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

Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

android-developers.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 250 posts

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#101

Post by fyzix »

willseth wrote: post #96
dcchambers wrote: post #22

I think people are focused on the wrong issue. The fee % is not the problem. The problem is the restriction against using other types of payment processors. I am 100% OK with Google, Apple, or whoever charging whatever price they want to charge for using their app store services. They are, after all, providing all of the infrastucture for software delivery, updates, payments, etc. Not to mention giving you access to…

> The problem is them preventing you (the developer) from allowing the user to use other forms of payment processing within the app itself. One major kink in this idea is that it breaks the free tier model, since paid apps are essentially subsidizing free ones. If you can use any payment processor in-app, then developers will make their apps nominally "free" for App Store purposes, and then use the payment processor…

An Apple developer account costs $100 per year and with 20Million registered developers. $2B a year is more than enough to host an appstore.

Or they can compete in the free market and offer their payment gateway for a competitive fee, or they can do what google is doing and allow third party app installs.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#102

Post by AnthonyMouse »

notsrg wrote: post #37
dcchambers wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the solution is for Apple to require that all payments at least have the option of being made through the app store payment system, while allowing developers that want to take the time and effort to set up outside payments do that as well. Consumers can continue to use app-store payments if they wish (and I bet the vast majority would), but developers and companies can no longer complain about Apple's monopol…

The problem with this is that using Apple Pay would be more expensive and so why would anyone use it?

If competing payment methods were reasonably available then maybe Apple Pay would lower its fees.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#103

Post by bww »

willseth wrote: post #96
dcchambers wrote: post #22

I think people are focused on the wrong issue. The fee % is not the problem. The problem is the restriction against using other types of payment processors. I am 100% OK with Google, Apple, or whoever charging whatever price they want to charge for using their app store services. They are, after all, providing all of the infrastucture for software delivery, updates, payments, etc. Not to mention giving you access to…

> The problem is them preventing you (the developer) from allowing the user to use other forms of payment processing within the app itself. One major kink in this idea is that it breaks the free tier model, since paid apps are essentially subsidizing free ones. If you can use any payment processor in-app, then developers will make their apps nominally "free" for App Store purposes, and then use the payment processor…

If Apple allowed developers to keep 100% of revenue from App Store transactions while Apple continued to pay for all the operating costs it would still, undoubtedly, work out greatly to Apple's advantage. They derive enormous value from having apps in their store creating value for their platforms.

Of course, they would not be satisfied with that arrangement because no company has ever been satisfied with making a ton of money if it is possible for them to make some more. But that certainly doesn't mean the model can't work or that if there were regulation to this effect that it wouldn't still be in Apple's enormous interest to continue to operate the App Store.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#104

Post by bialpio »

willseth wrote: post #96
dcchambers wrote: post #22

I think people are focused on the wrong issue. The fee % is not the problem. The problem is the restriction against using other types of payment processors. I am 100% OK with Google, Apple, or whoever charging whatever price they want to charge for using their app store services. They are, after all, providing all of the infrastucture for software delivery, updates, payments, etc. Not to mention giving you access to…

> The problem is them preventing you (the developer) from allowing the user to use other forms of payment processing within the app itself. One major kink in this idea is that it breaks the free tier model, since paid apps are essentially subsidizing free ones. If you can use any payment processor in-app, then developers will make their apps nominally "free" for App Store purposes, and then use the payment processor…

I think this could be defendable if they were selling the devices at a loss ("cheap printer, expensive ink" model, or gaming consoles model), but providing something that is effectively a general purpose device on which they already earn money, and that is locked down like this makes me annoyed with them ("we know better what you should do with your device, trust us"). That's the primary reason why I don't even look at what devices they are offering, which is a shame (I'd like to have more options).

> So how do you address this problem without charging every developer, even if they were otherwise willing to give away their app?

Aren't they already requiring developers to pay a fee to have a developer account? I'm sure there are ways they could recoup the costs of providing a service to the publishers of free apps (normally, a free market would converge on the actual price of providing this service). But they will only look for a solution when forced to, why give away a stable source of income?

