6 ms·

It’s incredible how much of tech is just scalping. I’m curious what loopholes exist for this - if you charge for coupons on your own site and a hosted space re

It’s incredible how much of tech is just scalping. I’m curious what loopholes exist for this - if you charge for coupons on your own site and a hosted space required a coupon but was otherwise not possible to use, would you still have to pay Apple?

bellyfullofbac 5y ago
Hah, imagine if someone makes a competitor. Is Twitter going to ban me tweeting to my 1000+ followers to come pay to see my talk at (some URL)? Or just derank that tweet so that very few people see it? (At which point the anti-competitive lawsuit should be interesting..)
- rchaud 5y ago
  A competitor would be a password-protected Zoom meeting with a Ko-fi button.
echelon 5y ago
I can understand Twitter taking a cut, but Apple and Google deserve no part of this. Hopefully this is more fuel for the rage machine that will shut this racket down. Device manufacturers should not be allowed to do the following: 1. run monopoly marketplaces on their devices 2. run any payments gateways on their devices If Apple Pay and Google Pay continue to be a thing, the DOJ needs to force the companies to be broken up into distinct business units. Let these organizations compete with Visa, PayPal, and the like on equal footing.
- 8note 5y ago
  Sure they do. They provide the devices that enable this TSMC should get the lion's share of the cut since they make all the chips to allow every part of the operation
  - aparsons 5y ago
    I didn’t realize they gave the devices away for free
  - Cu3PO42 5y ago
    How about ASML who make the EUV lithography machines that TSMC uses? How about those companies making parts that ASML uses, such as Zeiss and Trumpf? I'm not actually sure what exactly your point is, so I'm not arguing for or against it. I just thought the chain could be extended some.
  - echelon 5y ago
    AT&T and Verizon should get a 30% cut. The electric company should get a 50% cut. UPS, FedEx, and DHL should get a 72% cut. ... Oh my god, this is fucking stupid. In this entire chain, the only innovation and service being provided is by the app creator. All the dues to the other companies are already paid. The fucking OS vendor has nothing to do with anything other than enforcing their draconian bloodsucking rules.
    - nexuist 5y ago
      And they do! Phone contracts, electric bills, shipping fees. Everyone gets their cut when they deliver a service to the user. After I get Twitter from the App Store, the service is delivered. The App Store isn't doing anything other than providing free OTA updates which they could charge for if they want (not my fault they don't). Why should Twitter continue paying the App Store once the service is delivered? Would anyone pay FedEx every time they use an appliance shipped by FedEx, just because FedEx brought it to their house years ago? This is the same ask the App Store has whenever a developer wants to collect payment from users. And you can't even collect the payments yourself, even if you wanted to. And you can't tell users why payments are more expensive (not even through email or any web pages reachable through the app - Hey got kicked out for this). AND AND - this is truly outrageous mafia-like behavior - you can't sell your services for less outside of the App Store. That's right, if your monthly photo backup service is $9.99/mo on the App Store, you have to sell it for $9.99 on your web site, even if you want to sell it for $6.99/mo. And if you do sell it for $6.99 in your app, you have to accept the fact that 30% of your profits are just pissed away even before taxes. An entire subset of online businesses aren't even financially possible because the 30% Apple cut and forced pricing model would eat up profit margins that would be healthy otherwise. I would happily sell a service for $9.99 in app and $6.99 on web, and give the user a choice, but of course I can't, because the App Store is a racket.
rchaud 5y ago
It's not strange that tech products are basically just digital middlemen today, taking their cut. What is strange is the people working on such products, when speaking in public, always talk about innovation, creativity and freedom. Adjectives that are directly at odds with the strategic direction of their products.

bellyfullofbac 5y ago

Hah, imagine if someone makes a competitor. Is Twitter going to ban me tweeting to my 1000+ followers to come pay to see my talk at (some URL)? Or just derank that tweet so that very few people see it? (At which point the anti-competitive lawsuit should be interesting..)

rchaud 5y ago
A competitor would be a password-protected Zoom meeting with a Ko-fi button.

echelon 5y ago

I can understand Twitter taking a cut, but Apple and Google deserve no part of this. Hopefully this is more fuel for the rage machine that will shut this racket down. Device manufacturers should not be allowed to do the following: 1. run monopoly marketplaces on their devices 2. run any payments gateways on their devices If Apple Pay and Google Pay continue to be a thing, the DOJ needs to force the companies to be broken up into distinct business units. Let these organizations compete with Visa, PayPal, and the like on equal footing.

8note 5y ago
Sure they do. They provide the devices that enable this TSMC should get the lion's share of the cut since they make all the chips to allow every part of the operation
- aparsons 5y ago
  I didn’t realize they gave the devices away for free
- Cu3PO42 5y ago
  How about ASML who make the EUV lithography machines that TSMC uses? How about those companies making parts that ASML uses, such as Zeiss and Trumpf? I'm not actually sure what exactly your point is, so I'm not arguing for or against it. I just thought the chain could be extended some.
- echelon 5y ago
  AT&T and Verizon should get a 30% cut. The electric company should get a 50% cut. UPS, FedEx, and DHL should get a 72% cut. ... Oh my god, this is fucking stupid. In this entire chain, the only innovation and service being provided is by the app creator. All the dues to the other companies are already paid. The fucking OS vendor has nothing to do with anything other than enforcing their draconian bloodsucking rules.
  - nexuist 5y ago
    And they do! Phone contracts, electric bills, shipping fees. Everyone gets their cut when they deliver a service to the user. After I get Twitter from the App Store, the service is delivered. The App Store isn't doing anything other than providing free OTA updates which they could charge for if they want (not my fault they don't). Why should Twitter continue paying the App Store once the service is delivered? Would anyone pay FedEx every time they use an appliance shipped by FedEx, just because FedEx brought it to their house years ago? This is the same ask the App Store has whenever a developer wants to collect payment from users. And you can't even collect the payments yourself, even if you wanted to. And you can't tell users why payments are more expensive (not even through email or any web pages reachable through the app - Hey got kicked out for this). AND AND - this is truly outrageous mafia-like behavior - you can't sell your services for less outside of the App Store. That's right, if your monthly photo backup service is $9.99/mo on the App Store, you have to sell it for $9.99 on your web site, even if you want to sell it for $6.99/mo. And if you do sell it for $6.99 in your app, you have to accept the fact that 30% of your profits are just pissed away even before taxes. An entire subset of online businesses aren't even financially possible because the 30% Apple cut and forced pricing model would eat up profit margins that would be healthy otherwise. I would happily sell a service for $9.99 in app and $6.99 on web, and give the user a choice, but of course I can't, because the App Store is a racket.

rchaud 5y ago

It's not strange that tech products are basically just digital middlemen today, taking their cut. What is strange is the people working on such products, when speaking in public, always talk about innovation, creativity and freedom. Adjectives that are directly at odds with the strategic direction of their products.