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

Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 593 posts

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#241

Post by filoleg »

mschuster91 wrote: post #209
filoleg wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are welcome to look at the leaked documents[0], and they have a nice table showing cuts for all kinds of transactions on Microsoft Store. Looks like currently it is 30% for games, 15% for apps and app subscriptions, and they were exploring reducing the game-related cuts down to 12%. Microsoft spokesperson's reply to those leaked documents was "we have no plans to change the revenue share for console games at this…

> If that's the argument, then what's the magic number threshold that makes you a monopoly after you cross it? Let's assume a very generous 5% for payment costs (credit cards are capped at 0.3% in the EU, but US cards with their rewards can run up to 5% in merchant fees, and god knows about the cost of doing business in other markets), another very generous 5% for CDN/hosting (data traffic isn't cheap, modern games e…

Cool, so does that mean that Sony/MSFT/Nintendo should be sued for anti-monopoly here too, given that they take over 15% for game-related transactions?

Because my question was less about "how things should ideally be", and more about "how much legal scrutiny can this legal case withstand".

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#242

Post by alpacaillama »

hu3 wrote: post #221
JoshTko wrote: post #183

Title should be Fanhouse didn't understand app store policy and built an unsustainable business model.

The same App Store Policy that magically doesn't apply to a similar service, Patreon?

Going to jump in and reply. Patreon explicitly doesn’t do Pay to views, doesn’t have interaction gated behind paywalls, and is meant as just a straight transfer of $. Fanhouse does a lot of these things which counts as digital transactions. This differentiation makes sense to me. Also interestingly most people I have seen use fanhouse use it for NFSW stuff but Stripe seems to be fine with it? Specifically the pay to view feature which is people basically selling nudes.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#243

Post by alpacaillama »

allenu wrote: post #84
hellisothers wrote: post #12

Seems pretty disingenuous given they had to have known this would happen (note that OnlyFans has no app)

Yeah, it's not like they put together this entire business and then afterwards realized they'd have to pony up money to Apple. If they didn't know up front, that's not great business planning.

I think this might be a part of their strategy. Do a well timer PR push.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#244

Post by alpacaillama »

salamandersauce wrote: post #62
xmly wrote: post #42

So the subscription apple tax work-around does not work anymore if you are making too much money?

More like not enough money. Netflix and Spotify leaving the App Store would be a big deal and piss off a lot of consumers. Months old startup a handful have heard of? Perfect to extort in Apple's eyes.

Netflix and Spotify don’t offer in-app purchases and come under the reader rule within the appstore guidelines. At least know about things before you talk about them dude.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#245

Post by [deleted] »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #165
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #25

Serious question, why does everything require an app? Why can't the same thing be accomplished via the mobile web? I get so tired of being prompted to install apps when you could just *show me the damned web page*. Anything that requires speed can be done via webassembly, and sure, anything like games can ship a native app.

Because Apple is intentionally limiting the mobile web to force your hand to create an app. I've been working on hardware that we've been trying to ship using open technology for the protocols so it doesn't need apps. So focusing on things like WebBT and WebUSB which is almost magic, a user can unbox your device go to a website and then do anything you'd possibly want with. But yeah all falls apart the second it need…

[deleted]

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#246

Post by Supermancho »

threatofrain wrote: post #236
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When your app has revenues of $100M a month, let's see if you think Apple is providing you $30M worth of value. Sure, if you have 2 sales a month, I guess Apple is providing you $0.60 of revenue. That's not what this thread is about.

You’re saying this thread is about the big players and not the small ones? And that’s why this open question to HN developers isn’t really asking for their experiences, not unless they’re in the hundred million territory?

> You’re saying this thread is about the big players and not the small ones?

It's not about relative revenue, but illustrating the extent of the exploitation.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#247

Post by filoleg »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #218
3grdlurker wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just like Apple’s App Store the way that it is. I’ve been through so many technology stacks and it I find their platform a joy to work with. The SDKs are coherent, very well-architected, extremely easy to use, and I have access to a user base that has very high adoption rates of the latest software versions so that I don’t have to worry so much about fragmentation. It’s the happiest I’ve been as a coder, so I feel…

When your app has revenues of $100M a month, let's see if you think Apple is providing you $30M worth of value. Sure, if you have 2 sales a month, I guess Apple is providing you $0.60 of revenue. That's not what this thread is about.

You can have more than 2 sales. If you are making under $1mil in app revenue in a year, Apple takes a 15% cut instead of 30%.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#248

Post by mschuster91 »

filoleg wrote: post #241
mschuster91 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If that's the argument, then what's the magic number threshold that makes you a monopoly after you cross it? Let's assume a very generous 5% for payment costs (credit cards are capped at 0.3% in the EU, but US cards with their rewards can run up to 5% in merchant fees, and god knows about the cost of doing business in other markets), another very generous 5% for CDN/hosting (data traffic isn't cheap, modern games e…

Cool, so does that mean that Sony/MSFT/Nintendo should be sued for anti-monopoly here too, given that they take over 15% for game-related transactions? Because my question was less about "how things should ideally be", and more about "how much legal scrutiny can this legal case withstand".

> more about "how much legal scrutiny can this legal case withstand".

That is entirely a question of jurisdiction. The US is famous for its deregulation, usury only covers loan interest rates - whereas in Germany the limit in §138 BGB is something that is "obviously not in a fair relationship between the payment and the value received for it", plus our whole anti-trust regulation.

The German Bundeskartellamt is already prosecuting the big tech companies, the EU anti-trust agencies also have woken up from their slumber... we will see.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#249

Post by ksec »

qeternity wrote: post #69
cromwellian wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then why doesn't Apple take a 30% cut of every Uber driver fee? 30% of every DoorDash delivered, etc? Why is a platform for monetizing artists any different than a platform for monetizing your car?

They draw a line between digital and physical purchases.

That used to make sense in the early days of Smartphone era. Precisely because Digital have zero variable cost for each additional goods. And Apple wasn't very straight with those rules. They only enforce it on Software and Games, not services.

Now everything goes through your Smartphone. And the idea, to quote what Apple has been saying in court, they need to recoup those API cost. As they are using their API, they want a cut. Since the Apps for both Physical and Digital goods uses those API, and Digital Goods doesn't necessary use those API for creation. ( e.g I use Windows to create ), why are they only charging Digital Goods and not Physicals?

The only reason why Apple charges 30% of Digital Goods is because they know Digital Goods have zero replication cost. The cost of an additional Digital Goods is essentially zero, they want 30% of it. And Physical goods have basic unit cost. So they are charging base on the product margin. And this was clear in the Wordpess case, once they look at domain name registration where the whole industry is basically operating with 0% margin. Apple decide to put an exemption on it.

Then became a question, how did we arrive at 30% in the first place? If you look at Amazon Web Store, they have different percentage rate for different product? Why? Because they is how the market have worked over the years. They are basing the commission on current market rate / margin. Just like your Super Market has different margin for different product.

Ever since Apple decided on their Doubling Services Revenue by 2020, they have chased down every single 30% services. It is sad how much good faith they have burned.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#250

Post by stemlord »

Black101 wrote: post #212
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #154

It's time to stop asking "Why does Apple think they deserve 30% of App Store revenue" and start asking "Why has Apple not demanded 30% of web app revenue yet?". The justification of "We put all the hard work into building the hardware, the OS and the stack so deserve a cut" still stands if a website is opened using the Safari engine. If it doesn't stand then neither does the App Store cut.

> "Why has Apple not demanded 30% of web app revenue yet?" They would if they knew how. Which is probably why they block features on the web so that they can't compete with native apps.

You're talking about webm right?
Post reply on HN