Live data from Hacker News

Apple's bad faith 27% tax on web purchases

twitter.com

221–230 of 408 posts

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

#221

The infamous 30% goes back to the time when there where no app stores and we, mainly game developers, had to publish our games thru publishers who used to take a large percent of income, 50% or higher, up to 70% I heard; in order for app stores to become competitive they set the fee to 30% which was an incredibly great deal for us! It seemed to me that the democratization of game publishing finally arrived at that po…

[deleted]

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

#222

A law requiring hardware manufacturers to allow owners to run any software on their device would solve a lot of these Apple problems over time. Thats the root of the problem. Apple has a monopoly on the social status associated with their devices, and leverages the monopoly in many unscrupulous and toxic ways. I consider Apple the most cynical and toxic of all the tech giants.

[deleted]

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

#223

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…

[deleted]

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

#224
post #221

The infamous 30% goes back to the time when there where no app stores and we, mainly game developers, had to publish our games thru publishers who used to take a large percent of income, 50% or higher, up to 70% I heard; in order for app stores to become competitive they set the fee to 30% which was an incredibly great deal for us! It seemed to me that the democratization of game publishing finally arrived at that po…

[deleted]

[deleted]

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

#226

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?

A good way to find out would be to let the market choose from other app stores.

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

#228
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.

Just because most consumers outside the US use android instead of apple doesn't mean we shouldn't try to help protect hundreds of millions of users. There is a large enough portion of market along with all the businesses built around catering to this market that are unfairly being taken advantage of.

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

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Steam all take 30% for distribution and hosting, same as Apple. > It's not a monopoly. I believe you have accurately described a cartel, however.

Cartel =/= same rate. It requires more than just price matching. this is why gas stations and grocery stores aren't cartels either.

There are absolutely antitrust issues with grocery stores - Kroger/Albertsons is being contested right now! It's a major contributor to food deserts. It's not a cartel because the main players aren't acting in concert, but they are attempting to monopolize regionally. Walmart has also concentrated way too much power, but that's the 800 lb gorilla no one wants to touch.

That said, gas stations and grocery stores deal in commodity products. The video game companies are much more integrated with many games that will only run on one system, stores will only run on one type of hardware, and games are not transferrable between competitor systems. Competition is extremely restrained because of these exclusive and limited distribution agreements. The fact that they all maintain the same line on prices is a very clear signal of cartel behavior when you take the context into account - they are using control of a distribution chokepoint to control competition and pricing power. That's the essence of why antitrust laws passed in the first place.

Post reply on HN