5 ms·

What loophole? The one where a business gets to decide what they charge? The free market loophole? The loophole where business pass costs on to customers? Do

What loophole? The one where a business gets to decide what they charge? The free market loophole? The loophole where business pass costs on to customers? Do you propose governments should set prices?

cycomanic 4y ago
So here I thought the free market always finds the lowest price based on supply and demand and costs had very little to do with it.
- qeternity 4y ago
  Cost is the largest factor of the supply curve…
ReptileMan 4y ago
Except app store is not free market but monopoly. So it should be treated like one. The moment sideloading/root or alternative appstores are allowed - then then can charge whatever they feel like. Vendor lock in is bad towards the customer so limiting it actually increases the free market. What you think of is Laissez-faire
- qeternity 4y ago
  No, this is not even remotely close to a monopoly. Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can. When Android has 75% market share and multiple competing stores, we’re not even close to monopoly.
  - yelskcol 4y ago
    >Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can. Would be all well and awesome if you had any freedom of choice on Apple's platform and weren't forced into being locked into their ecosystem where you pay a 15% Apple tax on every purchase. Say what you like about mobile platforms but making ridiculous comparisons like this doesn't help your case.
    - Someone 4y ago
      > Would be all well and awesome if you had any freedom of choice on Apple's platform I don’t see how that is an argument against ”Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can.”. You don’t have freedom of choice as to who to buy from at your local grocer, either. I think that, in principle, companies creating a market should be able to decide what gets sold there and demand any cut of sales they want. That also is what I think laws say in most countries. It’s fairly normal with game consoles, for example, and I expect you can’t sell merchandise from studios competing with Disney (if they still exist) in Disneyland or sell ice cream there without Disney taking a significant cut, or sell Shell products at an Exxon pump. The big question, though, is whether the market power of a few players in mobile apps is so undesirable that action is necessary, and if so, whether existing laws are sufficient to correct the issue, or whether the rules of the game should change and if so, how. I think law will be changed, but how, I’m not sure about. Any law saying “this applies only to companies Foo, Bar and Baz” will be shut down in courts, so arguments must be formulated as to what exactly is wrong with the current situation, and decisions will have to be made as to whether those rules also should apply to, for example, game consoles.
      - qeternity 4y ago
        > You don’t have freedom of choice as to who to buy from at your local grocer, either. Exactly, and this isn't a problem because you have plenty of choice as to which grocer you patronize. There are plenty of mobile app stores. If you don't like Apple's, then grab an Android and use Amazon's.
        ReptileMan 4y ago
        There should be a hard right that owner of general purpose devices decides what kind of software runs on them. Not the vendor.
        qeternity 4y ago
        Entire business models that most of society are perfectly happy with would disappear. I would include myself in that. I say this just so that people with strong opinions on HN remember there are two sides to every coin.
- scarface74 4y ago
  Well, we just had a real judge with a real law degree that said the App Store is not a monopoly in the Epic vs Apple case.
  - ReptileMan 4y ago
    Good to know. It's good that judges are never wrong.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      Do you have relevant case law that you can cite that the well paid Epic lawyers missed that would have been more convincing?
      - ReptileMan 4y ago
        Microsoft EU antitrust case.
        scarface74 4y ago
        luckily we have real lawyers that don’t just pull up irrelevant cases. The case in both the US and the EU was about MS forcing OEMs to psy for a license on all shipping computers whether or not the computer shipped with Windows. Apple doesn’t license its operating system to other OEMs, it doesn’t have anywhere near 90% market share and EU case law is irrelevant in the US. > In 1993, the American software company Novell claimed that Microsoft was blocking its competitors out of the market through anti-competitive practices. The complaint centered on the license practices at the time which required royalties from each computer sold by a supplier of Microsoft's operating system, whether or not the unit actually contained the Windows operating system.
        ReptileMan 4y ago
        Luckily seems you have forgotten about the Internet Exporer
madsbuch 4y ago
I love that this comment is a response to a pricing scheme where developers are forced into pricing brackets. Apple are effectively hindering developers selling their apps on a free market.
- WHATDOESIT 4y ago
  But they also, you know, made the platform. Are you sure the platform would be there without their fees? Let's have a look at the Linux phone market...
  - whywhywhywhy 4y ago
    Ok, why do they not force fees on apps that run on their MacOS platform then? Or what about their WebKit platform?
    - WHATDOESIT 4y ago
      Seems like they've chosen a different business model back then and since it didn't work out so well (compare Mac/macOS market penetration to iPhone/iOS) they changed it to something that allows them to capture more revenue and use the money to develop the platform much further. And they're not forcing it on Mac because that would cause outrage and people not upgrading the OS, and desktop/laptop computers are dying anyways. Also, App Store on Mac definitely has fees. Perfectly understandable IMHO. (Webkit might be a platform to Google but it's not from Apple's point of view, it's merely one part of their platform offerings)
      - christophilus 4y ago
        TIL that producing MacBooks isn’t a good business.
        WHATDOESIT 4y ago
        Yes, it's much much smaller than the iPhone business. Of course, it'd be a huge company by itself, but Apple got to $1T thanks to iPhone, not Mac - by far.
hoppyhoppy2 4y ago
By "loopholes" I think they were referring to stuff like >Apple relied on a “complex web of offshore entities” and U.S. tax loopholes to avoid paying billions of dollars in U.S. taxes on $44 billion in offshore income over the past four years, according to excerpts from a Senate subcommittee report to be released tomorrow as Apple CEO Tim Cook testifies on the company’s overseas operations. >The maker of iPhones and iPads used at least three foreign subsidiaries that it claims are not “tax resident in any nation” to help it avoid paying billions in “otherwise taxable offshore income,” the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said in a statement today. https://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/05/20/apple-used-loopholes-to-skip-paying-44-billion-in-u-s-taxes-senate-committee-claims/?sh=6143aa5a5075 https://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/05/20/appl...

