8 ms·

> 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 its

> 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? Well, there is a simple way to test this... just get rid of the Patreon iOS app and just use a web version. Why does patreon need its own app? Why can't it just be web based? I wish fewer companies had apps. I don't need an app for everything. I don't need every hotel I stay at to have their own app, I don't need an app to order food at a restaurant. So why do companies make them? Because people spend more money when they can just use the in app purchase functionality. It is CLEARLY worth the 30% to most companies, because they keep pumping out single use apps that would be better as a mobile web page.

Dylan16807 2y ago
How many of the apps you're complaining about are paying 30% to Apple? Hotels and restaurants definitely aren't. Also a lot of companies make apps so they can get more tracking info. That value doesn't come from the Apple Store. It's things like games that really get an advantage from being native and in the store. And that's largely a red queen's race, they need to stay on top and they'll pay out the nose to be the easiest install. Paying lots of money in a zero-sum situation doesn't mean they're getting much value in a more zoomed-out sense.
- dhosek 2y ago
  The ability to get more tracking info comes from producing an app which in turn comes from the Apple Store. I’ve never found myself wanting to use a Patreon app instead of their website, just like I found the substack app a complete waste of space and immediately deleted it. Not everything needs to be an app.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    > which in turn comes from the Apple Store I strongly disagree with that. The store is not the reason apps are good for lots of things. You can assign a lot of value to phone and OS, but Apple does not try to take a cut based on making the phone and OS because it would be hard to defend. The store pales in comparison.
- echelon 2y ago
  > How many of the apps you're complaining about are paying 30% to Apple? Hotels and restaurants definitely aren't. If the CEOs could sign a petition that had a sure chance of antitrust action against Apple's fees, every single one of them would be itching to sign.
  - petre 2y ago
    Maybe s/he doesn't want to waste their time doing that and instead the company is politely signaling to their users that they're being charged junk fees by continuing to use the iOS app. Which is quite fair and transparent behaviour. Why take on Apple when you can correctly inform your users and push them to give Apple the boot?
    - fxtentacle 2y ago
      In the EU that's what they are doing. In the US, Apple will lock your account for snitching about the Apple tax to your users. See the Epic lawsuit.
      - echelon 2y ago
        > Apple will lock your account for snitching about the Apple tax to your users. See the Epic lawsuit. Mob boss behavior.
rottencupcakes 2y ago
When a mobile web page uses apple pay, does it also give 30% to apple? If not, what’s the difference between it and an app?
- cortesoft 2y ago
  No, it does not. You can buy anything from anywhere on the web.
- dwaite 2y ago
  Apple Pay and in-app purchase are different. Apple Pay is a percentage paid by the bank, not the merchant. In-app purchase is for an app being used to buy digital goods and services consumed in-app. The agreement for publishing apps says that you will give Apple a cut, and upfront purchase price and in-app purchases are how they collect it. You can’t use in-app purchases to say order dinner to be delivered.
  - KingMob 2y ago
    I think you're missing the point. You're focusing on the technical differences, but it's not outlandish to imagine Apple demanding a cut of all transactions on iOS over time. It would start slowly, with a minor value-add (e.g., making it easier to put/use CC info in the secure enclave, or whatever incremental step they choose), and an announcement that in exchange for "easing payments and making them more secure", Apple will be charging X% of transactions with their system.
- fragmede 2y ago
  Apple Pay is a wallet that can be used in various places. For a store to accept Apple Pay, the merchant is given a virtual credit card to charge for payment. This costs the merchant the normal credit card processing fee, usually 2.9% + 30 cents. On iOS, In-app-purchases (IAP) are used inside an app to purchase content. Because it's on Apple's device using Apple's SDK and APIs and hardware, Apple takes a 30% cut of the fee, so you charge $10, Apple takes $3 and gives you $7. Inside of the app, it uses Apple Pay, but because it's in the app, Apple takes 30%.
beeboobaa3 2y ago
> Why does patreon need its own app? Why can't it just be web based? because apple gimps their web browser capabilities & performance to incentivize developers to enter the walled garden
- chabes 2y ago
  Source?
- cortesoft 2y ago
  I use the web version on my phone instead of most apps, and they work fine.
  - olyjohn 2y ago
    That's because it's just like IE was back in the day. No web dev is going to build a web app that doesn't work on it, no matter what a turd it is.
    - account42 2y ago
      Then we should all be thankfull for Safari restraining web "devs".
- tourmalinetaco 2y ago
  While true in most cases (for anyone who disagrees look at PWAs being restricted in EU), Patreon’s app sucks butt and is honestly a worst experience in most ways than their mobile website anyway.
- mrweasel 2y ago
  That bullshit to be honest. Not the lack of features in Safari, that's very real, but you don't need most of it. There is nothing that Patreon needs to do that could not be done by a 15 year old browser, let alone the newest version of Safari on iOS. I can understand that developers would like to use certain feature, or that they'd make the job easier, but they are not required. Patreon isn't cutting edge web development, you could make it work on an IE8 if you cared enough. There it absolutely no features currently lacking in Safari that would prevent Patreon in moving to website only.
