27 ms·
Apple's requirements are about to hit creators and fans on Patreon
- philipov 2y agoIs this going to affect people who don't use patreon through the apple app store?
- jasonlotito 2y agoFrom my understanding: no. > If you have not switched to subscription billing by this November, your fans will not be able to purchase new memberships in the iOS app. Basically, you just won't be able to make purchases via the iOS app. Which is just really not great for creators. The per-creation billing is where this really stinks. I much prefer to have this all managed in Patreon rather than Apple. I'll be able to manage just fine, but this is going to cause confusion. Honestly, this is why the web is so important. At least you can still use the website to get around paying for this.
- jprete 2y agoIt sounds like they're outright killing per-creation patronage, so...yes? This seems to affect all their users?
- throwaway98797 2y agowhere’s the line between buying something on amazon, ordering a ride on uber, and patreon? why do some purchases get exempt and not others?
- htrp 2y agoSubscriptions I expect....
- Hamuko 2y agoWhatever you get as a Patreon patron isn't typically a physical product, unlike something you buy on Amazon (generally speaking) or a physical car ride. It's closer to a Netflix or a newspaper subscription, and Apple wants 30% of those too.
- kalleboo 2y agoSome Patreons I subscribe to do include stuff like postcards, signed posters or prints, so it's not quite as black and white
- akmarinov 2y agoThat's the reason why Kindle doesn't sell ebooks on iOS
- mintplant 2y agoApple is threatening to remove the Patreon app if they do the same.
- lovethevoid 2y agoWhether Apple believes it can strongarm the related companies.
- goosedragons 2y agoArbitrary Apple rules. Apple decided that "physical" goods & services in app purchases don't get taxed (e.g., clothes, uber rides). Digital goods do because they feel like they can get away with it which is why you can't buy eBooks from Kobo or Amazon on iOS, can't buy or rent movies from Google on iOS. People will tell you this is for "safety" and to keep you from getting scammed but there's nothing stopping malicious actors from creating apps that promise to ship physical goods and just don't. At least with digital goods you should get whatever you pay for immediately after purchase.
- crazygringo 2y agoBut Apple doesn't take a share of Venmo or PayPal or Zelle either. And Patreon sure feels a lot more like those -- you're sending money to a creator. Sometimes you get extra content, but sometimes you don't.
- wpm 2y agoThe line is wherever Phil Schiller fucking says it is.
- proxxie_desu 2y agoIn many cases, it isn’t even a “purchase“ in any reasonable sense of the word - it’s a donation. Supporters don’t get anything other than knowing they’re helping a creator keep making something they like. This is akin to Apple wanting a 30% cut when you send your buddy $5 through Apple Pay. With this, Apple isn’t just interfering in business relationships, they’re interfering in personal relationships. I’ve been pretty sympathetic to Apple in their tangles with the EU - I want my phone to be a locked-down appliance. But this is too far- it’s clear that Apple both has a lot of power and is abusing it.
- delecti 2y agoThe line is "can you use the purchase solely in the app distributed through Apple's infrastructure". I think their fee is outrageous, but that does seem like a defensible line.
- rondini 2y agoExcept they're stepping far over that line! You can use a Patreon subscription on all platforms, same as a Spotify or Netflix or Kobo... and yet they want a cut even when they have no part in the payment processing. Totally indefensible imo.
- kelnos 2y agoNo, I think you misunderstand. It's not "can you use it elsewhere?", it's "if the user chose to, could they use the purchase solely inside the context of the Apple ecosystem?" That is, if someone wants to, they can use Patreon's iOS app, not interact with Patreon in any other way, and get all of the benefits available to patrons.
- jjcm 2y agoI do wonder if a workaround here is buying a physical postcard from a patreon creator that comes with a free monthly subscription. A 50c mailed card would be cheaper for any subscription above $2.
- hellcow 2y agoI'm not sure you'd need to ship it. You're buying a 1/100,000 share of a physical postcard that exists at the Patreon offices. You can visit the office and see the postcard displayed out front under glass. It just so happens that buying such a postcard includes a free month's subscription to a Patreon creator.
- Hamuko 2y agoIs there a reason why Patreon doesn't just pull out of the App Store? Whenever I got Patreon rewards, I'd just get them in an email notification and the link there took me to the website. Worked great without having to download an app.
- xenospn 2y agoThe 30% fee is steep, but conversion rates using in-app purchase are astronomical compared to regular webpages with a credit card form. Everyone hates it (developers, I mean), but it works very well.
- rafavento 2y agoThis isn't going to hit developers.
- lovethevoid 2y agoThe developers part relates to having to deal with Apple and Google’s review process, hence the dislike.
- xenospn 2y agoIf they pass the 30% on, sure. Not so easy for smaller apps. Patreon might pull it off.
- yunwal 2y agoIn case anyone wants to know why this is: it's because 1) I don't have to enter credit card information 2) Apple allows me to cancel subscriptions in a central location as soon as I sign up If your service forces me to auto-renew my subscription, I'm probably not gonna buy it.
- pavel_lishin 2y agoPatreon has been pushing an app-based approach for awhile now; every email I get from them has callouts to open the notification in their app. I don't know why they badly want this - presumably for more user tracking, or because studies show that people engage more, or whatever - but pulling out of the app store would be at odds with this desire to push everyone into their app.
- _aavaa_ 2y agoAbsurd. What next, they want a 30% cut from me when I set up automatic payments for my credit card through the banks iOS app?
- polotics 2y agoNo! They want 30% of your net worth each time you connect to your bank over the internet using an Apple device.
- add-sub-mul-div 2y agoYeah I can't understand why people think that inviting new middlemen into their transactions is acceptable. It's time to stop prostrating ourselves to these companies.
- macintux 2y agoIt's complicated. Apple has given me a simple way to manage many of my subscriptions, a single pane of glass, which I appreciate. I'm fine paying a little extra for that. It would be more valuable to me if Apple didn't charge too much, which turns away service providers.
- mjhagen 2y agoExactly, it's the percentage that's just too damn high.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> can't understand why people think that inviting new middlemen into their transactions is acceptable Same reason people use credit cards or Gmail or hell Patreon. It reduces the number of counterparties you have to deal with and trust.
- jprete 2y agoI remember reading that per-creation billing is a very important feature for Patreon creators, because it removes the moral obligation to produce content just to justify a subscription. If Patreon really doesn't want to kill the feature itself, but is just responding to Apple's enforcement, then it seems like a really clear illustration of monopoly power - pushing unrelated markets to change their own structure and products just to fit Apple's preferred billing flow.
- balozi 2y agoPatreon also stands to gain from this change. Come think of it, the new arrangement is a win for everyone involved - except the actual patrons ofcourse.
- voiceblue 2y agoIs there any evidence that Apple has actually made this "threat"? I'm not seeing anything other than what Patreon has claimed (and it seems that they are only recently going to begin to allow iOS purchases, which might mean they are bringing this upon themselves). I am suspicious, because the specific change to per-creation billing is overwhelmingly positive for Patreon (and, as you pointed out, not for its users), from a business economics perspective (assuming they don't lose too many users over this). It also seems odd for Apple to press that point specifically.
