21–30 of 219 posts
That's a strange definition of lose. A third party doesn't contract with someone for their product launch, and that is considered a loss of money?
"$50m that google won't earn" sounds less cool.
I can't imagine that 100% of the people interested in fortnite for android are willing to sideload the apk. I would be surprised if this wasn't having a net-negative impact on the total number of android users. I wonder if this is just to avoid paying a percentage on in-app purchases? What else could it be?
> In the process, it’s costing Google around $50 million this year in platform fees, according to a new report. It's not costing Google anything, and they're not losing money on this either. It's revenue that they might have expected to earn, which they're now not going to be earning.
edit: This is a question folks, I'm not sure why you're down voting a question.. ya'll are touchy as hell lol.
To put it differently, since I think my first attempt just confused you all in mass:
If Google were to lower it's take from 30% to 15% (fake numbers), for everyone, so that Epic would use their business - would that gain them money or lose them money?
It's a question, yikes ya'll.
I can't imagine that 100% of the people interested in fortnite for android are willing to sideload the apk. I would be surprised if this wasn't having a net-negative impact on the total number of android users. I wonder if this is just to avoid paying a percentage on in-app purchases? What else could it be?
It will be available on samsung galaxy apps store, so for all Samsung users (quite a lot) no need to side install an apk.
"Unlike Apple, which only allows apps to be downloaded from its own storefront, Google’s platform is more open." Oh the irony. Android is more open than iOS and yet its Google that EU found to be at fault with Android. How is this not a classic example that, if anything, Android provides a more open platform?
> In the process, it’s costing Google around $50 million this year in platform fees, according to a new report. It's not costing Google anything, and they're not losing money on this either. It's revenue that they might have expected to earn, which they're now not going to be earning.
Also, what solution would there be? Allow other companies to bypass Google's revenue system in this area? How much will they lose from other companies who want to be treated equal to Fortnite. edit : This is a question folks, I'm not sure why you're down voting a question.. ya'll are touchy as hell lol. To put it differently, since I think my first attempt just confused you all in mass: If Google were to lower it's t…
On the other hand, Epic will lose out on the easy-to-access money that users have available on the Play Store through gift cards or google pay. The only reason I downloaded Hearthstone on my ios device was so I could use store credit to purchase packs. Otherwise I would have just remained a solely F2P player.
It's incredibly pain free to spend money on the google store. Just throw your fingerprint on there and who knows how much you've spent.
However the article is leaning towards a "google shouldn't allow this to earn more money" kind of view, but how much is this on the total that google makes from being a middleman?