chokma 2y ago
> Why does patreon need its own app? Wondering about that, too - I always use the website on my ipad since a browser allows me to enlarge the font size when reading novels on Patreon (a feature that the app does not offer).
- kwanbix 2y ago
  I use the web app if possible 100% of the time, but there are other generations that only (or mainly) use cellphone apps.
- throwitaway1123 2y ago
  Not only can you increase the font size, but Safari has an immersive "reader mode" where you can change the font and color scheme, and even have Safari dictate the page to you. A massive percentage of organizations that develop native iOS apps do so because: * Users have been indoctrinated by years of marketing (e.g. the "there's an app for that" ads). * Safari hides the "add to home screen button" deep within the share menu, and home screen real estate is incredibly valuable. Native apps have the advantage of Smart Banners [1]. * For several years Webkit didn't support notifications, and as much as I hate annoying notifications, it's undoubtably useful from a business perspective to be able to ping users and remind them to use your application. Even after allowing notifications in Webkit, they made sure to introduce Live Activities which are exclusive to native apps. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39181567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39181567
soulofmischief 2y ago
It's also an issue of onboarding and discoverability. Creators would see a marked reduction in subscriptions if Patreon was not allowed placement in the app store.
- tourmalinetaco 2y ago
  Why? What makes the app itself so attractive? Do Apple users not know what Safari is, or how to type in a link? And it should be noted most Patreon users find their way there via YouTube, which itself automatically opens links to Safari, where Patreon can be subscribed to easily.
  - olyjohn 2y ago
    No, they actually don't know how to type in a link. Most people still don't know how URLs work. People still type in Facebook to the Google search box.
  - fragmede 2y ago
    It's about friction. you could give users a PO box address and ask users to get out an envelope and write a check, and say if users really wanted to pay they'd do that. But we all know you're gonna lose out on a ton of money if you make it that hard for people to give you money. So it's about how much friction there is, and for some, an app is preferable to some website where I have to wade through a bunch of crap. Depending on what it is, if it bounces me to Safari, I might just get distracted and "just do it later" aka never.
- troad 2y ago
  I honestly don't think this is true. I think people tend to discover a creator they like first, and then click through to their Patreon. I don't think the reverse happens very often; I don't think many people install the Patreon app so that they can look through lists of people they could give money to. And if they do, they're clearly aware enough of Patreon to be able to use the website instead. Assuming the average user accesses Pateron by clicking a link, there's really no reason for a dedicated Patreon app to exist. Apple Pay works just fine on websites, without demanding the App Store fee.
petre 2y ago
> Why does patreon need its own app? Why can't it just be web based? Apple & Google Pay is my guess. Which I don't use, just because it's rent seeking and leads to this. I use the websites. Don't want to install bloody apps which request every permission available. My browser has most of those set to denied. Don't even ask for permission, outright deny.
- Cayde-6 2y ago
  You can use apple and google pay on normal websites that have it set up.
- timmattison 2y ago
  Apple Pay and Google Pay work with an existing card for normal (non-IAP) purchases. I don’t like rent seeking either but in this case it’s the standard CC payment flow. Nothing additional, just better security. What makes a normal CC better?
  - petre 2y ago
    > What makes a normal CC better? One doesn't need a phone or battery to use it, just a bank account and the plastic. Google and Apple now want to become Visa. Yes, their system is more secure.
Nekorosu 2y ago
Heh. I didn't even know there was a Patreon app. There is an issue though. A lot of people (not me) use phone as their main computing device. And Apple is well known for keeping web app experience subpar compared to native app experience. Safari is lagging behind all the other browsers regarding modern APIs support. Bugs are not getting patched for years. At the same time other web rendering engines are not allowed on the main official app store. The other app stores are hard to get to and I consider them non-existent for regular users. So, platform developers have to take iOS support very seriously or miss a lot of profit.
- azinman2 2y ago
  Is Chrome on Android complete in terms of modern APIs? If so, do people use it instead of apps on Android?
  - inanutshellus 2y ago
    In this context, Chrome is just a browser, just like Safari is on iOS. The "problem" is less-technically-savvy folks (especially -- and ironically -- tech native youth) don't understand/care about the distinction between Apps vs a Website Bookmark/Shortcut. That Patreon is even considering keeping the app is proof of this. Depending on how overt Patreon's app is about ringing the alarm bells (imagine a "JUST MAKE A SHORTCUT and save 30% on everything!!!" popup) would just get them banned too, no doubt. Presumably criticizing Apple is a bannable offense.
    - krger 2y ago
      >That Patreon is even considering keeping the app is proof of this. No, that Patreon is "even considering" keeping the app is evidence that they get more valuable information about users and their habits from the app than they could from a website.