- Kwpolska 2y agoApple has been on a crusade against all payments not going through them for many years. I absolutely believe this is Apple’s fault, although I would have expected this to have happened much sooner.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- egypturnash 2y agoI am a creator on the per-creation model and I got a very unambiguously worded email from Patreon this morning basically saying "if we want to be on the iOS store, Apple requires that we remove all billing methods that are not compatible with their payment method, and yours is not; in November 2025, you will be switched to the one billing method that Apple allows us to still have. If you would like to start earlier go to this link and hit this button to start the process." They used more words but they were very clear that this is a thing Apple is imposing on them as the price for being on the iOS App Store.
- whywhywhywhy 2y agoThe world where Apple is just completely fine with Apple users paying $13 instead of $10 for a subscription if they do it through an app is an interesting one. Obviously this makes a lot of money for them but when you think about it they must think very little of their customers treating them with disrespect like this. This is how 'Tim Cook's Apple' should be remembered.
- Rinzler89 2y agoApple users (I'm not one of them) seem fine with that arrangement.
- GaggiX 2y agoApple is making sure that it is not easy for Apple users to find out about this fee.
- EricE 2y agoHardly! The fee has been a hot topic of discussion since day one.
- akudha 2y agoHot topic of discussion where? Amongst developers, right? How many non-developer Apple users are aware of Apple’s shenanigans? I doubt not many. Even if the end users are aware and accept it, that doesn’t make Apple right. We as a society accept a lot of things - from the security theatre at airports (last week, I saw photos of passengers taken, for domestic flights) to Amazon workers peeing in bottles. As long as we get our crap the same day, we’re good with some unfortunate souls peeing in bottles. If it bothered us, we’d stop shopping at Amazon, for example. All this to say, we’ve been trained very well to tolerate and even accept a lot of bad behavior if it helps with our laziness. Doesn’t mean it is right though
- EricE 2y ago
- jp57 2y agoWhy does Patreon need an app?
- saurik 2y agoIf nothing else, to get consistent notifications from the creators you are a patron of, as Apple dragged their feet on web app notifications for many years, and they are still crippled and unreliable.
- 4ad 2y agoSo for nothing then.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- pests 2y agoNothing for you. Important to others.
- wheybags 2y agoEmail works just fine? Seriously, absolutely hate the trend of making apps out of websites.
- sodapopcan 2y agoMe too, but shockingly there are a lot of people who don't have a computer, just a phone. I even know people in their 40s like this.
- g15jv2dp 2y agoPhones usually have a web browser installed.
- sodapopcan 2y ago
- deegles 2y agoI think it's fair to take a fee for payments through Apple's infrastructure... but 30% is egregious.
- kllrnohj 2y agoPatreon doesn't currently and doesn't want to us Apple's infrastructure. They're being "forced" to do so, hence this post.
- dirtsoc 2y agothey should have just gone the same route as amazon with ebooks and removed the ability to subscribe in the app.
- g15jv2dp 2y agoIf you can't pay money to content makers, what's the point of a patreon app? It's the whole purpose.
- HDThoreaun 2y agoSeeing the content you paid for when using a non mobile device?
- aphantastic 2y agoI’ve happily been using Patreon for years and didn’t even know an app existed. Has the world entirely forgotten about websites?
- HDThoreaun 2y agoNative apps are better than websites on mobile. I know you know this.
- 2y ago
- RIMR 2y agoPatreon should just remove the ability to subscribe from the app, and just offload the process to Safari. Let Patreon users purchase their memberships using Apple's own browser app. Let Apple decide if they want to try to take 30% of all transactions made using their browser and see how that works out for them.
- vinceguidry 2y agoIf they tried that, Apple will just remove the app from the App Store.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- moribvndvs 2y agoYes. If you have a link to a site that has the ability or even another link to another place where you can buy something, Apple will block publishing of your app. They pulled this on us earlier this year after three years of publishing with no problems. All we had was a link to our support site, which had a link to our main site (where you could buy a subscription), the latter we had to remove or they refused. In fact, if we even try to give users materials on subscription details or talk about (not even providing a link) how to find those details, Apple blocks it. They need to get smashed with the antitrust bat hard.
- ApolloFortyNine 2y agoIt's still comical to me that Google lost their anti trust suit while Apple does blatant offenses with their 30% fee.
- storafrid 2y agoI hope the automatic price offset is separated out and labeled in the cart/checkout as "Apple's user fee".
- lovethevoid 2y agoThis isn’t allowed in the US, not sure about the new EU rules regarding this specifically. Best they can do is show a “deduction” only on web/other platforms that shows they’re getting it cheaper than iOS iirc.
- inetknght 2y ago> This isn’t allowed in the US Can you cite the US law for it? I think it's specifically Apple that doesn't want it because it would give more visibility to Apple's abusive behavior.
- sparky_ 2y agoI believe the poster means, it isn't allowed by Apple's guidelines, ergo your app will be rejected because of it. Nothing to do with the law itself.
- lovethevoid 2y agoShould have specified, isn't allowed in the US App Store.
- HDThoreaun 2y agoApple doesn’t allow this
- orangesite 2y agoThat would be golden!
- jmclnx 2y ago>Apple will be applying their 30% App Store fee to all new memberships purchased in the Patreon iOS app, in addition to anything bought in your Patreon shop. >remember, Apple’s fees are only in the iOS app. Your prices on the web and the Android app will remain completely unaffected. If this means Apple will take 30% of funds I send to Patreon, then time to dump Apple Pay. Yet another reason I avoid Apple, seems they are in a race with Microsoft to be the biggest abusers to their users.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- zombiwoof 2y agoApple used to create products for creators. Now it creates revenue streams for investors
- mensetmanusman 2y agoI like being able to cancel subscriptions from the App Store, it’s a huge advantage because companies will usually try to make it difficult to cancel.
- gigel82 2y agoThen you should get the option to pay a 30% surcharge for that privilege. Others can choose to use virtual credit cards that come for free (or cheap) from their bank or privacy.com for that purpose.
- pornel 2y agoApple could add an API for 3rd party subscriptions to integrate with that screen. But Apple prefers to insinuate that you either pay them 30% or get scammed, and there is absolutely no option in between.
- auggierose 2y ago[flagged]
- mensetmanusman 2y ago30% is too high. Charge whatever Visa charges.
- lotsofpulp 2y agoWithout commenting on the appropriate level of charges, Visa and Apple provide very different services. For example, with Apple, you get administration of taxes in many locales as well as dealing with currency exchange. Also, I don't think sellers have to deal with chargebacks, although Apple might have their own version of a chargeback, but I am not sure.
- FireBeyond 2y ago> Also, I don't think sellers have to deal with chargebacks, although Apple might have their own version of a chargeback, but I am not sure. They absolutely do, just through Apple, "Disputes". Apple will refund the user the full purchase price (that's fun, $10 app, you get $7 after the Apple cut, and on refund, you have to refund $10, so you're actually out money). And too many disputes will get your developer privileges restricted or revoked.
- Kim_Bruning 2y agoDoes this scheme also apply in Europe?
- stavros 2y agoI guess it must, unless you're using an alternative app store.
- isodev 2y agoYes but the EC is busy fighting Apple on it. Until now the conversation was mostly focused around app developers, but of course it has implications for the actual activity behind every app (like the creators using Patreon and alike) cf. https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/commission-sends-preliminary-findings-apple-and-opens-additional-non-compliance-investigation-2024-06-24_en https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/commission-sends-pr...
