Ok, it's hard to tell because both sides are over-extending and exaggerating the issues. Asking Apple to change the 30% fee to 0, or some other arbitrary numbe

Ok, it's hard to tell because both sides are over-extending and exaggerating the issues. Asking Apple to change the 30% fee to 0, or some other arbitrary number is untenable. Blocking Apps from advertising that you can subscribe on their website outside of the Apple platform is weakly tenable. I can see the argument and reasoning that Apps should pay for "advertising" for the service through the Apple platform, but in reality "discovery" through the Apple platform is limited and in Spotify's case most people probably do not discover it through the platform. That being said, I can see the argument that 1) If Spotify users discover them through the App store, they would not know about subscribing directly through Spotify for a lower rate. Therefore Spotify should pay the 30% as user acquisition cost. 2) If Spotify users come to the App store from Spotify, they should already have signed up outside or know about the lower rate outside of the Apple platform. It seems to me the main reason why Spotify is against the 30% tax (aside from generally wanting to not pay), is that 1) Spotify wants to be able to upgrade free users to paid users in-app with the least amount of friction. They can do this by email, or through the App, but obviously it's much easier to do so through an in-app popup. I've had countless friends that have accidentally subscribed to in-app subscriptions so I know how easy it is to subscribe. 2) Spotify does not want to pay the lifetime 30%/15% tax on customers acquired through the App store.