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

Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 79 posts

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#61

Post by zzleeper »

reedF211 wrote: post #53

Apple has gone too far trying to gouge developers and the backlash is well deserved. I was planning on buying an ipad but I decided to boycott all Apple products until they back off from this madness. I bet if 90s Microsoft could travel ahead in time and see apple's behavior recently, even they would blush with blatant anti-competitive moves, monopolistic practices and gouging of their users.

Same boat. I was going to buy a new ipad for my parents but I can't see myself doing that now. However, the problem is that there is no real alternative to it..

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#62

Post by juiceandjuice »

mortenjorck wrote: post #55

There is only one thing the DOJ should be concerned about with Apple's app subscription program, and that is the price requirement. As it's highly dubious that Apple has any kind of monopoly, it should be free to set whatever requirements it sees fit for its platform, but mandating other prices outside the App Store sounds an awful lot like restraint of trade to me: http://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/restraint-…

I believe they have a monopoly in terms of digital music distribution, which is one of the services that would be affected.

I might be wrong, but I don't think Amazon's market share approaches that of iTunes in music.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#63

Post by Bossman »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #2

Fully recognizing that Apple's 30% is highway robbery, isn't Google's "only 10%" still fairly outrageous? This seems like more a 5% feature, since the app providers still have to provide all their own infrastructure to actually support the subscription.

10% is still a bit much, I guess. But it's pretty damn smart of Google. Apple announces 30%, everyone gets pissed. Google comes out and announces their plan and doesn't make a big deal about any of it. Everyone wants to know how much Google takes and when they find out it's 10%, Google wins.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#64

Post by ghshephard »

zzleeper wrote: post #56
ghshephard wrote: post #46

The last thing we need at this stage of the game is "Regulators" messing around in the market. It's early years, in the tablet market, and Google is going to come out with some awesome android operating systems, and I'm confident we're going to see some great tablets that will let me read my Kindle books on. If Apple wants to shoot itself in the foot, and send everyone over to Google/honeycomb tablets by coming up wi…

I don't think they "shot themselves in the foot" in terms of profit. If they actually have a dominant position in the market (kinda true for ipads), then Amazon and the others will accept Apple's terms. That means that EVERYONE ELSE will subsidize Apple prizes (since they have to sell their products at the same prize as in the ipad). With that subsidy, Apple can choose to lower the prices of ipads, thus cementing it'…

Netflix, Kindle, and other resellers will not be able to operate on the iPad. The 30% number eliminates their entire margin. Therefore they will abandon the platform - rocketing up Android in popularity.

I think this is Apple's Plan (To have those resellers abandon their platform) - because they want to have a "Walled Garden" in which they are the only content sellers.

The only problem is that there are a _lot_ of us who like our Kindles, and have no desire to use "iBooks" - the lack of an eInk reader that lets us read in the sun is only one reason. Our large library of Kindle books is another.

Ergo - we'll go to the next platform, and abandon the iPad - reducing it to a niche player in the Tablet world.

This isn't like the iPod where Apple was the major distributor of Music. Apple is _not_ the major distributor of Books, Newspapers, and Magazine and there is _lots_ of competition in those markets. Apple actually only has about or so magazines and newspapers compared to the close to 1000 that PressReader and Zinio have. Apple has NO streaming Audio or Movie presence that I know of.

I think they learned the wrong lesson from the iPod - and now they are going to screw their Tablet market dominance - much to their loss.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#65

Post by random42 »

bpodgursky wrote: post #23
random42 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non US guy here. Which company is it? (Must be famous, but does not ring a bell to me, right now).

Pretty sure he's referring to the MPAA and RIAA (they aren't actually companies.)

Thanks!

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#66

Post by reedF211 »

zzleeper wrote: post #61
reedF211 wrote: post #53

Apple has gone too far trying to gouge developers and the backlash is well deserved. I was planning on buying an ipad but I decided to boycott all Apple products until they back off from this madness. I bet if 90s Microsoft could travel ahead in time and see apple's behavior recently, even they would blush with blatant anti-competitive moves, monopolistic practices and gouging of their users.