- Rebuff5007 2y agoIf apple was a young startup, struggling to get market share, or struggling to turn a profit, I can understand why they might want a cut of profits here. But they literally have more cash than anyone in the world... why bother with this?!
- dosinga 2y agoAh, but isn't it the other way around? If you are a young startup without market share (but well funded), you don't care about the extra margin. Uber was cheap before it killed the taxis.
- Mistletoe 2y agoThey have to make more and more money or their stock goes down. This is the gross world we live in now. There’s a reason Warren Buffett sold half of his Apple holdings. They’ve squeezed blood from the turnip about as much as you can.
- bkraz 2y agoAs a longtime YouTube creator who uses Patreon for financial support, the news is terrible: Patreon informed me that all creators must switch to a monthly subscription schedule instead of the per-creation schedule that I and many other currently use. The whole point of per-creation is that it allows me to take time off, and only charge people when I release something, thus incentivizing me, and being fair to my supporters. I'm really annoyed by this change, and will start pushing back, but if it happens as planned, I may be forced to switch to another platform, or come up with some other solution.
- ThrowawayTestr 2y agoIf you're able, my artist friend has had a lot of success running their own site and doing their own payments through PayPal.
- ncr100 2y agoAm I misunderstanding, that PayPal can workaround Apple's payment rules which Patreon is complying with?
- hnuser123456 2y agoAs long as you're not using the paypal app on an apple device
- burnished 2y agoYou are misunderstanding, the suggestion is to do it yourself instead of using patreon.
- whimsicalism 2y agothink p2p transactions are exempt - apple doesn’t get 30% of my venmo or zelle. no clue why patreon doesn’t count though
- froggit 2y agoIt's not p2p. 2 transactions happen: you pay patreon, patreon pays them.
- neilv 2y agoSince at least the 1980s, IT had the concepts of "open systems" and "interoperation", to support market competition and innovation. And we later did things like the Web and other open standards. Then Apple comes along, and uses its market position as a hardware and OS vendor, to make a nonstandard software download thing that could've been a Web site. In parallel, Apple also made open-standards Web apps unattractive on their hardware in various ways. (Often through foot-dragging when other vendors were trying to make Web apps a smooth experience, but sometimes also going out of their way to make Web work worse.) (See also: making kids look like losers to their peers in chat, if they don't have iPhones.) Apple then imposes predatory rates and terms on other businesses who are pretty much forced to use the Apple proprietary app store, due not to the merits of the app store so much as Apple's dominance of hardware and conflict of interest when implementing open standards. I assume many consumers don't understand the situation, and how much of an overbearing abuser of its market position Apple can be. Or they have some idea, but pragmatically have to accept it. Also, this affords Apple a lot of money for really first-rate PR. What I don't understand is why regulators haven't smacked the snot out of the Apple app store, with finality. For example: Apple may only charge a few-percent administration and payment processing fee, and that's it; and they have to permit other app stores with first-class access to the system, as a compromise given the proprietary lock-in mess they've made. (Making them support other open standards better, even to the exclusion of prorietary ones, is more complicated.)
- ncr100 2y ago> I assume many consumers don't understand the situation, and how much of an overbearing abuser of its market position Apple can be. Here is an awesome graph (scroll down 1 page) charting out the 3 options -- 1 web, and 2 overtly expensive for iOS. https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/27991664769677-How-iOS-in-app-purchases-work-on-Patreon https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/27991664769677...
- reaperducer 2y agoSince at least the 1980s, IT had the concepts of "open systems" and "interoperation", to support market competition and innovation. And we later did things like the Web and other open standards. Then Apple comes along, Wow. I don't know if that's selective memory, or revisionist history, but you've got a huge dose of the stuff. No, interoperability isn't perfect now, but it's a heck of a lot better than it was in the 80's.
- Rudism 2y agoDue to their app store monopoly, Apple is probably one of the few companies whose version of enshittification often involves enshittifying the products and services of other companies.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- advael 2y agoWe need to kill the phone duopoly A big part of it is restrictive and onerous standards on cellular firmware that act as a compliance moat for Apple and Google (and seem designed to enable surveillance more than anything), but if we fail to get open-source alternatives via commonsense regulatory reform the antitrust guns need to come out. When smartphones are often the only authentication mechanism accepted by major payment providers, workplaces, and other contexts that most people can't opt out of, a (fairly cozy, collaborating as often as they compete) duopoly on viable operating systems is unacceptable
- bluescrn 2y ago> We need to kill the phone duopoly We also need to save the world wide web. Most of these 'apps' have no need to exist.
- advael 2y agoStrongly agree, but the existence of platform-integrated DRM is a moral hazard that current incentives don't seem to have a mechanism for overcoming, and the only mechanisms that seem to work require open or at least regulated platforms
- ensignavenger 2y agoWhat advantage does the Patreon app offer to iOS users that the Patreon website is unable to offer? Why does Patreon even need an app?
- diebeforei485 2y agoBeing able to consume Patron-exclusive content on the go, probably.
- diebeforei485 2y agoiOS is the most-used platform for Patreon, according to the CEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-LoTH3PzgM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-LoTH3PzgM (0:57)
- TheDong 2y agoThere's a few things: 1. Some iOS users don't realize there even is a web browser, and only look for apps. If there's not an app, they give up. 2. The patreon app has features like playing music and video (patreon rewards), notifications (new posts and messages and such), etc.... and while those features would work for a webpage on android, they either don't work on iOS, or are more difficult to implement, buggy, and feel "non-native" for the user. Notice how the other two replies assumed "web page" didn't mean "using safari on iOS". If hacker news commenters have trouble with the concept of "using a webpage, not an app, on iOS", what hope does the general populace have?
- albertopv 2y agoI think one of the reasons Apple feels entitled to do this is almost monopolistic US market share. People should stop buying iPhones for this, but it's not hard to foreseen it won't happen.
- lenerdenator 2y agoApple has a far from monopolistic US market share for mobile devices. They might be one of the largest single vendors, but if I want to go buy a new smartphone that has decent app and service support from the marketplace, I can absolutely do that without giving so much as a penny to Apple.
- standardUser 2y agoApple has just over 60% of the US market share and employee a whole arsenal of tactics to create artificial friction with other platforms in order to increase that market share.
- lenerdenator 2y agoThat's big, but in the minds of most, that's not a monopoly. Duopoly with Google, sure, but convincing a court of a monopoly when a lot of people in that court have living memory of Windows being 80%+ of the total OS installs in the country is going to be a tall ask, especially considering that didn't even stick, long-term, as a rationale to keep MS under the original terms of its punishment.
- adam_arthur 2y agoWindows (Microsoft) never tried to charge 30% on top of all commerce occuring on the platform. What would your opinion be if they did?
- matwood 2y agoIMO, it's the interop that that will potentially get Apple. The stuff about the store and fees will likely end up nowhere in the US.
- iandanforth 2y agoNo mention of suing Apple, no mention of reducing their cut. Doesn't really seem like Patreon has got creators backs.
- bjtitus 2y agoI'm sure Patreon is just itching to take on the wealthiest company's legal department. Even the wealthiest nation states are struggling to reign this in.
- intended 2y agoTheir cut is 8%. Apple's cut is 30%. If Patreon went to 0%, creators will still be getting 22% less. What would, according to you, be a good reduction on Patreon's side?
- mrgoldenbrown 2y agoPatreon only takes 5%-12% , even if they gave it all up it wouldn't the Apple Tax.
