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

Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 47 posts

Re: Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies

#31

Post by TrainedMonkey »

three_seagrass wrote: post #18
fxtentacle wrote: post #2

TLDR: Both are afraid of Netflix making channel subscriptions superfluous. It's an interesting read with lots of explanations.

Yeah, I don't agree with their analysis of Disney+ either. It's as you say, these big corps are trying to claw back revenue that Netflix has been enjoying. I doubt the reason Disney really went into Disney+ was to enhance the Disney magic experience or whatever. Maybe if Walt were still alive. It seems more likely that Disney did the cost/benefit analysis and decided that Netflix subscriptions were not zero sum and t…

Disney+ is more than just a revenue stream. It is a sales channel for their brand. If you have Disney+ you are going to watch more Disney content... and if you watch more content you are going to buy more merchandise (0). Modern Disney is a brand company making money from selling merchandise (1).

Even more importantly Disney+ is a platform. Most little girls in western countries (3) already dream of being a princess. So if you provide a channel which parents can subscribe to put their kids in front of the TV... that is a tremendous value proposition for both sides. Parents because kids are out of their hair while watching family friendly shows and disney because see my previous point.

0. In my humble opinion. I have not done any research, but having disney+ -> watching more disney -> becoming a fan and buying their stuff makes sense to me.

1. $54.7bn from merchandise in 2019 with next highest revenue source bringing in $24.8bn - https://www.statista.com/topics/1824/disney/

3. Like every single 5 yo girl I've met... which is actually not a big number, so maybe not most little girls, but still a pretty sizeable portion.

Re: Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies

#32

Post by sjg007 »

enos_feedler wrote: post #25

>Content has extremely high fixed costs, and zero marginal costs; it follows, then, that the fiscally responsible content producers sell that content to as many outlets as possible I wonder if this means Netflix may try to maximize some of it's best content more by taking out of streaming inventory and charging to purchase/rent individual series and movies? all within the Netflix app?

Netflix doesn’t need or want to segment the market. Most consumers will stick with one streaming service that is good enough. Apple needs transactions. Netflix needs subscriptions. Amazon takes both but really only wants prime members. Amazon is actually useful though because you can consolidate HBO, showtime etc.. under a single login. It can work under Apple but it’s a lot harder to switch between devices.

Re: Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies

#33

Post by askafriend »

three_seagrass wrote: post #29
askafriend wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience 100% agree. I pay the premium because of the walled garden. I prefer it. I want Apple to have a tight grip over suppliers. I want Apple to have a tight grip over the experience on their platforms. I want Apple to have a tight grip over their 3rd party developers. In fact, I say this as an engineer myself; I even develop for Apple's platform so I'm impacted by their dev-…

Are those mutually exclusive though? Apple can control the user experience on the device you bought without forcing a 30% surcharge against the competition.

> Apple can control the user experience on the device you bought without forcing a 30% surcharge against the competition.

I don't disagree with you.

My response was meant to be general, not a direct response to the article. I didn't mean to imply that Apple gets everything right. I just wanted to express how all the things that HN thinks Apple gets wrong, are exactly the things that I (and many others) value deeply and pay a premium for.

Re: Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies

#34

Post by greggman3 »

yazaddaruvala wrote: post #21
three_seagrass wrote: post #17

It's still baffling that Apple is allowed to have such strict controls over their platform while still competing with the products they're charging rent to to be on it (i.e. iTunes & Spotify). I get why some make the analogy with Grocery Stores and stocking their in-house brands (e.g. Safeway with Signature, Apple with iTunes), but with Apple, it's like the customer has already bought the grocery store and Apple is s…

This might be an unpopular opinion on HN, but I don't only pay Apple for the smartphone's hardware. I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience. As a developer, I understand wanting to get access to a large user base. I understand wanting to keep costs down, especially as an indie dev. And I definitely understand wanting to keep my margins high, to fund better development but also retire early! As a customer, I'd p…

Why do those 2 things need to be bundled?

If you want a Blockbuster Video store with no porn for your VHS player you can go to Blockbuster Video and I can go down the street to my local Video store. We can both have a VHS machine by Sony.

There's no reason your phone has to be locked by Apple for you to continue to only get apps from Apple's porn free app store.

Why does your desire to have Apple curate your apps mean that I have to put with it as well? Can't you just choose to only get apps curated by Apple and I can choose to get my apps curated by someone else on the same device?

Re: Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies

#35

Post by ianmf »

wstrange wrote: post #30
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be an unpopular opinion on HN, but I don't only pay Apple for the smartphone's hardware. I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience. As a developer, I understand wanting to get access to a large user base. I understand wanting to keep costs down, especially as an indie dev. And I definitely understand wanting to keep my margins high, to fund better development but also retire early! As a customer, I'd p…

> I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience. Which is totally fine. But why not allow customers to make that decision? If the Apple App store truly delivers an experience that warrants a 30% uplift, consumers will pay for it.

