Live data from Hacker News

When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

twitter.com

101–110 of 583 posts

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#101

App stores need heavy regulations. It's not only Apple but Google and even steam to a small extent. Apple is of course the biggest offender as they heavily guard their monopoly with code signing enforcement. This shouldn't have been legal. They are the very definitions of predatory competition squashing monopolies.

The iPhone is an Apple product. The App Store is an Apple product. The libraries and development tools needed to create iOS apps are Apple products.

Traditionally the company that develops a product gets to decide what features that product has. There are various laws that require a product be safe to use, is not misrepresented and does what it is advertised to do, but beyond that there are very few actual features of products that they are required by law to have. Maybe some standards they need to meet.

Sometimes companies will invite other companies to join them in adding features to a product. A TV company might add licensed audio technology from Dolby, a car company might add licensed software for infotainment or navigation software, and they may charge their customers for the added software features.

This is how games consoles work, you buy the console from the manufacturer, who licenses other companies to write games for their product as add-on modules. In the past CDs and cartridges were used, but now this often happen via downloads. These games are developed using the console manufacturers tools, run against their code libraries on the device and are clearly an extension of their product. This has been an established approach for many decades. When my kids were toddlers I bought an educational toy where you could buy little cartridges for it that added educational features.

That's all the App Store is. It's a feature added by Apple to their product for adding optional features to the device. As in many cases in the past, across many types of device, this is a feature added by the manufacturer and your relationship as a customer remains with them.

There is no law requiring that a device containing a computer, be it a car, TV, games console, phone or whatever have any specific features to enable loading additional software. That's just not a requirement that exists, and if a device does have a mechanism to add or update its software, there are no laws about how that must or must not be implemented, that I'm aware of anyway.

If you disagree that this is the way it should be that's fine, that's absolutely your right, but can you explain how such laws should be drafted. What kinds of requirements should be put on manufacturers? Under what criteria should they apply and to what devices?

If you think Apple has failed to comply with some law in the way they implemented their products, I'd appreciate some clarity about exactly what you think Apple has done wrong, and how that should be redressed.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#102
Payment processors generally don't refund fees on payments when the payments are refunded, this isn't new. It's remarkable mainly because (a) it's 30%, not 3% and (b) the App store doesn't position itself as a payments processor the way Stripe does, so it sounds really weird that they would act like one.

If the app store took a 3% chunk and never refunded it regardless of the ongoing status of the transaction, that would put them right in line with other payment processors. It would also still net them billions of dollars, I think!

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#103
post #87
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Apple is of course the biggest offender as they heavily guard their monopoly with code signing enforcement. What monopoly? Apple controls maybe 8% of the desktop/notebook market and ~13% of the smartphone market. They don't even come close to qualifying as a monopoly.

Apple generates more than 50% of all smartphone App Store revenue, so I'd argue it has a monopoly through that lens https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/07/03/apples-app-store-...

That doesn’t mean that Apple has a monopoly, only that Android users are typically cheap and don’t pay for apps as much.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#104
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the same at all. Payment processing is work, regardless of direction. Marketing fees for non-sales is payment for nothing.

....but Apple processes payments for App Store purchases? And they pay to maintain the store. Storage, bandwidth, updates, those are all “work” as well. I do think 30% is quite high, but this comment seems to consider Apple a charity house that should provide these services for free

Despite the fluid nature of consideration in contract law there are checks to ensure you can't demand $5000 for a single aspirin. That seems like it'd come into play here. The 30% only makes sense in the context of it paying for more than payment processing, and consequently if the marketing wasn't effective I'd not pay for it.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#106

App stores need heavy regulations. It's not only Apple but Google and even steam to a small extent. Apple is of course the biggest offender as they heavily guard their monopoly with code signing enforcement. This shouldn't have been legal. They are the very definitions of predatory competition squashing monopolies.

I don't see what kind of regulation Steam needs. They are hardly the only storefront on the platforms they support, aren't the default one, have almost no exclusive content, and don't even take a cut if you sell Steam keys on other stores.

What is there to regulate? If you don't like their terms you can sell on a different store or distribute yourself, there's nothing stopping you like there is on a typical iPhone or Android device. And frankly their terms are pretty damned fair. For the longest time they took such a hands-off approach to their marketplace that people got angry about that instead!

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#107
post #50

App Stores are doing to software developers what supermarkets did to food producers and most other manufacturers: moving all power and profit to distributors. It is somewhat ironic that so many people who helped so many other sectors disintermediate again (by building websites), are now busy actually intermediating their own.

The Web isn't. Sir TBL doesnt get a cut from your sales. Why developers even use the app stores baffles me 97% of user's time is spent using the 10 top mobile apps Average user downloads ~0 apps / month PC sales are up last year and more this year with COVID Who makes money?

Assuming your numbers are accurate, 3% of users time is spent on non-top-10 apps.

There are 3.5 billion smartphone users. [0] Smartphone usage statistics suggest that an average person spends 2 hours and 51 minutes per day on their mobile device. [1] This works out to a cumulative total of 3.6 trillion hours of use per year. 3% of that time is 109 billion hours a year in non-top-10 apps.

You might not become a millionaire with your app being part of the 3%, but there's still real money there.

[0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/330695/number-of-smartph...

[1] https://leftronic.com/smartphone-usage-statistics/

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#108

It’s amazing that a decade and a half later Apple still hasn’t fulfilled Steve Jobs’ original dream of merging the web and apps. He wasn’t saying third party apps should be HTML5 just to stall for time. He really believed it. And it was a good idea and still is. Processors, memory, bandwidth, and browsers have all advanced by leaps and bounds and yet the dream remains unrealized and Apple is the most to blame. They g…

Apple has a history of pushing along after Steve left without any true vision until he returns. If anyone will return from the grave it's probably Steve. When he does he will probably VR Apple phones and we'll be in a new era.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#109
Purchase: Customer pays $10. Apple keeps $3. Developer gets $7

Refund should be: Developer has $7 deducted from current owed "royalties" Apple refunds $10 to the customer.

Is Apple actually taking $10 from the developer and giving it to the customer? That would be theft. The developer is not obligated to cover refunds beyond the profit/royalty they originally made on it.

Re: When a customer refunds your paid app, Apple refunds its 30% cut [edited]

#110
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will they? In some jurisdictions they are required by law to grant refunds. In others, they still have very little incentive to control refund fraud, what with the fact that they're still making money rather than losing it. It would be one thing if they said "We're keeping the credit card processing fees so that we don't lose money," but to keep the whole 30% cut is just petty.

Are they obligated to do business with you? Typically the answer is no, but some countries (like Germany) stores can't ban people if they're the only store in a town. I'm not sure if this would work for Apple, but it might if you already own an iDevice.

I couldn't say. But here's the bit of their terms of service (for USA) that mentions refunds:

> All Transactions are final. Content prices may change at any time. If technical problems prevent or unreasonably delay delivery of Content, your exclusive and sole remedy is either replacement of the Content or refund of the price paid, as determined by Apple. From time to time, Apple may refuse a refund request if we find evidence of fraud, refund abuse, or other manipulative behavior that entitles Apple to a corresponding counterclaim.

Which makes it sound like they aren't granting refunds at all for anything except failure to deliver the product.

And yet when I look at their actual refund request form it has options for "I did not mean to buy this, child bought without permission, I did not mean to subscribe, I did not mean to renew subscription, my purchase did not work as expected, in-app not received." So clearly not all purchases are final.

I don't think it's a good look for Apple to be issuing refunds at their sole discretion and then turning around and making someone else pay for it. You're just supposed to trust them that the magic fraud prevention box is doing its best?

Post reply on HN