      - inanutshellus 2y ago
        That's not disagreeing with me, but instead adding yet another argument for users to avoid as many Apps as they can. If the experience in an app is form, graphs, and payments... use the website. It apparently saves that company 30% and, to your point, keeps your computing habits yours.
kwanbix 2y ago
30% is deliriously high. Make it 10% and maybe then we can talk.
- bankcust08385 2y ago
  It's monopolistic extortion.
  - throwaway48476 2y ago
    Rent seeking behavior.
tonyhart7 2y ago
more and more people use mobile phone than ever and less and less people do googling and use "Apps" than bookmarking link to a website You may not like it but programmer reading news in HN is not common in global scale plus mobile apps is just value added, same reason you have dekstop app vs webapp
bankcust08385 2y ago
Yep. If I were Patreon, I would ditch the iOS app. Apple doesn't deserve a 30% gotcha capitalism mafia extortion fee.
grecy 2y ago
I’m a creator and have many supporters on patreon. I didn’t know there is an app and I don’t care.
majani 2y ago
Actually Patreon has played it perfectly by offering an android app, ios app and a website, and increasing the prices on the ios app to cater for the fees. The next thing should be to provide a clear notice on the ios app that lower prices can be found on the other apps. Then they will be able to objectively tell how many people value the app store's value additions enough to pay extra
- a_dabbler 2y ago
  Afaik from other discussions of this Apple do not allow apps to inform users that they can pay cheaper outside the app
- bearjaws 2y ago
  You can't put a notice saying your prices are increasing due to Apple, it's against the App Store TOS :)
  - gmokki 2y ago
    Is it allowed to put a notice that Android and web users are given a 30% discount on the normal prices, which accidentally are only for iOS users. Or just add a clickbait title: "See here to find out if you are eligible to discounted prices!" to a link to the web site. Of course buyer has to be able to disable the 30% discount on the web site, to make it plausible that the normal prices are the ones on iOS. And all billing lines in the invoice always have to include a 30% discount line on Android and web purchases.
    - danShumway 2y ago
      > Is it allowed to put a notice that Android and web users are given a 30% discount on the normal prices No. You are not allowed to provide customers any details about other payment options. Apple has provisions that basically say, "you must not encourage the user to use a different payment option." And Apple can interpret that quite broadly; telling users that another platform has a discount would be treated as a violation. > "See here to find out if you are eligible to discounted prices!" to a link to the web site. This would be a violation of Apple's policies. I sort of understand why people have a hard time grasping this, and I don't think it's through any fault of their own. It's because it's such an obviously anti-consumer, anti-competitive policy that I think normal people assume "it cannot possibly be the policy that Apple has." There's almost a defense in audacity: Patreon must be lying about its options because, come on, Apple wouldn't seriously ban links, right? No company would be that bold, right? The policy is so blatant that people assume there must be something they're misunderstanding about it.
raverbashing 2y ago
There's an advantage to using in-app purchases when you doubt the developer, so either you think they're going to overcharge you or make it difficult to cancel. However this is not the case with Patreon So I don't know what's the case here, but sounds like people who get confused by bubbles of different colors
GeekyBear 2y ago
> Why does patreon need its own app? Why can't it just be web based? There is the simple solution taken by companies like Spotify and Netflix. Have a free app for users, but only accept payments through your own website. In which case, Apple doesn't get a dime.
- bearjaws 2y ago
  Spotify had a nightmare of a time getting to that point. Same with Floatplane, a streaming platform from LTT. If you actually try to copy Spotify / Amazon you find out very quickly they have exclusive deals and their own account managers. You actually will not get approved for 5-6 months if you try to copy them, and even use their same exact UI and verbiage. This is the part of the problem with Apple app store.
  - GeekyBear 2y ago
    As far as I've seen, this isn't any sort of exclusive on Apple's App Store or Google's Play Store. Free apps that allow users to access paid subscription content aren't required to accept payments for the subscription through the app. > Offer subscriptions through your own website or app rather than the app stores. This allows you to process payments directly and avoid the 30% fees. However, you'll need to provide your own payment processing and customer support. https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-avoid-paying-a-30-commission-to-Google-and-Apple-for-my-subscription-apps https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-avoid-paying-a-30-co...
    - bearjaws 2y ago
      Here is just one example about how hard it is to get approved, and reflects my experience as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzQw3kEbEio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzQw3kEbEio You can say it's easy, but if you try to make your app only take payments off platform you will fight with Apple for months. Apple will gladly say they aren't preventing you from taking payment off platform and then make your life hell. They are big enough that this isn't some accident, this is 100% on purpose. The whole LTT saga went on for nearly 2 years, you can watch all of it through their podcast: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=floatplane+apple+app+store https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=floatplane+appl... AND they had the benefit of having millions of viewer leading to them getting an active account manager... Imagine some random company.
