5 ms·

How about we got to a place where Apple isn't taking 30% from companies just for the privilege of putting an app in the store, even when payment streams are com

How about we got to a place where Apple isn't taking 30% from companies just for the privilege of putting an app in the store, even when payment streams are completely unrelated to the app store and are merely provided as a convenience to customers? Apple taking 30% (or trying) from every app is bad for everyone.

WWLink 6y ago
How about a point where Apple doesn't expect a kickback from every transaction that occurs on an apple device?
- TuringNYC 6y ago
  What happens now if the account is created now on iOS, but then I do a transaction, say via the web? Does AAPL get a share of the offline transaction also if done via the same account? A good example might be something like the Starbucks app.
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    It's a physical product, so currently Apple isn't attempting to levy a 30% charge on the transaction. Apple is having enough trouble getting retailers to accept Apple Pay as it is; attempting to tax physical sales would kill Apple Pay and likely bring about the immediate ire of pretty much every government of every jurisdiction they do business in.
pwinnski 6y ago
The vast majority of apps in the store are free, which leaves Apple footing the enormous bill for providing the apps. The original idea, which worked for a few years, was that 30% of the for-fee apps helped cover the costs of the free apps. For the first few years, Apple operated their App Store at a loss, and aimed for break-even. I think subscriptions is ultimately what broke that model.
- suprfsat 6y ago
  The App Store drives trillions of dollars in sales of iPhones. That's your break-even.
  - singhrac 6y ago
    Trillions is a bit of an exaggeration, but not much. The iPhone is somewhere around 150-200bn of revenue a year.
    - dane-pgp 6y ago
      Actually, as the parent comment didn't say "per year", and the App Store was opened in 2008, "trillions" (as an aggregate) doesn't seem like an exaggeration at all.
- vbezhenar 6y ago
  Let me host my app on my own servers, I'll pay the bills.
- ksec 6y ago
  >The vast majority of apps in the store are free, which leaves Apple footing the enormous bill for providing the apps. Enormous bill of what? And lets not forget, and needs to be repeated every time this is mentioned, people are paying $99 dollar a year just to submit these "free" apps.
  - zuppy 6y ago
    and let’s not forget about the huge markup on iPhones themselves, this should cover whatever their owner ever downloads.
  - olyjohn 6y ago
    And lets also not forget, the majority of the people paying that fee probably will never publish an app to the store.
- klmadfejno 6y ago
Shivetya 6y ago
Oh I can see a whole new method here. Buy an iPhone for %15 off price if you use Apple's App store or buy it at full price if you don't use Apple's App store. As in, let Apple subsidize the cost of the phone with the app store, I suspect a significant number of people would go for it even with just a five percent price drop. The problem currently isn't that Apple is charging what they do for the App store, the problem is they are in effect selling customers of their hardware for that amount.
- muro 6y ago
  As they set the price of the iPhone, they would just increase the "non subsided" price.
kempbellt 6y ago
They aren't taking 30% from anyone. That is their price for services provided. You are making it sound like thievery. It isn't. People know this price going in and agree to it. If you don't like the price, use (or create) an alternative.
- cma 6y ago
  Due to user lock-in through things like sticky iMessages, plain inertia, network effects, and anticompetitive practices, it is sort of an extortion.
  - kempbellt 6y ago
    Some of the things they do are anticompetitive within their ecosystem, yes, and these things should be addressed. But charging 30% for using their app store is not. It's the price for access to the clubhouse that they built. If you don't like the entry fee, build your own clubhouse or find another one. Every reason you provided is more reason to build a competitive solution. None of them are incentive for Apple to lower their prices. You don't have to use Apple. You can send snail mail or use pigeon carriers like in the olden times if you want to communicate with people. And of course, you can always use the string and paper cup method to talk to your friends, rather than Facetiming. The cost you pay is for the convenience, and despite being very used to it, most people can live without it.
    - stale2002 6y ago
      > But charging 30% for using their app store is not. The issue is not that they charge this fee. Instead it is that they prevent competing app store on their platform, through the use of anti competitive practices. If, instead, it was quick an easy to install a different app store on the iPhone, then few people would complain. > Every reason you provided is more reason to build a competitive solution Apple prevents competing app stores. Thats not really possible to get a different app store on the iPhone. This is anti-competitive, due to the size of Apple's market share, which is around 50% of the US smartphone market. This anti-competitiveness is therefore illegal, according to section 2 of the sherman anti-trust act. > If you don't like the entry fee, build your own clubhouse or find another one. You missed the other option. Which is to prosecute apple for their illegal, anti-competitive practices, and make them follow the law by allowing competing app stores.
devmunchies 6y ago
i wouldn't mind apple taking 30% on anything in the app store as long as they allowed a user to download my app from my website. Just like desktop computers. Nobody is complaining about Apple taking a cut from the Mac App Store. Personally, it's nobodies place to dictate how much Apple charges. The main complaint is over Apple's monopoly over the channel for getting apps onto your mobile device.
- gamblor956 6y ago
  Personally, it's nobodies place to dictate how much Apple charges. Actually, it's everybody's place to dictate them, through commercial negotiation. Antitrust generally applies where, as with the App Store, traditional market dynamics do not apply to constrain one participant's market actions. The main complaint is over Apple's monopoly over the channel for getting apps onto your mobile device. No, that's the foundation of the antitrust claims. The main complaints are that Apple is abusing its power over the app delivery channel to force other market participants to put up with a variety of things they would otherwise never agree to if market dynamics were functioning correctly, like giving up 30% of all their income even when it's unrelated to the app itself (e.g., ticket sales), or preventing competing apps (e.g., browsing engines, mail apps like Hey, etc.), banning third-party apps from using API features in the OS or from certain forms of outreach but letting first-party apps violate those restrictions (see, all Apple apps released in the past 3 years).
tyingq 6y ago
It sounded weird to me from the start because it doesn't match any traditional thing I'm aware of. Payment services are in the 3% range. Realtors are in the 5% range. Talent agents might be 10-20%, but usually 10%. Apple's 30% just seems outrageous.
- 1123581321 6y ago
  It has its origins in the fees that game consoles and software distributors charge.
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    Console fees can and are negotiated by publishers. Epic, etc., are not paying MS and Sony 30% of all transactions. You can't negotiate the Apple tax, which is is a sign of market dysfunction.
    - 1123581321 6y ago
      That may be the case. The OP was just struggling to think of anything mainstream in that range of revenue share.
      - tyingq 6y ago
        Yes, I didn't know the gaming space was also that high. I wonder what a mob protection racket's percentage is.
        1123581321 6y ago
        This is just the start of research, but apparently Sicilian mob extracts 1.6B euro from the island with 80% of businesses paying, and the GDP is about 90B. So those businesses are perhaps losing 2.5% although the article makes it seem like they tend to be small or individual businesses that pay, which would increase that. Obviously very rough and I’d like to know more. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzo_(mafia) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzo_(mafia)
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

