So I guess the big questions remains: (1)Do Google still get to tax all revenue made by the app? (2) are we likely to see price differentials, so that Spotify can return some of the savings to users?
Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing
331–340 of 392 posts
Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even your 2.9% number is probably too high. Perhaps for AmEx or in super-high-risk situations you need to pay that kind of fees, but for regular MC/VISA in developed countries, even a medium-sized business can get below 1%. Large companies, like Apple, can almost certainly get it lower than that. Source: Involved in multiple such deals over the years.
It is 2% to 3% in the US due to the copious rewards programs which result in minimum 2% cash back for credit card users.
But those are paid for by your bank (by charging high interest rates on the percentage of people who don't pay right away), not by MC/VISA.
Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing
#333As a user, why would I choose this? I only see a benefit to developers for this, but from a user prospective going with another system is a downgrade. Assuming google works like Apple (correct me if I am wrong), disabling a subscription should be able to happen from a central location with a click or 2. If I instead go with the billing through a company not only do they now have my credit card information, but I have…
> As a user, why would I choose this
Privacy
Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then let's focus on lowering that percent instead of making the situation worse for consumers. However to be clear, that percent is in the same area that game consoles and I believe Steam (someone correct me?) charge. And we accept that. When the 30% rule for the App Store came down, our smart phones were basically the same as a game console. Most people did not expect these devices to become the central part of all…
> Then let's focus on lowering that percent instead of making the situation worse for consumers. The only viable path towards finding a fair price for this service (apparently deemed essential and basically a steal by Apple and Google, but worth less than nothing by many app developers) would seem to be competition. Why not offer both, explicitly allowing for different prices, special deals only for non-store subscri…
Or regulation.
In Australia, the Reserve Bank regulates interchange fees and requires the end user to be made aware of card processing fees which can't exceed a percentage/value of the transaction.
Similar regulation applies in the EU.
There's no reason why Google/Apple/etc stores can't be similarly regulated.
Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is why I use cash as much as possible - to delay that day. A big thing discouraging me from using cash is how suspicious people are of you when you pay in cash. I've definitely gotten weird looks from cashiers when doing so, especially when you pay in larger bills (like $100).
Why would I care what a cashier _thinks_ of me when I pay for products with common legal tender? It's a completely normal means of transaction in exchange for products and services.
Humans tend to want to have other humans like them and think highly of them.
Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because Apple and a Google created a market where there was none. It basically impossible to make money from selling mobile apps to consumers before them. Had Verizon singlehandedly created the internet and had no real competitors they might have been able to tax it’s usage. Thank God that did not happen, though…
I am fine with them charging whatever they want, as long as they don't prevent competitors from opening alternative markets. The problem is the monopoly, not the price.
If they are a monopoly (or roughly equivalent) then they can be regulated.
Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would hate carrier-based charging. We still have a shared cellular account in my family so I would end up billing someone else, rather than my credit card, and that's on top of giving my carrier more lock-in (subscriptions? delayed billing? etc.). The Payment Request API existed in browsers for years (always saw it in settings but never in actual use other than Google Pay/Apple Pay), what about something like that?…
Yes thats what I see happening. On top of this there would be strict policing by Apple and Google to provide a good user experience. Carriers and banks would certainly be subscription providers. The reason why I like carriers specifically is because they invest in a core resource of the mobile computing experience. Apple provides the compute and storage, while Verizon etc provide the network. So far, Apple has captur…
> If I subscribe to Stadia via Verizon, it means Verizon can pump that money into mmWave 5G to lower the latency on that cloud gaming experience.
More like "If I subscribe to Stadia via Verizon, they can charge me more for the Gamer experience 5G bundle plan"
Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty standard Google playbook these days. Instead of building something and then cancelling it later when it doesn't gain traction to get their PR win, they decide to cash in on the PR win upfront with a big partnership announcement, then cancel the product before building it if it doesn't gain sufficient traction, thus saving on engineering costs and streamlining the typical Google technical offering lifecycle. Be…
This is such an odd conspiracy theory. This new effort is a response to regulation in markets around the world like South Korea [1] and the Netherlands [2] [1] https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/4/22763040/google-in-app-pu... . [2] https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/24/22852966/apple-netherlan...
[deleted]
Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or they could allow app devs to integrate with the OS payment API, so that when I want to pay, I get prompted to choose if I want to pay with MyBank App, MyCreditCard App, or ThirdParty App. But I'd also like legislation to force apps that I subscribed to,or paid through to allow me to unsubscribe with a single click.
I think if we got the OS level payments API that you envision Apple and Google would do a decent job policing the user experience
It exists, I can "pay with apple pay" that then lets me choose one of the cards in my apple pay wallet.
The issue is access of payment providers to the wallet. There's no real reason why there couldn't be a "MyTelco card" in your wallet that supports EMV processing rails.
Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing
#340I do see one potential customer benefit: rather than increasing your attack surface by giving two companies your CC info you just give one (google). In theory Google is going to have more security than a bunch of smaller companies. I use Apple Pay whenever possible for this precise reason. I don't want to trust Target with my CC info. Of course since under this scheme the company I'd be sharing my card info with is t…
Or more credit card companies could offer virtual cards, that way you can even tell which service leaked your card. Capital One offers them for free.
My bank offers virtual cards. Can generate and disable them in the mobile banking app, no need to go to the physical bank for it. I have a card for each service I pay for. Also useful for "free" trails that wants you to enter a CC. Oh and the the whole virtual card feature is free from my bank, no extra card fees etc. (I'm not in the USA)