- nhggfu 2y agonever build your house on rented land eh.
- _han 2y agoThis is the most shocking part to me: > Apple has also made clear that if creators on Patreon […] disable transactions in the iOS app, we will be at risk of having the entire app removed from their App Store. Absolutely astounding that removing transactions from the platform could result in being removed.
- sschueller 2y agoHow is the EU going to respond to this since it is literally blackmail with Apple's market dominance?
- nabla9 2y agoWhen they respond Apple changes policy for EU users, not for anyone else. Already users based in the European Union with an iPhone have the ability to install apps using alternative app marketplaces or web distribution, in addition to the App Store.
- jdiez17 2y agoIs that so? I’ve been waiting to try app sideloading but haven’t seen any app repositories or so that work with the app marketplace APIs
- nabla9 2y agoYes. It has been just few months. It takes some time to catch up. Mobivention (b2b specialized) https://app-marketplace.eu/ https://app-marketplace.eu/ AltStore https://altstore.io/#Downloads https://altstore.io/#Downloads Sometime in the future, Epic Games Store, MacPaw’s Setapp
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ryan29 2y agoI wonder how far those rules from Apple go. I don't know a ton about Patreon, but what if creators have exclusive content available via the app and use that to encourage fans to subscribe outside of iOS? What if creators start an education campaign on YouTube telling their fans to avoid subscriptions on iOS? I wonder if Apple is playing with fire on this one. If the creator and influencer markets turn on them, I think it could have a non-trivial impact on Apple's brand, especially with younger generations. Many modern creators are also smart business people and they're not going to see much value in Apple taking 30% of their revenue when Patreon is already providing all the services they need for about 15% at the top end IIRC. Right now I think the biggest change that could help the average consumer would be for legislators to allow, or maybe even require, app owners to split platform fees into separate line items. For example, something like: Donation $1.00 Patreon Platform Fee $1.18 Apple Platform Fee $0.50 ---------------------------- Total $1.68
- dnissley 2y agoThis is what the world looks like when you give up the ability to download and install an app from anywhere.
- jlarocco 2y agoWhy is there even a Patreon app? Should've sent people to the website. You bought into the platform, so you have to pay by their rules.
- trvz 2y ago> Why is there even a Patreon app? Considering its tendency to overheat your phone even when displaying pure text posts, it's there so you can warm your hands in winter.
- mrweasel 2y agoThe Patreon website is equally shitty, at least it was when I last used it last year. Haven't tried the app though. So you hands should remain toasty. But I do agree, why not just send Apple a big "fuck you" and create a really good mobile website? Apple is still really pushing it with the 30%. I do agree that they should get cut, or straight up charge app developers a yearly fee for being in the App Store (which they already do with the developer licens), perhaps a smaller fee per update and a fee for using their subscriptions feature (which I do like as a consumer). Patreon need to tread really carefully, because what Apple does not that different from Patreons own business model. Creators are similarly complaining about Patreons fees. Still 30% is a lot, but I don't know what the actual cost of running the App Store is.
- stalfosknight 2y agoAs a user, I welcome this change if it means it becomes possible to easily cancel Patreon subscriptions with a single click in my device settings instead of having to go through Patreon’s cancellation process. Patreon makes it a completely unnecessary pain in the ass to cancel multiple subscriptions. It seems like only Apple gives a shit about making things easy to cancel and I find it hard to have any empathy for companies / developers that make canceling things painful.
- sersi 2y agoI dislike Patreon because they keep making their UI worse over time but that said, I'm furious at apple for this. I like Patreon to allow creators to do per-creation schedule and I hate that Apple has enough power to impact me despite being an Android user (specifically because of these kind of behaviors). So, to people who say that with only 27% of global marketshare there's no case for an antitrust lawsuit, well if they can impact users outside of their ecosystem, there's a clear case for antitrust.
- charlie0 2y ago[flagged]
- andybak 2y agoHow?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- dinobones 2y agoNot a fan of Apple's policy, but I am a fan of consistency. It was unfair that Patreon was able to operate on the App Store without paying this 30% cut, it basically gave them a monopoly that no similar Patreon-like platform could compete with.
- summerlight 2y agoEven if we have to accept all the BS from Apple, at least customers should be aware of the information at the purchase time that they're paying 30% more money compared to other alternative options. This asymmetricity of information is playing good only for Apple at the cost of all the app creators and their customers.
- throawayonthe 2y ago[dead]
- neves 2y agoNon North-American here. I've read that Biden passed a "Hidden costs" bill. Wouldn't this Apple charges account as a hidden cost?
- wccrawford 2y agoYou are presented the final cost up-front. There is no "hidden cost" here. When you sign up for a hotel room and they add on room cleaning charges at the end of your stay, that's a hidden cost, especially since the charge is the same no matter what you do while you are there. Ironically, "sales tax" feels like a hidden cost to me. Yes, everyone knows it exists, but not everyone knows what the local value is wherever they are, especially on vacation. It should be on the sign. I guess it's not surprising that the government exempts themselves from this law.
- FredPret 2y agoThe reason sales prices are quoted without tax in North America is because there's a million different permutations governing what the sales tax is going to be in different situations (who's buying what, from whom, where, when), and this changes all the time. Local governments can shift their taxes at any time to encourage or discourage certain things. I'd argue this flexibility is very good, but the downside is calculating sales tax in the US is complex enough that there are companies dedicated to it. So everyone quotes pre-tax pricing.
- ttepasse 2y agoIf we only had databases and computers which can track and calculate those advanced math stuff.
- FredPret 2y agoWell, yeah, but you can also see how the key piece of information a company discloses is the pre-tax price. To show each customer the right post-tax price, you'd have to know where they live and where they will buy your product. It would be impossible to advertise a price en masse on your website / in a brochure.
- mandeepj 2y agoAny reason why Patreon can't go Netflix/Spotify way? they charge their customers via the web thus bypassing Apple paywall.
- jjcm 2y agoIn my eyes the most egregious aspect of this is it’s a financial transaction between two people that they’re taking a 30% cut of. I see 30% as fine for things like IAP for digital games and such, but somehow in this lens it feels wrong. One proposal for a compromise that would feel fair: Apple gets 30% of the app creator’s take rate. IE if patreon’s take rate is 8%, Apple should get 30% of that, not 30% of the full transaction. This could generalize to physical goods as well. It would require more reporting, but would feel more fair in the eyes of the creators and the users. I run a similar service to patreon where I charge a flat $1 fee on subscriptions, regardless of the size of the subscription. A $50 sub suddenly getting only $34 after my $1 fee and apple’s $15 fee feels wrong. There’s no amount I can reduce my take rate to cover Apple’s take. But I’m entirely ok giving them $0.30 on my $1 take. Basically - I’m entirely OK having 30% of my net profits taken by Apple. I’m not ok with 30% of my gross.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 2y agoI expect Apple and platforms would not be happy with this model. Apple now has to trust that platforms are properly reporting their gross take. Platforms now have to give detailed financial records to a (potential) competitor. The current situation with Apple as the middleman lets them ensure they get every dollar without any accounting shenanigans.
- adamomada 2y agoIf it was a financial transaction between two people, then Apple couldn’t possibly take any cut of it.