CivBase 2y ago
> Why does patreon need its own app? Notifications. Performance. Responsiveness. Bandwidth. Offline access. And a lot of users simply find apps to be more convenient than browser bookmarks. I use the web interface for Patreon, but I can see why some users would want the app. Why does Apple themselves have apps for things like maps, news, stocks, weather, video chats, etc? These all rely on web services and could theoretically be handled in the browser. I don't think any of these examples even provide users the ability to buy anything. Clearly Apple recognizes a value in some services being available through native mobile apps.
- nottorp 2y ago
  > Notifications. No thanks. > Performance. Responsiveness. Bandwidth. Offline access. Isn't Patreon basically a web site where you can pay a subscription to ... something? Why would it need all that? Does the subscriber content get delivered through Patreon?
  - CivBase 2y ago
    You and I may not want notifications, but a lot of people do. > Does the subscriber content get delivered through Patreon? Yes. Many of creators deliver media content through Patreon. Announcements, updates, Q&As, early access to regular content, bonus behind-the-scenes content, and sometimes exclusive content. It all depends on the creator.
    - nottorp 2y ago
      Ah so it's more like Steam than like just subscription management. Thanks.
- brlewis 2y ago
  I think your information about lack of notifications is outdated. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/sending-web-push-notifications-in-web-apps-and-browsers https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/...
JKCalhoun 2y ago
> So why do companies make them? Because people spend more money when they can just use the in app purchase functionality. I assumed it was so they could skirt around the privacy built more consistently into web browsers. Or that they are still stuck in the "There's an app for that" era that I think we have collectively left behind.
dcow 2y ago
> It is CLEARLY worth the 30% to most companies, because they keep pumping out single use apps that would be better as a mobile web page. Based on the context given in the OP, this conclusion does not follow and is not fair. 1. Patreon is passing the 30% on to customers by default, or allowing creators to pay for it out of their existing income, so Patreon isn’t making any value judgement at all. They are leaving it up to creators and users. 2. Even if they weren’t doing (1), there are other factors in play that don’t make this a fair “experiment”. Most notably that established platforms like Amazon and Spotify _don’t_ find the value here, contradicting your assertion that most companies do. Note: I didn't think Apple historically allowed (1), which also invalidates the “experiment”, but maybe terms have changed recently.
- eduction 2y ago
  > Patreon isn’t making any value judgement at all. They are leaving it up to creators and users. That’s incorrect. They are phasing out two of their three payment options (per creation and first of month) for all creators in order to have the right to operate an app on iOS. That’s a value judgment - Patreon would rather have an app than continue to make independent business judgments. They could have said “well, people can just use their browser on iOS” and it would have meant far fewer changes to their business. The browser only approach is clearly not preferred. Clearly, having an app with easy payment infra is worth a lot, just as the person you’re replying to suggested. The question is why the web never developed effective single sign on payment solutions.
  - dcow 2y ago
    In the OP Patreon leads with a pretty strong assertion that they would not be making these changes to their subscription model on merit alone. “Do this or you’ll lose X% of your users” is not Patreon making a value judgement on 30% margin, it’s post facto extortion. Nothing is answering the question, “would Patreon itself take a 30% hit to margin just to operate natively iOS”? I am pretty dubious. My point still stands that none of this is fair first principles representation of the value the platform provides. I’m sure the product conversation and user research inside Patreon HQ is much more along the lines of “fuck you Apple you’re making me choose my 10% iOS user base over the 7% of global users that happily use per-creation billing”. Not “oh Apple was right subscriptions are a more consistent payment model for users why didn't we realize that before thanks Apple here’s your 30% rev share for the idea let’s just pass that cost on to our iOS users they won’t mind”. LOL
jms703 2y ago
YES. So much this. Patreon doesn't even mention the web version in their blog post. Stop making apps when a website will suffice.
- jallbrit 2y ago
  > But remember, Apple’s fees are only in the iOS app. Your prices on the web and the Android app will remain completely unaffected. You can always send your fans to this Help Center article which explains the iOS in-app fees relative to other platforms, so they can better understand the implications of where they choose to make their purchases.
Reubachi 2y ago
Patreon allows creators to for a fee serve additional media content via it's app which is agnostic of media type. (IE music, coding, youtube etc.) Most people pay for things for convenience and perceived value. There is very little convience or perceived value in having to go to a mobile/safari/ios website, log in, and then download a for example 1gig podcast tothen have to find it in my "downloads" and then play via some media player.

