←back to thread

830 points todsacerdoti | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
pja ◴[] No.25136113[source]
I’m seeing a lot of positive comments on HN about this: to me it seems to be purely a cynical piece of PR on Apple’s part.

They hope to significantly reduce the pressure on politicians to take a close look at their App store practices by significantly reducing the absolute number of developers suffering the full impact whilst taking the minimum possible hit to their revenue. This has nothing to do with “doing the right thing” or “accelerating innovation” and everything to do with limiting the number of outraged letters to senators from devs, the number of newspaper interviews with prominent indie developers & so on.

Indie devs have an outsize PR impact relative to their revenue contribution, so buy them off with a smaller revenue tax that delivers outsize returns if it prevents the 30% house rake on the majority of Apple’s App Store income coming under scrutiny.

Apple / Google’s 30% take is the anti-competitive elephant in the room here, not a few crumbs thrown to small developers.

replies(33): >>25136142 #>>25136180 #>>25136192 #>>25136194 #>>25136229 #>>25136254 #>>25136310 #>>25136326 #>>25136369 #>>25136392 #>>25136896 #>>25136921 #>>25136932 #>>25136947 #>>25137067 #>>25137364 #>>25137458 #>>25137537 #>>25137558 #>>25137578 #>>25137627 #>>25137982 #>>25138093 #>>25138809 #>>25139232 #>>25139847 #>>25140155 #>>25140160 #>>25140313 #>>25140614 #>>25140958 #>>25141658 #>>25141813 #
NovemberWhiskey ◴[] No.25136254[source]
>to it seems to be purely a cynical piece of PR on Apple’s part.

Oh please.

Has it ever occurred in the history of the world that the selfish motives of two different parties aligned? i.e. Apple gets good press for helping smaller developers and the smaller developers get increased revenues. It happens all the times, and it's called "good business".

You can keep waiting for Apple's App Store executives to cover themselves with sackcloth and ashes and repent of their terrible policies. Let me know how that works out.

replies(5): >>25136581 #>>25137299 #>>25137489 #>>25138069 #>>25139596 #
ocdtrekkie ◴[] No.25136581[source]
If Apple didn't fear either Epic's lawsuit or Congressional action, or both, they'd never reduce their app store cut, for anyone, ever.

This announcement means Apple knows that neither public opinion nor the law is on their side and they're about to lose really, really big. And they're hoping if they can flip this around a bit and get control of the narrative, they can convince regulators they will self-regulate... while continuing to get a third of the revenue from all the most lucrative developers.

Google's new Gmail privacy settings fall in the same boat: They'd rather lose data from a small portion of their users if it might deter the government from taking away all of it.

replies(4): >>25136775 #>>25136945 #>>25137597 #>>25139022 #
zaroth ◴[] No.25137597[source]
> If Apple didn't fear either Epic's lawsuit or Congressional action, or both, they'd never reduce their app store cut, for anyone, ever.

Except they have done exactly that in the past. In June 2016 Apple introduced a subscription billing model which reduces the fee to 15% after the first year a customer is subscribed.

replies(1): >>25138779 #
1. calcifer ◴[] No.25138779[source]
I'm sure the developers of all 15 apps that sell multi-year subscriptions were very happy about that.
replies(1): >>25139068 #
2. zaroth ◴[] No.25139068[source]
Interestingly the top benefactor is Google, as YouTube is #1 for subscription revenue in 2019 according to TechCrunch.

Subscription revenue on Apple's store was $3.6B of ~$50B in 2019, so 7.2% of app store revenue overall.

It's absolutely true that Apple doesn't have a lot of pricing pressure on their 30% fee, since their platform is so compelling and especially since most competitor App Stores charge the same amount. But it's also absolutely false that they have never lowered their rate.