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#105

Post by summerlight »

dcchambers wrote: post #22

I think people are focused on the wrong issue. The fee % is not the problem. The problem is the restriction against using other types of payment processors. I am 100% OK with Google, Apple, or whoever charging whatever price they want to charge for using their app store services. They are, after all, providing all of the infrastucture for software delivery, updates, payments, etc. Not to mention giving you access to…

> I think people are focused on the wrong issue. The fee % is not the problem. The problem is the restriction against using other types of payment processors.

I generally agree with this sentiment, but still feel that the fee % itself is a significant part of the problem and worth to tackle it in parallel.

My concern is that Google/Apple have lots of direct/indirect advantages against its payment competitors as platform holders and I'm 90% sure that they're willing to exercise that position to keep the dominance of their payment solutions. And I think they have a good chance of winning. We need to push them in all possible directions even if some approaches don't work.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#106

Post by moonchrome »

didibus wrote: post #58
concinds wrote: post #3

I don't see the point. Spotify's not willing to give up 10% of their Android revenue, they'll still use their own payment. Epic won't give up 15%. South Korea mandated that apps be allowed to have custom payment methods within apps. Why would any big company, whether Netflix, Epic or Spotify, still give Android 10%? It just seems that the "app store pay toll" is getting less and less justifiable; and it seems outrage…

On the desktop, ton of apps don't do their own payments. It takes quite a lot for a company to be able to process their own payments. That's why you see a lot of pay with PayPal, Amazon, Google Pay, Apple Pay, etc. So I think for sure people will still offer Apple Pay. The difference is that there'd be competition now, so Apple would be forced to reduce their margins to the minimum, maybe close to cost price to compe…

Apple pay != App store payment

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#107

Post by totony »

concinds wrote: post #3

I don't see the point. Spotify's not willing to give up 10% of their Android revenue, they'll still use their own payment. Epic won't give up 15%. South Korea mandated that apps be allowed to have custom payment methods within apps. Why would any big company, whether Netflix, Epic or Spotify, still give Android 10%? It just seems that the "app store pay toll" is getting less and less justifiable; and it seems outrage…

>Google Play constitutes most of Android revenue.

Google also includes a few services apps use (eg google play services) which they could disable if an app isnt bought through google play. Their alternative might be to monetize their current services.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#108

Post by willseth »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #98
willseth wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is them preventing you (the developer) from allowing the user to use other forms of payment processing within the app itself. One major kink in this idea is that it breaks the free tier model, since paid apps are essentially subsidizing free ones. If you can use any payment processor in-app, then developers will make their apps nominally "free" for App Store purposes, and then use the payment processor…

They would still be required to report that they have in-app purchases, just like they are currently required to report they have ads, even if they aren't using Apple's or Google's ad APIs.

This is the only reasonable suggestion I've heard, but it's still very messy because it would not only require even more careful policing of app code, but mostly because Apple would have to invent an entirely new fee structure for apps under this umbrella. I think to do it fairly it would just end up looking like an AWS bill.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#109

Post by diebeforei485 »

No need for complicated pricing tier systems. Here's what I think fairer pricing would look like:

For anything that competes with the platform owner's paid apps (eg. Spotify, Netflix, Sweat with Kayla, Audible/Kindle, Fastmail etc compete with Apple Music, YouTube, Apple Fitness+, Google Books, iCloud+ Mail etc) - they should be allowed to use their own payment service in their apps just like Uber and Doordash do.

Anything else should be no more than a 15% cut.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#110

Post by dataviz1000 »

Can someone explain the subscription on Google Play and Apple App Store today?

I launched an app for a B2B SAAS service that clients paid ten of thousands of dollars a year for. We put the app which was secondary to the web dashboard which the clients used mostly during business hours in the Apple App Store and on Google Play without mentioning any payment in the product description which both allowed. When I first submitted the app Apple said we had to remove the link to the payment form on our website after which they were cool with as long as it wasn't on the app description. We billed the users and maintained the accounts through the web application and web dashboard without giving any money to Google or Apple.

Is this still allowed today?

Post reply on HN