Dylan16807 2y ago

How many of the apps you're complaining about are paying 30% to Apple? Hotels and restaurants definitely aren't. Also a lot of companies make apps so they can get more tracking info. That value doesn't come from the Apple Store. It's things like games that really get an advantage from being native and in the store. And that's largely a red queen's race, they need to stay on top and they'll pay out the nose to be the easiest install. Paying lots of money in a zero-sum situation doesn't mean they're getting much value in a more zoomed-out sense.

dhosek 2y ago
The ability to get more tracking info comes from producing an app which in turn comes from the Apple Store. I’ve never found myself wanting to use a Patreon app instead of their website, just like I found the substack app a complete waste of space and immediately deleted it. Not everything needs to be an app.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  > which in turn comes from the Apple Store I strongly disagree with that. The store is not the reason apps are good for lots of things. You can assign a lot of value to phone and OS, but Apple does not try to take a cut based on making the phone and OS because it would be hard to defend. The store pales in comparison.
echelon 2y ago
> How many of the apps you're complaining about are paying 30% to Apple? Hotels and restaurants definitely aren't. If the CEOs could sign a petition that had a sure chance of antitrust action against Apple's fees, every single one of them would be itching to sign.
- petre 2y ago
  Maybe s/he doesn't want to waste their time doing that and instead the company is politely signaling to their users that they're being charged junk fees by continuing to use the iOS app. Which is quite fair and transparent behaviour. Why take on Apple when you can correctly inform your users and push them to give Apple the boot?
  - fxtentacle 2y ago
    In the EU that's what they are doing. In the US, Apple will lock your account for snitching about the Apple tax to your users. See the Epic lawsuit.
    - echelon 2y ago
      > Apple will lock your account for snitching about the Apple tax to your users. See the Epic lawsuit. Mob boss behavior.

rottencupcakes 2y ago

When a mobile web page uses apple pay, does it also give 30% to apple? If not, what’s the difference between it and an app?

cortesoft 2y ago
No, it does not. You can buy anything from anywhere on the web.
dwaite 2y ago
Apple Pay and in-app purchase are different. Apple Pay is a percentage paid by the bank, not the merchant. In-app purchase is for an app being used to buy digital goods and services consumed in-app. The agreement for publishing apps says that you will give Apple a cut, and upfront purchase price and in-app purchases are how they collect it. You can’t use in-app purchases to say order dinner to be delivered.
- KingMob 2y ago
  I think you're missing the point. You're focusing on the technical differences, but it's not outlandish to imagine Apple demanding a cut of all transactions on iOS over time. It would start slowly, with a minor value-add (e.g., making it easier to put/use CC info in the secure enclave, or whatever incremental step they choose), and an announcement that in exchange for "easing payments and making them more secure", Apple will be charging X% of transactions with their system.
fragmede 2y ago
Apple Pay is a wallet that can be used in various places. For a store to accept Apple Pay, the merchant is given a virtual credit card to charge for payment. This costs the merchant the normal credit card processing fee, usually 2.9% + 30 cents. On iOS, In-app-purchases (IAP) are used inside an app to purchase content. Because it's on Apple's device using Apple's SDK and APIs and hardware, Apple takes a 30% cut of the fee, so you charge $10, Apple takes $3 and gives you $7. Inside of the app, it uses Apple Pay, but because it's in the app, Apple takes 30%.

beeboobaa3 2y ago

> Why does patreon need its own app? Why can't it just be web based? because apple gimps their web browser capabilities & performance to incentivize developers to enter the walled garden

chabes 2y ago
Source?
cortesoft 2y ago
I use the web version on my phone instead of most apps, and they work fine.
- olyjohn 2y ago
  That's because it's just like IE was back in the day. No web dev is going to build a web app that doesn't work on it, no matter what a turd it is.
  - account42 2y ago
    Then we should all be thankfull for Safari restraining web "devs".
tourmalinetaco 2y ago
While true in most cases (for anyone who disagrees look at PWAs being restricted in EU), Patreon’s app sucks butt and is honestly a worst experience in most ways than their mobile website anyway.
mrweasel 2y ago
That bullshit to be honest. Not the lack of features in Safari, that's very real, but you don't need most of it. There is nothing that Patreon needs to do that could not be done by a 15 year old browser, let alone the newest version of Safari on iOS. I can understand that developers would like to use certain feature, or that they'd make the job easier, but they are not required. Patreon isn't cutting edge web development, you could make it work on an IE8 if you cared enough. There it absolutely no features currently lacking in Safari that would prevent Patreon in moving to website only.

