5 ms·

Spotify really has the short end of the stick here. Apple does themselves no favors by participating from a privileged position at every point in the market. Ap

Spotify really has the short end of the stick here. Apple does themselves no favors by participating from a privileged position at every point in the market. Apple App Store sets rules that disadvantages Apple Music's competitors. To offer subscriptions on iOS, Spotify must give away 30% of it's revenue to Apple. Yet Apple compete with them with Apple Music. Do you think Apple is giving away 30% of it's Apple Music revenue? This means that in order for Spotify to compete head-to-head with Apple Music, it must either charge 30% more, or maybe 30% less money than it's next competitor.[0] This is on top of Apple's blatently unfair rules that prevent developers actually explaining any of them to it's users, or informing users how to actually sign up or get a cheaper option. If Apple believes these rules are so correct, why does it ban communicating them to it's users? [0] Indeed, for Apple Music on Android Apple bypasses Google Play payments, it's 30% cut, and bills itself via credit card.

scarface_74 3y ago
[flagged]
- malermeister 3y ago
  It's not about Apple Music's market share. It's about Apple iPhone market share.
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    Which is 35%. If Apple needs to be regulated as a monopoly in the mobile device market, Spotify needs to be regulated in the streaming space.
gilgoomesh 3y ago
> To offer subscriptions on iOS, Spotify must give away 30% of it's revenue to Apple Spotify haven't paid revenue to Apple in years. This finding is because Spotify aren't permitted to "[inform] users of payment options outside its App Store" due to Apple's anti-steering rules.
- hu3 3y ago
  I think you agree with your quoted message then? To be more clear: Spotify haven't paid revenue to Apple in years... because they haven't offered payment from inside the iOS app.
- madeofpalk 3y ago
  I know. I also read the press release. So Spotify has three options available to them: - They make 30% less on iOS subscriptions compared to Apple Music - They charge users 30% more compared to Apple Music - They offer less functionality (don't accept subscriptions on iOS) compared to Apple Music. Apple uses one area of it's business to disadvantage competitors to it's other areas.
  - carlosjobim 3y ago
    Spotify can also manufacture their own device and sell to consumer. Nobody is forcing them to be on iOS.
    - throwaway2037 3y ago
      This is going to be downvoted, very hard. I could not disagree more. Thank goodness there is a strong regulator in EU. In is unfortunate that US and Japan have not come to similar conclusions.
    - oblio 3y ago
      They can also boil the oceans or wait for the heat death of the universe, while they're at it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_moat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_moat Mobile phones are NOT a free market.
      - browningstreet 3y ago
        So you’re agreeing that Apple successfully boiled the ocean and now should help others who can’t?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
baxtr 3y ago
This all sounds logical, but only to the extent you want it to be logical and numbers based. Why not include all the dollars required to get a working phone platform to billions of people on the planet? Ask Jeff Bezos or Microsoft how easy that is. Spotify wants to have all the positive aspects of the global Apple ecosystem but is not willing to pay a price for it.
- apwell23 3y ago
  > Why not include all the dollars required to get a working phone platform to billions of people on the planet? yea they do it not as a public service but to make their own platform more attractive with apps to ppl who buy iphones. This is not a service like aws purely benefit of app creators like spotify. Apple does it for their own benefit.
- albert180 3y ago
  Yes, poor Apple selling their phones at cost to make money on the ecosystem like Google or Microsoft. Oh wait
- lopis 3y ago
  What's the point of defending a multi-trillion-dollar company? Apple is abusing its market position. Let's not pretend that they are strapping for money because getting a working phone platform is expensive. Apple doesn't provide 30% of the value of a company to deserve 30% of their profit. If they wanted to make it fair, they would charge a fair usage cost of the app store. Charge for hosting apps, delivering updates, appearing in featured apps, etc. Heck, companies already spend money on marketing, let them opt-out from appearing in search results if they want.
  - judge2020 3y ago
    The fee is somewhat for paying apple to make and maintain the APIs they put into iOS, including perpetual access to all future APIs. Not Apple’s fault if Spotify then refuses to e.g. integrate with the HomePod for years after Apple made the APIs to do so.
Spivak 3y ago
> To offer subscriptions on iOS, Spotify must give away 30% of its revenue to Apple. Yet Apple compete with them with Apple Music. Do you think Apple is giving away 30% of its Apple Music revenue? This isn't the right read on the situation — Apple pays the 30% in opportunity cost. Now Spotify doesn't actually pay the 30% but let's pretend they did. Every Spotify user they have paying $10/mo nets Apple $3/mo. So if Apple Music wants to enter the market every user they get that would have otherwise been a Spotify user loses them $3/mo. So the cost of the Apple Music subscription has to make Apple $3/mo in profit to break even with the cost of doing nothing. So if Apple's costs are the same as Spotify's for actually providing the service and Spotify charges $10/mo and Apple charges $7/mo Apple is losing money. This is why across different industries and long before Apple existed this practice was ruled not anti-competitive.

