14 ms·

Apple really is asking for trouble here. First off, they say that in order to get out of the requirement that everyone give Apple 30% of income, they say that t

by not2b 5y ago

Apple really is asking for trouble here. First off, they say that in order to get out of the requirement that everyone give Apple 30% of income, they say that those using an alternative payment method still must give Apple 27% of income. Then they say that app developers have to produce an entirely new app. In effect they are trying to create a situation where it is irrational for any developer to try to escape their payment system, which is exactly what the courts have already ruled that they must allow. They are risking having the EU as a whole slap them down and impose tougher restrictions.

neximo64 5y ago
If they didn't have the 27%, I would basically set up a business for a US app and boost my revenue 40% simply by cutting out Apple.
firloop 5y ago
> First off, they say that in order to get out of the requirement that everyone give Apple 30% of income, they say that those using an alternative payment method still must give Apple 27% of income. That's not exactly the trade here – Apple is letting people use alternative payment providers, which does carry a lot of benefits besides not paying the fee, including better customer management and support
- ummonk 5y ago
  > which does carry a lot of benefits besides not paying the fee, including better customer management and support And most importantly, making it really difficult for the user to cancel the subscription
  - Tagbert 5y ago
    One problem app developers now have is that they can’t refund any purchases even if they agree that it is justified. They tell customers that only Apple can do that and customers tend to not believe them but that is how Apple set it up.
    - philistine 5y ago
      How easy would it have been for Apple to implement a way for a third-party developper to push a refund to a customer? I'm so mad at them.
  - Nextgrid 5y ago
    Which can be resolved by a consumer awareness campaign around card disputes & chargebacks. You can dispute any transaction even on a debit card if the merchant is being uncooperative or you haven't received the goods/services promised.
    - bradknowles 5y ago
      Laws differ on that subject internationally. You can’t assume that your American-centric views on that subject are universally applicable. They’re not.
      - Nextgrid 5y ago
        My point is that it's not just laws - it's rules enforced by the card networks. Laws may strengthen these protections under certain conditions, but the basic card network rules are enough to fight against malicious merchants.
    - ummonk 5y ago
      The key statement there is "if" - you have to try to contact the merchant first before you issue the chargeback. And even a successful chargeback doesn't prevent the merchant from reporting the missed payments on your credit record or sending it to collections. In contrast, with Apple Pay it's a quick subscription cancellation via one simple interface.
      - keleftheriou 5y ago
        Apple Pay != Apple in-app purchases Regardless, Apple could still mandate use of their own payment system alongside optional 3rd-party systems, and let all options compete on their merits - ease of cancellation being one of them.
    - FabHK 5y ago
      > chargebacks. > You can dispute any transaction even on a debit card if the merchant is being uncooperative or you haven't received the goods/services promised. You can? In the Netherlands? Which is what this is about?
  - lozenge 5y ago
    Not necessarily, one example of an alternative payment method which allows users to cancel subscriptions is PayPal. While there are probably some companies that would like to make subscriptions difficult to cancel, I don't believe this is true of dating apps.
  - JanSt 5y ago
    New EU legislation makes it mandatory to add a prominent button to cancel your subscription! It‘s not allowed to force you to give a call or, in Germany, even login. https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/211006-new-two-click-cancellation-button.html https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/211006-new-two-click...
    - ummonk 5y ago
      Okay that's really awesome!
    - chihuahua 5y ago
