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

EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 825 posts

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#81

Post by f6v »

thayne wrote: post #53
simonh wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's 30% for the first year of subscriptions and 15% thereafter. According to Apple in 2019 Spotify didn't actually pay 30% on any of it's subscriptions at that time, and only paid the 15% on 0.5% of the App's users. The rest are ad supported and Apple gets 0% of the ad revenue. So for every Spotify app user Apple get's a 15% fee for, there are 199 Spotify app users Apple is distributing the App to for which they get…

But I think the key here, and probably a big reason Spotify went after Apple and not Google, is that on iOS you have to use Apple's app store. You can't distribute your app using your own infrastructure, or an alternative app store even if you want to.

You also don’t have to buy a subscription in the app, do you? You can pay on the web directly to Spotify and use the subscription in the app.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#82

Post by have_faith »

piokoch wrote: post #47
zibzab wrote: post #2

Unpopular opinion: This was a no brainer. Apple wanted 30% (or was it less for subscriptions?) on any business that used apps, no matter if they used apple infrastructure or not. Just think about it: one company is in practice entitled to 30% of what any other business makes (in any industry)!! Also, I think apple brought this to themselves by picking a fight with Spotify (on Watch support).

I think argument about 30% is not that good. There is a number of services that Apple provides like software distribution, updates distribution, reviews (even though they don't benefit software creator directly, they build trust in the platform and attract more users), invoicing, regardless on the location (this one is really big - getting a single invoice from Apple instead of dealing with potentially thousands of d…

This is all fine if other stores existed on the phone that could compete with Apple's offering. If it's such good value then developers would choose the 30% cut over publishing on an alternative store with less fees (and potentially less benefits). But as Apple holds a monopoly on app stores on the iPhone this assumption that the cut justifies the value offered can never be tested in a real market setting.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#83

Post by mnd999 »

yarcob wrote: post #41
spzb wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they're proposing anything at this point but the obvious remedy would be to allow third party payment options.

I think this would be the best solution. Apples only (real) reason for forbidding sideloading is because then they could no longer force people to use their payments. If developers were free to use 3rd party payment solutions, then Apple would probably be a lot more lenient towards side loading apps. I believe that Apple generally wants to build what's best for their customers, except when money is on the line.

I think security is a valid consideration as well. The average non-technical iPhone user would not be hard to hoodwink into installing a 3rd party App Store full of malware. Agree, revenue is probably the primary driver.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#84

Post by bennysomething »

teknopaul wrote: post #21
dustinmoris wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this principle but in this specific case it’s not true because Apple started their music business long before the iPhone and Spotify existed. In fact they started with the iPod and their music business with the iPod is what lead them to invent the iPhone and the AppStore. It’s rich from other music businesses like Spotify to want to benefit from all of the R&D and innovation cost from Apple and the marke…

starting first does not mean you are not abusing your monopoly. Another way of looking at this is that a 30% margin is preventing a lot of businesses from happening until Apple do it. The 30% is less of a concern that the fact that they can shut you down on a whim.

30 percent fee is not a 30 percent margin. You are factoring in any costs of running and developing the service.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#85

Post by xxs »

zibzab wrote: post #2

Unpopular opinion: This was a no brainer. Apple wanted 30% (or was it less for subscriptions?) on any business that used apps, no matter if they used apple infrastructure or not. Just think about it: one company is in practice entitled to 30% of what any other business makes (in any industry)!! Also, I think apple brought this to themselves by picking a fight with Spotify (on Watch support).

>Unpopular opinion:

Only if you own Apple stock... or well hackernews is overall unfriendly for anything Apple related.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#86

Post by itg »

endisneigh wrote: post #69
dannyw wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any percentage is accessible, Spotify just can't be forced to use it. Don't wanna use Spotify's own billing system? Don't use Spotify, there's Apple music. Voila. Competition.

Spotify doesn’t have to be available on Apple devices at all. The competition you’re describing already exists no? There’s a contradiction in these arguments. Either Spotify benefits from Apple devices, in which case the fee is a cost of doing business that ultimately benefits them, or they don’t benefit from the arrangement in which case they leave the platform. It’s the same thing with the food delivery apps and ot…

Apple devices and services don't have to be available in Europe at all. Either Apple benefits from Europe, in which case they need to follow European rules and regulations, or they don't benefit from the arrangement in which case they leave the EU.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#87

Post by agust »

speedgoose wrote: post #11

I wish one of the outcome would be to allow better web browsers than Safari on iOS.

I really wish this too. Unfortunately, I am not sure the anticompetitiveness of Apple's behaviour regarding web browser engines — and its implication on the entire app industry — has been brought to the attention of EU lawmakers...

For those not familiar with this issue, Apple is totally blocking browsers (like Firefox and Chrome) to use their own engine on iOS, preventing them to give web application access to native features, like push notification. Because of course, Apple won't add these features to their own engine (WebKit).

That way, they are forcing app developers to develop native iOS apps, which have to go through their App Store to be installed on iOS. By doing so, they can take the 30% commission fee on in-app purchases, and lock developers/companies in, because apps developed for iOS are not usable outside of Apple devices, of course.

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#88

Post by ChrisRR »

endisneigh wrote: post #52
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #46

Since this is an EU case, that should mean it'll actually do something, and won't take a decade and a half to conclude. The penalty won't be the big deal here, it'll be what Apple is prohibited from doing. And it'll be really exciting if the precedent set blows back on the entire 30%-rent-seeking-platform-industry.

What percentage is acceptable to you? Perhaps all percentage based transactions are rent seeking and should be made illegal. I’m on board.

It's not so much the percentage, as the ability to operate outside of the app store if you so wish

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#89

Post by simion314 »

f6v wrote: post #70
simion314 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not about who is first, is about fair competition, If Apple is the best then they should not be afraid to compete fair, let other web browsers exist, let alternative stores exist, let free apps show a Patreon link, let apps show the user the information that they have the choice to buy outside the store (defend this please, this information can harm the user somehow or it harms the pockets of some rich guy)

I don’t think EU cares about fair competition, rather being petty about not having their own FAANG.

But you could be wrong right? Maybe we should analyze if there is actual any merit for the complaints on Apple or about the tracking on the web instead of inventing some conspiracy.

I would show you the example with Microsoft or Intel, this companies were found guilty and all the US nerds did not complain that EU is anti-american.(they were found guilty in US too)

Re: EU says Apple’s App Store breaks competition rules after Spotify complaint

#90

Post by kwanbix »

piokoch wrote: post #47
zibzab wrote: post #2

Unpopular opinion: This was a no brainer. Apple wanted 30% (or was it less for subscriptions?) on any business that used apps, no matter if they used apple infrastructure or not. Just think about it: one company is in practice entitled to 30% of what any other business makes (in any industry)!! Also, I think apple brought this to themselves by picking a fight with Spotify (on Watch support).

I think argument about 30% is not that good. There is a number of services that Apple provides like software distribution, updates distribution, reviews (even though they don't benefit software creator directly, they build trust in the platform and attract more users), invoicing, regardless on the location (this one is really big - getting a single invoice from Apple instead of dealing with potentially thousands of d…

30% seems a crazy high number in my humble opinion.

For the companies that can, that cost gets transferred to the purchaser.

But for those who can't, for example Spotify who has to compete with Apple Music that has no %, it gets absorbed by the company.

There is no way that the services that Apple provide are worth 30%. 10% would be already too much in my humble opinion.

But then again you have the advantage for apple music who can go 10% lower than the competition in price.

Post reply on HN