7 ms·
Wonder if they could simply offer it for purchase in AppStore, at a 30% markup, clearly presented as “Apple’s cut”. Users can then choose where to buy and they
by nickpp 6y ago
Wonder if they could simply offer it for purchase in AppStore, at a 30% markup, clearly presented as “Apple’s cut”.
Users can then choose where to buy and they will obey the rules...
- nileshtrivedi 6y agoEither way, Apple loses nothing.
- berkes 6y agoA potential effect is that iPhone (iOS) users see that they pay far more than people on other platforms. Which may reflect bad on either HEY or on Apple, depending on how the story is spun.
- berkes 6y agoHow would that work with an annual subscription, though? Or do you mean that they have the in-app purchase of that subscription and then, instead of asking $99 they'd ask $99.00 Subscription + $29.70 Apple Fees = $128.70 That would be clear and transparent, indeed. But it is also a bit of a finger to iOS users, though.
- httpsterio 6y agoIt's what the likes of Spotify have had to do. either that or eat the cut themselves but no way around it if you want to be listed.
- Despegar 6y agoDistribution isn't free in any business. Spotify and the like might not be as profitable paying the 30/15%, but that's a Spotify problem not an Apple problem.
- paulgb 6y agoThis would be a more compelling case if there was a market to set a competitive price for distribution instead of a monopoly. This looks more like rent seeking than a fair cost of distribution. After all, why does it cost any more on Apple's end to distribute Spotify to a paying customer than a non-paying one?
- camel_Snake 6y agoDoes Apple Music have to pay that same 30% fee though? I don't think so, which makes it kind of an Apple problem.
- Despegar 6y agoDoes the Walmart that has a McDonalds within their store need to charge themselves rent because McDonalds has to in order for it to be "fair"?
- foepys 6y agoAt a certain market share anti-trust kicks in. The market share does not have to be at 100%, it can even be lower than 50% if your "niche share" in this market is large enough.
- criddell 6y agoApple Music competes with Spotify with a very similar product. Walmart and McDonald's are for more different.
- ficklepickle 6y agoThat assumes that Walmart is the franchisee of the McDonalds located in their store. I cannot find any evidence to support that. I found a WSJ article[0] that indicates that Subway locations inside Walmarts are run by individual franchisees. So it would probably be fair to say that yes, restaurants located inside of Walmart stores probably pay rent. [0] https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118970298406826519 https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118970298406826519
- benhurmarcel 6y agoThey can't show "Apple Fees" in the app, as per Apple's rules. They would only be able to show the total. In many cases it's not a great idea because it makes it look like your product is a lot more expensive than it is, and the customer has no idea there's a way to get a better price. It happened to me with Youtube Premium, I thought it was expensive at €16 (instead of €12 in reality), and only found out by chance it was the iOS pricing.
- deltron3030 6y ago>and the customer has no idea there's a way to get a better price. Wouldn't you look for more information outside the appstore before you buy into a subscription? I mean if you do that you should stumble upon the actual price and maybe an explanation for the higher price in the appstore. It's less a problem for Basecamp than for Spotify, who have a more mainstream product and audience.
- benhurmarcel 6y agoWell if the app tells me it costs $X, I have no reason to doubt it and double-check on the web. Unless I know about that Apple policy, but most consumers don't.
- jankassens 6y agoUnclear to me, but this might disallow a higher price for Apple in-app purchases: > 3.1.3(b) [...] You must not directly or indirectly target iOS users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase, and your general communications about other purchasing methods must not discourage use of in-app purchase. from https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#multiplatform-services https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#mul...
- deltron3030 6y agoThey could just price it atronomically high in the app, like a bug, which will trigger people to reach out to others or investigate.
- pdog 6y agoIf Apple charges a 30% fee, the total price would have to be $141.43 to get back $99 for the subscription.
- paulgb 6y ago> But it is also a bit of a finger to iOS users, though. Yes, but I'd point out that it is Apple giving their own customers the finger here, not Hey.
- superasn 6y agoThis is such a neat idea. I think if all app developers start doing it, it will force big companies to maybe lower their cut. Like how we add VAT to final price it should say Apple/Google tax and add 30% to total. At least it will make the non dev users aware of the app store tax bs.
- rubicon33 6y agoThe issue is that the user may not even know there's an alternative price somewhere else (website). Apple bans you from adding ANY information to your app that indicates they can pay somewhere else.
- ninjaturtlez 6y agoIf they host their own ad server couldnt they just advertise their own application, linking to the website where the user would be able to find the real price? Would apple be able to tell what content they are serving? Is that still against the ToS?
- treebornfrog 6y agoThis is a very interesting workaround. Would like to know if anyone has done this.
- ninjaturtlez 6y agoI'm not personally an IOS developer but it sounds like a really obvious solution to the problem. I'm assuming Apple isn't this dumb
- Joeri 6y agoApp store rules state “ You must not directly or indirectly target iOS users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase, and your general communications about other purchasing methods must not discourage use of in-app purchase.” I’m pretty sure that means you’re not allowed to let the user know in any way, even on your site, that they can get a better deal than the IAP. Besides, apple clearly intends to get a cut of hey’s business. If they find a loophole, it will be closed soon enough.
- bryan_w 6y agoThat sounds like harm to the consumer.
- drewg123 6y agoI wonder if it would satisfy Apple if they offered an in-app subscription price at something like 10,000% markup? Eg, something nobody would sign up for. But the option would indeed be there... People would realize that an email app could not cost that much, and so would look to sign up on the website.
- dumbfounder 6y agoOr bury the subscription so far in the menu that no one would ever find it?
- drewg123 6y agoI think that probably violates Apple's guidelines. But I'm not sure how Apple can complain about price, given there are apps that cost $1000 or more.
- ksec 6y agoThat is actually a very decent idea. Charge it at $9999/ Yr. I wonder if that would work.