7 ms·

15% is highway robbery. The cost via your own account on Stripe is 5% on the high end.

by RNCTX 5y ago

lobocinza 5y ago
You pay for marketing.
- oblio 5y ago
  Marketing what? Being in the app stores is a requirement to be alive these days, there are 0 discoverability benefits. Also, both Apple and Google sell app store app ads, double dipping on this source of income.
chenzhekl 5y ago
But there is operational cost like bandwidth for Google, which is not there for Stripe.
- RNCTX 5y ago
  Do you think that hits to the Stripe checkout page are free? Or that their databases for storing all of the payment info are free? Stripe needs servers and bandwidth like everything else.
rahimnathwani 5y ago
This would carry more weight if Stripe were to maintain a mobile operating system, and an app store to help developers get customers.
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  App developers already pay Apple $100 a year and, as someone in these comments calculated, that earns Apple $2 billion a year alone. Developers regularly need to buy Apple computers, tablets and phones that have 64% profit margins. Users are also buying those computers, tablets and phones that have 64% profit margins. > and an app store to help developers get customers. Apple strictly enforces limits and restrictions on users' devices that ensure that the App Store is the only way to get customers. Every other way is banned. Customers cannot get the apps they want without the App Store. Developers are able to find customers on their own, otherwise. If you want to enter the mobile or tablet markets at all, you're forced to give either company 15% to 30% of your gross revenue. There's no choice, alternative or competition because all the competition is banned. Personally, I don't think running an exclusive mobile app repository, and then forcing all apps to use Apple or Google's payment methods, should entitle either company to 15% to 30% of a company or developer's gross revenue.
  - rahimnathwani 5y ago
    We’re discussing Google’s 15% cut of subscriptions purchased through the Google Play store. Google doesn’t require anyone to pay Apple $100/year, nor does Google require anyone to buy Apple hardware. So none of the costs you mention are relevant to the article we’re discussing. And Google doesn’t run ‘an exclusive mobile app repository’. A dozen or more of the apps on my mobile are installed from F-droid, and Google does nothing to prevent those apps from working.
    - oblio 5y ago
      Google also makes money through ads, ads which you're guided to through control of the operating system (and browser). It also makes money by providing their apps and services a front row seat in mobile marketing heaven, on prime screen real estate. Let's not weep yet for Google's Android hardships.
bdhess 5y ago
How many potential customers do you lose with your home brew subscription workflow though? If I don’t think it will be easy to cancel, I probably won’t be signing up.
threeseed 5y ago
> The cost via your own account on Stripe But it's not the cost for operating the payments gateway. It's the cost for the channel. The real world equivalent is supermarkets, retailers etc charging for products to be stocked on their shelves. Customer acquisition is extremely expensive and difficult and stores expect to be compensated for it.
- tomnipotent 5y ago
  > It's the cost for the channel. Except it's not. People don't download Uber or Netflix because of the app stores. Epic demonstrated unequivocally they could get installs without Google involved as an intermediary. The app store value at this point is singularly it their platform-specific monopolies, and the fact that you have no choice but to play ball to do business on mobile. > The real world equivalent is supermarkets It's nothing like that. I have multiple supermarket chains I can go to - I have only Apple and Google when dealing with mobile. Customers can choose either Apple or Google, but most businesses are stuck doing business with both. Not even Microsoft screwed over both sides like this. At this point, Google and Apple have done far more harm to both customers and businesses than Microsoft ever had. It's beyond frustrating.
  - threeseed 5y ago
    > People don't download Uber or Netflix because of the app stores Uber would never have existed without the App Store. > It's nothing like that It's exactly like that. That's where the business model comes from. It's a digital representation of the way physical stores interact with OEMs.
    - RNCTX 5y ago
      > It's exactly like that. It's not exactly like that. Kroger and Safeway cannot prevent potato chips from being sold outside of Kroger and Safeway. That's the whole point of the conversation here, don't know how you're missing it. Apple and Google are the textbook definitions of illegal monopolies, Kroger and Safeway are not.
    - 5y ago

15% is highway robbery. The cost via your own account on Stripe is 5% on the high end.

by RNCTX 5y ago

15% is highway robbery. The cost via your own account on Stripe is 5% on the high end.

lobocinza 5y ago

You pay for marketing.

oblio 5y ago
Marketing what? Being in the app stores is a requirement to be alive these days, there are 0 discoverability benefits. Also, both Apple and Google sell app store app ads, double dipping on this source of income.

chenzhekl 5y ago

But there is operational cost like bandwidth for Google, which is not there for Stripe.