      That article seems to say that it's sufficient to identify (but not authenticate) yourself as the subscriber who wants to cancel. So anyone can cancel any other subscribers they want? OK, German lawmakers, whatever you say... > If sufficient data to identify the subscription to be cancelled > is entered by the consumer, the submission of the form will itself > be a valid cancellation, the effect of which cannot be made subject > to further steps such as logins or second factor (e.g., email, app) > confirmations.
      - Someone 5y ago
        I think the right pattern would be to send a mail “we got a request to cancel your subscription. We did that, but if it wasn’t you who made that request, or you accidentally unsubscribed, click here to revert that cancellation within X days”.
        chihuahua 5y ago
        And if you're unlucky, you're going to get one of these every day for every one of your subscriptions. All it takes is someone who doesn't like you and who knows your email.
        littlecranky67 5y ago
        True, you'd be in for some more clicks. I'd still prefer to take that risk, as it is way more work to find out cancellation procedures for the ever-growing list of paid/subscription services, employing more and more dark patterns to extract "value" out of you.
- samb1729 5y ago
  I'd speculate that not paying the 30% Apple Tax is basically the whole point for most businesses that care about it.
- JanSt 5y ago
  They also added a bunch of requirements. Example (besides what was already mentioned): You have to report every single transaction to them. Apple is making it practically impossible AND they put a 27% fee on top. This behaviour might really come hunt them. The EU is already set to add gatekeeper legislation. Apple‘s behaviour might lead to even stricter regulation or forcing them to split the app store off into a new company. They don‘t even try to mask what they are doing. A big middle finger to the EU regulators.
spywaregorilla 5y ago
This seems like not only a boneheaded move but also a very user hostile one. Not the one I would have expected Apple to do. The obvious approach imo is to require apps to offer Apple payment as an option, while optionally offering other payment options. That way users who like apple payment can always use it. Having apps that don't integrate with apple's payment system but still charges the huge revenue tax is both greedy and bad looking for apple, but throws the customer to the dogs.
- bmitc 5y ago
  > This seems like not only a boneheaded move but also a very user hostile one. Not the one I would have expected Apple to do. Apple defines user hostility. They just get away with for reasons I have never understood. Apple doesn't want pictures or videos or any use of a mouse plugged in while being used? Put the charging port on the bottom of the mouse. Doesn't want to adopt the industry standard USB-C? Puts several different permutations of ports on devices, often incompatible without highly marked up dongles. Wants users to buy into wireless headphone ecosystem? Removes audio jack from all devices except laptops and desktops and the lowest end iPad. They refuse to fix longstanding issues with their Bluetooth and wireless cards. They refuse to cooperate and support third-party external monitors. They significantly break backwards compatibility and apps with every OS update, often intentionally. Apple has done whatever the hell they've wanted to for a very long time. They just hide it behind what I see as inane marketing but nonetheless marketing that has been very successful.
  - bradknowles 5y ago
    The Lightning port preceded USB-C by many years. And it was a huge improvement in every way over everything else available at the time. Apple didn’t invent Thunderbolt or USB-C. Intel did. Apple is the biggest adopter, but most blame for all the crazy shitty problems with USB-C should be laid at Intel’s feet, just like they should take the blame for all the crazy weird shit with older USB standards. I’m still pissed at the loss of a 2.5mm physical jack. Don’t get me started on this one. Bluetooth is a big bag of shit, and way worse than Blueray. At least Apple is trying to fix some of these problems with their U1 and W1 chips. As for external monitors, HDMI works everywhere HDMI works. And USB-C or Thunderbolt to DisplayPort adapters are easy enough to get. Apple has done nothing wrong there. Apple works harder at maintaining backwards compatibility than any other major vendor in existence. Your extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, of which you have provided none. Looking back at this post, your score appears to be one for six, so far. That’s not great, but you could improve on it if you were to provide adequate evidence of your claims.
granzymes 5y ago
