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

Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 408 posts

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#131

Post by jbverschoor »

aeturnum wrote: post #84

Apple's fees are too high, and I also don't find this particularly persuasive. - Apple charges a ~30% fee to publish on their store. It's a high fee! I also understand people make money there (more than on stores with lower fees). - Apple also has a pretty sophisticated set of financial products you can use through your account with them. It makes sense you wouldn't be able to use those in the same with with another…

For most it’s only 15% which includes payment processing and tax handling.

If anything is expensive, is creditcard fees

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#132

Post by ericmay »

arrosenberg wrote: post #59
etchalon wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. If you want to include a link to an website for payment of digital goods, you have to request an entitlement from Apple. 2. As part of that entitlement, you agree to pay Apple a 27% commission on any purchases made when users click those links, for up to 7 days after the link is clicked. 3. You agree to send Apple monthly sales reports. 4. You agreed to give Apple a right to audit your books at anytime. That's the…

> Developers are in arms because they don't believe Apple deserves any money for distributing their app on their App Store. Rephrased - Developers are up in arms because the cost of distribution on iOS is artificially high. It's artificially high because the cost is not subject to market forces. It's not subject to market forces because Apple has a vertical monopoly on hardware and software distribution. Vertical int…

How is it not subject to market forces? That doesn't make sense.

If Apple's platform doesn't work for their profit margins they are free to sell their software elsewhere, including a plethora of phones from a diverse set of manufacturers. But they don't want to do that because Apple's platform makes them a fuck load of money. They just want more of it.

How about this: Apple can charge Epic the same outrageous* 12% that Epic charges game developers. Do you think that would alleviate Epic's concerns?

> Vertical integration is illegal.

Can you provide a legal document or explicit law that states "vertical integration is illegal"?

* It's outrageous because Epic provides even fewer services (SDKs for example), still requires developer fees $100/submission, and has a much smaller user base. They're also not really doing anything. At least Apple makes the iPhone and improves the capabilities of it each year...

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#133

Post by Muromec »

CivBase wrote: post #114
lykahb wrote: post #108

Apple collects the rent from the apps that exist withn their walled garden. Epic employs behavioural specialists tasked in making their games addictive and coerce user into spending with micro-transactions. I do not want to take a side in this fight.

Bad entities can point out when other entities behave badly. You don't have to like either of them.

See: bin Laden's letter to America doing rounds in the internet in 2023.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#134

Post by edgyquant »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #129
lykahb wrote: post #108

Apple collects the rent from the apps that exist withn their walled garden. Epic employs behavioural specialists tasked in making their games addictive and coerce user into spending with micro-transactions. I do not want to take a side in this fight.

All businesses employ manipulative practices, marketing and sales are built on them. An indictment of Epic on these grounds is an indictment of modern capitalism. It's annoying, base and tragic but not ultimately anywhere near the mafia-level thuggery to which Apple has engaged.

How does the tea shop down the road from me manipulate anyone? I think maybe it’s the case that most large businesses do so because their bureaucracy comes to demand it for ever greater gains. But it is not the case that all businesses do so.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#135

Post by paulddraper »

danbruc wrote: post #130

The economy primarily exists to benefit the consumers, not the producers. With that in mind, I should be able to run any operating system on an iPhone I bought. Apple should not be required to actively support this, put in extra work to document things or whatnot, but they should not be allowed to actively make things harder. If I got an iOS license, I should be able to install and run any application and be able to…

Is 30% reasonable?

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#136

Post by dkonofalski »

grishka wrote: post #123
dkonofalski wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you do. You have the choice to put your App on Google Play or host it yourself and make it available for Android.

I'm talking about iOS apps specifically. Don't pretend that not making your app available for the second most popular mobile OS is acceptable.

You're not forced to make apps for iOS or any Apple product. Making your app for the second most popular OS is acceptable because that's what iOS is. I know you tried to make it seem like Android is but, worldwide, Android is far more popular than iOS. The fact that there even is a 2nd most popular mobile OS proves that Apple doesn't have a monopoly.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#137

Post by edgyquant »

Muromec wrote: post #133
CivBase wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad entities can point out when other entities behave badly. You don't have to like either of them.

See: bin Laden's letter to America doing rounds in the internet in 2023.

False equivalency. Most people like living in America and tons of people want to move there, while only religious fanatics would be okay living in a country built and controlled by Al-qaeda

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#138

Post by aurareturn »

lykahb wrote: post #108

Apple collects the rent from the apps that exist withn their walled garden. Epic employs behavioural specialists tasked in making their games addictive and coerce user into spending with micro-transactions. I do not want to take a side in this fight.

>Epic employs behavioural specialists tasked in making their games addictive and coerce user into spending with micro-transactions.

Epic also has their own game store that they will happily charge 30% once they have more marketshare. They also want to be able to put their own game store on iOS.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#139

Post by asadotzler »

robertlagrant wrote: post #80
jmole wrote: post #78

I think what’s missing here is sideloading. The new terms apple set are ridiculous, but it’s their App Store, so whatever. However, this iPhone is my device and I should be able to install whatever app I’d like on it. Without that freedom, Apple has no competition and can set their fees as high as they please.

They do have competition. Most phones aren't iPhones.

The relevant market is iOS app distribution, not smartphones.

Re: Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

#140

Post by Someone »

lolinder wrote: post #86
peterallport wrote: post #61

Apple must allow alternate payment modes without imposing a gatekeeper tax. It must be consistent without exceptions (i.e. not just Amazon). The issue is not the gratuitous fee, it is the lack of choice. iOS is more ubiquitous than macOS yet more restrictive--it cannot last. This entitlement is so restrictive -- it just seems vindictive. Apple's market share and success means additional responsibility. The argument t…

This argument has been repeatedly made over the past 24 hours with a lot of emotion but little justification. The judge forced Apple to unbundle their payments. Apple's solution to that is probably overly restrictive. And I suspect that you're right that 27% is too large a cut to survive. With both of those points granted, though, your argument seems to be that Apple should be obliged to host, distribute, and market…

> And I suspect that you're right that 27% is too large a cut to survive.

I don’t see that being killed soon. The 3% for payment processors is a lot higher than the 0,2% or 0,3% limits for debet/credit card payments within the EU (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/fees-for-..., and AFAIK no payment processor decided to leave the EU market because they couldn’t earn money anymore.

There also is ‘prior art’ for that 3%/27% split in the case of dating apps in the Netherlands, where the Dutch regulator declared that OK (https://techcrunch.com/2022/06/13/apple-dutch-dating-apps-pa...). AFAIK, there hasn’t been further action on that front.

Post reply on HN