to reduce cost
- vacri 10y ago
  Apple, Google, and Valve are creators, and they're also providing the service of being middlemen for you. They deal with hosting, serving, taking payments, so on and so forth. There are AAA companies that have found Steam so much better for distribution that they no longer sell any other way (look at Paradox Studios, for example). And while you're locked into Apple (not that anyone is forcing you - and Apple basically created that whole industry), with Google and Valve, you're free to run your own setup and deal with all the middleman stuff yourself. 30% to hop onto their infrastructure and let them deal with bad payments is a pretty good deal. In short, you can always tell the people inexperienced in business in these conversations, because they think that 30% is a crushing 'take'. 30% is actually pretty damn good - normally in retail it's what you'd get, rather than what they'd take.
- scarface74 10y ago
  In the case of Google and Valve, if developers think that the commissions are too high they could always try to sell the software on their own site.....
- eastWestMath 10y ago
  They make the hardware and the operating system!

wklauss 10y ago

I know math. But my point is that no solution will ever be satisfactory. Is 9% too high? 6%? 3%? Also, think on the reverse situation. Apple currently makes 0$ on the sale of free apps but obviously these apps have a cost in storage and distribution. ¿What is the "fair" proposition in that case?

baldfat 10y ago
> Apple currently makes 0$ on the sale of free apps That is 100% not true and probably right now Apple makes most of their App Store money from free apps. 98% of Google Play income is from free apps. https://www.smartappmarketer.com/how-do-free-apps-make-money/ https://www.smartappmarketer.com/how-do-free-apps-make-money...
- wklauss 10y ago
  Apps that use in-app purchases are not free apps, they are priced apps that defer payment. There are millions of real free apps in the AppStore.
  - Karunamon 10y ago
    That's a bit of a broad brush statement. An IAP could be any one of: * An upgrade of some sort (often ad removal) * In-game currency (which may or may not be a defacto requirement) * A tip to the developer with no added functionality Neither of those carries an implication for the pricing status of the title. It's all context-dependent.
- stevefeinstein 10y ago
  Apple makes at least $99/yr for each free app (Developer's program fee)
  - jstanley 10y ago
    Apple makes $99/yr for each free app developer. There's nothing stopping any developer from releasing multiple apps.

Steko 10y ago

> What's is their cost? Cost isn't relevant, the commission is because Apple brings X hundred million credit cards to your door and presumably increases sales by at least that much. > Most developers don't make a profit Because most apps are garbage? > but Apple is guaranteed a profit form each purchase. When the creator makes less then the deliver there is a problem. When the deliver makes money from purchase 1 and the developer might never see a penny after thousands of purchases there is a problem. A developer makes an app that cost her $10,000 and she must sell $14,300 to break even and not make a dime. Apple will make $4,299. Except Apple eats all the credit card fees, server fees (hosts free apps for free), built the platform with an install base of hundreds of millions with a demo that spends more than other platforms etc.

matheweis 10y ago
> Cost isn't relevant, the commission is because Apple brings X hundred million credit cards to your door and presumably increases sales by at least that much. Except that developers have demonstrated with real numbers that that is not always true: https://weblog.rogueamoeba.com/2017/02/10/piezos-life-outside-the-app-store/ https://weblog.rogueamoeba.com/2017/02/10/piezos-life-outsid...
- Steko 10y ago
  Aside from the fact that I didn't claim it was a universal rule, are we drawing big conclusions from sample size n=1? How about looking at the amount of money developers made from app store vs google play by year? http://bgr.com/2016/07/20/ios-vs-android-developers-profits-app-store-google-play/ http://bgr.com/2016/07/20/ios-vs-android-developers-profits-...
jclardy 10y ago
If we still lived in 2008 this is relevant. But it is now 2017, server costs are so close to zero for an app binary download, and credit card transactions can be had for 2.9% + 30 cents with Stripe. App visibility used to be a bonus, but today your app will get seen by literally no one if you just upload it just because of the sheer number of apps being released every day. And that is only mentioning the "good parts" of being on the App Store. The bad parts: - No customer data, this is fine, except for when the expectation is that you will host the application for that specific user indefinitely. But this leads into the next point... - No ability to do customer support - Want to refund a user? We have to tell them to go to Apple. Want to give a user a free subscription month? Can't do that, as subscriptions will just continue to auto-renew on apple's servers. Want to give an existing user a discount on a new app? Can't do that without some super awkward app bundle. Want to even know that a user purchased your app in the first place? I hope you collected an email when they signed up... - Arbitrary app review process - my company has had an app stuck "in review" for two weeks. We pulled it and resubmitted and it was available later that day. What? - Search. And now Search Ads. Search highly favors volume over user satisfaction. Have a small user base but impeccably high retention rate? Who cares, we have another app with 10x the downloads and a 2.5 star rating that will rank above you. Also your competitor is buying your app name as a keyword to also bump you down one more slot. - Subscriptions: They pushed these really hard last WWDC, but in iOS 10.3 users still have to find the subscriptions page buried in settings and use a crappy web view emulating iOS to cancel. So for "all that" Apple takes 30%... I appreciate all Apple has done in creating the market, but they need a way to make it actually sustainable for things that aren't SaaS or candy crush clones with in-app currency. Paid apps are dead along with anything wanting to be "pro" level on the iPad. My main issue is that almost all of these things can be fixed with some small changes to how things work. Responding to reviews was a definite step in the right direction, but they still have a ways to go to actually be worth 30% in 2017. There is a reason you can't sign up for Spotify Premium in the iOS app anymore.