4 ms·

I wonder if you would feel differently if the 30% premium you were paying to Apple on every digital purchase were transparently shown on the transaction.

by travoc 5y ago

bradknowles 5y ago
But 30% doesn’t exist anymore, except for the top 1%of earners on the platform. Most sellers on the App Store are now paying 15%, if anything at all. Most apps I’ve seen are using ads to bypass paying anything to Apple. Some of them support IAP to remove ads. But that’s just an option.
criddell 5y ago
I'd be okay with that. I'd also be okay if regulators forced Apple to allow apps to use outside payment services where the price could be 30% less. I just hope that Apple would be allowed to say that if you are going to use outside payment providers, you must allow paying through Apple and the outside price can be no lower than 30% (or whatever Apple's cut is). I don't spend a lot through Apple each year. Maybe $200. If I'm paying 30% more than I would otherwise that means it's costing me something like sixteen cents per day and I'm okay with that. When I was younger, I used to focus a lot more on price. When Zappos came around it clicked for me that paying more can be smart if the service you get is better. I'll pay $0.16 every day if it means a few times per year I avoid a lot of bullshit.
- coz131 5y ago
  I don't get what do you mean by "you must allow paying through Apple and the price can no lower than 30% or whatever the cut".
  - Nasrudith 5y ago
    Essentially they must allow the user the option of Apple as a payment mechanism to ensure their feature is unbroken. The no lower part is that they can only discount up to whatever Apple's cut would be if they use their own payment mechanism. Related to the first point to prevent "soft disables" like setting Apple pay price at something dramatically worse that few would pay. Charging $13 through Apple and $10 through theirs ensures they get their $10 no matter the customer choice. Or they could call the volume worth the cut and charge $10 for both methods. Setting it worse opens up effectively a "soft disable" like Apple price at $1000 and their price at $1. If they for some reason decided to charge $1 through Apple and $1000 through their own that poor decision is no skin off Apple's nose.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  That money isn't being taken from you though, it's being taken from the developer who made that app or service. No matter how you frame it, the developer sets their price and Apple scalps them accordingly. So just because you don't care doesn't mean that the people who are trying to make a living off it shouldn't.
Jensson 5y ago
It is ~43% premium. 100 / 70 ~= 1.429

I wonder if you would feel differently if the 30% premium you were paying to Apple on every digital purchase were transparently shown on the transaction.

by travoc 5y ago

I wonder if you would feel differently if the 30% premium you were paying to Apple on every digital purchase were transparently shown on the transaction.

bradknowles 5y ago

But 30% doesn’t exist anymore, except for the top 1%of earners on the platform. Most sellers on the App Store are now paying 15%, if anything at all. Most apps I’ve seen are using ads to bypass paying anything to Apple. Some of them support IAP to remove ads. But that’s just an option.

criddell 5y ago

I'd be okay with that. I'd also be okay if regulators forced Apple to allow apps to use outside payment services where the price could be 30% less. I just hope that Apple would be allowed to say that if you are going to use outside payment providers, you must allow paying through Apple and the outside price can be no lower than 30% (or whatever Apple's cut is). I don't spend a lot through Apple each year. Maybe $200. If I'm paying 30% more than I would otherwise that means it's costing me something like sixteen cents per day and I'm okay with that. When I was younger, I used to focus a lot more on price. When Zappos came around it clicked for me that paying more can be smart if the service you get is better. I'll pay $0.16 every day if it means a few times per year I avoid a lot of bullshit.

coz131 5y ago
I don't get what do you mean by "you must allow paying through Apple and the price can no lower than 30% or whatever the cut".
- Nasrudith 5y ago
  Essentially they must allow the user the option of Apple as a payment mechanism to ensure their feature is unbroken. The no lower part is that they can only discount up to whatever Apple's cut would be if they use their own payment mechanism. Related to the first point to prevent "soft disables" like setting Apple pay price at something dramatically worse that few would pay. Charging $13 through Apple and $10 through theirs ensures they get their $10 no matter the customer choice. Or they could call the volume worth the cut and charge $10 for both methods. Setting it worse opens up effectively a "soft disable" like Apple price at $1000 and their price at $1. If they for some reason decided to charge $1 through Apple and $1000 through their own that poor decision is no skin off Apple's nose.
smoldesu 5y ago
That money isn't being taken from you though, it's being taken from the developer who made that app or service. No matter how you frame it, the developer sets their price and Apple scalps them accordingly. So just because you don't care doesn't mean that the people who are trying to make a living off it shouldn't.

Jensson 5y ago

It is ~43% premium. 100 / 70 ~= 1.429