3 ms·

They are trying to force content producers to work exclusively with Apple. I can up the cost to the end user _as long as I stay only with Apple_. Once I move

They are trying to force content producers to work exclusively with Apple. I can up the cost to the end user _as long as I stay only with Apple_. Once I move my product to a second competing device, then it really hurts profit because the price has to stay the same. Once they become the exclusive provider, then they continue to dominate the market, regardless of what other tablets and operating systems come along.

myhf 16y ago
Why does the price have to stay the same between platforms?
- coffeedrinker 16y ago
  That is one of Apple's requirements. Whatever you sell somewhere else, it has to be the same price or cheaper at Apple. You cannot charge more on iOS to compensate for Apple's 30% cut (which I think is rather high for subscriptions).
  - halostatue 16y ago
    Aside from the subscription model involved, this is identical to (but with a better producer margin at 70%) what Handango and other PalmOS app distributors offered. I remember developers being up in arms because (a) Handango wanted a 60% cut, (b) you had to offer the same pricing on the Handango store as anywhere else, and (c) you couldn't direct people out of the Handango store. The clause you're talking about is pretty standard in reseller contracts everywhere. I wouldn't be surprised if there were one in the distributor contract for selling software in boxes at Apple stores, where the manufacturer makes 10% or less of the retail price. Also, Amazon has to make certain deep discount prices only visible after clicking or putting into the customer's cart because while they can sell for less than the MSRP, they aren't allowed to advertise (or let searches advertise) at that deep discount price. Edit: Added (c) as I remembered it while rereading this.
nooneelse 16y ago
Actually having the same content/product sold through both Apple and somewhere else is an interesting case. Between the two distribution channels, in which do you put your R&D or advertising dollar when channel Apple returns 30% less per customer gained there versus channel other?
- ubernostrum 16y ago
  Well. First up, I suspect this policy won't last long; the most likely explanation for it that I can see is that Apple's trying to figure out what the market will bear. Which, you know, is something they tend to do fairly often with the iOS platform, and sometimes it works the first try and they stick to the policy, and sometimes it doesn't and they change it. But as far as choosing where to focus money, I think Apple's banking on the fact that nobody else in the mobile space has the kind of integrated platform and distribution channel iOS has. There's a lot of attraction there, especially given that the alternatives (i.e., Android) not only aren't there yet, but aren't even close to getting there. So right now, if I had to choose where to put my budget, I'd put it into iOS without a second thought; sure, Apple's going to get a cut, but the reduced overhead and relative ease (if I want broad exposure on Android, how many app stores do I have to market my content in? How many carriers do I have to sign deals with to get promoted? etc.), combined with an existing and known-to-be-loyal installed base for the platform, would suggest to me that I'm going to make up the difference pretty quickly.
adsr 16y ago
That's not how I read their ToS, they are forcing content providers to offer the same price as elsewhere. They ban pop-up's or redirects outside. Both of these are good for end users, and user experience. The 30% cut is only going to affect the providers, not the end users, (at least not directly). They are in turn offering a large user base to these providers, in essence acting like a distributor. If this somehow leads to providers leaving, I'm sure that Apple will back off some of these rules.

myhf 16y ago

Why does the price have to stay the same between platforms?

coffeedrinker 16y ago
That is one of Apple's requirements. Whatever you sell somewhere else, it has to be the same price or cheaper at Apple. You cannot charge more on iOS to compensate for Apple's 30% cut (which I think is rather high for subscriptions).
- halostatue 16y ago
  Aside from the subscription model involved, this is identical to (but with a better producer margin at 70%) what Handango and other PalmOS app distributors offered. I remember developers being up in arms because (a) Handango wanted a 60% cut, (b) you had to offer the same pricing on the Handango store as anywhere else, and (c) you couldn't direct people out of the Handango store. The clause you're talking about is pretty standard in reseller contracts everywhere. I wouldn't be surprised if there were one in the distributor contract for selling software in boxes at Apple stores, where the manufacturer makes 10% or less of the retail price. Also, Amazon has to make certain deep discount prices only visible after clicking or putting into the customer's cart because while they can sell for less than the MSRP, they aren't allowed to advertise (or let searches advertise) at that deep discount price. Edit: Added (c) as I remembered it while rereading this.

nooneelse 16y ago

Actually having the same content/product sold through both Apple and somewhere else is an interesting case. Between the two distribution channels, in which do you put your R&D or advertising dollar when channel Apple returns 30% less per customer gained there versus channel other?

ubernostrum 16y ago
Well. First up, I suspect this policy won't last long; the most likely explanation for it that I can see is that Apple's trying to figure out what the market will bear. Which, you know, is something they tend to do fairly often with the iOS platform, and sometimes it works the first try and they stick to the policy, and sometimes it doesn't and they change it. But as far as choosing where to focus money, I think Apple's banking on the fact that nobody else in the mobile space has the kind of integrated platform and distribution channel iOS has. There's a lot of attraction there, especially given that the alternatives (i.e., Android) not only aren't there yet, but aren't even close to getting there. So right now, if I had to choose where to put my budget, I'd put it into iOS without a second thought; sure, Apple's going to get a cut, but the reduced overhead and relative ease (if I want broad exposure on Android, how many app stores do I have to market my content in? How many carriers do I have to sign deals with to get promoted? etc.), combined with an existing and known-to-be-loyal installed base for the platform, would suggest to me that I'm going to make up the difference pretty quickly.

adsr 16y ago

That's not how I read their ToS, they are forcing content providers to offer the same price as elsewhere. They ban pop-up's or redirects outside. Both of these are good for end users, and user experience. The 30% cut is only going to affect the providers, not the end users, (at least not directly). They are in turn offering a large user base to these providers, in essence acting like a distributor. If this somehow leads to providers leaving, I'm sure that Apple will back off some of these rules.