If Apple would allow customers bypass "the wall" by side loading apps, developers and companies will tell users to disable some security settings to install app from their website, creating a security issue for their users.

Re: Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies

#36

Post by mark-r »

xkjkls wrote: post #15
Talanes wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As things start to fracture more and more, the big studios kind of find themselves in the same position. Disney+ probably has one of the strongest single-publisher back catalogs, and there's still a lot of talk about there being nothing to watch after you finish the few originals and whatever old thing you were interested in.

Yeah, Netflix has far more new exclusive content. And by that, I'm counting out all of the currently released movies Disney has also on Disney+, since many saw those in theaters.

Disney knows better than most how much appeal there is in movies that you've already seen.

Re: Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies

#37

Post by macintux »

wstrange wrote: post #30
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be an unpopular opinion on HN, but I don't only pay Apple for the smartphone's hardware. I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience. As a developer, I understand wanting to get access to a large user base. I understand wanting to keep costs down, especially as an indie dev. And I definitely understand wanting to keep my margins high, to fund better development but also retire early! As a customer, I'd p…

> I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience. Which is totally fine. But why not allow customers to make that decision? If the Apple App store truly delivers an experience that warrants a 30% uplift, consumers will pay for it.

Users have demonstrated repeatedly they’re unwilling to pay for anything when there’s a free alternative (broad strokes, obviously).

So some significant chunk of Apple’s users would use a 3rd party app store and experience would be down, security would be a nightmare, people would have all sorts of complaints and Apple’s reputation would take a hit.

Re: Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies

#38

Post by sjwright »

wstrange wrote: post #30
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be an unpopular opinion on HN, but I don't only pay Apple for the smartphone's hardware. I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience. As a developer, I understand wanting to get access to a large user base. I understand wanting to keep costs down, especially as an indie dev. And I definitely understand wanting to keep my margins high, to fund better development but also retire early! As a customer, I'd p…

> I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience. Which is totally fine. But why not allow customers to make that decision? If the Apple App store truly delivers an experience that warrants a 30% uplift, consumers will pay for it.

The curated model stops working the moment that there's any way to get around it, because enough developers will do what they think is in their best interest rather than the customer's. Anyway, the option for customers to "make that decision" exists and comes in the form of Android.

Re: Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies

#39

Post by ksec »

askafriend wrote: post #23
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be an unpopular opinion on HN, but I don't only pay Apple for the smartphone's hardware. I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience. As a developer, I understand wanting to get access to a large user base. I understand wanting to keep costs down, especially as an indie dev. And I definitely understand wanting to keep my margins high, to fund better development but also retire early! As a customer, I'd p…

> I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience 100% agree. I pay the premium because of the walled garden. I prefer it. I want Apple to have a tight grip over suppliers. I want Apple to have a tight grip over the experience on their platforms. I want Apple to have a tight grip over their 3rd party developers. In fact, I say this as an engineer myself; I even develop for Apple's platform so I'm impacted by their dev-…

> I do not value an open platform. I only value a good user experience and I value my problems being solved in consistent and elegant ways with a focus on design.

Fully agree. While I still criticise Apple on keyboard, hardware defects, sometimes unfair competitive advantage, I still prefer user experience over whatever ideology such as Open or Close, proprietary or Free. And I vote that with my money.

The only problem is when User Experience is not up to standards, such as the early days ( and arguably even today ) Apple Music, Apple TV+, Apple Arcade. But then of coz I still have choices such as Spotify and Netflix.

Again, none of that is to say I agree with charging 30/15% for its direct competitors. Given nearly 80% of the App Store platform are Gaming revenue. I wish Apple could use this opportunities to lower its fees for Non-Gaming Apps to 20% and Subscription to 10% charge. I think that is a much more fair price.

Re: Apple, Amazon, and Common Enemies

#40

Post by vlozko »

greggman3 wrote: post #34
yazaddaruvala wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be an unpopular opinion on HN, but I don't only pay Apple for the smartphone's hardware. I'm also paying Apple to curate my experience. As a developer, I understand wanting to get access to a large user base. I understand wanting to keep costs down, especially as an indie dev. And I definitely understand wanting to keep my margins high, to fund better development but also retire early! As a customer, I'd p…

Why do those 2 things need to be bundled? If you want a Blockbuster Video store with no porn for your VHS player you can go to Blockbuster Video and I can go down the street to my local Video store. We can both have a VHS machine by Sony. There's no reason your phone has to be locked by Apple for you to continue to only get apps from Apple's porn free app store. Why does your desire to have Apple curate your apps mea…

Easy: Because Apple clearly sees it as a more profitable move and, whether you agree with them or not, contributes to an overall better user experience. Better experience = happier customers = more business.
Post reply on HN