Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Addressing Spotify’s Claims

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 688 posts

Re: Addressing Spotify’s Claims

#121

Post by threeseed »

jraedisch wrote: post #70
RayVR wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re not milking anything. Apple has, as far as I know, always charged 30%. What has changed is the way we buy and pay for apps and services. Everyone wants to move to the subscription service model and Apple has developed rules accordingly.

I thought the problem was, that their own apps do not have to pay 30%, so they can easily replace any app with their own, if they choose to.

There is zero evidence that Apple does not pay the 30%.

We don't see the internal accounting but it's quite likely they do. Internal revenue distribution is standard practice in almost all enterprises.

Re: Addressing Spotify’s Claims

#122

Post by winter_blue »

pfortuny wrote: post #76
cialowicz wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Spotify’s aim is to make more money off others’ work Moreover, that's the pot calling the kettle black. That's the app store in a nutshell -- Apple supplies the marketplace, but is also making a substantial chunk of money off of others’ work.

That is the definition of work-for-hire, is it not? Is it immoral now?

The lack of choice is a problem. I’d support a law that mandated that all Turing-complete machines allow its owner to execute whatever code he wants on it, and therefore that iOS devices allow third-party apps (and third-party app stores) to be installed.

Re: Addressing Spotify’s Claims

#123

Post by saagarjha »

bunnycorn wrote: post #107
zaidf wrote: post #3

Underneath the rhetoric, Spotify’s aim is to make more money off others’ work. Wow. It is astonishing to read this from a company being widely accused of an unfair 30% tax. Correction: the revenue share is 15%, it was originally 30%

> Wow. It is astonishing to read this from a company being widely accused of an unfair 30% tax. Widely accused by people who do nothing at all.

This is a thinly-veiled personal attack :/

Re: Addressing Spotify’s Claims

#124

Post by chj »

scoutt wrote: post #116

It's a symbiotic relationship, but if it reduces to "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" analogy it would be: * the app store is successful thanks to apps like Spotify * Spotify is successful thanks to the app store I think the second premise tends to be more accurate to the case. If I make the most used app in the world today, I cannot take credit for pumping the success of the app store, because it was alrea…

> In either case, it's Apple yard, they set the rules and charge what they want. Don't place your main source of income in another person's yard.

It's too late. Had people known it would become what it is today, nobody in their right mind would build apps for it. Not me at least.

Re: Addressing Spotify’s Claims

#125

Post by saagarjha »

keiferski wrote: post #52

I have noticed that the quality of writing at Apple has gone down dramatically since Jobs passed. It used to be concise and elegant. Now it’s some cross between a SAAS landing page and a passive-aggressive tweet. You can see this everywhere from Apple.com to this letter.

This letter is the exception, not the norm. I have never seen official statements from Apple this strong aside from the Bloomberg letter they published last last year.

Re: Addressing Spotify’s Claims

#126

Post by threeseed »

hamandcheese wrote: post #82
pjmlp wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like other online book shops don't sell their books on the Kindle device store app.

But, at the very least, Amazon doesn’t prevent you from reading ebooks from outside their store on a kindle. They just don’t favilate their discovery. (Unless things changed since I last owned a kindle which was quite a while ago)

Apple allows you to have PDFs and ePub files in their Books app as well.

So not sure what you mean.

Re: Addressing Spotify’s Claims

#127

Post by laumars »

isostatic wrote: post #104
cialowicz wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Spotify’s aim is to make more money off others’ work Moreover, that's the pot calling the kettle black. That's the app store in a nutshell -- Apple supplies the marketplace, but is also making a substantial chunk of money off of others’ work.

Exactly what my local store does. They pay the wholesaler 10 and sell to me for 15.

That’s also why high street stores are now struggling while consumers are buying direct from the source or online where margins are tighter.

However I’m not suggesting that local stores are in the wrong either but it does illustrate how consumers have choice there is no such competition inside Apples walled garden. And that is the real crux of why their margins are high: it’s because developers and iPhone owners are locked into the App Store

The obvious counteragument here is that people don’t have to buy iPhones - and that is true. However people do and they still expect their app prices to be low, so developers are the ones who ultimately lose out as they either have to support Apple or be left out entirely and they’re the ones who then have to lower their prices to compete.

It’s also worth noting that the physical store, in your example, would have greater overheads than an App Store of equivalent size so Apples markup shouldn’t include the same operational cost.

Re: Addressing Spotify’s Claims

#129

Post by threeseed »

zaidf wrote: post #14
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple won't find itself standing alone. Other major distributors like Google and Valve are both happy to take 30% off the top of app sales too, and if the chance comes to speak up in support, they will. But the difference is both of them can be circumvented by competitors, for instance Epic Games, who is challenging both. (Epic is launching an Android store soon.) Apple can't be, and that's likely to be the crux of a…

But the difference is both of them can be circumvented by competitors If the App Store could be circumvented as easily, Spotify probably wouldn't be raising this issue to begin with.

It can be circumvented quite easily and Spotify already does.

You can upgrade to Spotify Premium through a website which they advertise during their free tier ads.

Re: Addressing Spotify’s Claims

#130

Post by isostatic »

ahmedalsudani wrote: post #112
isostatic wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly what my local store does. They pay the wholesaler 10 and sell to me for 15.

No, not exactly. You're free to buy from other stores, and suppliers can sell to them. A very important distinction.

I use spotify and netflix without going through apple, the former on my linux desktop, the latter additionally on my smart tv.
Post reply on HN