- 0x6862 2y agoThey force you to use their billing system exclusively
- stahtops 2y agoDeveloper + Guitarist makes an iOS app and sells $10/mo subscriptions to their guitar tabs in it. Guitarist sells $10/mo subscriptions to their guitar tabs through the Patreon app. Why should these be considered any different?
- verisimi 2y agoApple are really such filth. Imagine thinking it's ok to take 30% of every transaction like this, and like they already do on their app store. I don't know how anyone thinks this is ok. It's worse than credit card rates.
- stahtops 2y agoGotta be honest, I don't get the vitriol. Patreon wants to advertise and publish content in an iOS app. Apple says you must allow in-app-purchases. Either there is value in being on the platform or there isn't. Patreon seems to think there is. To creators there is no cost, by default the price of their subscription offerings will be bumped up so they get the same revenue. Patreon will also increase revenue by taking the same % of the higher overall price. Users will have the choice of subscribing through iOS or through the website. If the higher cost from within the app isn't worth it to them, they will go to the website. Who cares?
- slaymaker1907 2y agoThis is so shitty, imagine taking 30% from donations to creators. It should only be 30% from the money that Patreon itself makes off of subscriptions.
- inglor_cz 2y agoNext step: if you do any transaction in your smart banking app, 30 per cent go to Apple.
- dboreham 2y agoDid I miss something? Did Apple acquire Patreon?
- aftbit 2y agoAs a Patreon user who primarily subscribes on a per-creation basis, I will be ending all of my affected subscriptions if they make this change. That was kinda the whole point of Patreon for me. I can support my creators but only if they actually produce some content. If they take a long break, they don't get any money from me, but they will also get paid automatically if and when they come back.
- jobigoud 2y agoI use this model as a creator and I just hope/assume that my users will use the website instead of an app. It doesn't remove the per-creation model, it just makes it absent from the iOS app.
- aftbit 2y agoAh okay, that's fine then. I'll just keep using the per-creation model. I don't use Apple hardware so I won't even notice the change.
- genpfault 2y ago> I'll just keep using the per-creation model. Until Patreon takes it away: > As a result of Apple’s mandates and in order to make sure that you can continue getting new members in the iOS app, we've started a 16-month-long migration process to bring all creators onto subscription billing by November 2025, supported by a roadmap of new features and tools to make sure the billing model works for you, your community, and your business. To be clear, this means that first-of-the-month and per-creation billing models will be discontinued in November 2025.
- jobigoud 2y agoDamn, that's really disappointing. I publish a Windows-only open source software, I don't care about the iOS app. Why should this have any impact on my project? I'm fine with my page not being available from the iOS app at all. Why do they have to remove this payment model from every other platforms? It makes no sense. OK I read this in their FAQ about this: > You will maintain control over how frequently your members are billed. By default, members are billed monthly, but creators will also be able to offer less frequent billing options, like annual billing, to reduce the pressure to produce something new for fans on a monthly basis. We’re also committed to maintaining the ability to pause billing when you need to take a break. Yearly billing seems better for me I think.
- ed_voc 2y agoI wonder what would happen if a third-party made an app for viewing Patreon content. Would Apple accept that the third-party client cannot accept payments on Patreon’s behalf and not require the Apple tax?
- tomcam 2y agoCan’t Patreon just use a link to a website?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- theturtle32 2y agoYay. More Enshittification and Chickenization due to monopsony power in a walled garden. I hate it here.
- Gud 2y agoWhat a total dick move by Apple. 30% of the money donated to independent creators will now go to Apple, the richest corporation in the world. How is this legal?
- satellitemx 2y agoAccording to App Review Guideline: 3.2.1 (vii) Apps may enable individual users to give a monetary gift to another individual without using in-app purchase, provided that (a) the gift is a completely optional choice by the giver, and (b) 100% of the funds go to the receiver of the gift. However, a gift that is connected to or associated at any point in time with receiving digital content or services must use in-app purchase. Many years ago in China where WeChat said Apple was about to collect fees on reader's donation to writer's article (whether paywalled or not). WeChat was taking a cut on such donation. Later WeChat agreed to not taking such cut on donations and the payment not fullfilled by in-app purchase but rather WeChat Pay (as a means of fund transfer). However, in the case of Patreon, often people are not donating to the creator, they are paying money to gain access to the creators' work (early access, exclusive membership content, etc.), thus Patreon is selling the product produced by creators. Edit: I want to add that there should be a cut for Apple in this case, but not 30% or 15% (via subscription).
- Gud 2y agoI don’t give a shit what’s written in Apples TOS. If they wrote they were entitled to a 10000% processing fee, would that be OK? Apple are using their status as software/hardware vendor to force their users to use their App Store. This is obviously illegal. There is no excuse for this.
- knallfrosch 2y ago> 30% of the money donated to independent creators will now go to Apple, the richest corporation in the world. Can you guess how they became the richest corporation in the world? ;)
- bluescrn 2y agoPatreon shouldn't need an 'app' to begin with. We have very capable web browsers on mobile these days.
- diggan 2y ago[flagged]
- derriz 2y agoThanks, I was struggling to understand the discussion here. I've bought fully into the Apple ecosystem - a bunch of iPhones, iPads, AppleTVs and Macbooks. I've also been paying a couple of creators via Patreon for the last year or two. But I hadn't even realized that there was a Patreon App. Why would you use such an App instead of the website? And the answer seems obvious as you suggest. Direct users to the website and forget about the App?
- joemi 2y agoIt really seems like the obvious solution. I can't believe that they haven't considered it, so then that would mean they _did_ consider it and decided that it's better for them to do what they're doing and just blame any issues on Apple. Doesn't seem right to make Apple out to be the bad guy when Patreon made a shrewd business decision at the expense of the creators.
- sureIy 2y agoI don’t understand one part: why can’t a creator just decide to not appear in the app? Are they changing the donation structure for everyone regardless of their interest of the Apple platform? Why should YouTubers be bothered by this change, for example.
- ajdude 2y agoThey said that if they offer different options for people who are not in the app, Apple threatened to remove them from the App Store.
- sureIy 2y agoI smell lawsuit. Apple should not force a company to change their ways outside the Apple ecosystem for a chance to publish an app. I bet the EU won’t like this one.
- Havoc 2y agoI can see a fee for facilitating...but that in my mind is 1% not 30%.
- bangaladore 2y agoLet's not forget that if Apple created something called "Apple Creators", they would instantly gain 100% of the market share because there would be no fee (assuming feature parity) This forcing apps to use your payment platform through extortion is anti-competitive. Full stop.
- popcalc 2y ago>would be no fee Because fraud doesn't exist?
- bangaladore 2y agoWhy would Apple charge itself a platform fee? They are the platform. Unless you are talking about CC fees, which are like 2% compared to the 30% that Apple is extorting you for. Can you explain your comment?
- KeplerBoy 2y agoApple charges you a fee for publishing your App on their Store. What makes you think they wouldn't ask for their cut, if you could publish other content on their marketplaces?
- bangaladore 2y agoI don't think you read this thread correctly. At this point, we are talking about Apple not paying fees for its apps on its marketplace.
- drewg123 2y agoThe only reason I'd want to use a Patreon app over their website would be to play creator's videos on a large screen. As far as I can tell, they don't have an AppleTV app. This, TBH, is why I've never supported a creator via Patreon, as I have no idea how I'd access a creator's supporter-only content in a way that was convenient for me.
