4 ms·

For payment solutions, yes. You don't see VISA charging 30% on top of each transaction.

by yokoprime 5y ago

endisneigh 5y ago
- clusterfish 5y ago
  Nice whataboutism, except Mobile Safari is intentionally crippled to not support PWAs well.
  - endisneigh 5y ago
    Nobody said anything about PWAs. Your app can be a pure web app. If you don’t want to do that then pay the fees. Simple as that.
    - clusterfish 5y ago
      If you don't want do do one thing do another unrelated thing, great logic, very insightful.
olliej 5y ago
I don't see apple doing that either. This article says very clearly that the payment processing fee is 3%.
LordDragonfang 5y ago
It's not 30%, but a very large portion of VISA's profits comes from the fees they charge; VISA's fees are not capped to their "costs" of operating. VISA exists as a literal precedent that you can profit off a commission for a financial transaction. The issue in question isn't whether Apple should be allowed to profit, it's whether they should be allowed to abuse their effective monopoly position to set their commission a literal order of magnitude higher than any other processor.
- clusterfish 5y ago
  In EU credit card fees are capped by law, and the duopoly is surviving just fine, just with less obscene profits. Should do the same with mobile app stores.
lolinder 5y ago
Apple has always argued that the 30% is not a payment processing fee. It's the App Store fee, which until today has bundled their payment processing fee with fees to cover their other expenses (and make them a tidy profit). The argument over alternative payment methods has always struck me as odd for precisely this reason--throughout the Epic case Apple has made it clear that if they allowed alternative payment methods they would still charge the 30% fee for the other services. Is 30% (or 27%) too steep for what the App Store provides? Probably. But fighting over the 30% as a payment processing fee is a huge misstep, because regulators will always take Apple's side on that question.

For payment solutions, yes. You don't see VISA charging 30% on top of each transaction.

endisneigh 5y ago

clusterfish 5y ago
Nice whataboutism, except Mobile Safari is intentionally crippled to not support PWAs well.
- endisneigh 5y ago
  Nobody said anything about PWAs. Your app can be a pure web app. If you don’t want to do that then pay the fees. Simple as that.
  - clusterfish 5y ago
    If you don't want do do one thing do another unrelated thing, great logic, very insightful.

olliej 5y ago

I don't see apple doing that either. This article says very clearly that the payment processing fee is 3%.

LordDragonfang 5y ago

It's not 30%, but a very large portion of VISA's profits comes from the fees they charge; VISA's fees are not capped to their "costs" of operating. VISA exists as a literal precedent that you can profit off a commission for a financial transaction. The issue in question isn't whether Apple should be allowed to profit, it's whether they should be allowed to abuse their effective monopoly position to set their commission a literal order of magnitude higher than any other processor.

clusterfish 5y ago
In EU credit card fees are capped by law, and the duopoly is surviving just fine, just with less obscene profits. Should do the same with mobile app stores.

lolinder 5y ago

Apple has always argued that the 30% is not a payment processing fee. It's the App Store fee, which until today has bundled their payment processing fee with fees to cover their other expenses (and make them a tidy profit). The argument over alternative payment methods has always struck me as odd for precisely this reason--throughout the Epic case Apple has made it clear that if they allowed alternative payment methods they would still charge the 30% fee for the other services. Is 30% (or 27%) too steep for what the App Store provides? Probably. But fighting over the 30% as a payment processing fee is a huge misstep, because regulators will always take Apple's side on that question.