3 ms·

>For myself and many others their choice is to take the 30% (really it’s less considering there are still credit card processing fees and unless you make your o

>For myself and many others their choice is to take the 30% (really it’s less considering there are still credit card processing fees and unless you make your own billing system the fees of other systems) or nothing. Exactly, in which case they would have to come back to the Apple App Store. Still I'm not sure how common this sentiment is with how popular Netflix and Spotify still are even without App Store payment methods. It's still beneficial for you if Apple have to compete, cuz maybe now they'll lower that 30% fee, and you can have all the advantages of Apple's subscription management and a lower price. The whole reason Apple blocks other payment services is because they know plenty of consumers will choose the cheaper one. Which is what Epic tried to do with allowing multiple payment options in Fortnite that got them removed. That is removing consumer choice.

Terretta 3y ago
> maybe now they'll lower that 30% fee They already do in year 2, and have for a long time. Once you are looking at the recurring cut to compare, I suggest taking a look at the % fee of app stores in general, whether open or closed, with competitors, or no, and the services those stores provide for those fees. Also look at the cost of cobbling together an equivalent quality stack, fully, including the overhead of having to manage that stack and labor to turn the crank. Finally look at what creators get in wide open markets relative to portions that go to warehousing, logistics, distribution, product stocking/placement, sales, payments, and support. Creators are not seeing 70%.
- ThatPlayer 3y ago
  Yeah, if Apple are already providing the best value, they have nothing to worry about from competitors.
musicale 3y ago
> The whole reason Apple blocks other payment services is because they know plenty of consumers will choose the cheaper one It's almost as if it isn't a payment processing fee at all but a platform fee that enables Apple (or Google) to make money on "free to play" apps with in-app purchases. I can definitely see why a developer like Epic would want to pay platform fees for Fortnite to Apple and Google that are lower than what they currently pay to Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo. https://www.gamesindustry.biz/30-is-a-market-fee-not-a-monopoly-fee-says-google-epic-vs-google https://www.gamesindustry.biz/30-is-a-market-fee-not-a-monop...

Terretta 3y ago

> maybe now they'll lower that 30% fee They already do in year 2, and have for a long time. Once you are looking at the recurring cut to compare, I suggest taking a look at the % fee of app stores in general, whether open or closed, with competitors, or no, and the services those stores provide for those fees. Also look at the cost of cobbling together an equivalent quality stack, fully, including the overhead of having to manage that stack and labor to turn the crank. Finally look at what creators get in wide open markets relative to portions that go to warehousing, logistics, distribution, product stocking/placement, sales, payments, and support. Creators are not seeing 70%.

ThatPlayer 3y ago
Yeah, if Apple are already providing the best value, they have nothing to worry about from competitors.

musicale 3y ago

> The whole reason Apple blocks other payment services is because they know plenty of consumers will choose the cheaper one It's almost as if it isn't a payment processing fee at all but a platform fee that enables Apple (or Google) to make money on "free to play" apps with in-app purchases. I can definitely see why a developer like Epic would want to pay platform fees for Fortnite to Apple and Google that are lower than what they currently pay to Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo. https://www.gamesindustry.biz/30-is-a-market-fee-not-a-monopoly-fee-says-google-epic-vs-google https://www.gamesindustry.biz/30-is-a-market-fee-not-a-monop...