Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15% • Hacker News Board

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#221

Post by threeseed » Fri, Oct 22, 2021, 12:12 PM UTC

concinds wrote: post #178

threeseed wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Given that so much of Apple's profits are from extortionate App Store fees Apple earns ~20% of their revenue from all their services not just App Store [1] Given they don't break out their App Store profit numbers I think you should provide your source. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/382260/segments-share-re...

I'm the OP and I just compared what Apple gets from the App Store (around $21.7m estimated in 2020 which I saw in Barron's, but it's probably an overestimation since I don't think it takes into account the 15% rate below $1m) to Apple's 2020 profits ($57.4m). It's really a back-of-napkin thing, just meant to show the similarity in scale, and how damaging it would be to companies if this revenue went away.

This comment is a mess.

(a) Provide a link to the source if you're going to throw numbers around.

(b) According to CNBC [1] Apple had App Store revenues of $64 billion in FY2021. Which at 30% = $19.2 billion and at 15% = $9.6 billion. All of which doesn't factor in any of the costs associated with running the store or acquiring all of the customers.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/10/apple-vs-epic-70percent-of-a...

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#222

Post by threeseed » Fri, Oct 22, 2021, 12:17 PM UTC

tomnipotent wrote: post #180

threeseed wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The cost via your own account on Stripe But it's not the cost for operating the payments gateway. It's the cost for the channel. The real world equivalent is supermarkets, retailers etc charging for products to be stocked on their shelves. Customer acquisition is extremely expensive and difficult and stores expect to be compensated for it.

> It's the cost for the channel. Except it's not. People don't download Uber or Netflix because of the app stores. Epic demonstrated unequivocally they could get installs without Google involved as an intermediary. The app store value at this point is singularly it their platform-specific monopolies, and the fact that you have no choice but to play ball to do business on mobile. > The real world equivalent is superma…

> People don't download Uber or Netflix because of the app stores

Uber would never have existed without the App Store.

> It's nothing like that

It's exactly like that. That's where the business model comes from. It's a digital representation of the way physical stores interact with OEMs.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#223

Post by threeseed » Fri, Oct 22, 2021, 12:20 PM UTC

realusername wrote: post #189

metagame wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not actually the truth. You can go to F-Droid, or Cydia, Amazon or one of the dozens of SEA app stores that exist. You have plenty of options. Your argument is basically that Wal-Mart is everywhere, so Wal-Mart should be forced to serve you on your terms.

> That's not actually the truth. You can go to F-Droid, or Cydia, Amazon or one of the dozens of SEA app stores that exist. Is that sarcasm? All of those combined don't even have 0.5% of the market. There's no competition, period.

There is no competiton in countless situations when you narrowly define the scope.

For example is there competition in the "operating system for Samsung microwaves" market ?

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#224

Post by quitit » Fri, Oct 22, 2021, 12:30 PM UTC

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…

I’d like a source for the “37%” profit from the App store. Apple’s services division which includes the app store, music service, icloud services, apple pay, apple card, arcade/news/tv+ and fitness generated 20% of apple’s profit in their last filing. If we rewind to before the addition of apple music and most of those other services we have this division earning just 10%.

It’s simply not supported that the app store is as profitable as you state - the figure you’ve suggested is closer to the iPhone’s share of apple’s profit. Sources: fy21q3 & fy15q3 earnings statements.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#225

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Oct 22, 2021, 1:46 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#226

Post by zionic » Fri, Oct 22, 2021, 1:56 PM UTC

dataviz1000 wrote: post #110

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 s…

Is your app Mixpanel?

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#227

Post by RNCTX » Fri, Oct 22, 2021, 2:12 PM UTC

threeseed wrote: post #222

tomnipotent wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's the cost for the channel. Except it's not. People don't download Uber or Netflix because of the app stores. Epic demonstrated unequivocally they could get installs without Google involved as an intermediary. The app store value at this point is singularly it their platform-specific monopolies, and the fact that you have no choice but to play ball to do business on mobile. > The real world equivalent is superma…

> People don't download Uber or Netflix because of the app stores Uber would never have existed without the App Store. > It's nothing like that It's exactly like that. That's where the business model comes from. It's a digital representation of the way physical stores interact with OEMs.

> It's exactly like that.

It's not exactly like that. Kroger and Safeway cannot prevent potato chips from being sold outside of Kroger and Safeway.

That's the whole point of the conversation here, don't know how you're missing it. Apple and Google are the textbook definitions of illegal monopolies, Kroger and Safeway are not.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#228

Post by RNCTX » Fri, Oct 22, 2021, 2:17 PM UTC

chenzhekl wrote: post #157

RNCTX wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

But there is operational cost like bandwidth for Google, which is not there for Stripe.

Do you think that hits to the Stripe checkout page are free? Or that their databases for storing all of the payment info are free?

Stripe needs servers and bandwidth like everything else.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#229

Post by notreallyserio » Fri, Oct 22, 2021, 2:46 PM UTC

hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #143

echelon wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

And update mechanisms! I don’t really want to log in to my phone to get several different shaped and sized and placed popups about updates.

Re: Decreasing service fees on subscriptions to 15%

#230

Post by com2kid » Fri, Oct 22, 2021, 2:50 PM UTC

realusername wrote: post #189

metagame wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not actually the truth. You can go to F-Droid, or Cydia, Amazon or one of the dozens of SEA app stores that exist. You have plenty of options. Your argument is basically that Wal-Mart is everywhere, so Wal-Mart should be forced to serve you on your terms.

> That's not actually the truth. You can go to F-Droid, or Cydia, Amazon or one of the dozens of SEA app stores that exist. Is that sarcasm? All of those combined don't even have 0.5% of the market. There's no competition, period.

Amazon was a real player for awhile, but they stopped treating developers well and their app store started to lag behind.

Back when the Amazon app store first started, they gave away a high quality free app every week. Great for user acquisition, then IIRC they stopped paying the app developers whose apps they were giving away, and the quality of the store overall started to drop off soon after.

If Amazon had made a play of taking a much smaller % of payment fees, sales and subs, they could have continued building momentum and been a serious competitor.

I presume they decided not to for some good reason, but the potential was there.