3 ms·

> How is it not subject to market forces? That doesn't make sense. 65% of domestic App Store revenue is on iOS, and the Apple app store is the only distributio

> How is it not subject to market forces? That doesn't make sense. 65% of domestic App Store revenue is on iOS, and the Apple app store is the only distribution channel. What market forces affect Apple's pricing power on commissions? > Can you provide a legal document or explicit law that states "vertical integration is illegal"? No, because like all things, it's about how you use it. Per the FTC - Exclusive dealing and exclusive distribution arrangements may be anticompetitive, however, if they are used to raise rivals' costs, exclude (or foreclose) competition, or facilitate tacit collusion. Exclusive dealing contracts may raise rivals' costs when the contracts are made with so many retailers, and lock up so much capacity at the retail level, that competing manufacturers are unable to attain minimum efficient scale in either the production or the distribution functions. Apple is dealing with itself - maybe that argument holds in court (certainly has a shot with the current junta). It would certainly help if Congress would update the law for the 21st century. It's close enough to the line that it can be argued, and they are clearly nervous about it. > How about this: Apple can charge Epic the same outrageous* 12% that Epic charges game developers. Do you think that would alleviate Epic's concerns? Be mad at someone else. I don't know or care about Epic and I don't play Fortnite. I just know that private companies should not be able levy a tax or unreasonable tolls in restraint of commerce. It's hard to justify a 30% toll on 65% of a $100B+ market without at least knowing if a third-party marketplace would offer better rates and service.

ericmay 3y ago
> 65% of domestic App Store revenue is on iOS, and the Apple app store is the only distribution channel. What market forces affect Apple's pricing power on commissions? That just proves that Apple provides a lot of value through its platform and that developers are hungry to develop for it despite the platform fees, it doesn't prove that Apple's App Store isn't "subject to market forces". > No, because like all things, it's about how you use it. Per the FTC - Exclusive dealing and exclusive distribution arrangements may be anticompetitive, however, if they are used to raise rivals' costs, exclude (or foreclose) competition, or facilitate tacit collusion. This broad definition would apply from any company ranging from Nintendo to Walmart to Tesla. It's not convincing. If you are going to make the claim that "vertical integration is illegal" you should provide factual evidence stating this instead of just your broad interpretation of "Per the FTC". > Be mad at someone else. Something something Apple tax, Junta, illegal something something.
- arrosenberg 3y ago
  > That just proves that Apple provides a lot of value through its platform and that developers are hungry to develop for it despite the platform fees, it doesn't prove that Apple's App Store isn't "subject to market forces". That's really an argument for court. It could mean they've locked in a dominant market position they are abusing. Not for me to say, but you haven't made an argument otherwise.
  - ericmay 3y ago
    Sure, but friend aren't we just discussing this on the Internet? It's all an argument for court :)
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
charcircuit 3y ago
>What market forces affect Apple's pricing power on commissions? Raising the rev share they take makes the developers less incintivized to develop for the platform. Lowering the rev share makes developers more incentivized to develop for the platform. Apple is competing against other app platforms over developers of which there is a limited amount of. So for Apple to lower the amount they take there would need to be another platform that is stealing developers from Apple's ecosystem. If developers stop developing apps for Apple's devices then that makes them less desirable for users so they would be incintivized to let developers keep a bigger portion of the revenue.

ericmay 3y ago

> 65% of domestic App Store revenue is on iOS, and the Apple app store is the only distribution channel. What market forces affect Apple's pricing power on commissions? That just proves that Apple provides a lot of value through its platform and that developers are hungry to develop for it despite the platform fees, it doesn't prove that Apple's App Store isn't "subject to market forces". > No, because like all things, it's about how you use it. Per the FTC - Exclusive dealing and exclusive distribution arrangements may be anticompetitive, however, if they are used to raise rivals' costs, exclude (or foreclose) competition, or facilitate tacit collusion. This broad definition would apply from any company ranging from Nintendo to Walmart to Tesla. It's not convincing. If you are going to make the claim that "vertical integration is illegal" you should provide factual evidence stating this instead of just your broad interpretation of "Per the FTC". > Be mad at someone else. Something something Apple tax, Junta, illegal something something.

arrosenberg 3y ago
> That just proves that Apple provides a lot of value through its platform and that developers are hungry to develop for it despite the platform fees, it doesn't prove that Apple's App Store isn't "subject to market forces". That's really an argument for court. It could mean they've locked in a dominant market position they are abusing. Not for me to say, but you haven't made an argument otherwise.
- ericmay 3y ago
  Sure, but friend aren't we just discussing this on the Internet? It's all an argument for court :)
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

charcircuit 3y ago

>What market forces affect Apple's pricing power on commissions? Raising the rev share they take makes the developers less incintivized to develop for the platform. Lowering the rev share makes developers more incentivized to develop for the platform. Apple is competing against other app platforms over developers of which there is a limited amount of. So for Apple to lower the amount they take there would need to be another platform that is stealing developers from Apple's ecosystem. If developers stop developing apps for Apple's devices then that makes them less desirable for users so they would be incintivized to let developers keep a bigger portion of the revenue.