4 ms·

> IMO they can keep the 30% but they should just allow apps to offer other payment methods. Would this just result in every app being free, but using (non-appl

> IMO they can keep the 30% but they should just allow apps to offer other payment methods. Would this just result in every app being free, but using (non-apple) IAP to gain access to any content beyond the opening screen?

jamil7 6y ago
I think it'd have to have to caveats, e.g if offering payment you have to also offer apple payment at the same rate to the user.
- smnrchrds 6y ago
  Not at the same rate. That would defeat the purpose from the consumer's point of view. They should be able to set a higher price for Apple Pay to cover the extra 30%.
  - jamil7 6y ago
    I think we're in agreement? I just worded it weirdly.
mattmaroon 6y ago
Other than the non-Apple part, that's how it pretty much works now. Only 3% and 8% of apps in the stores are paid on Android and iOS respectively, and counted by downloads it's probably much lower. IAPs might be over 99% of revenue. If I were Apple, I'd make my payments optional. They're so seamless that as a customer, I'd probably still use them unless I were getting a substantial discount to do otherwise, and sometimes even then. They could do something like give developers the option to sign up to use it exclusively for a reduced rate. It'd be one less bullet for the anti-trust regulators, and app store revenues are only about 4% of Apple's revenue anyway.
- balfirevic 6y ago
  > Other than the non-Apple part, that's how it pretty much works now. Only 3% and 8% of apps in the stores are paid on Android and iOS respectively, and counted by downloads it's probably much lower. IAPs might be over 99% of revenue. Yes, but all IAPs now go through Apple and they get their 30% cut. > hey're so seamless that as a customer, I'd probably still use them unless I were getting a substantial discount to do otherwise, and sometimes even then Well, every app would easily be able to offer you a 25% discount (30% - 5% to account for transaction fees), since they would not be paying the Apple fee.
  - judge2020 6y ago
    > Well, every app would easily be able to offer you a 25% discount (30% - 5% to account for transaction fees), since they would not be paying the Apple fee. Since when have companies passed on fee decreases to their customers instead of accepting the effectively free higher margins?
    - blendergeek 6y ago
      > Since when have companies passed on fee decreases to their customers instead of accepting the effectively free higher margins? Since companies had to compete with other companies. The moment the Apple tax is lifted, at least one company will lower prices. Other companies will be forced to follow suit. I'm not saying ALL the price decrease will be passed to consumers, but some of it definitely will. Especially since a lot of these goods are currently sold at a mark up on the App Store right now.
      - mattmaroon 6y ago
        I think this model looks at apps as widgets too much. People don't price compare IAPs. Nobody's like "well fortnite charges X for Y, but Minecraft charges A for B." App store revenues are probably largely games or similar things that don't really have a competitor you can easily price compare against. App developers set their prices at whatever maximizes revenue (which is often determined by testing) and the payment processing fee has no effect. It's more like Coke pricing at an airport than Coke pricing at a gas station with another gas station next door. I expect they'd offer whatever discount maximized revenue, so the real question is how much of a discount do they need to offer to get you to switch from app store payments to some other method? Other methods are largely pretty seamless these days too, so the answer is probably not much. I expect consumers would barely benefit. (Source: been doing games with IAPs for 13 years).
kevingadd 6y ago
They can always require that you offer Apple Pay alongside direct payments. They're already doing this for their apple login system, if you offer facebook login etc you're expected to also offer their login system.

jamil7 6y ago

I think it'd have to have to caveats, e.g if offering payment you have to also offer apple payment at the same rate to the user.

smnrchrds 6y ago
Not at the same rate. That would defeat the purpose from the consumer's point of view. They should be able to set a higher price for Apple Pay to cover the extra 30%.
- jamil7 6y ago
  I think we're in agreement? I just worded it weirdly.

mattmaroon 6y ago

Other than the non-Apple part, that's how it pretty much works now. Only 3% and 8% of apps in the stores are paid on Android and iOS respectively, and counted by downloads it's probably much lower. IAPs might be over 99% of revenue. If I were Apple, I'd make my payments optional. They're so seamless that as a customer, I'd probably still use them unless I were getting a substantial discount to do otherwise, and sometimes even then. They could do something like give developers the option to sign up to use it exclusively for a reduced rate. It'd be one less bullet for the anti-trust regulators, and app store revenues are only about 4% of Apple's revenue anyway.

balfirevic 6y ago
> Other than the non-Apple part, that's how it pretty much works now. Only 3% and 8% of apps in the stores are paid on Android and iOS respectively, and counted by downloads it's probably much lower. IAPs might be over 99% of revenue. Yes, but all IAPs now go through Apple and they get their 30% cut. > hey're so seamless that as a customer, I'd probably still use them unless I were getting a substantial discount to do otherwise, and sometimes even then Well, every app would easily be able to offer you a 25% discount (30% - 5% to account for transaction fees), since they would not be paying the Apple fee.
- judge2020 6y ago
  > Well, every app would easily be able to offer you a 25% discount (30% - 5% to account for transaction fees), since they would not be paying the Apple fee. Since when have companies passed on fee decreases to their customers instead of accepting the effectively free higher margins?
  - blendergeek 6y ago
    > Since when have companies passed on fee decreases to their customers instead of accepting the effectively free higher margins? Since companies had to compete with other companies. The moment the Apple tax is lifted, at least one company will lower prices. Other companies will be forced to follow suit. I'm not saying ALL the price decrease will be passed to consumers, but some of it definitely will. Especially since a lot of these goods are currently sold at a mark up on the App Store right now.
    - mattmaroon 6y ago
      I think this model looks at apps as widgets too much. People don't price compare IAPs. Nobody's like "well fortnite charges X for Y, but Minecraft charges A for B." App store revenues are probably largely games or similar things that don't really have a competitor you can easily price compare against. App developers set their prices at whatever maximizes revenue (which is often determined by testing) and the payment processing fee has no effect. It's more like Coke pricing at an airport than Coke pricing at a gas station with another gas station next door. I expect they'd offer whatever discount maximized revenue, so the real question is how much of a discount do they need to offer to get you to switch from app store payments to some other method? Other methods are largely pretty seamless these days too, so the answer is probably not much. I expect consumers would barely benefit. (Source: been doing games with IAPs for 13 years).

kevingadd 6y ago

They can always require that you offer Apple Pay alongside direct payments. They're already doing this for their apple login system, if you offer facebook login etc you're expected to also offer their login system.