6 ms·

> this is good and fair for customers at the point of purchase. I think it is widely accepted in commerce that a deal is only fair if both parties have the rel

> this is good and fair for customers at the point of purchase. I think it is widely accepted in commerce that a deal is only fair if both parties have the relevant information. If customers know they're paying more because of Apple's fees and are comfortable with it because they feel they get adequate benefits in return, that's fair. If they are unaware of this however, am not sure how the deal can be considered fair, since not all parties have the relevant information to make an informed purchase.

vr46 6y ago
This sounds interesting, but not convinced since we could say that fairness mainly exists in the circumstances and rarely in the courts. At some point there is an upper limit to the relevant information available for any decision. We could test this, I mean, suppose the invoices or even the details at the checkout broke down the total into developer’s fee, apple’s fee, government tax, and so everyone could see that, would that be sufficient to fix the problem? I suspect not, because Epic, in this story, are seeking to pay Apple less, and give themselves more - that’s really their bottom line. Are they really going to all this trouble on my behalf?
- thu2111 6y ago
  Well, hotel bills do routinely break out not just taxes but individual taxes. And it does matter. I just got back from a hotel where I was rather irritated to find that local taxes for just a 6 day stay added up to the cost of a very nice restaurant meal for two. That's worth knowing next time a politician talks about tax. The hotel could treat such taxes as overheads and incorporate it into the price, but that's not really useful because they can't change it, only the customer can. Most business overheads aren't like that. If only a customer can affect a charge it makes sense to break it out and highlight it.
  - chucksmash 6y ago
    Interesting take. What if the shoe were on the other foot? What company would hire me if I negotiated a salary and then after we shook hands and everybody had the warm and fuzzies, I said, "Well now, you'll understand this is just the rate I charge, so it is exclusive of federal and state income tax. These are additional fees that I am responsible, by law, for collecting from you on behalf of the government. I've broken the numbers down this way in the interest of full transparency."
    - rolisz 6y ago
      That's pretty much how it happens in Romania. All (or almost) salaries are negotiated post tax (so what gets payed out to me) and the employer is responsible for paying the appropriate taxes to the government.
      - throwaway5792 6y ago
        What if you have other income from investments?
        rescbr 6y ago
        I assume it’s done the same way as any other withheld tax. The only difference is negotiating salary net of tax rather than ex-tax.
        rolisz 6y ago
        In that case you have to go to the tax office and file out some documents and then you pay the taxes for the investments separately. There is a single income tax rate, 10%, so it doesn't matter how much you earn. If your investments make more than the annual minimum wage, you also have to pay the health insurance tax and "social security" tax.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - LexGray 6y ago
    Did the hotel also break out their net profit after expenses, including how much had been paid to affiliates for booking?
  - elif 6y ago
    Knowing that a city has a high hotel tax has driven me immediately to Airbnb in the past. Knowing the amount that I am overpaying for a service is a valuable capitalist function.
  - bobdole12345 6y ago
    Hotel bills are broken out like that because the tax system allows many write-offs and reimbursements of many of those fees. They're broken down because they often go to different parts of the local, state and federal governments, and it's important that those seeking write off or reimbursement know who they need to claim those against. Interestingly, many large companies use services for this kind of thing, much like Apples walled garden, where their employees can spend without worrying about tracking all these details, and the service takes care of all the (significant) legal wrangling and deal negotiation to make this simple. That's essentially what Apple does for their money: makes it possible for users to buy things across a host of jurisdictions from an ecosystem of vendors, without risking their device security or payment security. There is a significant amount of legal and infrastructural wrangling involved, most of which the end customer, and many of the vendors don't fully understand. But yeah, let us focus on the least important part: price.
fredguth 6y ago
It would be fare if it wasn’t a monopoly. Only if other companies could create their own app stores that worked on iPhone the customers would be optioning. In the current state of affairs there is no option. Remember there was a time you could only phone people in the network you were a subscriber. It is not the same, but a similar situation here.
- vr46 6y ago
  But it’s not a monopoly, it’s one of many, many devices. There are, at time of writing, many games platforms and many application platforms: XBox, PlayStation, Nintendo, IOS, Android, Windows, MacOS, Linux, with Google Stadia too. Developers make a choice and everything sold on those platforms has distribution costs. Fortnite is available on most if not all of those platforms. AND, players play against one another through the internet not through a private developers network. So there’s plenty of competition. Why Epic aren’t demanding Nintendo and Sony take a lower cut is a mystery. Or maybe not? Epic have massively, massively, overplayed their hand here. Instead of creating an amazing new game and using THAT as leverage to platform owners for a deal, they’ve made a satirical video, broken a contract, had their bluff called, and cemented their place in future business school classes as how not to go about a negotiation.
  - enragedcacti 6y ago
    > cemented their place in future business school classes as how not to go about a negotiation it isn't a negotiation, it's an anti-trust lawsuit. Tim Sweeney made it clear that the only 'deal' he is willing to accept is 3rd party stores.
    - LadyCailin 6y ago
      I find it rich that a company that bleeds tons of money just so they have exclusive titles on their platform is suing someone else for anti competitive behavior.
  - elif 6y ago
    Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are creating a game ecosystem by selling hardware at a loss or near loss, footing R&D, supporting devkits, and running promotions mutually beneficial for developers. The value of creating and enabling an entire ecosystem is found to be worth 30%. An iPhone is sold for a substantial profit regardless of gaming entirely, and offers none of those services or promotional benefits to developers/publishers.
heroprotagonist 6y ago
You can see this in action on Twitch sometimes in the chat. People ask why the subscription for a streamer via mobile app is $5.99 when it's $4.99 via the web app when there is no difference in what is being provided. It is noticed and often people actively avoid the higher price once they are aware. Some are frustrated and unsubscribe. This is understandable since they realize they've been paying an on-going 20% premium every month for a one-time convenience by originally pressing the subscribe button from the mobile version. And none of the extra 20% goes to the streamer they wanted to support.

