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

141–150 of 250 posts

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#141

Post by paxys »

reissbaker wrote: post #131
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…

Given that so much of Apple's profits are from extortionate App Store fees... I can't help but think this is a classic "commodify your complement" strategy from Google. The lion's share of Google's revenue comes from search: if cutting subscription fees on the Play Store forces Apple to cut their take on the App Store by half, then Apple loses considerably more than Google — and Apple's loss is Google's gain. And if…

> if cutting subscription fees on the Play Store forces Apple to cut their take on the App Store by half

Will it though? Or will the fee just become another "premium" differentiator between the two? The average Android phone sells for $250, but that hasn't discouraged Apple from pricing iPhones at 3-5x that. Other than strong government regulation (or the threat of it), I don't see Apple ever willingly reducing the App Store tax.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#142

Post by supah »

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…

The part that people overlook. Is what does your mobile first start up look like without Google or Apple providing a distribution point like the respective app stores.

While the original 30% fee is BS. 15% Is reasonable to pay to get your application out there.

Otherwise your Brilliant idea in most cases is worthless if it’s not visible to majority of users.

I like the way that Apple has approached it where it’s capped for apps under 1M.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#143

Post by hsbauauvhabzb »

echelon wrote: post #8
joenathanone wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, personally I think 3-5% would be fair anything more is rent seeking.

Credit card transactions take far less, and they deal in legitimate risk (chargebacks, stolen cards, fraud, etc). As developers, we don't even need app stores. They're an artifice that got shoved down our throat by trillion dollar mega corporations. A taxation clearinghouse. You can distribute the same program bytes from anywhere, most notably the web. It's Steve Ballmer's old dream of taxing all software. There's ju…

As a consumer I’m somewhat glad I don’t have to deal with the cesspit that would be app stores home rolled payment gateways.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#144

Post by d0gsg0w00f »

Factorium wrote: post #13
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…

Just to be clear, this is just 30% --> 15% for subscriptions . One-off purchases for large companies ($1m+) still attracts 30%.

This is the part I don't understand. What is a subscription? I'm skeptical that this is just PR smoke and mirrors.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#145

Post by leucineleprec0n »

CountSessine wrote: post #78
pornel wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Apple likes to pretend that there are no better payment options. I would prefer to subscribe via PayPal, because it's easier to cancel via them than via Apple's iTunes corpse.

I don’t understand? Settings -> AppleID -> Subscriptions? It’s on your phone? You don’t have to use iTunes at all? I wouldn’t have even thought to use iTunes? Unsubscribing is the easiest thing in the world - much easier than PayPal. It’s right there in the Settings app.

Dude it’s like some ancient web UI despite existing in the native settings software, it’s utterly slow as fuck to load and only faintly responsive to touch. It is clearly a deliberate ploy by Cupertino. Or in practice, an update is “not on the agenda this cycle”

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#146

Post by leucineleprec0n »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #82
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…

In an alternate universe these app "stores" operate the same as package managers on Linux do. No account necessary.

God willing.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#147

Post by weyland108 »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #30
weyland108 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a iOS user I feel safer that all payments go through apple. I am assured of certain level of privacy and security which is very comforting.

Are you also feel safer that Apple decides what apps you are allowed to run? For example, in China, iOS users aren't allowed to run Signal or Protonmail apps. Did it occur to you that if a user is not the final authority who decides which apps should run on the device, he is not really owning the device, but merely leasing it, under some strict terms?

It’s not really a concern tbh. Appstore hasn’t been draconian in that sense. It’s a fair argument that they can do that if they wish but there is no incentive to become that. Quite the opposite actually.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#148

Post by RNCTX »

paxys wrote: post #130
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…

You are only talking about Spotify, Epic, Netflix and the like, but this makes a huge difference for services that are a tier below that. For any smaller company having trouble with growth/user conversion, a 30% cut to Google for the lifetime of the account is still way too steep, but at 15% you start to consider it.

15% is highway robbery. The cost via your own account on Stripe is 5% on the high end.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#149

Post by RNCTX »

anxrn wrote: post #24
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…

Reminder that Jobs initially did not support having an app store at all for the original iPhone, IIRC for reasons of maintaining the bar on experience. His proposal was to build "apps" for use in Safari. https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/07/10/the-revolution-st...

But Jobs didn't turn down the money, did he?

Nor did his wife turn down her friendship with the Epsteins.

There's no need to volunteer to write hagiographies for billionaires, they pay PR firms to do it for them.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#150

Post by johnny35 »

This seems like a significant milestone in what I really hope is the path toward the app ecosystem opening up to the level of freedom we’ve enjoyed in the web and desktop software space for decades now. Needing the recurring approval from two mega-corps scrutinizing whatever details of your business and customer relationships they wish, forcing their way in between… feels terrible compared to hooking up to a standard payment processor and doing your thing on the open web. I don’t want your help marketing and distributing my app, I just want to be able to serve my customers and I’d prefer if you mostly ignored us. The phone calls with Apple begging for them to see our point of view and interpretation of their deliberately vague requirements, the stories about companies hiring someone whose personal Google account activities become toxic for the company’s Play Store account, it all just sucks. I didn’t dedicate my life to doing business in software and the internet to be this directly under any one thumb. Crossing my fingers for more moves in the right direction.
Post reply on HN