4 ms·

"... they will need to give Apple 30% of their subscription revenue for all customers that want to access SalesForce via mobile." Wow, a huge post based on thi

by YooLi 16y ago

"... they will need to give Apple 30% of their subscription revenue for all customers that want to access SalesForce via mobile." Wow, a huge post based on this flawed understanding. It isn't 30% of every customer that accesses the mobile app, it's 30% of each client that signs up via the mobile app. The rules are pretty simple. If you offer subscription service purchasing elsewhere, like your website, you also must offer it in your app via in-app purchase. If a person finds your service by installing the mobile app and then decides to sign up, using the now required in-app purchase ability, Apple gets 30%.

mithaler 16y ago
...and if your profit margin is close to that 30%, as it is with many businesses, you are now required (should you choose to develop an app for iOS) to sell your product to users whom you have to support and stand a very good chance of gaining nothing from. In other words, such a business would be required to offer an option to hand off all of its profit to Apple, should it choose to offer a native iOS app. Apple gets a better experience for its customers, and the third party gets more customers it gets zero profit from. I can understand if such a business would find this unacceptable. (And look at it from a user's perspective: if given two options, one-click billing through Apple or time-consuming credit card entry through a web portal, which do you suppose the majority of users will take?) So how exactly is that understanding flawed? Edit: More details added, and some wording correction.
- ryanwaggoner 16y ago
  You're using the words profit and revenue interchangeably.
  - mithaler 16y ago
    You're right; I've updated the post, thanks for the correction. :)
- podperson 16y ago
  No-one is _required_ to sell stuff in the App Store. Don't sell stuff in the App Store, keep all your profits. > I can understand if such a business would find this unacceptable. Let's say you distribute a FREE app in the App Store and it requires a subscription at $10.00 per month (through Apple) but you provide a handy button labeled "Get subscription for $8.00 per month" that goes to your website. Apple doesn't want this. It costs Apple to distribute (and market, and support) your App. Apple gets nothing. And now you are selling your profitable product via an inferior user experience AND making anyone who actually uses Apple's service look like a chump. Gee, why doesn't Apple allow this?
  - 83457 16y ago
    Because they want to make more money off the apps so they can reduce the price of their phones to stay competitive with android?
  - anonymous246 16y ago
    > It costs Apple to distribute (and market, and support) your App Give me a break. You used the weasel word "costs" which is technically truthful, because it is greater than zero. But it is not material, IMHO. Because developers PAY $100/developer to get on the Apple developer program. They spend their own money/time to develop the app. And sell it to a user who's PAID for his phone and net access. Apple is serving as a glorified download.com (which btw also does reviews and ratings for free). Apple "markets" apps: again a weasel word, since in your universe listing your app in their directory is "marketing". Ditto "support" (they test your app cursorily to reject things).
    - YooLi 16y ago
      But they are marketing your app by marketing the platform. Those commercials you see with catchy tunes and hands swiping and flicking apps, those make people want an iOS device to run apps. Everything Apple does is to make consumers want to come to the platform, and based on their numbers, it is working. Then you, the developer, gets to put you app in the only marketplace available to those 100M+ users. That is the value Apple is bringing. It is the same value other market places bring. People sell on eBay because they know there are eyeballs there. Same with people who sell on Amazon. eBay and Amazon market their platforms to bring that value. No one creates their own webpage when they want to sell some stuff and hope people find it through Google. They go to where the hard part, bringing people to look, has already been done.
stcredzero 16y ago
Wow, a huge post based on this flawed understanding. That's about 80% of the entries from this blog that make it on the front page of HN. It's a great blog for gauging general developer perception and dissatisfaction, but that doesn't mean that the opinions expressed are actually true. (Signals all stations to prepare for downvotes.)

by YooLi 16y ago

mithaler 16y ago

...and if your profit margin is close to that 30%, as it is with many businesses, you are now required (should you choose to develop an app for iOS) to sell your product to users whom you have to support and stand a very good chance of gaining nothing from. In other words, such a business would be required to offer an option to hand off all of its profit to Apple, should it choose to offer a native iOS app. Apple gets a better experience for its customers, and the third party gets more customers it gets zero profit from. I can understand if such a business would find this unacceptable. (And look at it from a user's perspective: if given two options, one-click billing through Apple or time-consuming credit card entry through a web portal, which do you suppose the majority of users will take?) So how exactly is that understanding flawed? Edit: More details added, and some wording correction.

ryanwaggoner 16y ago
You're using the words profit and revenue interchangeably.
- mithaler 16y ago
  You're right; I've updated the post, thanks for the correction. :)
podperson 16y ago
No-one is _required_ to sell stuff in the App Store. Don't sell stuff in the App Store, keep all your profits. > I can understand if such a business would find this unacceptable. Let's say you distribute a FREE app in the App Store and it requires a subscription at $10.00 per month (through Apple) but you provide a handy button labeled "Get subscription for $8.00 per month" that goes to your website. Apple doesn't want this. It costs Apple to distribute (and market, and support) your App. Apple gets nothing. And now you are selling your profitable product via an inferior user experience AND making anyone who actually uses Apple's service look like a chump. Gee, why doesn't Apple allow this?
- 83457 16y ago
  Because they want to make more money off the apps so they can reduce the price of their phones to stay competitive with android?
- anonymous246 16y ago
  > It costs Apple to distribute (and market, and support) your App Give me a break. You used the weasel word "costs" which is technically truthful, because it is greater than zero. But it is not material, IMHO. Because developers PAY $100/developer to get on the Apple developer program. They spend their own money/time to develop the app. And sell it to a user who's PAID for his phone and net access. Apple is serving as a glorified download.com (which btw also does reviews and ratings for free). Apple "markets" apps: again a weasel word, since in your universe listing your app in their directory is "marketing". Ditto "support" (they test your app cursorily to reject things).
  - YooLi 16y ago
    But they are marketing your app by marketing the platform. Those commercials you see with catchy tunes and hands swiping and flicking apps, those make people want an iOS device to run apps. Everything Apple does is to make consumers want to come to the platform, and based on their numbers, it is working. Then you, the developer, gets to put you app in the only marketplace available to those 100M+ users. That is the value Apple is bringing. It is the same value other market places bring. People sell on eBay because they know there are eyeballs there. Same with people who sell on Amazon. eBay and Amazon market their platforms to bring that value. No one creates their own webpage when they want to sell some stuff and hope people find it through Google. They go to where the hard part, bringing people to look, has already been done.

stcredzero 16y ago

Wow, a huge post based on this flawed understanding. That's about 80% of the entries from this blog that make it on the front page of HN. It's a great blog for gauging general developer perception and dissatisfaction, but that doesn't mean that the opinions expressed are actually true. (Signals all stations to prepare for downvotes.)