- crazygringo 2y agoCan't you just play a video from their website full-screen, and AirPlay that to your Apple TV? AirPlay is the general way to get anything from your phone or Mac to your Apple TV.
- drewg123 2y agoAirplay doesn't qualify as "convenient" for me. First is the frustration of even getting it to work, and second if I have a phone or mac open, I'll ignore the TV and get sucked into work instead of relaxing.
- crazygringo 2y agoIt's usually two taps, three at most. Hard to see how that isn't convenient. And what's frustrating about getting it to work? It's generally extremely reliable.
- DrBenCarson 2y agoI’m a huge Apple fan in general, but this isn’t right. Feels like a leader is getting ambitious, trying to squeeze revenue in a couple quarters instead of building new stuff that would generate new revenue Maybe they have data suggesting people were using Patreon as an easy way around in-app payments? Can’t imagine this generates enough revenue to offset the long-term reputation cost among creators (what I would imagine is disproportionately an Apple user base)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- dzonga 2y agojust use the web. porn companies do this and they're still in business. uber / lyft etc i'm 98% certain don't pay apple tax.
- xyst 2y agoIt’s odd how Apple picks and chooses where to enforce this requirement. Netflix has been using their own billing system for years, yet I can still download Netflix on iOS, tvOS app stores. Makes me wonder if there is an under the table deal between Netflix and Apple. On the topic of Patreon vs Apple. I am not a lawyer but this seems to have the same basis as the Epic Games vs Apple litigation.
- shreddit 2y agoAFAIK this is because you can not make changes to your subscription within the app. You have to visit the Netflix homepage. There is no “pay” button in Netflix, so they do not have to use apple’s payment system…
- xyst 2y agoIf this is the case, I don’t understand why Patreon and other sites cannot adopt the same approach. Very easy to remove buy buttons in apps, and redirect users to patreon.com to manage subscriptions for content creators and “per content” payments. iOS and Google apps just used to view content. Patreon is a relatively small company so velocity to complete this effort even amongst multiple teams should be at most a few weeks. If this was a Fortune 500, I would probably estimate it at 2-3 months.
- charrondev 2y agoIf you do that Apple still takes a 27% commission today even after going through their special entitlement process. https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitlement-us/ https://developer.apple.com/support/storekit-external-entitl... All purchases must still be allowed as in app purchases as well.
- xyst 2y agoso, I give 30% to Apple for the “entitlement” to provide an external link? No, thanks. I’ll do it the Netflix way. Apps have read only content. No links to manage subs. Creator subscriptions managed strictly on desktop or browser. Or just do away with iOS App Store distribution until US government gets their shit in gear and break up these monopolies
- curious_cat_163 2y agoWhere is Lina Khan when you need her, eh?
- timmytokyo 2y agoI suspect we'll be hearing from her soon. She's not been shy about taking on anti-consumer monopoly behavior.
- kelnos 2y agoAnd yet so many people here seem to think that Apple doesn't have monopoly power, and doesn't abuse their market position. Go figure.
- mcguire 2y agoI don't know Google's Android policy for Patreon, but I expect it is or will soon be similar, if the inability to buy ebooks from the Android apps is any precedent. Walled gardens suck.
- jocaal 2y ago> Walled gardens suck. Let me fix that for you. uhuhm. Duopolies suck.
- danShumway 2y agoAnother point that Patreon isn't really emphasizing here that seems relevant to any conversations about "fairness" is that Apple's fees on Patreon subscriptions in-app are now higher than Patreon's fees. It's important to recognize any time that we're talking about the market that services charge what they can, not what is fair. The market does not have a concept of fairness, only competition. This is why there is no such thing as a benevolent monopoly that charges fair prices - because fairness does not exist in the market, only competition. BUT... since fairness gets so often brought into conversations about Apple's fees, often with the implicit suggestion that Apple "deserves" to be compensated for all of the work they're putting into hosting and curating apps and for (in heavy quotes) "creating" a market that they supposedly also don't have duopoly control over: does anybody want to argue that Apple hosting the Patreon app on iOS provides more value to Patreon subscribers and creators than the existence of Patreon itself does? Like, if we're going to talk about what's egregious and what's not egregious, charging higher fees per-transaction than the platforms you are hosting seems like it might be a good indicator that things have gotten out of control.
- queuebert 2y agoKind of like how realtors make more money on a house transaction than the closing attorneys who draw up all the paperwork and execute it legally.
- danShumway 2y agoOr, I would argue, like if a realtor made more money off of the sale than the person selling the house made.
- abfan1127 2y agothat is easily true. You buy a house for $500k. A year later, you decide to move. The house's value remains at $500k. Realtor commissions of 6% cost you $30k. You lost $30k on the total transaction, the realtor made $30k (not including the original buy).
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- AndyKelley 2y agoI think we should strive for making all "middle-man" platforms non-profits. App stores should be run by non-profits. Food delivery platforms should be non-profits. Rideshare platforms should be non-profits. I think it's the only way to defend against the natural process of enshittification that occurs when the platform itself is has a conflict of interest from the two parties that it connects. That goes for Patreon itself by the way - why in the world is a platform for connecting creators to fans itself a for-profit entity? A non-profit would be able to offer significantly less transaction fees - for example, Every.org. There's also the question of what Patreon's "exit strategy" will be...
- joemi 2y agoThis is an interesting idea. Though I think it'll be tough to differentiate what exactly constitutes a middle man, and therefore hard/impossible to enact. Would marketplaces (such as Amazon) be considered a middle man? If so, good luck making any traction on this plan. If not, then why would app stores be considered middle men if Amazon isn't? It would have to come down to some very particular and very exact legal points, and you can bet every middle man would try very hard to be just barely on the OK side of the law.
- AndyKelley 2y agoYeah you could try to enforce it with a law, that's one strategy. But there's also the strategy of just getting in there and outcompeting the encumbents! As a consumer, I would certainly favor a new, non-profit player in this space.
- bhewes 2y agoI am happy I removed Apple from my business workflow.
- duxup 2y agoI only recently started using Patreon (as in giving someone money). I really never thought of the app and I just went to the website. Is there some reason to use the app?
- fmorel 2y agoIf you wanted notifications there instead of email. But I've been using the website for over a year and don't feel like I'm missing out.
- ginko 2y agoIsn't Patreon essentially just a website to pay creators? What added value does the iphone app even provide?
- nozzlegear 2y agoThe only reason I installed their iOS app was because their mobile website is essentially hot garbage that made it impossible to navigate through a creator's media playlist, let alone cast it to a television.
- fredski42 2y agoApple creating an ecosystem of mobile apps is causing all this. Just go back to the Internet’s universal UI: the Web
- jacobp100 2y agoObviously Apple will back down here. They have enough issues with regulators. Their rules currently say any form of tipping has to use in app purchases - so I expect this rule to be changed.
- CatWChainsaw 2y agoObviously Apple is testing how much teeth the rules have.
- gohwell 2y agoWhat's the advantage for Patreon to have a native iOS app?
- iamleppert 2y agoIf any part of your face, voice, or any text that is ever written by you, or any kind of software or code you have written, has ever touched an Apple product, you better be prepared to kiss the ring of Tim Cook & Apple if you want to even THINK about making a dollar of it. Apple gets their cut, and yes, if you don't or can't pay they will shut you down. Not even your business account, they will come for your personal accounts, phones and any devices you own or have owned in the past and shut them down as well. Let it be a lesson to anyone trying to skirt out of paying their fair share, Apple is due AT LEAST 30% of what you make, plus developer fees. If you don't like it, TOUGH LUCK, PAY UP!
