7 ms·
~20% of Apple's total earnings (not revenue) could come from the App Store: https://deepwatermgmt.com/apples-app-store-is-an-important-part-of-its-profitability
by onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
~20% of Apple's total earnings (not revenue) could come from the App Store: https://deepwatermgmt.com/apples-app-store-is-an-important-part-of-its-profitability-and-its-not-changing/ https://deepwatermgmt.com/apples-app-store-is-an-important-p...
When you look at the multiple on services - the App Store could easily be >40% of Apple's total market cap.
They're going to stick their fingers in their ears as long as they can to defend that.
You don't give up the golden goose. You defend it.
- delfinom 3y agoGood thing goose is eaten in Europe traditionally.
- toyg 3y agoIt's not even the harshest thing we do to that sort of bird. Patè des californiens is going to be delicious.
- itopaloglu83 3y ago[flagged]
- loceng 3y ago[flagged]
- youngtaff 3y agoWhat’s the woke culture mind virus?
- loceng 3y ago[flagged]
- layer8 3y agoBut human life doesn’t.
- Jensson 3y agoYes, plants grows massively faster with higher CO2, plants has been CO2 starved for millions of years now but add it in labs and you can see plants growing more than 100% faster. Probably the reason we see less mineral density in crops today, CO2 levels has risen so they grow faster but mineral supply is the same. So probably not very beneficial, we aren't lacking in plant calories as is.
- loceng 3y agoRe: "Probably the reason we see less mineral density in crops today" I thought that's primarily because monocrops are quick to strip minerals from the land, as they leave with the food that's harvested?
- Zambyte 3y ago> Plants-life thrive off of CO2, contrary to what the propaganda has taught people to believe. I don't know what propaganda you have been consuming, but mine hasn't tried to convince me that I am a plant yet.
- loceng 3y agoThat's a straw man argument, right?
- Zambyte 3y agoMaybe? I wouldn't say there was any straw man argument here honestly. More just that they misunderstand issues regarding climate change. They think that people are saying that climate change is causing deforestation, and arguing against that. That's pretty easy to confuse with what people are actually trying to raise awareness of, which is that deforestation is leading to climate change (those same plants that thrive off the additional CO2 in the atmosphere can't do so if the additional CO2 in the atmosphere is there because they're already dead before they can take it out of the atmosphere).
- gopher_space 3y agoBeing kind.
- verticalscaler 3y agoCan one be kind and not woke? If so there must be more to it. Lets not ruin another thread with this nonsense.
- gopher_space 3y ago> Can one be kind and not woke? I think if you surround yourself with children it becomes difficult to hear the adults. It's too easy to drop a hot take and then dip out of the conversation, retreating back to safety, and never develop the tools needed for critical thinking or self-reflection. You'll never have a chance to understand how the everyday people who aren't edgy internet pals see you, or why, or what that means for your life.
- verticalscaler 3y agoCool. As a critical thought experiment, is it possible to be kind and not woke?
- gopher_space 3y agoI mean your statement boils down to "is it possible for evil to do good" and I think the general consensus after a few thousand years of thought is "not really".
- verticalscaler 3y agoIs it possible to be woke and not kind?
- gopher_space 3y agoInitially I approached this concept as "can good do evil?" but after some reflection I think we have a series of choices and what we do in the moment is the only thing that matters. Good is only good if it does good. If you want to tie religion into the issue, ask yourself "Is it possible to do evil in the name of good?"
- highwaylights 3y agoWhy would you ask that? Don't you realise the extra work @dang has to do when you trigger these posters? Have a heart and spare a thought the guy works hard.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- verticalscaler 3y agoThat's a bit of an exaggeration financially. I think Apple is afraid 100% of their market cap depends on the App Store, just not so directly. Phones are "done". Geese don't live forever. Switching away is hard. In the not too distant future a $99 no brand phone will be equivalent to the iPhone experience for 80% of use cases, modulo the camera. If apps are just web apps and run on whatever hardware, Apple will need to come up with something new. Maybe the goose was really named Steve.
- planb 3y agoThat’s why I hope they compete hard in the AI-in-your-pocket space. Seems like they got the hardware talent to make that happen (software-wise I’m not so sure, but at least it sounds like they focus a bit more on that now the car project is dead). I want Apple to win by selling expensive devices, not by collecting 30% fee on minors gambling for loot boxes.
