3 ms·

I think the % for processing/platform is justifiable and hard to argue against setting that % for them. The most likely outcome is that they will either remove

I think the % for processing/platform is justifiable and hard to argue against setting that % for them. The most likely outcome is that they will either remove the restriction from advertising alternative payment methods on signup, and in exchange Apple can do what it wants with in-app payments.

ocdtrekkie 8y ago
I agree that the best case is that Apple sets the price it does business at, but that there are reasonable ways for the app to use a different payment provider, even if just by linking to the web. This keeps Apple's price in check naturally... As they'll need to keep the price competitive enough that the convenience of using their service is worth it.
- chrischen 8y ago
  I can also see the argument that for users that discover an app through the App store, they must pay the platform/acquisition costs. But I agree a lifetime 15% is unfair. Best case scenario is 1) Apple switches their platform monetization to a more direct model where you pay to advertise your app in the App store. This will get tricky because their "Top apps" list still serve as advertising but you can't just remove an app from there because it refuses to pay. 2) Apple removes the restrictions against advertising alternative payment/subscription methods
  - ndnxhs 8y ago
    In this case users should also be able to install from outside sources and not be forced to use the app store.
    - badwolf 8y ago
      Perhaps one reason people buy iphones, is because you can't install from outside sources. It's part of the feeling of trust in iPhone. If you get a subscription in-app, you can easily cancel it on your phone, without having to worry about going through some kind of retention hell (call to cancel, dark ux patterns to prevent cancellation, etc...) As well as level of security in that it's one less company with my credit card to worry about being leaked/hacked/whatever.
  - ihuman 8y ago
    They already have a way to pay for ads when searching.
kelnos 8y ago
If Visa or MasterCard tried to charge 30% transaction fees, they'd be laughed out of the market. The problem is that you can't laugh Apple out of the market for payments on iOS devices, because they don't allow other entrants into that market.
- mediocrejoker 8y ago
  Visa and Mastercard do actually charge 30% if you don't pay within 30 days or so. Why is that not equally laughable? Is it because they provide a service in exchange for that 30%, a service that many people are willing to pay 30% for?
  - kelnos 8y ago
    I'm talking about the merchant fees, not the interest rate for cardholders. The cardholder interest rate is not at all analogous to Apple's revenue share.

ocdtrekkie 8y ago

I agree that the best case is that Apple sets the price it does business at, but that there are reasonable ways for the app to use a different payment provider, even if just by linking to the web. This keeps Apple's price in check naturally... As they'll need to keep the price competitive enough that the convenience of using their service is worth it.

chrischen 8y ago
I can also see the argument that for users that discover an app through the App store, they must pay the platform/acquisition costs. But I agree a lifetime 15% is unfair. Best case scenario is 1) Apple switches their platform monetization to a more direct model where you pay to advertise your app in the App store. This will get tricky because their "Top apps" list still serve as advertising but you can't just remove an app from there because it refuses to pay. 2) Apple removes the restrictions against advertising alternative payment/subscription methods
- ndnxhs 8y ago
  In this case users should also be able to install from outside sources and not be forced to use the app store.
  - badwolf 8y ago
    Perhaps one reason people buy iphones, is because you can't install from outside sources. It's part of the feeling of trust in iPhone. If you get a subscription in-app, you can easily cancel it on your phone, without having to worry about going through some kind of retention hell (call to cancel, dark ux patterns to prevent cancellation, etc...) As well as level of security in that it's one less company with my credit card to worry about being leaked/hacked/whatever.
- ihuman 8y ago
  They already have a way to pay for ads when searching.

kelnos 8y ago

If Visa or MasterCard tried to charge 30% transaction fees, they'd be laughed out of the market. The problem is that you can't laugh Apple out of the market for payments on iOS devices, because they don't allow other entrants into that market.

mediocrejoker 8y ago
Visa and Mastercard do actually charge 30% if you don't pay within 30 days or so. Why is that not equally laughable? Is it because they provide a service in exchange for that 30%, a service that many people are willing to pay 30% for?
- kelnos 8y ago
  I'm talking about the merchant fees, not the interest rate for cardholders. The cardholder interest rate is not at all analogous to Apple's revenue share.