- phkahler 2y agoTaken to an extreme, Patreon just drops the app and requires mobile users to use a web interface. Then what? Apple tells browser makers they have to skim a cut of any payments to any sites and give it to Apple or else your browser isn't allowed in the app store?
- mensetmanusman 2y agoThey should move to the Epic App Store.
- acqbu 2y agoOne more reason to stop using Crapple
- arresin 2y ago30% is fucking disgusting and the only way they can get away with it is a captured regulator. It’s so despicably greedy and arrogant. It’s like they’re rubbing it in your face that they can do this: “what are you gonna do about it huh?”
- Bwass 2y agoBasic question: does the use of the Patreon iOS app incurs some sort of additional expenses for Apple?
- seatac76 2y agoHow can this go on? It is a tax on innovation
- hoseja 2y agoWhy do you need an app. Is this downstream of the awful state of american bank transfers?
- CodeWriter23 2y agoAlready hitting me to the tune of $30/mo. for my family to do laundry.
- umvi 2y agoSo wait, if I donate $1000 to a creator via iOS app, Apple takes $300? That can't be right, can it? Seems like literally robbery.
- fastest963 2y agoActually what would happen is that you would pay $1400: $1000 to the creator and $400 to Apple.
- EugeneOZ 2y agoOne more reason to avoid app stores and build/use PWA or just web apps.
- wkat4242 2y agoWhy does patreon really have to be an app though? It works just fine as a mobile site and it doesn't do anything complex that would require it to be an app. And this goes for most services with an app, the main reason they have apps (and try to force their users to use those) is to collect more data from the user as an app has more opportunity to do this than a mobile site. Of course for a supposedly 'noble cause' app like patreon they shouldn't be doing this at all in the first place.
- charrondev 2y agoI’ll note their app actually sucks at least for reading serial fiction from a few people I subscribe to. What does require an app though is sending notifications. As a result I have their app just to receive notifications of new chapter releases, then go read the post on the website. If Apple stopped locking this functionality into applications then something like Patreon could just be a website that you pin on your homescreen. Now another alternative is email notifications but I will tell you email sucks and most people won’t bother with it. If I start allowing notifications from my mail client I’ll get a ton of notifications that I don’t give a crap about. There is a real spam problem there which application based notifications don’t have.
- wkat4242 2y agoNotifications don't require an app. I get many website notifications from my browser app. At least on android. Since Apple now purportedly supports PWA this should also work.
- charrondev 2y agoI was planning to write about how iOS PWAs didn’t support push notifications, but it seems they added it since I last checked. They were a bit late on that but with that finally here there really is no excuse for Patreon to not be a PWA.
- DavidPiper 2y agoI'm a long-time Apple fan and this news just sucks. Apple have been openly pro-creativity and pro-artist for a long time, and now they're actively hamstringing one of the best online platforms for facilitating that, for... profit reasons? Maybe the ill-fated "crushing creativity" advert was just the beginning.
- thayne 2y agoDo creators have an option to opt out of allowing transactions from the iOS app?
- rmbyrro 2y agoFolks that still buy Apple: what are you waiting to boycot this draconian business? Every Apple device you buy feeds this monster.
- ok_dad 2y agoI suppose they should stop trying to push me into their app then? Every time I visit their site, I have to ignore several messages about how it would be easier to do this in the Patreon app. It’s a mess they could avoid by sticking to a web based app. It still sucks for the creators who relied on them to avoid issues like this.
- ksec 2y ago611 comments and not a single mentioned yet. I am not familiar with Patreon on iOS but Why is it Patreon only get charged 30% now, and not previously. After all their competitor also have 30% requirement for a long time, so Patreon had been the special case all these years? It is unfortunate Google isn't even competing hard. Microsoft doesn't seems to be interested in Mobile any time soon.
- failuser 2y agoHow much time do we have till Apple blocks addresses of services that provide web apps instead of iOS apps or just crippling web apps altogether even more than they are now?
- mvdtnz 2y agoThe app store is not Home Depot or a book shop or Walmart. Apps are not cars or cans of soda or real estate. Can we cut the bad analogies and talk about what is real? These analogies do nothing to clear anything up and lead to insanely stupid irrelevant discussions about entirely different things.
- eigenvalue 2y agoThis just seems kind of insane to me in that it really burns up a lot of consumer goodwill towards Apple, especially from creator types, who are way more influential than regular customers. And it also seems to invite regulatory scrutiny which could end up killing their golden goose if they are forced to open up their platform and strict limits are placed on what they can charge for facilitating transactions on the platform. That kind of regulatory crackdown is really not unprecedented-- just look what the US did the phone company back in the day, or to banks and credit card companies in terms of interchange fees. This is just extremely silly behavior to engage in from a dominant company.
- virtue3 2y agoI don't feel SUPER bad for patreon here. They're been trying to push people to their app super hard instead of their mobile website. And the mobile website is barely usable. This is kinda what happens when you put yourself into a situation where you can't make your product work WITHOUT apple or google's store.
- pcdoodle 2y agoWhy the F are we letting apple tax 30% of the hard work of people. They do not deserve it. If they had a platform with organic "discovery", maybe 10% would feel less like rape (including processing fees)
- loongloong 2y agoIf the App Store is a place where creators can also sell their own content (story apps, etc.).. isn't it a direct competitor to Pateron as a creator's platform, and so should be treated (and maybe regulated) as such? In the manner that Apple need to allow legitimate platforms such as Pateron to survive and compete fairly in the iOS ecosystem? (A parallel is Netscape Navigator vs Microsoft bundling Internet Explorer) Lastly, a gentle reminder since I too sometimes slip up and fondly recall the good old six-colored apple... that Apple has been the top 3 largest company by market capitalisation for more than 10 years. They are underdogs no more.
- m3kw9 2y agoIt’s the same argument for apple, you use our infrastructure host/distrubute/secure/pay, you pay the same.
- 6510 2y agoEveryone is focused on the money but I'm mostly fascinated by the requirement to not mention there are other ways to pay. There is also adsense forbidding you from talking about adsense earnings on pages with ads. Youtube demanding advertisement friendly speech. Platforms taking a percentage of second hand goods bought and sold by users don't want you to use the chat to take the deal outside their walled garden. It all seems so reasonable! Of course there are also tons of topics you should never mention on HN, X or Reddit but their users guide offers very limited guidance. It is, shall we say, not fashionable to be specific. Maybe they are all wrong? Perhaps there is room for a more rigorous industry that specifically instructs us how to behave. We are "secretly" already at the internet cult level of things. It gets more funny if you hold that thought and picture how the controllers are constantly hammering us with spam. People are so nice they cant imagine outlawing advertisement for the annoying troll it is. Take this bit from the adsense TOS: > A "Sensitive Event" is an unforeseen event or development that creates significant risk to Google's ability to provide high quality, relevant information and ground truth, and reduce insensitive or exploitative content in prominent and monetized features. During a sensitive event, we may take a variety of actions to address these risks. You see? Telling you straight up how to behave is much easier than to try to make sense from this. I'm to old of course but for the younglings there is still hope. https://studentsfororwell.org https://studentsfororwell.org
- asne11 2y agoWhy even have an iOS app in the first place over a simple web app? Is there any additional functionality that the iOS app can offer over web?
