3 ms·

This is already way off topic to my post I'm wondering if I'm the right person you replied to. Let's stay focused on this, because I agree with most of your poi

• fossuser 5y ago
  I'd argue your question is a warped framing that confuses the issue in an attempt to be leading. iPhone sale to user is irrelevant. Apple forces distribution via their store and they force companies to pay a cut. I think this is bad, but at least it's across all people that participate in the store. Then Apple itself enters the market via the store selling the same product at the same price, but without the tax. That's cheating. It has nothing to do with the 'physical material sale' - it has to do with requiring store distribution and taking a cut of competitors margins, but then entering yourself. It's not Spotify 'getting more of the pie' it's Spotify not having to pay an anti-competitive tax to the platform controller. They can either allow distribution outside of the store (which I would not want) or they can remove the tax on apps that they directly compete with. I'd prefer they remove the cut entirely and replace it with some low yearly fee for distribution.
  • Humdeee 5y ago
    > iPhone sale to user is irrelevant. Thank you. I agree. The iPhone sale to the user is irrelevant to Spotify's return. The rest of the post is yelling at a cloud. I have not given my position on any of that so I have no clue to whom you are arguing with.