vr46 6y ago

This sounds interesting, but not convinced since we could say that fairness mainly exists in the circumstances and rarely in the courts. At some point there is an upper limit to the relevant information available for any decision. We could test this, I mean, suppose the invoices or even the details at the checkout broke down the total into developer’s fee, apple’s fee, government tax, and so everyone could see that, would that be sufficient to fix the problem? I suspect not, because Epic, in this story, are seeking to pay Apple less, and give themselves more - that’s really their bottom line. Are they really going to all this trouble on my behalf?

thu2111 6y ago
Well, hotel bills do routinely break out not just taxes but individual taxes. And it does matter. I just got back from a hotel where I was rather irritated to find that local taxes for just a 6 day stay added up to the cost of a very nice restaurant meal for two. That's worth knowing next time a politician talks about tax. The hotel could treat such taxes as overheads and incorporate it into the price, but that's not really useful because they can't change it, only the customer can. Most business overheads aren't like that. If only a customer can affect a charge it makes sense to break it out and highlight it.
- chucksmash 6y ago
  Interesting take. What if the shoe were on the other foot? What company would hire me if I negotiated a salary and then after we shook hands and everybody had the warm and fuzzies, I said, "Well now, you'll understand this is just the rate I charge, so it is exclusive of federal and state income tax. These are additional fees that I am responsible, by law, for collecting from you on behalf of the government. I've broken the numbers down this way in the interest of full transparency."
  - rolisz 6y ago
    That's pretty much how it happens in Romania. All (or almost) salaries are negotiated post tax (so what gets payed out to me) and the employer is responsible for paying the appropriate taxes to the government.
    - throwaway5792 6y ago
      What if you have other income from investments?
      - rescbr 6y ago
        I assume it’s done the same way as any other withheld tax. The only difference is negotiating salary net of tax rather than ex-tax.
      - rolisz 6y ago
        In that case you have to go to the tax office and file out some documents and then you pay the taxes for the investments separately. There is a single income tax rate, 10%, so it doesn't matter how much you earn. If your investments make more than the annual minimum wage, you also have to pay the health insurance tax and "social security" tax.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- LexGray 6y ago
  Did the hotel also break out their net profit after expenses, including how much had been paid to affiliates for booking?
- elif 6y ago
  Knowing that a city has a high hotel tax has driven me immediately to Airbnb in the past. Knowing the amount that I am overpaying for a service is a valuable capitalist function.
- bobdole12345 6y ago
  Hotel bills are broken out like that because the tax system allows many write-offs and reimbursements of many of those fees. They're broken down because they often go to different parts of the local, state and federal governments, and it's important that those seeking write off or reimbursement know who they need to claim those against. Interestingly, many large companies use services for this kind of thing, much like Apples walled garden, where their employees can spend without worrying about tracking all these details, and the service takes care of all the (significant) legal wrangling and deal negotiation to make this simple. That's essentially what Apple does for their money: makes it possible for users to buy things across a host of jurisdictions from an ecosystem of vendors, without risking their device security or payment security. There is a significant amount of legal and infrastructural wrangling involved, most of which the end customer, and many of the vendors don't fully understand. But yeah, let us focus on the least important part: price.

fredguth 6y ago

It would be fare if it wasn’t a monopoly. Only if other companies could create their own app stores that worked on iPhone the customers would be optioning. In the current state of affairs there is no option. Remember there was a time you could only phone people in the network you were a subscriber. It is not the same, but a similar situation here.

vr46 6y ago
But it’s not a monopoly, it’s one of many, many devices. There are, at time of writing, many games platforms and many application platforms: XBox, PlayStation, Nintendo, IOS, Android, Windows, MacOS, Linux, with Google Stadia too. Developers make a choice and everything sold on those platforms has distribution costs. Fortnite is available on most if not all of those platforms. AND, players play against one another through the internet not through a private developers network. So there’s plenty of competition. Why Epic aren’t demanding Nintendo and Sony take a lower cut is a mystery. Or maybe not? Epic have massively, massively, overplayed their hand here. Instead of creating an amazing new game and using THAT as leverage to platform owners for a deal, they’ve made a satirical video, broken a contract, had their bluff called, and cemented their place in future business school classes as how not to go about a negotiation.
- enragedcacti 6y ago
  > cemented their place in future business school classes as how not to go about a negotiation it isn't a negotiation, it's an anti-trust lawsuit. Tim Sweeney made it clear that the only 'deal' he is willing to accept is 3rd party stores.
  - LadyCailin 6y ago
    I find it rich that a company that bleeds tons of money just so they have exclusive titles on their platform is suing someone else for anti competitive behavior.
- elif 6y ago
  Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are creating a game ecosystem by selling hardware at a loss or near loss, footing R&D, supporting devkits, and running promotions mutually beneficial for developers. The value of creating and enabling an entire ecosystem is found to be worth 30%. An iPhone is sold for a substantial profit regardless of gaming entirely, and offers none of those services or promotional benefits to developers/publishers.

heroprotagonist 6y ago

You can see this in action on Twitch sometimes in the chat. People ask why the subscription for a streamer via mobile app is $5.99 when it's $4.99 via the web app when there is no difference in what is being provided. It is noticed and often people actively avoid the higher price once they are aware. Some are frustrated and unsubscribe. This is understandable since they realize they've been paying an on-going 20% premium every month for a one-time convenience by originally pressing the subscribe button from the mobile version. And none of the extra 20% goes to the streamer they wanted to support.