- SlightlyLeftPad 2y agoShit hits the fans
- udev4096 2y agoI'll probably get down voted to oblivion because of all the "apple" supporters but looking at all the moves that apple has made, that should be enough to leave their entire ecosystem. Don't be so stingy, the web was not built for one entity to have this much power
- casenmgreen 2y ago403 - can't read it. Patreon blocks Tor network.
- jaimex2 2y agoCan creators disable payment or delist from Apple users?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- marbartolome 2y agoNot gonna defend Apple here, but I think it's also kinda sucky that Pateon is simply pushing the problem downward to the end users. They should have made a decision to either take the hit themselves or leave the apple store altogether. But of course this is too much to ask from a company who also has a dominant position in the market of creator revenue, so more enshitificacion for everyone.
- fishbacon 2y agoSeems like this just validates the idea that Patreon did not need to be an app. The website works just fine and I doubt people are using the app for discovery or content creation? I know Patreon wants to capture as much of your time as possible, because they are now on the infinite growth destruction trajectory. So the app is going to stay and they will keep pushing it and probably remove features from mobile web because of it. Imagine if Patreon was just a for-profit company and not a growth monster.
- kweingar 2y agoThe arguments in HN and elsewhere about monopoly seem to be missing the point imo. My problem isn't even with Apple's 30% take rate! I use Patreon on the web on a non-Apple desktop computer. Apple is simply not part of the equation in my transaction with Patreon. But because of Apple's App Store policy, Patreon has to remove useful features from the web app. That seems like an abuse of power to me. If you have Apple goggles on and disagree, I ask you to consider a reverse situation. Imagine that your favorite third-party iPhone apps delete features because some other company in charge of some other platform demands it. Technically the app developer could simply pull out of that other platform, but they do the math and conclude they will lose less revenue by degrading the iPhone app and pissing off iOS users. Doesn't that seem outrageous?
- willhackett 2y agoI’m getting extremely annoyed that I have to keep paying ~30% more than other platforms for iOS subscriptions. I’ve already bought the device. I’m already paying for iCloud. How much money does this business really need to squeeze from me? If I could download and install apps directly from their makers, I would. Just like I can on my Mac. We shouldn’t let this business model continue.
- ftyhbhyjnjk 2y agofcking apple... has itself become the IBM of 1984. What a fall!
- pyrale 2y agoThe article is filled with despicable stuff, but this one stands out: > Apple’s in-app purchase system, on the other hand, only supports Patreon’s subscription billing model. Apple has also made clear that if creators on Patreon continue to use unsupported billing models or disable transactions in the iOS app, we will be at risk of having the entire app removed from their App Store. Apple needs to get the Standard Oil treatment.
- gigatexal 2y agoall of this app services stuff and apple can't find a way to stop burning any of its good will, shame really there's got to a good middle ground where all parties are happy and one where apple's goodwill isn't torched
- talldayo 2y agoThere's no middle-ground that makes Apple happy. Their goal is to have their cake and eat it too, which regulators won't allow. It's basically guaranteed at Apple's scale that they will keep pushing new pricing schemes until the threats to their profit are substantial enough. Over the next few months, we're going to watch regulators inch down the guillotine until Apple finally settles in on something reasonable. Shame indeed, but I'm fine letting Apple get it out of their system. Their public image is long overdue for a reset anyways.
- EGreg 2y ago[flagged]
- sod 2y agoWhen ignoring for a sec. the questionable 30% cut and duopoly: In the age of subscriptions, being able to see all your recurring payments on a single page and cancellable with two tabs without questions asked, is a feature worth paying for.
- pimterry 2y ago> In the age of subscriptions, being able to see all your recurring payments on a single page and cancellable with two tabs without questions asked, is a feature worth paying for. This is a service the banking system should clearly provide natively though - there's no good reason Apple is the only one capable of this, nor any good reason why they're best placed for this (there's plenty of non-Apple subscriptions where this would be useful). Your card provider is well aware of what recurring payments are currently authorized, and should be perfectly capable of providing tools to cancel those authorizations (and inform the merchant of this when doing so). That that doesn't work is a failure on the part of financial firms (who could provide it) and regulators (who imo should oblige card providers to offer this, and oblige companies to treat cancellation notification like this as equivalent to written notice). Recurring payments are an increasingly fundamental part of consumer banking, but banks provide effectively zero tools for consumers to manage them. The argument against is that some of these payments might have ongoing obligations you can't just cancel without consequence, and you'd be effectively just be refusing to pay your bills - but you could equally well have no balance available or something so the payment fails in existing cases anyway, so this seems like an entirely solveable issue (if a business that you _must_ pay receives a notification that you've cancelled the card billing authorization, they're going to need to get in touch with you about it just as if your monthly charge failed).
- Rapzid 2y agoYeah they should get together and create a standard protocol for managing, transferring, and paying subscriptions. Imagine if you could manage subs through your bank, but also transfer the sub to a different bank as needed. Could even have protocols for payees to verify payer sub status. Maybe there could be two "ends" to a sub; payer and payee end. Like a money wormhole.
- jaza 2y agoFuck Apple. That is all.
- welcome_dragon 2y agoYou beat me to it. Others will say "but Apple gives us beautiful products and since the app store is theirs they have every right to charge fees like this". Yes I understand the "overhead" of an app store but since it's required it seems sort of monopolistic practice to me
- stubish 2y agoCould this backfire on Apple? Patreon may not be able to point out to users that they will save 30% if they use the web interface, but thousands of creators will, guiding them along with a few choice words about Apple.
- dventimi 2y agoIf I understand it correctly, if I build an Android app, I can offer in-app payments through a variety of integrations: Google, Stripe, Amazon, etc. If I build an Apple app, in-app payments can only be offered through the Apple payment system. Is that more or less correct?
- oglop 2y agoMan I can’t wait to unload this iPhone and finally leave the Apple ecosystem. The watch was the last straw for me. They’ve really nose dived in design and quality. Seeing stuff like this just makes me hate them more. This company went down the tubes years ago and is just running on branding.
- SirMaster 2y agoHow does it work when I order food through an iOS app? Apple gets 30% of the food order price?
- mmmlinux 2y agoHot take, Patreon doesn't really care about fighting this because they get more revenue from monthly subscriptions. I'd bet most creators using this model do it because the publish less than once a month and don't want to be charging their patrons for more than they make.
- Sloppy 2y ago"Apps" suck. Use a web ui and tell Apple and Google to shove it. If anti-trust and/or our consumer protestors in various US legislatures won't fix the app stores by breaking them up, the app devs can just drop making apps. I've done many apps and would estimate that 90% have no real need for the API toolkits that Apple and Google give you, they can just as easily be done as "web apps" -- if, that is, everyone dropped the apps and used web apis so cooperation of apps would be based on them, not the toolkits. Exceptions do apply but they are in the minority IMHO.
- peebeefive 2y agoThe solution is so fiendishly simple I am astonished not to see it suggested elsewhere yet. Back when I were a lad, there was this thing called the world wide web... Apps as a crappy, less capable front-end for what is just a webpage anyway is not a new trend, but it has gotten crappier and stupider over time. Patreon should just pull their app entirely from platforms that behave as predatory rent-seekers and work on making their mobile web interface top-notch. It's not that hard.