Google Play service fee reduced to 15% for the first $1M/year

Post by fsflover » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 11:46 AM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #91

guytv wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know that Android is open source... Technically Android is OpenSource. De-facto - its not. For many many years now Google is adding all non-os functionality into "support" libraries, "Google Services" - the name changes periodically - but the essence is the same: Making sure that any Android that is not "Google certified" won't be able to run Android apps - which all use these libraries - and won't have apps su…

But there is an opensource implementation of those support services (microg) which work for most apps.

Post by ronyfadel » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 11:49 AM UTC

amelius wrote: post #119

CGamesPlay wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you make $999k in revenue, you will receive almost $850k in profit. If you make $1000k in revenue, you will instead receive $700k in profit. You're strangely incentivized to completely shut down your app as you approach the 1000k mark, unless you're confident you'll make it past the 1200k mark, where it's worth it again. Silly system.

Wealth distribution is exponential, meaning almost nobody will fall in the small revenue gap you mentioned.

Post by einpoklum » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 11:57 AM UTC

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #11

Worth remembering that as good as it is that Google is reducing it's abusive taxation on third party developers, the primary reason they're doing this is to try to quiet the majority of developers asking for stronger government regulations against this taxation without actually reducing their profit much, since the large companies which bring in the majority of revenue still have to pay full price. Basically, they're…

Post by opencl » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 11:59 AM UTC

krisgenre wrote: post #67

onion2k wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those apps would not survive without vendor-included single click app stores anyway. I find this a little amusing because it's the exact reason why Microsoft lost their IE anti-trust case. Users were given IE by default, and because using something else required effort IE took a huge chunk of the market remarkably quickly. That was deemed to be violating their effective monopoly position on OSs to influence their pos…

What was really the outcome of Microsoft losing the anti-trust case? Windows still comes with a preinstalled browser and I don't remember ever seeing a version of Windows without one.

Post by shimfish » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 12:03 PM UTC

WA wrote: post #124

shimfish wrote: post #106

What's also not being said here is that ~99% of apps on Google Play don't make money this way either. Due to a combination of Android user's reluctance to spend money on apps at all and the rampant piracy that Android's open model makes trivially easy, most developers only way to make money is through in-app advertising, which this change obviously makes no difference to. Google Play is mostly a pyramid scheme. Devel…

This is not true. Yes, Android users tend to pay less for apps, but useful apps that provide daily utility actually make good money as well. If you have a brand-name app like Runtastic, Netflix, Headspace or whatever, the platform doesn't really matter. You buy the product, because you want it. It's probably different for utility apps like a different Camera, a photo editor, small productivity apps you need only once…