4 ms·
“ It’s the first time Apple has directly taxed advertising in iOS apps.” This might not be the first time they are taxing boosts, just being fair about it acro
by enos_feedler 4y ago
“ It’s the first time Apple has directly taxed advertising in iOS apps.”
This might not be the first time they are taxing boosts, just being fair about it across apps. I am pretty sure Tinder uses in app purchases for buying it’s boost feature. And isn’t Tinder just an ad platform for the user themself?
EDIT;
Would appreciate feedback in thread rather than downvotes here. Genuinely thinking this isn’t a big deal and an enforcement of existing rules. Am I wrong? I am not sure what is stronger here, the love for apple or the love for hating on them.
- Terretta 4y agoYou're correct, others like TikTok and Twitter and dating apps correctly consider a user asking to show their post or profile to more people a digital service, and use IAP per the contract with Apple. FB/Insta were claiming it's an ad so they could disregard. Since FB wouldn't resolve, Apple closed the loophole.
- pentae 4y agoI'd hazard a guess it's because of people disagreeing with your analogy. Even though it's cute, tinder boosts and advertising are generally not considered to be the same product or use case
- weberer 4y agoHow is it not an ad? You're paying to be exposed to more people.
- enos_feedler 4y agoPrecisely. I really don’t see the different between an ad which is just sponsored content and a boosted tinder profile where the additional reach it created is effectively sponsored content. I get that it is not really an ad. But my point is that its tricky to define IAP conditions.