> those using an alternative payment method still must give Apple 27% of income While 27% is higher than expected, everyone knew Apple would (and had the right to) impose a fee for alternative payment methods. There isn't a magic flag you can wave to avoid paying Apple if you are accepting payments in an iOS app. > app developers have to produce an entirely new app This is the part the Dutch court slapped down. The development concerns in the press release are overblown, though ("must develop a completely new app") since it's more like you must submit a new app that uses the new entitlements.
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
  > you must submit a new app that uses the new entitlements. That's easy to do. Simply change the SKU and Bundle ID, and set up a new app in iTunes App Store. Deprecate the old one. Lots of apps do this, anyway. It's sort of S.O.P. for new paid versions. I've released a whole bunch of apps, over the years. I've retired most of them, and come out with entirely new versions of others. It's a pain, but nothing too intimidating. I find the article to be a bit ... hyperbolic ... The process I just described would take me a day, and that's mostly because I'm fairly anal about hand-crafting a lot of stuff that many developers can integrate into their CD process.
- JanSt 5y ago
  I‘m sure the fee will be slapped down later too. It gives Apple unfair competetive advantages in the industries it operates in. (e.g Apple Music vs Spotify)
  - FabHK 5y ago
    "Reader" apps, broadly construed, can already offer outside subscriptions. Apparently, Spotify does not pay a 30% fee to Apple, but only 15%, and that on less than 1% of its paid members, so only around 0.15%. That does not seem to constitute unfair competitive advantage. https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-fires-back-spotify-pays-fees-on-less-than-1-percent-of-members/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-fires-back-spotify-pa...
qq66 5y ago
I think these 200 IQ tech CEOs have lost their minds and don't realize that their power is like that of an ant next to a lion when compared to the power of the 89 IQ politicians that run governments. Except for Satya Nadella they are all headed for a massive beatdown.
- oceanplexian 5y ago
  Depends on what region we're talking about. In the EU, it does seem like politicians have the upper hand, but in the US, neither of our two major political parties (Democrat and Republican) have taken any concrete steps to regulate the tech giants despite a bunch of rhetoric. There are several reasons: - A non-trivial number of lawmakers are holding stock investments in tech - Good luck getting re-elected if said regulation affects growth and crashes the economy - Good luck getting re-elected if you get on the wrong side of the largest advertising companies in the world. What are they going to do, run campaign ads in the newspaper?
  - littlecranky67 5y ago
    > In the EU, it does seem like politicians have the upper hand, but in the US, neither of our two major political parties (Democrat and Republican) I don't think in the EU the politicians have "the upper hand", they work exactly as in the US. The difference is that all those digital giants pay taxes (and employ people who do so) mostly in the US, so you can't touch em. EU politicians are free to impose restrictions since we don't have this industry on our side of the lawn.
    - jltsiren 5y ago
      Another difference is that most European countries have multi-party systems. One of the key divisions is between the establishment (social democrat, christian democrat, etc.) and the activists (green, liberal left, populist right, conservative nationalist, etc.). While the establishment pays more attention to corporate interests, the activists are often ideologically opposed to them. If the establishment pays too much attention, it may lose seats to the activists. In US politics, the establishment/activist division occurs within parties rather than between them. The first-past-the-post system makes it difficult for the minority faction to gain a significant number of seats, until there is phase shift and the minority suddenly becomes the majority. That's arguably what happened to Republicans, but it's too early to say if the shift has had an effect on their stance towards corporations.
BiteCode_dev 5y ago
They will take the fine, deduct it from their huge profit, and carry on. The EU will be happy to pocket the fine, they need the money. It worked in the past, what new thing could make it go wrong for Apple?