- pas 3y agoThere's a very nice premium in execution. (And vertical integration.) For example their laptops are selling like hot cakes ... because they are seen as better made then the competition by consumers. (Sure, it seems the (premium?) laptop market finally getting some competition thanks to Framework/StarLabs/etc.) Obviously the same is true of the iPhone. And software is a big part of it. (I don't want to deal with Dell and Windows. And Asahi is getting better day-by-day.) And hardware too. (M1, M2, M3, etc.. and the A series chips allow their devices to really shine with the big battery, etc.) And ... while I don't like the actual UX of Apple-land, I don't like it either that Google with all their PhDs and big brain still cannot fucking solve the jankyness. Yes, they will hopefully be forced to give up the free money rent from the walled garden, and hopefully it will encourage them to invest in being a good platform, invest in software, win/keep market share on merits instead of by decree.
- deergomoo 3y ago> In the not too distant future a $99 no brand phone will be equivalent to the iPhone experience for 80% of use cases, modulo the camera I'm not so sure, for the same reason people still buy MacBooks when cheap Windows laptops are available, and luxury cars when there is no shortage of lightly used Kias. Laptops and cars have been around substantially longer than smartphones, but it's still very easy to see the difference between cheap and expensive. While technically yes all of them do "the same thing", people are willing to pay for premium, and I suspect (due to relative affordability if nothing else) that the market of people able and willing to pay for a nicer phone is and will remain quite large.
- pg_1234 3y agoThe EU should make a public service announcement. Something along the lines of: "We urge all EU citizens with Apple devices to have an alternate means of accessing critical internet services like banking, to protect themselves in the event we are forced to block all Apple services EU-wide for legal non-compliance." ... then watch AAPL stock drop below NVDA ... ... and Apple come crawling back, suitably obedient.
- microtherion 3y agoIronically, the iOS banking apps I use are particularly finicky about only running on customer installs without developer capabilities enabled. I very much doubt that banks would queue up to install from web sites etc.
- lgeorget 3y agoThat sounds awfully like market manipulation. We need something a tad more subtle.
- pg_1234 3y agoMarket manipulation would be if they shorted the stock first. This would be: A) looking out for their citizens B) making it clear who's boss
- elevatedastalt 3y agoIt is, but all regulation is market manipulation (like, literally. It forces the market equivalent away from the free market). We have decided it's ok to vest that power in governments.
- scarface_74 3y agoEU App Store revenue is 7% of total App Store revenue.
- dns_snek 3y agoHow's that relevant? It's their second largest market for iPhone sales, representing around 25% of total units sold. If, as the parent comment suggested, the EU intervened and somehow banned Apple's services in the EU until they started complying with the law, new iPhones sales would effectively drop to 0.
- scarface_74 3y agoAnd from what I read, only 7% of the App Store revenue comes from the EU.
- paulpan 3y agoThis can't be repeated often enough. App Store revenue (part of Services segment) is a key growth driver and Apple will drag this out for as long as they can. I think it's inevitable iPhone 16 prices will increase in EU starting later this year. Arguably similar to Valve's Steam Deck, iPhone prices are subsidized by the apps revenue. Apple is going to try preserve their profit margins one way or another.
- zarzavat 3y agoIncreasing prices in response to this is irrational. Prices are a function of what people are prepared to pay. If people are prepared to pay more for an iPhone then Apple should have already increased prices, and if they are not then increasing prices will make less money.
- IshKebab 3y agoIt's a function of what people are willing to pay and what suppliers are willing to sell for. So I think the price will go up a little bit, but probably not much.
- mqus 3y agoI mean, "unlocked" iPhones can be worth more money than regular ones, at least in theory. In practice, Apple can probably raise prices by 50% even if they would release the same phone just with an incremented number and people will still buy their stuff.
- zarzavat 3y agoI’m not sure the DMA works like that. Someone correct me if I’m wrong but as far as I understand the DMA applies to Apple’s operations in the EU, not devices that are sold in the EU. If you buy a “locked” iPhone outside the EU and bring it to the EU and set it up in the EU, I believe that Apple still has to comply with the DMA for that device because all of Apple’s services are still operating in the EU. So Apple wouldn’t be able to charge a premium for “unlocked” devices.
- 3y ago
- johnnyanmac 3y ago>You don't give up the golden goose. You defend it. Meanwhile, Android has dozens of stores and Google Play keeps the lion's share because it's built into almost every phone, has most of the apps anyway, and google's own safety assurances built-in. Google has gotten dinged but for much more insidious stuff behind the scenes, which still amounts to a few large publishers out of hundreds. It's just paranoia at this point. Most of the market is captured, and any part Apple couldn't capture after 15 years (say, maybe premium games) is one they probably weren't every going to capture anyway. This is being worried about a crack in the brick wall while 99.999% of devs will just keep entering the front door like normal people. And most of the remaining people bypassing apple will just throw a brick at the door instead of meticulously exploit said crack.