3 ms·
So Apple’s argument stands… Basically, Apple is a wealthy neighborhood. If you sell nice bags or expensive cars, you want to be near the people who can afford
by leokennis 5y ago
So Apple’s argument stands…
Basically, Apple is a wealthy neighborhood. If you sell nice bags or expensive cars, you want to be near the people who can afford them. So you need to rent store space in the wealthy neighborhood. Where rent is higher than in the outskirts.
Sure you could try to sell your goods in the outskirts (the Play Store) but you won’t sell as much.
To bring it back to non-metaphors. Apple is the only maker of premium phones. Therefor people who are willing to spend on apps are very often iPhone users. So if you want to reach these people and their money you need to be on the App Store. Apple knows this, and charges developers accordingly for the privilege.
- smoldesu 5y ago> Apple is the only maker of premium phones So by your own admission, Apple has a monopoly on the premium market, and is using that power to broker their audience for a premium fee to developers who simply want to sell their code to someone who's willing to pay for it? That is one of the most dystopian arguments I've ever heard, bravo.
- mrkstu 5y agoIs a segment a market? And it is also simply untrue that Apple is the only premium handset maker- plenty of Chinese competition in China and Samsung elsewhere. It is dominant in the segment but it is at best part of a duopoly.
- leokennis 5y agoI’m not sure if it’s a monopoly, but a stronghold for sure. I’m not seeing how Apple’s behavior is any different than that of other players who have a stronghold in their markets though? It’s exactly the same with $10.000 rents in San Francisco or super expensive country clubs where you can mingle/deal with fellow rich people: it’s expensive to get access to a scarce resource. Apple has the scarce resource (people willing to pay for apps) so they charge you a lot of money to access it (30% of your revenue).