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

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

android-developers.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 342 posts

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

#171

Post by Bellamy »

modeless wrote: post #43
im3w1l wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A third party app store can not automaticly apply updates to apps. The user has to explictly approve every update. This puts the play store in a privileged position of lower ongoing friction.

There was a recent Android blog post that said "we will be making changes in Android 12 (next year's Android release) to make it even easier for people to use other app stores on their devices". https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2020/09/listening-...

I bet they invest billions of resources to this feature.

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

#172

Post by sumedh »

40four wrote: post #147

Really a meaningless gesture if you ask me, reluctantly following Apple’s lead. A meager attempt to get regulators off their back. I believe Google & Apple should not be allowed to take a percentage at all . It should be a tiered system of fees, like a subscription or something. Sure, their systems help distribute and promote discovery of our apps, so let us pay for that . It should be a yearly fee appropriate for th…

> so let us pay for that.

and what would be the fair price for that?

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

#173

Post by leetcrew »

criddell wrote: post #156
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…

I've always wondered what it is about Android that makes users reluctant to pay for apps. I'm guilty of it too. I have both iOS and Android devices and I spend far more money buying apps on my iOS device.

pure speculation, but I doubt there's some intrinsic quality of android that makes users reluctant to pay for apps. more likely, people that are very price sensitive are more likely to have an android phone to begin with. the cheapest new iphone is already $400. while it may not be a good long-term value, you can buy an android phone for $50.

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

#174

Post by leetcrew »

oblio wrote: post #155
quelsolaar wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did loose, then they appealed and settled.

Yeah, people should start treating, morally, settling just as losing a case. This doesn't apply for individuals, but companies settling for millions and millions are morally admitting defeat. Corporations can afford the drawn out court battles, so if they're not continuing them, it means that they're admitting they lost.

no, people should consider settlements on a case-by-case basis depending on the actual terms. entities settle totally unfounded suits all the time just because it's cheaper than taking them to court. just because a giant corporation could afford to doesn't mean settling isn't a rational choice.

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

#175

Post by bogwog »

cletus wrote: post #114

Better title: Google matches what Apple already did. I said it about Apple and I’ll say it about Google: this is a PR move, nothing more. Google really missed an opportunity here to put Apple in a tough spot by just cutting it to 15%. Your biggest users of your payment infrastructure are also the most likely, most willing and most able to handle their own payments because they already do (eg Netflix, Epic). If either…

> Google really missed an opportunity here to put Apple in a tough spot by just cutting it to 15%

Why would Google want to start a bidding war here? They're both monopolies and they don't compete with each other. If Google lowers the fee to 5%, that's not going to convince developers (and their customers) to leave iOS for Android; it's just going to shift revenues out of Google's piggy bank and into developers' piggy banks in the best case.

In the worst case, it will increase anti-trust scrutiny, either because Apple doesn't lower it so they're showing they don't need to compete, or they do lower it despite it being an illogical business decision (and possibly inviting lawsuits from shareholders), suggesting that there's some collusion going on to stave off anti-trust regulation.

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

#176

Post by jeswin »

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…

> 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

Ridiculous allegation, which doesn't take into account the wealth inequality around the world. Hundreds of millions of people in the developing world have a smartphone today due to Android; a $1000 phone, or even a $400 phone is way out of reach for them.

So the "reluctance to spend money on apps" is that it's a choice between that and food on the table.

Also, very few people are side-loading apps - the rest are too tech illiterate to make that happen.

Add: I responded to your post because you're calling Google Play a "pyramid scheme". From fisherfolk trying to sell at optimal prices to daily labourers hunting for jobs, you've no idea how many people are enabled by the platform and its apps.

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

#177

Post by sidlls »

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…

It is just true. Compared to the only other major mobile app ecosystem, Android users are relatively cheap. That doesn’t mean nobody pays or that nobody who distributes an app earns money through purchases. It just means that on Android it’s a smaller group than on, say, Apple.

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

#178

Post by coder543 »

vishnumohandas wrote: post #61
dfabulich wrote: post #48

Here's the next achievable goal to fight for: I want the fee structure Microsoft provides on the Microsoft Store. https://blogs.windows.com/windowsdeveloper/2018/05/07/a-new-... Microsoft takes only a 5% cut if customers click on a link on my website with my referral code, taking them directly to the store details page. Otherwise, they take a 15% cut. > consumer applications (not including games) sold in Microsoft St…

> 5% That’s less than the Stripe tax!

Stripe is 2.9% + 30¢, isn't it? What am I missing? I guess you're implying that these transactions are normally so small that the 30¢ raises it to above 5%? I think it really depends on your price structure.

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

#179

Post by briandear »

giantg2 wrote: post #165
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…

At least they aren't charging $100 per year to be a developer like Apple does. I would have liked to make my apps multiplatform, but it just doesn't make sense at that price. Edit: It's great to see that this platform likes downvoting people who release their software for free. Profit matters above all else. I guess next you all will tell me my job is worthless and I suck at life because I make under $100k.

If $100/yr is too much, then it’s very likely your app isn’t profitable. A person doesn’t say “I would sell my product at Target, but spending money on gas to deliver it to their distribution center is too expensive.”

Literally, it’s $8.33 per month to be a part of the Apple Developer program. If your app isn’t making that much in a month, then your app isn’t very good or you’re bad at business. No disrespect intended, but $8.33 as a cost of doing business is so trivial as to not even be worth mention.

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

#180

Post by nfin »

ksec wrote: post #22
psaux wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“ The App Store's standard commission rate of 30 percent remains in place for apps selling digital goods and services and making more than $1 million in proceeds, defined as a developer's post-commission earnings” [1] What is convoluted and worse? I am not a mobile Dev at this time, just going by what I see online. Edit: [1] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/11/apple-announces-app-s...

It is not automatic, you need to enrol into the programme. It only work for first year, subsequent year revert back to 30% if your previous year exceed $1M. ( the 1,000,000.01 problem ) Google also has a much more flexible definition of Services, Teaching to a group of Students via Video Call is not considered as Digital Services as on Apple App Store, and hence requires 30% of commission when signing up. ( And since…

1) Can you can explain what "And since been exempt after bad PRs"?

Does Apple does not charge for Teaching to a group of students anymore?

2) and is "teaching to a group of students" just an example for teaching to groups, or does it really only apply to students and to groups, but not when teaching to one person interested in guitar for example?

Thanks! PS: any good ressources that distill such App Store & digital services? (even better would be also comparing them)

Post reply on HN