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

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

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 583 posts

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

#131

Post by conductr »

bloomboom wrote: post #65

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…

I think they were creating a walled garden and this was just lip service. Blaming it on state of tech/HTML5/etc was easy. The app store could be open from administration/censors and thus would function exactly like the web even if native code was required. The frustrating part of current state is they censor who, what, and how can be brought to market and the 30% cut is just egregious.

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

#132

Post by RobRivera »

wlesieutre wrote: post #7

Does this mean if there's a developer I don't like, I can buy their stuff and refund it to arbitrarily cost them money at no cost to myself and there's nothing they can do about it? That seems ... not great, especially these days. What happens when mobs of internet morons decide review bombing isn't sufficient and realize Apple will help them cause direct financial harm instead?

The fact that that is even a thought screams silly and childish in my mind, but then again life has taught me that 'maturity' really is a social construct and the rule of law and contracts really should be the only baseline expectation of human behavior from strangers.

Also - that plotline from SV where he just buys pizza from thd pizza startup that is operating at a loss seems like the same idea as this but just slightly different. Business is funny

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

#133

Post by vageli »

jfk13 wrote: post #118
vageli wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What laws would be broken in this case?

Something about conspiracy to defraud, maybe?

How is that fraud? "Everyone, buy this product and return it to the store for a full refund," doesn't sound like fraud to me. It doesn't result in personal or financial gain to the people perpetrating it, either.

edit: so who is in trouble here? The person calling for people to do it with their twitter following or the twitter followers? I'm not saying that buying the app and returning it is not fraud if you entered into the transaction in bad faith and with intent to cause damage to the dev, I'm saying calling people to do that is not fraud.

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

#134

Post by peeters »

simonh wrote: post #101
bronzeage wrote: post #8

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 o…

OP didn't say Apple was breaking the law. They said that they need to be regulated. There's a difference. Make all the equivalences you want, at the end of the day the government has a mandate to regulate business practice to benefit the consumer. If that means treating a mobile phone as a platform but not a game console, so be it.

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

#135

Post by alickz »

oliverx0 wrote: post #18

Seems fair to me. Apple provided with you a service and charged your for it. It is a cost associated with distributing / developing your product. Why should Apple be responsible for refunding you? It was not their fault that the customer decided their money back.

> It is a cost associated with distributing / developing your product.

On top of the non-negotiable $99/y developer account fee.

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

#137

Post by terrortrain »

alewi481 wrote: post #119
indymike wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

App stores need competition, not regulation.

A positive aspect of Apple’s model is that it’s impossible for a malicious ad to trick an unsuspecting user into sideloading malware on their device.

A positive aspect of prison is that you won't crash your car

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

#138

Post by hrhrhrd »

simonh wrote: post #101
bronzeage wrote: post #8

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 o…

Anti-monopoly legislation seems like a good starting place. Game console app stores are, at least in my opinion, equally exploitative, but Apple is one of the most problematic publishers out there. Being able to run whatever software you want on general purpose hardware isn't what this is about (although you should be able to, as the FSF has been saying for years). It's that Apple can't monopolise the market like this, so the government should be able to force them to allow competing app stores.

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

#139

Post by Marsymars »

bena wrote: post #39

I don't think the issue is that Apple is keeping its fee even with a return. That on some level is fair. They are providing a service to the developer. The bigger question is whether their cut should be 30% in the first place. 30% was chosen by the first store of this type and it's just never been questioned by platforms. I just read that Valve recently changed their agreement to be a sliding scale based on sales (30…

Other than games, MS is a 15/85 (or 5/95 split if the customer purchases via following a deep link from the publisher’s site or app) split on digital sales.

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

#140

Post by munk-a »

RobRivera wrote: post #132
wlesieutre wrote: post #7

Does this mean if there's a developer I don't like, I can buy their stuff and refund it to arbitrarily cost them money at no cost to myself and there's nothing they can do about it? That seems ... not great, especially these days. What happens when mobs of internet morons decide review bombing isn't sufficient and realize Apple will help them cause direct financial harm instead?

The fact that that is even a thought screams silly and childish in my mind, but then again life has taught me that 'maturity' really is a social construct and the rule of law and contracts really should be the only baseline expectation of human behavior from strangers. Also - that plotline from SV where he just buys pizza from thd pizza startup that is operating at a loss seems like the same idea as this but just sli…

It's a bit different when a company is completely voluntarily engaging in self-destructive behavior - when it comes to the app store it is voluntary that folks post their apps there but Apple has an absolute monopoly on the market.
Post reply on HN