WWLink 6y ago

How about a point where Apple doesn't expect a kickback from every transaction that occurs on an apple device?

TuringNYC 6y ago
What happens now if the account is created now on iOS, but then I do a transaction, say via the web? Does AAPL get a share of the offline transaction also if done via the same account? A good example might be something like the Starbucks app.
- gamblor956 6y ago
  It's a physical product, so currently Apple isn't attempting to levy a 30% charge on the transaction. Apple is having enough trouble getting retailers to accept Apple Pay as it is; attempting to tax physical sales would kill Apple Pay and likely bring about the immediate ire of pretty much every government of every jurisdiction they do business in.

pwinnski 6y ago

The vast majority of apps in the store are free, which leaves Apple footing the enormous bill for providing the apps. The original idea, which worked for a few years, was that 30% of the for-fee apps helped cover the costs of the free apps. For the first few years, Apple operated their App Store at a loss, and aimed for break-even. I think subscriptions is ultimately what broke that model.

suprfsat 6y ago
The App Store drives trillions of dollars in sales of iPhones. That's your break-even.
- singhrac 6y ago
  Trillions is a bit of an exaggeration, but not much. The iPhone is somewhere around 150-200bn of revenue a year.
  - dane-pgp 6y ago
    Actually, as the parent comment didn't say "per year", and the App Store was opened in 2008, "trillions" (as an aggregate) doesn't seem like an exaggeration at all.
vbezhenar 6y ago
Let me host my app on my own servers, I'll pay the bills.
ksec 6y ago
>The vast majority of apps in the store are free, which leaves Apple footing the enormous bill for providing the apps. Enormous bill of what? And lets not forget, and needs to be repeated every time this is mentioned, people are paying $99 dollar a year just to submit these "free" apps.
- zuppy 6y ago
  and let’s not forget about the huge markup on iPhones themselves, this should cover whatever their owner ever downloads.
- olyjohn 6y ago
  And lets also not forget, the majority of the people paying that fee probably will never publish an app to the store.
klmadfejno 6y ago