chokma 2y ago

> Why does patreon need its own app? Wondering about that, too - I always use the website on my ipad since a browser allows me to enlarge the font size when reading novels on Patreon (a feature that the app does not offer).

kwanbix 2y ago
I use the web app if possible 100% of the time, but there are other generations that only (or mainly) use cellphone apps.
throwitaway1123 2y ago
Not only can you increase the font size, but Safari has an immersive "reader mode" where you can change the font and color scheme, and even have Safari dictate the page to you. A massive percentage of organizations that develop native iOS apps do so because: * Users have been indoctrinated by years of marketing (e.g. the "there's an app for that" ads). * Safari hides the "add to home screen button" deep within the share menu, and home screen real estate is incredibly valuable. Native apps have the advantage of Smart Banners [1]. * For several years Webkit didn't support notifications, and as much as I hate annoying notifications, it's undoubtably useful from a business perspective to be able to ping users and remind them to use your application. Even after allowing notifications in Webkit, they made sure to introduce Live Activities which are exclusive to native apps. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39181567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39181567

soulofmischief 2y ago

It's also an issue of onboarding and discoverability. Creators would see a marked reduction in subscriptions if Patreon was not allowed placement in the app store.

tourmalinetaco 2y ago
Why? What makes the app itself so attractive? Do Apple users not know what Safari is, or how to type in a link? And it should be noted most Patreon users find their way there via YouTube, which itself automatically opens links to Safari, where Patreon can be subscribed to easily.
- olyjohn 2y ago
  No, they actually don't know how to type in a link. Most people still don't know how URLs work. People still type in Facebook to the Google search box.
- fragmede 2y ago
  It's about friction. you could give users a PO box address and ask users to get out an envelope and write a check, and say if users really wanted to pay they'd do that. But we all know you're gonna lose out on a ton of money if you make it that hard for people to give you money. So it's about how much friction there is, and for some, an app is preferable to some website where I have to wade through a bunch of crap. Depending on what it is, if it bounces me to Safari, I might just get distracted and "just do it later" aka never.
troad 2y ago
I honestly don't think this is true. I think people tend to discover a creator they like first, and then click through to their Patreon. I don't think the reverse happens very often; I don't think many people install the Patreon app so that they can look through lists of people they could give money to. And if they do, they're clearly aware enough of Patreon to be able to use the website instead. Assuming the average user accesses Pateron by clicking a link, there's really no reason for a dedicated Patreon app to exist. Apple Pay works just fine on websites, without demanding the App Store fee.

petre 2y ago

> Why does patreon need its own app? Why can't it just be web based? Apple & Google Pay is my guess. Which I don't use, just because it's rent seeking and leads to this. I use the websites. Don't want to install bloody apps which request every permission available. My browser has most of those set to denied. Don't even ask for permission, outright deny.

Cayde-6 2y ago
You can use apple and google pay on normal websites that have it set up.
timmattison 2y ago
Apple Pay and Google Pay work with an existing card for normal (non-IAP) purchases. I don’t like rent seeking either but in this case it’s the standard CC payment flow. Nothing additional, just better security. What makes a normal CC better?
- petre 2y ago
  > What makes a normal CC better? One doesn't need a phone or battery to use it, just a bank account and the plastic. Google and Apple now want to become Visa. Yes, their system is more secure.

Nekorosu 2y ago

Heh. I didn't even know there was a Patreon app. There is an issue though. A lot of people (not me) use phone as their main computing device. And Apple is well known for keeping web app experience subpar compared to native app experience. Safari is lagging behind all the other browsers regarding modern APIs support. Bugs are not getting patched for years. At the same time other web rendering engines are not allowed on the main official app store. The other app stores are hard to get to and I consider them non-existent for regular users. So, platform developers have to take iOS support very seriously or miss a lot of profit.

azinman2 2y ago
Is Chrome on Android complete in terms of modern APIs? If so, do people use it instead of apps on Android?
- inanutshellus 2y ago
  In this context, Chrome is just a browser, just like Safari is on iOS. The "problem" is less-technically-savvy folks (especially -- and ironically -- tech native youth) don't understand/care about the distinction between Apps vs a Website Bookmark/Shortcut. That Patreon is even considering keeping the app is proof of this. Depending on how overt Patreon's app is about ringing the alarm bells (imagine a "JUST MAKE A SHORTCUT and save 30% on everything!!!" popup) would just get them banned too, no doubt. Presumably criticizing Apple is a bannable offense.
  - krger 2y ago
    >That Patreon is even considering keeping the app is proof of this. No, that Patreon is "even considering" keeping the app is evidence that they get more valuable information about users and their habits from the app than they could from a website.
    - inanutshellus 2y ago
      That's not disagreeing with me, but instead adding yet another argument for users to avoid as many Apps as they can. If the experience in an app is form, graphs, and payments... use the website. It apparently saves that company 30% and, to your point, keeps your computing habits yours.

