5 ms·
The way this is worded makes no sense - surely it should be for the first $1,000,000? $1,000,000 = $150,000 $1,000,001 = >$300,000? It feels like a knee-jerk
by supermatt 6y ago
The way this is worded makes no sense - surely it should be for the first $1,000,000?
$1,000,000 = $150,000
$1,000,001 = >$300,000?
It feels like a knee-jerk reaction to the ongoing complaints without much forethought other than an arbitrary change in the percentage below some round number.
- lilyball 6y agoSo on Jan 1st every year your commission would suddenly fall from 30% to 15%, until you hit $1M and it jumps back up to 30%? That seems rather arbitrary.
- sokoloff 6y agoYou’ll probably find the actual rules even more arbitrary. In year 2, your January sales will still pay a 30% commission if you hit $1M the prior year.
- benhurmarcel 6y agoThat would be an incentive to drop the price is almost 0 until January if you see that you're trending towards $1M at the end of the year.
- samatman 6y agoHonestly? Fire sale prices on apps around the holidays sounds like a consumer win to me.
- mjs 6y agoThere's no discontinuity in the first year you exceed $1m: that extra dollar is "taxed" at 30%, but the first $1m is at 15% ("the standard commission rate will apply for the remainder of the year"). Looks like the next year (after exceeding $1m) the first dollar will be taxed at 30%, though. They should just make this work like income tax: the first $1m is taxed at 15%, and everything above that is at 30%. (Same rules every year, no flip-flop.)
- mpweiher 6y agoMaybe that makes it look a bit too much like the tax it is for comfort.
- mjs 6y agoThe way the rules are now seems like there's a very big incentive to avoid earning a little bit more than $1m. This could have … unintended consequences. (e.g. if it looks like you're going to earn a little bit over $1m, increase prices by a lot (to discourage purchases), but tell people the app will be "cheap" again in January. Or even make the app free for a while.)