Shivetya 6y ago

Oh I can see a whole new method here. Buy an iPhone for %15 off price if you use Apple's App store or buy it at full price if you don't use Apple's App store. As in, let Apple subsidize the cost of the phone with the app store, I suspect a significant number of people would go for it even with just a five percent price drop. The problem currently isn't that Apple is charging what they do for the App store, the problem is they are in effect selling customers of their hardware for that amount.

muro 6y ago
As they set the price of the iPhone, they would just increase the "non subsided" price.

kempbellt 6y ago

They aren't taking 30% from anyone. That is their price for services provided. You are making it sound like thievery. It isn't. People know this price going in and agree to it. If you don't like the price, use (or create) an alternative.

cma 6y ago
Due to user lock-in through things like sticky iMessages, plain inertia, network effects, and anticompetitive practices, it is sort of an extortion.
- kempbellt 6y ago
  Some of the things they do are anticompetitive within their ecosystem, yes, and these things should be addressed. But charging 30% for using their app store is not. It's the price for access to the clubhouse that they built. If you don't like the entry fee, build your own clubhouse or find another one. Every reason you provided is more reason to build a competitive solution. None of them are incentive for Apple to lower their prices. You don't have to use Apple. You can send snail mail or use pigeon carriers like in the olden times if you want to communicate with people. And of course, you can always use the string and paper cup method to talk to your friends, rather than Facetiming. The cost you pay is for the convenience, and despite being very used to it, most people can live without it.
  - stale2002 6y ago
    > But charging 30% for using their app store is not. The issue is not that they charge this fee. Instead it is that they prevent competing app store on their platform, through the use of anti competitive practices. If, instead, it was quick an easy to install a different app store on the iPhone, then few people would complain. > Every reason you provided is more reason to build a competitive solution Apple prevents competing app stores. Thats not really possible to get a different app store on the iPhone. This is anti-competitive, due to the size of Apple's market share, which is around 50% of the US smartphone market. This anti-competitiveness is therefore illegal, according to section 2 of the sherman anti-trust act. > If you don't like the entry fee, build your own clubhouse or find another one. You missed the other option. Which is to prosecute apple for their illegal, anti-competitive practices, and make them follow the law by allowing competing app stores.

devmunchies 6y ago

i wouldn't mind apple taking 30% on anything in the app store as long as they allowed a user to download my app from my website. Just like desktop computers. Nobody is complaining about Apple taking a cut from the Mac App Store. Personally, it's nobodies place to dictate how much Apple charges. The main complaint is over Apple's monopoly over the channel for getting apps onto your mobile device.

gamblor956 6y ago
Personally, it's nobodies place to dictate how much Apple charges. Actually, it's everybody's place to dictate them, through commercial negotiation. Antitrust generally applies where, as with the App Store, traditional market dynamics do not apply to constrain one participant's market actions. The main complaint is over Apple's monopoly over the channel for getting apps onto your mobile device. No, that's the foundation of the antitrust claims. The main complaints are that Apple is abusing its power over the app delivery channel to force other market participants to put up with a variety of things they would otherwise never agree to if market dynamics were functioning correctly, like giving up 30% of all their income even when it's unrelated to the app itself (e.g., ticket sales), or preventing competing apps (e.g., browsing engines, mail apps like Hey, etc.), banning third-party apps from using API features in the OS or from certain forms of outreach but letting first-party apps violate those restrictions (see, all Apple apps released in the past 3 years).

tyingq 6y ago

It sounded weird to me from the start because it doesn't match any traditional thing I'm aware of. Payment services are in the 3% range. Realtors are in the 5% range. Talent agents might be 10-20%, but usually 10%. Apple's 30% just seems outrageous.

1123581321 6y ago
It has its origins in the fees that game consoles and software distributors charge.
- gamblor956 6y ago
  Console fees can and are negotiated by publishers. Epic, etc., are not paying MS and Sony 30% of all transactions. You can't negotiate the Apple tax, which is is a sign of market dysfunction.
  - 1123581321 6y ago
    That may be the case. The OP was just struggling to think of anything mainstream in that range of revenue share.
    - tyingq 6y ago
      Yes, I didn't know the gaming space was also that high. I wonder what a mob protection racket's percentage is.
      - 1123581321 6y ago
        This is just the start of research, but apparently Sicilian mob extracts 1.6B euro from the island with 80% of businesses paying, and the GDP is about 90B. So those businesses are perhaps losing 2.5% although the article makes it seem like they tend to be small or individual businesses that pay, which would increase that. Obviously very rough and I’d like to know more. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzo_(mafia) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzo_(mafia)

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]