4 ms·

> Apple is famously the company that tells rent seekers after more ROI above all to fuck off (both Jobs and Cook). The App Store, and their demand of 30% of al

> Apple is famously the company that tells rent seekers after more ROI above all to fuck off (both Jobs and Cook). The App Store, and their demand of 30% of all revenue that passes through an iPhone is the most infamous example of digital platforms rent seeking.

adamwk 4y ago
Android has the same cut for their in-app purchases
- paddez 4y ago
  No, Google gets a cut for purchases through the Google Play Store. Google does not take a cut if you use an alternative app store (which isn't possible on iOS)
  - musicale 4y ago
    I assume the 30% platform fee is the reason why nobody uses Google Play and everyone uses other app/game stores instead.
    - TheBrokenRail 4y ago
      Everyone uses Google Play because it's convenient. But as a notable example, Fortnite refused to use Google Play for a while precisely because of that 30% fee, and it worked out pretty well for them. Eventually they gave in and put Fortnite on Google Play. Although Google kicked them off later (they pushed an update which allowed users to bypass Google's 30% cut using their own payment system) so it's back to direct download from the website.
      - scarface74 4y ago
        It worked out pretty well but they gave in. So why do you think it worked out pretty well if they came crawling back?
  - scarface74 4y ago
    Which no one does and when even Epic tried it it was an abysmal failure.
- Phrodo_00 4y ago
  Android allows you to update apps from outside the play store.
- heavyset_go 4y ago
  And this is why Google and Apple form a duopoly in the mobile app distribution and mobile app payments markets.
brookst 4y ago
> 30% of all revenue that passes through an iPhone A bit of hyperbole there. 30% of revenue from sales of digital goods after the first $1m (15% before). I’ve probably spent $20k on Amazon using my iPhone this year alone. You don’t think Apple takes 30% of that, do you? Besides, it’s so funny when people use “rent seeking” as a pejorative. Like, yes, the reason my landlord bought this house for a lot of capital up front was that they believed it would be profitable rent it for much smaller amounts for a long time. What, am I supposed to feel entitled to use the house for free? A bunch of years ago I made several hundred thousand dollars from the App Store. You know how much I would have made without the app store? Zero. Do you think I begrudge the 30% I paid, any more than I begrudge the rent I pay for this house? I understand people who dislike the Apple walled garden and want no part of it. I do not understand people who want all of the benefits but expect Apple to provide it for free.
- coldtea 4y ago
  >Besides, it’s so funny when people use “rent seeking” as a pejorative "People" including anybody from Marx to the left, all the way to Friendman and Hayek to the right, including Adam Smith... Sorry, rent-seeking is milking assets without producing value (or with only minimal investment/maintainance costs). It's the opposite of a functional market. >Like, yes, the reason my landlord bought this house for a lot of capital up front was that they believed it would be profitable rent it for much smaller amounts for a long time. What, am I supposed to feel entitled to use the house for free? No, you're supposed to not want an economy where people don't mouch off of standing assets, but actually contribute to making value (and products and progress and stuff). Rent-seeking 101: "Rent-seeking activities have negative effects on the rest of society. They result in reduced economic efficiency through misallocation of resources, reduced wealth creation, lost government revenue, heightened income inequality, and potential national decline."
  - 95014_refugee 4y ago
    Calling the Apple ecosystem a “standing asset” is an outstanding example of either disingenuity or ignorance. You’re free to help us decide which.
musicale 4y ago
Tim Cook told ROI-focused investors to "get out of the stock." Unfortunately now you've unlocked the "haven't you heard of platform fees (Google Play) or walled gardens (Nintendo eShop) before?" tangent. There is no new information here - some people are perfectly happy with Apple's walled garden business model as it is and/or don't think Apple should be forced to change, while some think that Apple should be forced to change it so that customers can have more freedom or developers can collect more money.
scarface74 4y ago
You mean “infamous” as in what every other platform does - including Google and the console makers? The console makers even force game developers to pay a royalty on every physical game sold.

adamwk 4y ago

Android has the same cut for their in-app purchases

paddez 4y ago
No, Google gets a cut for purchases through the Google Play Store. Google does not take a cut if you use an alternative app store (which isn't possible on iOS)
- musicale 4y ago
  I assume the 30% platform fee is the reason why nobody uses Google Play and everyone uses other app/game stores instead.
  - TheBrokenRail 4y ago
    Everyone uses Google Play because it's convenient. But as a notable example, Fortnite refused to use Google Play for a while precisely because of that 30% fee, and it worked out pretty well for them. Eventually they gave in and put Fortnite on Google Play. Although Google kicked them off later (they pushed an update which allowed users to bypass Google's 30% cut using their own payment system) so it's back to direct download from the website.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      It worked out pretty well but they gave in. So why do you think it worked out pretty well if they came crawling back?
- scarface74 4y ago
  Which no one does and when even Epic tried it it was an abysmal failure.
Phrodo_00 4y ago
Android allows you to update apps from outside the play store.
heavyset_go 4y ago
And this is why Google and Apple form a duopoly in the mobile app distribution and mobile app payments markets.

brookst 4y ago

> 30% of all revenue that passes through an iPhone A bit of hyperbole there. 30% of revenue from sales of digital goods after the first $1m (15% before). I’ve probably spent $20k on Amazon using my iPhone this year alone. You don’t think Apple takes 30% of that, do you? Besides, it’s so funny when people use “rent seeking” as a pejorative. Like, yes, the reason my landlord bought this house for a lot of capital up front was that they believed it would be profitable rent it for much smaller amounts for a long time. What, am I supposed to feel entitled to use the house for free? A bunch of years ago I made several hundred thousand dollars from the App Store. You know how much I would have made without the app store? Zero. Do you think I begrudge the 30% I paid, any more than I begrudge the rent I pay for this house? I understand people who dislike the Apple walled garden and want no part of it. I do not understand people who want all of the benefits but expect Apple to provide it for free.

coldtea 4y ago
>Besides, it’s so funny when people use “rent seeking” as a pejorative "People" including anybody from Marx to the left, all the way to Friendman and Hayek to the right, including Adam Smith... Sorry, rent-seeking is milking assets without producing value (or with only minimal investment/maintainance costs). It's the opposite of a functional market. >Like, yes, the reason my landlord bought this house for a lot of capital up front was that they believed it would be profitable rent it for much smaller amounts for a long time. What, am I supposed to feel entitled to use the house for free? No, you're supposed to not want an economy where people don't mouch off of standing assets, but actually contribute to making value (and products and progress and stuff). Rent-seeking 101: "Rent-seeking activities have negative effects on the rest of society. They result in reduced economic efficiency through misallocation of resources, reduced wealth creation, lost government revenue, heightened income inequality, and potential national decline."
- 95014_refugee 4y ago
  Calling the Apple ecosystem a “standing asset” is an outstanding example of either disingenuity or ignorance. You’re free to help us decide which.

musicale 4y ago

Tim Cook told ROI-focused investors to "get out of the stock." Unfortunately now you've unlocked the "haven't you heard of platform fees (Google Play) or walled gardens (Nintendo eShop) before?" tangent. There is no new information here - some people are perfectly happy with Apple's walled garden business model as it is and/or don't think Apple should be forced to change, while some think that Apple should be forced to change it so that customers can have more freedom or developers can collect more money.

scarface74 4y ago

You mean “infamous” as in what every other platform does - including Google and the console makers? The console makers even force game developers to pay a royalty on every physical game sold.