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

Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing

newsroom.spotify.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 392 posts

Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing

#341

Post by obert »

ehsankia wrote: post #296
obert wrote: post #149

Imagine if AWS, Azure, Gcloud were charging for your VMs a % of your business revenue… AppStores are services, they should have a fixed price like any other service, and that can cover also variable costs like cents per download, cents per review, etc

You're paying for compute, whereas you can put an app on a store for (basically) free. A million people can download your app and you wouldn't pay a penny more, whereas if a million people suddenly used your AWS app, you'd see a nice bump in cost.

as per my previous comment, they could charge a fixed price per view/download and any other functionality of the app store. It would be the same price for everyone, regardless of revenue, and for most apps, it would be less, fairer, and more transparent

Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing

#342

Post by obert »

jasongi wrote: post #271
obert wrote: post #149

Imagine if AWS, Azure, Gcloud were charging for your VMs a % of your business revenue… AppStores are services, they should have a fixed price like any other service, and that can cover also variable costs like cents per download, cents per review, etc

Compute likely is a rough function of business revenue though.

with the same amount of compute power one can run a successful business and earn $100M or something not successful and earn $100K. The compute cost is the same, compute does not become more or less expensive just because one makes more or less money with it.

Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing

#343

Post by mojzu »

echelon wrote: post #46
orangepanda wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the opportunity for developers? An opportunity to make unsubscribing a more engaging activity

It's the opportunity to take more of your revenue as margin, plain and simple. Contrary to your suggestion, I would argue that most businesses do not want to predatorily extract money from unwilling customers. It's typically the old, calcified businesses that do not innovate (gyms, cable companies, etc.) that engage in this behavior. I want more margin so I can hire more engineers and change the world faster. Google…

I don't think many businesses think of their dark patterns/retention schemes as predatory is part of the problem. Outside of the app stores, my experience with subscription services is that a significant number of them engage in what I would consider poor behaviour (making it difficult to cancel/change the level you are subscribed at/trying to get your CC details for trials, etc.). Which resulted in me mostly avoiding subscription services, with the app store and having the ability to control subscriptions from a central location I'm much more willing to sign up and as a result am paying for more of them now then at any point in the past

I'd agree that I don't think it's a majority that are bad actors, but I'd say it's far more then one or two, and atleast enough to impact the decisions users are making. I'd prefer this kind of subscription management functionality was handled via bank accounts, but until that's possible I'll probably keep using the app stores

Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing

#344

Post by HotHotLava »

selcuka wrote: post #285
dale_glass wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems pretty fair, since if it was easy for an artist to undercut Spotify, they'd be doing it.

> if it was easy for an artist to undercut Spotify, they'd be doing it Isn't this the definition of a monopoly?

No, the definition of a monopoly is "the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service."

A company that is not easy to undercut could just be an efficient business that operates roughly at cost without excessive margins.

Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing

#345

Post by sascha_sl »

RupertHandjob wrote: post #318
LewisVerstappen wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's still on YouTube btw, so still making money off the YouTube platform and gaining listeners/distribution from there. Also, there's far worse people than Joe Rogan who make a full living off YouTube, so yeah just completely ideologically inconsistent if someone is going to reject Spotify because of Rogan and still use YouTube.

It's funny. There where 101 articles when he had "anti-vax" people on. 0 articles when he had "pro-vax" people on. He can make 15 three hour episodes that none gives a fuck about, but then 1 episode that everybody loses their shit! :D It seems that there is some kind of disparity between how Joe Rogan is being portrayed.

It's because him having a "pro vax" person on is incidental, whereas the "anti vax" person is invited because they're anti vax. And you shouldn't be platforming people who spew nothing but falsehoods.

But if you need another example, I'd love to see a single person who stops Rogans randomly inserted anti-trans rants he manages to somehow have on every episode, even if it is not topical. Aside from the fact he had a lot of "anti trans" people on (Debora Soh, Abigail Shrier, Jordan Peterson, Blair White... I mean the list is essentially endless) and not one person who is invited because they're pro trans.

At this point I'm really curious who makes most of the booking decisions for the show. They seem to maximize for right-leaning outrage culture / reactionaries, comedians and some people with very milquetoast politics. I can only remember Bernie as a big left voice on the JRE.

Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing

#346

Post by Tainnor »

nerdjon wrote: post #45

As 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…

I don't understand your comment. It would make sense if Spotify had been using Google for payments and was now planning on introducing their own payment processing.

But what's happening is the exact opposite, Spotify has been using their own payment processing on Android so far and are now planning to add Google payments.

Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing

#348

Post by distances »

lamontcg wrote: post #273
olau wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know that a consumptionist attitude is popular these days, but as a user of something like Spotify I would surely prefer as much as possible of my monetary contribution ending up with Spotify and the musicians instead of in the hands of a company controlling the market place. To the people who think the exorbitant fees are okay: Imagine a world with no cash. Now the payment card companies decide they want 30% of al…

> I would surely prefer as much as possible of my monetary contribution ending up with Spotify and the musicians If you care about the musicians you should probably be using Tidal and not Spotify.

Tidal et al. only seem to pay more to artists because they have lower engagement than Spotify. So the same monthly pot is just divided between fewer artists. It's a misleading metric.

Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing

#349

Post by jonathantf2 »

cglong wrote: post #168
enos_feedler wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the reason you mentioned I don’t think its a step in the right direction. Carriers already know how to charge their users. Google and Apple should let the user choose their carrier as a systemwide in—app payment processor. Its a small fix, its a good user experience. Arguably even better than what exists today. And is a step in the right direction (move away from Apple and Google controlled things)

Windows Phone actually supported this! Your carrier would be listed alongside your credit cards when purchasing something.

It still exists on Android, whenever I go to pay for something on Google Play it asks me if I want to bill it to my network account, it appears on my bill the next month.

Re: Spotify and Google Announce User Choice Billing

#350

Post by amelius »

nerdjon wrote: post #45

As 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…

Unsubscribing should have been solved by banks years ago.
Post reply on HN