RNCTX 5y ago
Do you think that hits to the Stripe checkout page are free? Or that their databases for storing all of the payment info are free? Stripe needs servers and bandwidth like everything else.

rahimnathwani 5y ago

This would carry more weight if Stripe were to maintain a mobile operating system, and an app store to help developers get customers.

heavyset_go 5y ago
App developers already pay Apple $100 a year and, as someone in these comments calculated, that earns Apple $2 billion a year alone. Developers regularly need to buy Apple computers, tablets and phones that have 64% profit margins. Users are also buying those computers, tablets and phones that have 64% profit margins. > and an app store to help developers get customers. Apple strictly enforces limits and restrictions on users' devices that ensure that the App Store is the only way to get customers. Every other way is banned. Customers cannot get the apps they want without the App Store. Developers are able to find customers on their own, otherwise. If you want to enter the mobile or tablet markets at all, you're forced to give either company 15% to 30% of your gross revenue. There's no choice, alternative or competition because all the competition is banned. Personally, I don't think running an exclusive mobile app repository, and then forcing all apps to use Apple or Google's payment methods, should entitle either company to 15% to 30% of a company or developer's gross revenue.
- rahimnathwani 5y ago
  We’re discussing Google’s 15% cut of subscriptions purchased through the Google Play store. Google doesn’t require anyone to pay Apple $100/year, nor does Google require anyone to buy Apple hardware. So none of the costs you mention are relevant to the article we’re discussing. And Google doesn’t run ‘an exclusive mobile app repository’. A dozen or more of the apps on my mobile are installed from F-droid, and Google does nothing to prevent those apps from working.
  - oblio 5y ago
    Google also makes money through ads, ads which you're guided to through control of the operating system (and browser). It also makes money by providing their apps and services a front row seat in mobile marketing heaven, on prime screen real estate. Let's not weep yet for Google's Android hardships.

bdhess 5y ago

How many potential customers do you lose with your home brew subscription workflow though? If I don’t think it will be easy to cancel, I probably won’t be signing up.

threeseed 5y ago

> The cost via your own account on Stripe But it's not the cost for operating the payments gateway. It's the cost for the channel. The real world equivalent is supermarkets, retailers etc charging for products to be stocked on their shelves. Customer acquisition is extremely expensive and difficult and stores expect to be compensated for it.

tomnipotent 5y ago
> It's the cost for the channel. Except it's not. People don't download Uber or Netflix because of the app stores. Epic demonstrated unequivocally they could get installs without Google involved as an intermediary. The app store value at this point is singularly it their platform-specific monopolies, and the fact that you have no choice but to play ball to do business on mobile. > The real world equivalent is supermarkets It's nothing like that. I have multiple supermarket chains I can go to - I have only Apple and Google when dealing with mobile. Customers can choose either Apple or Google, but most businesses are stuck doing business with both. Not even Microsoft screwed over both sides like this. At this point, Google and Apple have done far more harm to both customers and businesses than Microsoft ever had. It's beyond frustrating.
- threeseed 5y ago
  > People don't download Uber or Netflix because of the app stores Uber would never have existed without the App Store. > It's nothing like that It's exactly like that. That's where the business model comes from. It's a digital representation of the way physical stores interact with OEMs.
  - RNCTX 5y ago
    > It's exactly like that. It's not exactly like that. Kroger and Safeway cannot prevent potato chips from being sold outside of Kroger and Safeway. That's the whole point of the conversation here, don't know how you're missing it. Apple and Google are the textbook definitions of illegal monopolies, Kroger and Safeway are not.
  - 5y ago