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

Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 369 posts

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#121

Post by BlueTemplar »

friendlybus wrote: post #72
BlueTemplar wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The non-standard features like Steam multiplayer and mods Workshop that lock out non-Steam users pretty much forever are IMHO even worse than the 1-year exclusivity (as long as it's not retroactive).

Steam multiplayer? You mean the friends list? Steam doesn't provide hosted mp servers for games. Mods are made by community members that can be released anywhere. Workshop is just a distribution channel. Battle.net and origin are lock in services. Nothing about them is open to the public or accessible. Steam is pretty open and reasonably successful at it.

Also, Battle.net is in a somewhat different category, as, as far as I know, is only used for Activision-BLizzard games ? (No possible monopsony issues when it's the same company !)

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#122

Post by jp555 »

julianozen wrote: post #118
braythwayt wrote: post #67

Amusingly, there are two sets of people arguing about why Apple is bad, and each have their own argument: 1. Android sells more, and offers more variety of mobile and wearable devices than Apple. And here’s the data to prove it. 2. Apple is a monopoly/monopsony and should be forced to allow more user choice of apps, allow sideloading, lower their prices, lower their app store cut, &c. Which one is is? Apple is like T…

While this is certainly true, computers and especially mobile ones need to allow consumers to run whatever software they want period. While in the US, it becomes a small inconvenience for us that companies like Netflix and Spotify are having their business sidelined by apple, Apples lock on phones becomes a human rights issue in places like Hong Kong, Russia and Saudi Arabia when Apple complies with local regulation.…

"computers and especially mobile ones need to allow consumers to run whatever software they want period."

I should expect to be able to run Windows on my coffee maker?

That's a bit of an exaggeration of course, but I do not think this is an important "need".

It's Utopian garbage. A top down "simple solution" that is appealing on the surface but deeply flawed in the complex interconnected systems of reality.

You can already buy an Android device if you want more flexibility, and you can even get a developer account with Apple and make your own custom software if you really wanted. But telling everyone that they must have what you have decided is important is a garbage idea.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#123

Post by Dylan16807 »

simonh wrote: post #112
pjc50 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can do Android development for free on a Windows or even Linux machine and run the app in an emulator. Apple are in the process of squashing a third-party emulator.

Of course you can because Android is open source and has portable code. That's a great competitive advantage for Android. Cool. There is no requirement on Apple to make their code open source or cross platform. It's their code and their choice what they do with it, and what features they pay their employees to develop for it.

The comment said it's a rip-off, nothing about 'requirements'.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#124

Post by DagAgren »

pjmlp wrote: post #48
DagAgren wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were not really any public app stores like the Apple one. And cuts were, in general, much higher. Apple's app store took off so well because it offered a much better deal than the competition.

Sure there were in Europe. I had plenty of J2ME and Symbian apps before iOS was even born.

You didn't get them from an app store open to the public like the Apple one, though, and neither did their developer get to keep a full 70% of the price.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#125

Post by DagAgren »

huhtenberg wrote: post #26
DagAgren wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it used to be much higher before Apple.

What are you referring to exactly?

The carrier-run app stores that existed before Apple's. They charged much more than 30%, and were much harder to deal with.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#126

Post by DagAgren »

thepangolino wrote: post #36
DagAgren wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were not really any public app stores like the Apple one. And cuts were, in general, much higher. Apple's app store took off so well because it offered a much better deal than the competition.

This is just wrong. Nokia had the Ovi store launched at around the same time as Apple’s App Store. Palm OS also had its own if I remember correctly.

"Around the same time" means it wasn't around before, no?

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#127

Post by belorn »

braythwayt wrote: post #73
ksec wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree on most if not all points but the article didn't argue against any of that. It did point out two things. Companies don't have to literally be the only buyer in a marketplace to wield "monopsony power." If competition isn't perfect — like when there are only a few companies in a market and they aren't undercutting each other's prices — companies gain some ability to lower the price on the stuff they buy. Sellers…

Monopsony is a slippery concept. If I tilt my head just right, we could be discussing the way WalMart purchases products. They sell a product in their store, they decide they want a certain margin, and then they tell suppliers to meet a certain price target if they want their products in WalMart.

The difference is that walmart actually purchase the products that they sell in their store. They are a reseller.

A more accurate comparison is a market hall which permit sellers to set up booths in return for a cut of the revenues. As an example I would look at stores around Olympics games, where the organizers holds enormous power in controlling who get to sell what, the price and the cut. The level of control they assert seems pretty similar to that of apple.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#128

Post by DagAgren »

fenomas wrote: post #39
DagAgren wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were not really any public app stores like the Apple one. And cuts were, in general, much higher. Apple's app store took off so well because it offered a much better deal than the competition.

I can only speak for Japan, but all three major carriers here had app stores years before the iPhone launched. (Apple's may have been the first store operated by a hardware maker rather than a carrier though.)

Yes, carriers had app stores, that were not generally open to anyone, and that took a much bigger cut than Apple.

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#129

Post by julianozen »

jp555 wrote: post #122
julianozen wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this is certainly true, computers and especially mobile ones need to allow consumers to run whatever software they want period. While in the US, it becomes a small inconvenience for us that companies like Netflix and Spotify are having their business sidelined by apple, Apples lock on phones becomes a human rights issue in places like Hong Kong, Russia and Saudi Arabia when Apple complies with local regulation.…

"computers and especially mobile ones need to allow consumers to run whatever software they want period." I should expect to be able to run Windows on my coffee maker? That's a bit of an exaggeration of course, but I do not think this is an important "need". It's Utopian garbage. A top down "simple solution" that is appealing on the surface but deeply flawed in the complex interconnected systems of reality. You can a…

We can play this game for any appliance but we know that your mobile phone and laptop is uniquely special in this regard.

When Apple gets to decide everything that runs on your device, it’s bad for you in the long term. As an iOS developer who loves my phone, I’ve worked on teams that have dealt with complete bs that I shouldn’t divulge here, trying to get Apple to approve our app. we werent doing onerous data collection. we weren’t writing spam or malware. Just Apple’s bureaucratic and anti-competitive nonsense.

Apples should not have the decision about whether to allow or pull the Hong Kong protesting app. It’s too much power for a private company to make

Re: Apple’s “monopsony” power, and the woman who named it

#130

Post by netsharc »

notduncansmith wrote: post #16
GeekyBear wrote: post #14

Next up: Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony's game consoles?

As the only buyer of goods sold to me, and the only seller of goods sold by me, I suppose I'm running a monopsony and then some. May as well add me to the list. On a serious note: would a judgement in this case have immediate impact on other companies, or would it set a precedent? Also, what are the proposed damages? How is Apple supposed to repair the situation? Honestly, this feels entirely arbitrary (Apple is far…

> As the only buyer of goods sold to me

Eh, it doesn't work like that, if I spent a lot of time coding an iOS app, but Apple rejects it, that's my investment gone. Of course I can learn Android development, but I still spent a lot of time learning about iOS without any benefit.

Meanwhile, someone sold you a burger, if you didn't buy it, it doesn't mean someone else couldn't buy it...

Post reply on HN