by not2b 5y ago

neximo64 5y ago

If they didn't have the 27%, I would basically set up a business for a US app and boost my revenue 40% simply by cutting out Apple.

firloop 5y ago

> First off, they say that in order to get out of the requirement that everyone give Apple 30% of income, they say that those using an alternative payment method still must give Apple 27% of income. That's not exactly the trade here – Apple is letting people use alternative payment providers, which does carry a lot of benefits besides not paying the fee, including better customer management and support

ummonk 5y ago
> which does carry a lot of benefits besides not paying the fee, including better customer management and support And most importantly, making it really difficult for the user to cancel the subscription
- Tagbert 5y ago
  One problem app developers now have is that they can’t refund any purchases even if they agree that it is justified. They tell customers that only Apple can do that and customers tend to not believe them but that is how Apple set it up.
  - philistine 5y ago
    How easy would it have been for Apple to implement a way for a third-party developper to push a refund to a customer? I'm so mad at them.
- Nextgrid 5y ago
  Which can be resolved by a consumer awareness campaign around card disputes & chargebacks. You can dispute any transaction even on a debit card if the merchant is being uncooperative or you haven't received the goods/services promised.
  - bradknowles 5y ago
    Laws differ on that subject internationally. You can’t assume that your American-centric views on that subject are universally applicable. They’re not.
    - Nextgrid 5y ago
      My point is that it's not just laws - it's rules enforced by the card networks. Laws may strengthen these protections under certain conditions, but the basic card network rules are enough to fight against malicious merchants.
  - ummonk 5y ago
    The key statement there is "if" - you have to try to contact the merchant first before you issue the chargeback. And even a successful chargeback doesn't prevent the merchant from reporting the missed payments on your credit record or sending it to collections. In contrast, with Apple Pay it's a quick subscription cancellation via one simple interface.
    - keleftheriou 5y ago
      Apple Pay != Apple in-app purchases Regardless, Apple could still mandate use of their own payment system alongside optional 3rd-party systems, and let all options compete on their merits - ease of cancellation being one of them.
  - FabHK 5y ago
    > chargebacks. > You can dispute any transaction even on a debit card if the merchant is being uncooperative or you haven't received the goods/services promised. You can? In the Netherlands? Which is what this is about?
- lozenge 5y ago
  Not necessarily, one example of an alternative payment method which allows users to cancel subscriptions is PayPal. While there are probably some companies that would like to make subscriptions difficult to cancel, I don't believe this is true of dating apps.
- JanSt 5y ago
  New EU legislation makes it mandatory to add a prominent button to cancel your subscription! It‘s not allowed to force you to give a call or, in Germany, even login. https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/211006-new-two-click-cancellation-button.html https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/211006-new-two-click...
  - ummonk 5y ago
    Okay that's really awesome!
  - chihuahua 5y ago
    That article seems to say that it's sufficient to identify (but not authenticate) yourself as the subscriber who wants to cancel. So anyone can cancel any other subscribers they want? OK, German lawmakers, whatever you say... > If sufficient data to identify the subscription to be cancelled > is entered by the consumer, the submission of the form will itself > be a valid cancellation, the effect of which cannot be made subject > to further steps such as logins or second factor (e.g., email, app) > confirmations.
    - Someone 5y ago
      I think the right pattern would be to send a mail “we got a request to cancel your subscription. We did that, but if it wasn’t you who made that request, or you accidentally unsubscribed, click here to revert that cancellation within X days”.
      - chihuahua 5y ago
        And if you're unlucky, you're going to get one of these every day for every one of your subscriptions. All it takes is someone who doesn't like you and who knows your email.
        littlecranky67 5y ago
        True, you'd be in for some more clicks. I'd still prefer to take that risk, as it is way more work to find out cancellation procedures for the ever-growing list of paid/subscription services, employing more and more dark patterns to extract "value" out of you.
samb1729 5y ago
I'd speculate that not paying the 30% Apple Tax is basically the whole point for most businesses that care about it.
JanSt 5y ago
They also added a bunch of requirements. Example (besides what was already mentioned): You have to report every single transaction to them. Apple is making it practically impossible AND they put a 27% fee on top. This behaviour might really come hunt them. The EU is already set to add gatekeeper legislation. Apple‘s behaviour might lead to even stricter regulation or forcing them to split the app store off into a new company. They don‘t even try to mask what they are doing. A big middle finger to the EU regulators.

spywaregorilla 5y ago

This seems like not only a boneheaded move but also a very user hostile one. Not the one I would have expected Apple to do. The obvious approach imo is to require apps to offer Apple payment as an option, while optionally offering other payment options. That way users who like apple payment can always use it. Having apps that don't integrate with apple's payment system but still charges the huge revenue tax is both greedy and bad looking for apple, but throws the customer to the dogs.

bmitc 5y ago
> This seems like not only a boneheaded move but also a very user hostile one. Not the one I would have expected Apple to do. Apple defines user hostility. They just get away with for reasons I have never understood. Apple doesn't want pictures or videos or any use of a mouse plugged in while being used? Put the charging port on the bottom of the mouse. Doesn't want to adopt the industry standard USB-C? Puts several different permutations of ports on devices, often incompatible without highly marked up dongles. Wants users to buy into wireless headphone ecosystem? Removes audio jack from all devices except laptops and desktops and the lowest end iPad. They refuse to fix longstanding issues with their Bluetooth and wireless cards. They refuse to cooperate and support third-party external monitors. They significantly break backwards compatibility and apps with every OS update, often intentionally. Apple has done whatever the hell they've wanted to for a very long time. They just hide it behind what I see as inane marketing but nonetheless marketing that has been very successful.
- bradknowles 5y ago
  The Lightning port preceded USB-C by many years. And it was a huge improvement in every way over everything else available at the time. Apple didn’t invent Thunderbolt or USB-C. Intel did. Apple is the biggest adopter, but most blame for all the crazy shitty problems with USB-C should be laid at Intel’s feet, just like they should take the blame for all the crazy weird shit with older USB standards. I’m still pissed at the loss of a 2.5mm physical jack. Don’t get me started on this one. Bluetooth is a big bag of shit, and way worse than Blueray. At least Apple is trying to fix some of these problems with their U1 and W1 chips. As for external monitors, HDMI works everywhere HDMI works. And USB-C or Thunderbolt to DisplayPort adapters are easy enough to get. Apple has done nothing wrong there. Apple works harder at maintaining backwards compatibility than any other major vendor in existence. Your extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, of which you have provided none. Looking back at this post, your score appears to be one for six, so far. That’s not great, but you could improve on it if you were to provide adequate evidence of your claims.