scarface_74 3y ago

[flagged]

malermeister 3y ago
It's not about Apple Music's market share. It's about Apple iPhone market share.
- scarface_74 3y ago
  Which is 35%. If Apple needs to be regulated as a monopoly in the mobile device market, Spotify needs to be regulated in the streaming space.

gilgoomesh 3y ago

> To offer subscriptions on iOS, Spotify must give away 30% of it's revenue to Apple Spotify haven't paid revenue to Apple in years. This finding is because Spotify aren't permitted to "[inform] users of payment options outside its App Store" due to Apple's anti-steering rules.

hu3 3y ago
I think you agree with your quoted message then? To be more clear: Spotify haven't paid revenue to Apple in years... because they haven't offered payment from inside the iOS app.
madeofpalk 3y ago
I know. I also read the press release. So Spotify has three options available to them: - They make 30% less on iOS subscriptions compared to Apple Music - They charge users 30% more compared to Apple Music - They offer less functionality (don't accept subscriptions on iOS) compared to Apple Music. Apple uses one area of it's business to disadvantage competitors to it's other areas.
- carlosjobim 3y ago
  Spotify can also manufacture their own device and sell to consumer. Nobody is forcing them to be on iOS.
  - throwaway2037 3y ago
    This is going to be downvoted, very hard. I could not disagree more. Thank goodness there is a strong regulator in EU. In is unfortunate that US and Japan have not come to similar conclusions.
  - oblio 3y ago
    They can also boil the oceans or wait for the heat death of the universe, while they're at it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_moat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_moat Mobile phones are NOT a free market.
    - browningstreet 3y ago
      So you’re agreeing that Apple successfully boiled the ocean and now should help others who can’t?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

baxtr 3y ago

This all sounds logical, but only to the extent you want it to be logical and numbers based. Why not include all the dollars required to get a working phone platform to billions of people on the planet? Ask Jeff Bezos or Microsoft how easy that is. Spotify wants to have all the positive aspects of the global Apple ecosystem but is not willing to pay a price for it.

apwell23 3y ago
> Why not include all the dollars required to get a working phone platform to billions of people on the planet? yea they do it not as a public service but to make their own platform more attractive with apps to ppl who buy iphones. This is not a service like aws purely benefit of app creators like spotify. Apple does it for their own benefit.
albert180 3y ago
Yes, poor Apple selling their phones at cost to make money on the ecosystem like Google or Microsoft. Oh wait
lopis 3y ago
What's the point of defending a multi-trillion-dollar company? Apple is abusing its market position. Let's not pretend that they are strapping for money because getting a working phone platform is expensive. Apple doesn't provide 30% of the value of a company to deserve 30% of their profit. If they wanted to make it fair, they would charge a fair usage cost of the app store. Charge for hosting apps, delivering updates, appearing in featured apps, etc. Heck, companies already spend money on marketing, let them opt-out from appearing in search results if they want.
- judge2020 3y ago
  The fee is somewhat for paying apple to make and maintain the APIs they put into iOS, including perpetual access to all future APIs. Not Apple’s fault if Spotify then refuses to e.g. integrate with the HomePod for years after Apple made the APIs to do so.

Spivak 3y ago

> To offer subscriptions on iOS, Spotify must give away 30% of its revenue to Apple. Yet Apple compete with them with Apple Music. Do you think Apple is giving away 30% of its Apple Music revenue? This isn't the right read on the situation — Apple pays the 30% in opportunity cost. Now Spotify doesn't actually pay the 30% but let's pretend they did. Every Spotify user they have paying $10/mo nets Apple $3/mo. So if Apple Music wants to enter the market every user they get that would have otherwise been a Spotify user loses them $3/mo. So the cost of the Apple Music subscription has to make Apple $3/mo in profit to break even with the cost of doing nothing. So if Apple's costs are the same as Spotify's for actually providing the service and Spotify charges $10/mo and Apple charges $7/mo Apple is losing money. This is why across different industries and long before Apple existed this practice was ruled not anti-competitive.