kwanbix 2y ago

30% is deliriously high. Make it 10% and maybe then we can talk.

bankcust08385 2y ago
It's monopolistic extortion.
- throwaway48476 2y ago
  Rent seeking behavior.

tonyhart7 2y ago

more and more people use mobile phone than ever and less and less people do googling and use "Apps" than bookmarking link to a website You may not like it but programmer reading news in HN is not common in global scale plus mobile apps is just value added, same reason you have dekstop app vs webapp

bankcust08385 2y ago

Yep. If I were Patreon, I would ditch the iOS app. Apple doesn't deserve a 30% gotcha capitalism mafia extortion fee.

grecy 2y ago

I’m a creator and have many supporters on patreon. I didn’t know there is an app and I don’t care.

majani 2y ago

Actually Patreon has played it perfectly by offering an android app, ios app and a website, and increasing the prices on the ios app to cater for the fees. The next thing should be to provide a clear notice on the ios app that lower prices can be found on the other apps. Then they will be able to objectively tell how many people value the app store's value additions enough to pay extra

a_dabbler 2y ago
Afaik from other discussions of this Apple do not allow apps to inform users that they can pay cheaper outside the app
bearjaws 2y ago
You can't put a notice saying your prices are increasing due to Apple, it's against the App Store TOS :)
- gmokki 2y ago
  Is it allowed to put a notice that Android and web users are given a 30% discount on the normal prices, which accidentally are only for iOS users. Or just add a clickbait title: "See here to find out if you are eligible to discounted prices!" to a link to the web site. Of course buyer has to be able to disable the 30% discount on the web site, to make it plausible that the normal prices are the ones on iOS. And all billing lines in the invoice always have to include a 30% discount line on Android and web purchases.
  - danShumway 2y ago
    > Is it allowed to put a notice that Android and web users are given a 30% discount on the normal prices No. You are not allowed to provide customers any details about other payment options. Apple has provisions that basically say, "you must not encourage the user to use a different payment option." And Apple can interpret that quite broadly; telling users that another platform has a discount would be treated as a violation. > "See here to find out if you are eligible to discounted prices!" to a link to the web site. This would be a violation of Apple's policies. I sort of understand why people have a hard time grasping this, and I don't think it's through any fault of their own. It's because it's such an obviously anti-consumer, anti-competitive policy that I think normal people assume "it cannot possibly be the policy that Apple has." There's almost a defense in audacity: Patreon must be lying about its options because, come on, Apple wouldn't seriously ban links, right? No company would be that bold, right? The policy is so blatant that people assume there must be something they're misunderstanding about it.

raverbashing 2y ago

There's an advantage to using in-app purchases when you doubt the developer, so either you think they're going to overcharge you or make it difficult to cancel. However this is not the case with Patreon So I don't know what's the case here, but sounds like people who get confused by bubbles of different colors

GeekyBear 2y ago

> Why does patreon need its own app? Why can't it just be web based? There is the simple solution taken by companies like Spotify and Netflix. Have a free app for users, but only accept payments through your own website. In which case, Apple doesn't get a dime.

bearjaws 2y ago
Spotify had a nightmare of a time getting to that point. Same with Floatplane, a streaming platform from LTT. If you actually try to copy Spotify / Amazon you find out very quickly they have exclusive deals and their own account managers. You actually will not get approved for 5-6 months if you try to copy them, and even use their same exact UI and verbiage. This is the part of the problem with Apple app store.
- GeekyBear 2y ago
  As far as I've seen, this isn't any sort of exclusive on Apple's App Store or Google's Play Store. Free apps that allow users to access paid subscription content aren't required to accept payments for the subscription through the app. > Offer subscriptions through your own website or app rather than the app stores. This allows you to process payments directly and avoid the 30% fees. However, you'll need to provide your own payment processing and customer support. https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-avoid-paying-a-30-commission-to-Google-and-Apple-for-my-subscription-apps https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-avoid-paying-a-30-co...
  - bearjaws 2y ago
    Here is just one example about how hard it is to get approved, and reflects my experience as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzQw3kEbEio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzQw3kEbEio You can say it's easy, but if you try to make your app only take payments off platform you will fight with Apple for months. Apple will gladly say they aren't preventing you from taking payment off platform and then make your life hell. They are big enough that this isn't some accident, this is 100% on purpose. The whole LTT saga went on for nearly 2 years, you can watch all of it through their podcast: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=floatplane+apple+app+store https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=floatplane+appl... AND they had the benefit of having millions of viewer leading to them getting an active account manager... Imagine some random company.