granzymes 5y ago

> those using an alternative payment method still must give Apple 27% of income While 27% is higher than expected, everyone knew Apple would (and had the right to) impose a fee for alternative payment methods. There isn't a magic flag you can wave to avoid paying Apple if you are accepting payments in an iOS app. > app developers have to produce an entirely new app This is the part the Dutch court slapped down. The development concerns in the press release are overblown, though ("must develop a completely new app") since it's more like you must submit a new app that uses the new entitlements.

ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
> you must submit a new app that uses the new entitlements. That's easy to do. Simply change the SKU and Bundle ID, and set up a new app in iTunes App Store. Deprecate the old one. Lots of apps do this, anyway. It's sort of S.O.P. for new paid versions. I've released a whole bunch of apps, over the years. I've retired most of them, and come out with entirely new versions of others. It's a pain, but nothing too intimidating. I find the article to be a bit ... hyperbolic ... The process I just described would take me a day, and that's mostly because I'm fairly anal about hand-crafting a lot of stuff that many developers can integrate into their CD process.
JanSt 5y ago
I‘m sure the fee will be slapped down later too. It gives Apple unfair competetive advantages in the industries it operates in. (e.g Apple Music vs Spotify)
- FabHK 5y ago
  "Reader" apps, broadly construed, can already offer outside subscriptions. Apparently, Spotify does not pay a 30% fee to Apple, but only 15%, and that on less than 1% of its paid members, so only around 0.15%. That does not seem to constitute unfair competitive advantage. https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-fires-back-spotify-pays-fees-on-less-than-1-percent-of-members/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-fires-back-spotify-pa...

qq66 5y ago

I think these 200 IQ tech CEOs have lost their minds and don't realize that their power is like that of an ant next to a lion when compared to the power of the 89 IQ politicians that run governments. Except for Satya Nadella they are all headed for a massive beatdown.

oceanplexian 5y ago
Depends on what region we're talking about. In the EU, it does seem like politicians have the upper hand, but in the US, neither of our two major political parties (Democrat and Republican) have taken any concrete steps to regulate the tech giants despite a bunch of rhetoric. There are several reasons: - A non-trivial number of lawmakers are holding stock investments in tech - Good luck getting re-elected if said regulation affects growth and crashes the economy - Good luck getting re-elected if you get on the wrong side of the largest advertising companies in the world. What are they going to do, run campaign ads in the newspaper?
- littlecranky67 5y ago
  > In the EU, it does seem like politicians have the upper hand, but in the US, neither of our two major political parties (Democrat and Republican) I don't think in the EU the politicians have "the upper hand", they work exactly as in the US. The difference is that all those digital giants pay taxes (and employ people who do so) mostly in the US, so you can't touch em. EU politicians are free to impose restrictions since we don't have this industry on our side of the lawn.
  - jltsiren 5y ago
    Another difference is that most European countries have multi-party systems. One of the key divisions is between the establishment (social democrat, christian democrat, etc.) and the activists (green, liberal left, populist right, conservative nationalist, etc.). While the establishment pays more attention to corporate interests, the activists are often ideologically opposed to them. If the establishment pays too much attention, it may lose seats to the activists. In US politics, the establishment/activist division occurs within parties rather than between them. The first-past-the-post system makes it difficult for the minority faction to gain a significant number of seats, until there is phase shift and the minority suddenly becomes the majority. That's arguably what happened to Republicans, but it's too early to say if the shift has had an effect on their stance towards corporations.

BiteCode_dev 5y ago

They will take the fine, deduct it from their huge profit, and carry on. The EU will be happy to pocket the fine, they need the money. It worked in the past, what new thing could make it go wrong for Apple?