Same boat. I was going to buy a new ipad for my parents but I can't see myself doing that now. However, the problem is that there is no real alternative to it..

Have faith in Android tablets

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#67

Post by Niten »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #2

Fully recognizing that Apple's 30% is highway robbery, isn't Google's "only 10%" still fairly outrageous? This seems like more a 5% feature, since the app providers still have to provide all their own infrastructure to actually support the subscription.

Not at all. Because unlike Apple, Google isn't forcing people to play by their rules; they're just holding this out as an option for those developers who choose to use it.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#68

Post by danilocampos »

invertd wrote: post #41
danilocampos wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd amazed by how much people support one of the richest companies in the world get richer off the backs of others. Apple is getting rich by making extremely good stuff. I support them getting richer because I want them to continue making really good stuff I enjoy using. Because I can't trust any other company in the world to do that hard work. Let me show you something: 2001: http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscellan…

My question to you; is consuming content in a device that is not "dull, stodgy" worth 30% overcharge for life?

It is to me.

But then again, I buy a MacBook Pro instead of a junky plastic laptop. I'll pay a premium for quality, so will another chunk of the market and everyone else can fight over the Wal-Mart segment.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#69

Post by SoftwareMaven »

alanfalcon wrote: post #42
SoftwareMaven wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And paying the bandits on the highway was the cost of doing business if you wanted to run your trade caravan through the forrest. I love my Apple products. I'm in awe at what the company has accomplished over the last decade. That doesn't mean they can do no wrong and their decisions can't be questioned. I'm not talking about the cost of doing business here. I'm talking about the cost of being a customer here and the…

The parent comment makes no mention of any terms beyond the 30%. I agree that there seem to be some questionable terms (especially involving the most favored nation clause) but the 30% fee itself is simply not highway robbery. There are two roads to your customer on an iPhone. One is nicely paved with trees planted and maintained for maximum appearance, and if you take this road you're charged 30%. The other road is…

There are places I think the 30% is completely reasonable. As another comment here mentions, trying to do $1 transactions using Paypal or a merchant account would be insane. Taking a 30% cut on applications, where they are not just processing money, but also providing distribution and other infrastructure is fine.

My complaint is taking a flat 30% of all subscriptions and digital purchases where their only value-add is as a credit card processor. As I said originally, I think Google's 10% is also steep for this same feature, but, as others pointed out, you aren't required to use theirs, so if you find a better deal, good for you. Also, Google's 10% won't cause my iPhone subscriptions to go up by 10%, but Apple's 30% may cause my Android subscriptions to go up 30%.

This is still hypothetical, and it is a hard problem to solve. On the one hand, you have Netflix that has a huge infrastructure and large supplier costs who is already set up to do very well at $15/month. On the other hand, you have Po Dunk Developer who wants to add $0.99 subscriptions to his app. 30% on the former is too much; 30% on the latter is reasonable. How do you reconcile?

Most businesses would provide a way for Netflix to enter a formal agreement that pays some amount up front, then lowers the percentage. I have to wonder if Apple will go that path (or something similar) as well. I hope so.

Re: Regulators probe Apple 30% subscription plan

#70

Post by pnathan »

juiceandjuice wrote: post #62
mortenjorck wrote: post #55

There is only one thing the DOJ should be concerned about with Apple's app subscription program, and that is the price requirement. As it's highly dubious that Apple has any kind of monopoly, it should be free to set whatever requirements it sees fit for its platform, but mandating other prices outside the App Store sounds an awful lot like restraint of trade to me: http://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/restraint-…

I believe they have a monopoly in terms of digital music distribution, which is one of the services that would be affected. I might be wrong, but I don't think Amazon's market share approaches that of iTunes in music.

I always buy Amazon MP3s, personally. It works really well, and I know they don't seem to have a big skin in the DRM game for music, unlike Apple.

Personally, a Kindle is my next gadget to buy. I've been very happy with the Kindle apps on PC/Mac and I've liked the physical Kindle UI.

The iPad just doesn't do anything for me.

Post reply on HN