CivBase 2y ago

> Why does patreon need its own app? Notifications. Performance. Responsiveness. Bandwidth. Offline access. And a lot of users simply find apps to be more convenient than browser bookmarks. I use the web interface for Patreon, but I can see why some users would want the app. Why does Apple themselves have apps for things like maps, news, stocks, weather, video chats, etc? These all rely on web services and could theoretically be handled in the browser. I don't think any of these examples even provide users the ability to buy anything. Clearly Apple recognizes a value in some services being available through native mobile apps.

nottorp 2y ago
> Notifications. No thanks. > Performance. Responsiveness. Bandwidth. Offline access. Isn't Patreon basically a web site where you can pay a subscription to ... something? Why would it need all that? Does the subscriber content get delivered through Patreon?
- CivBase 2y ago
  You and I may not want notifications, but a lot of people do. > Does the subscriber content get delivered through Patreon? Yes. Many of creators deliver media content through Patreon. Announcements, updates, Q&As, early access to regular content, bonus behind-the-scenes content, and sometimes exclusive content. It all depends on the creator.
  - nottorp 2y ago
    Ah so it's more like Steam than like just subscription management. Thanks.
brlewis 2y ago
I think your information about lack of notifications is outdated. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/sending-web-push-notifications-in-web-apps-and-browsers https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/...

JKCalhoun 2y ago

> So why do companies make them? Because people spend more money when they can just use the in app purchase functionality. I assumed it was so they could skirt around the privacy built more consistently into web browsers. Or that they are still stuck in the "There's an app for that" era that I think we have collectively left behind.

dcow 2y ago

> It is CLEARLY worth the 30% to most companies, because they keep pumping out single use apps that would be better as a mobile web page. Based on the context given in the OP, this conclusion does not follow and is not fair. 1. Patreon is passing the 30% on to customers by default, or allowing creators to pay for it out of their existing income, so Patreon isn’t making any value judgement at all. They are leaving it up to creators and users. 2. Even if they weren’t doing (1), there are other factors in play that don’t make this a fair “experiment”. Most notably that established platforms like Amazon and Spotify _don’t_ find the value here, contradicting your assertion that most companies do. Note: I didn't think Apple historically allowed (1), which also invalidates the “experiment”, but maybe terms have changed recently.

eduction 2y ago
> Patreon isn’t making any value judgement at all. They are leaving it up to creators and users. That’s incorrect. They are phasing out two of their three payment options (per creation and first of month) for all creators in order to have the right to operate an app on iOS. That’s a value judgment - Patreon would rather have an app than continue to make independent business judgments. They could have said “well, people can just use their browser on iOS” and it would have meant far fewer changes to their business. The browser only approach is clearly not preferred. Clearly, having an app with easy payment infra is worth a lot, just as the person you’re replying to suggested. The question is why the web never developed effective single sign on payment solutions.
- dcow 2y ago
  In the OP Patreon leads with a pretty strong assertion that they would not be making these changes to their subscription model on merit alone. “Do this or you’ll lose X% of your users” is not Patreon making a value judgement on 30% margin, it’s post facto extortion. Nothing is answering the question, “would Patreon itself take a 30% hit to margin just to operate natively iOS”? I am pretty dubious. My point still stands that none of this is fair first principles representation of the value the platform provides. I’m sure the product conversation and user research inside Patreon HQ is much more along the lines of “fuck you Apple you’re making me choose my 10% iOS user base over the 7% of global users that happily use per-creation billing”. Not “oh Apple was right subscriptions are a more consistent payment model for users why didn't we realize that before thanks Apple here’s your 30% rev share for the idea let’s just pass that cost on to our iOS users they won’t mind”. LOL

jms703 2y ago

YES. So much this. Patreon doesn't even mention the web version in their blog post. Stop making apps when a website will suffice.

jallbrit 2y ago
> But remember, Apple’s fees are only in the iOS app. Your prices on the web and the Android app will remain completely unaffected. You can always send your fans to this Help Center article which explains the iOS in-app fees relative to other platforms, so they can better understand the implications of where they choose to make their purchases.

Reubachi 2y ago

Patreon allows creators to for a fee serve additional media content via it's app which is agnostic of media type. (IE music, coding, youtube etc.) Most people pay for things for convenience and perceived value. There is very little convience or perceived value in having to go to a mobile/safari/ios website, log in, and then download a for example 1gig podcast tothen have to find it in my "downloads" and then play via some media player.