cycomanic 4y ago

So here I thought the free market always finds the lowest price based on supply and demand and costs had very little to do with it.

qeternity 4y ago
Cost is the largest factor of the supply curve…

ReptileMan 4y ago

Except app store is not free market but monopoly. So it should be treated like one. The moment sideloading/root or alternative appstores are allowed - then then can charge whatever they feel like. Vendor lock in is bad towards the customer so limiting it actually increases the free market. What you think of is Laissez-faire

qeternity 4y ago
No, this is not even remotely close to a monopoly. Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can. When Android has 75% market share and multiple competing stores, we’re not even close to monopoly.
- yelskcol 4y ago
  >Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can. Would be all well and awesome if you had any freedom of choice on Apple's platform and weren't forced into being locked into their ecosystem where you pay a 15% Apple tax on every purchase. Say what you like about mobile platforms but making ridiculous comparisons like this doesn't help your case.
  - Someone 4y ago
    > Would be all well and awesome if you had any freedom of choice on Apple's platform I don’t see how that is an argument against ”Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can.”. You don’t have freedom of choice as to who to buy from at your local grocer, either. I think that, in principle, companies creating a market should be able to decide what gets sold there and demand any cut of sales they want. That also is what I think laws say in most countries. It’s fairly normal with game consoles, for example, and I expect you can’t sell merchandise from studios competing with Disney (if they still exist) in Disneyland or sell ice cream there without Disney taking a significant cut, or sell Shell products at an Exxon pump. The big question, though, is whether the market power of a few players in mobile apps is so undesirable that action is necessary, and if so, whether existing laws are sufficient to correct the issue, or whether the rules of the game should change and if so, how. I think law will be changed, but how, I’m not sure about. Any law saying “this applies only to companies Foo, Bar and Baz” will be shut down in courts, so arguments must be formulated as to what exactly is wrong with the current situation, and decisions will have to be made as to whether those rules also should apply to, for example, game consoles.
    - qeternity 4y ago
      > You don’t have freedom of choice as to who to buy from at your local grocer, either. Exactly, and this isn't a problem because you have plenty of choice as to which grocer you patronize. There are plenty of mobile app stores. If you don't like Apple's, then grab an Android and use Amazon's.
      - ReptileMan 4y ago
        There should be a hard right that owner of general purpose devices decides what kind of software runs on them. Not the vendor.
        qeternity 4y ago
        Entire business models that most of society are perfectly happy with would disappear. I would include myself in that. I say this just so that people with strong opinions on HN remember there are two sides to every coin.
scarface74 4y ago
Well, we just had a real judge with a real law degree that said the App Store is not a monopoly in the Epic vs Apple case.
- ReptileMan 4y ago
  Good to know. It's good that judges are never wrong.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    Do you have relevant case law that you can cite that the well paid Epic lawyers missed that would have been more convincing?
    - ReptileMan 4y ago
      Microsoft EU antitrust case.
      - scarface74 4y ago
        luckily we have real lawyers that don’t just pull up irrelevant cases. The case in both the US and the EU was about MS forcing OEMs to psy for a license on all shipping computers whether or not the computer shipped with Windows. Apple doesn’t license its operating system to other OEMs, it doesn’t have anywhere near 90% market share and EU case law is irrelevant in the US. > In 1993, the American software company Novell claimed that Microsoft was blocking its competitors out of the market through anti-competitive practices. The complaint centered on the license practices at the time which required royalties from each computer sold by a supplier of Microsoft's operating system, whether or not the unit actually contained the Windows operating system.
        ReptileMan 4y ago
        Luckily seems you have forgotten about the Internet Exporer

madsbuch 4y ago

I love that this comment is a response to a pricing scheme where developers are forced into pricing brackets. Apple are effectively hindering developers selling their apps on a free market.

WHATDOESIT 4y ago
But they also, you know, made the platform. Are you sure the platform would be there without their fees? Let's have a look at the Linux phone market...
- whywhywhywhy 4y ago
  Ok, why do they not force fees on apps that run on their MacOS platform then? Or what about their WebKit platform?
  - WHATDOESIT 4y ago
    Seems like they've chosen a different business model back then and since it didn't work out so well (compare Mac/macOS market penetration to iPhone/iOS) they changed it to something that allows them to capture more revenue and use the money to develop the platform much further. And they're not forcing it on Mac because that would cause outrage and people not upgrading the OS, and desktop/laptop computers are dying anyways. Also, App Store on Mac definitely has fees. Perfectly understandable IMHO. (Webkit might be a platform to Google but it's not from Apple's point of view, it's merely one part of their platform offerings)
    - christophilus 4y ago
      TIL that producing MacBooks isn’t a good business.
      - WHATDOESIT 4y ago
        Yes, it's much much smaller than the iPhone business. Of course, it'd be a huge company by itself, but Apple got to $1T thanks to iPhone, not Mac - by far.

hoppyhoppy2 4y ago

By "loopholes" I think they were referring to stuff like >Apple relied on a “complex web of offshore entities” and U.S. tax loopholes to avoid paying billions of dollars in U.S. taxes on $44 billion in offshore income over the past four years, according to excerpts from a Senate subcommittee report to be released tomorrow as Apple CEO Tim Cook testifies on the company’s overseas operations. >The maker of iPhones and iPads used at least three foreign subsidiaries that it claims are not “tax resident in any nation” to help it avoid paying billions in “otherwise taxable offshore income,” the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said in a statement today. https://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/05/20/apple-used-loopholes-to-skip-paying-44-billion-in-u-s-taxes-senate-committee-claims/?sh=6143aa5a5075 https://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/05/20/appl...