Incoming "please pay on webpage, else you have to pay 30% more" banner in the app
Version update rejected by Apple
Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app
371–380 of 944 posts
Re: Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app
#372Apple’s App Store profits on commissions from digital sales Revenue $32 B Operating Costs $7 B [1] Estimated Profit $25 B Operating Margin ~78% [1] R&D, security, hosting, human review, and including building and maintaining developer tools Xcode, APIs, and SDKs. Apple could take just 7% cut and still make 20% profits. Fun Fact: During the Epic trial, it was revealed that Apple's profit margins on the App Store were…
> Apple could take just 7% cut and still make 20% profits. We can say this to any company, "$X could reduce price by $Y and still make $Z profits", but it doesn't really make any sense. Making profits is what makes a company a company instead of a non-profit organization.
It makes sense that regulators can step in without destroying a company.
Re: Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app
#373How long until they make the argument that they're entitled to 30% of your salary because you use Apple hardware to do your work?
They must be looking at the revenue Claude Code is making on Mac and thinking “Why aren’t we getting 30% of that?” Wouldn’t be surprised if macOS starts locking down CLI tools towards an App Store model too.
Presumably if you buy an AI subscription through an iOS app you also have to pay 30% Apple tax. Nice work for them.
Re: Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app
#374Apple’s App Store profits on commissions from digital sales Revenue $32 B Operating Costs $7 B [1] Estimated Profit $25 B Operating Margin ~78% [1] R&D, security, hosting, human review, and including building and maintaining developer tools Xcode, APIs, and SDKs. Apple could take just 7% cut and still make 20% profits. Fun Fact: During the Epic trial, it was revealed that Apple's profit margins on the App Store were…
> Apple could take just 7% cut and still make 20% profits. We can say this to any company, "$X could reduce price by $Y and still make $Z profits", but it doesn't really make any sense. Making profits is what makes a company a company instead of a non-profit organization.
When parts of a market become dominated by one or few companies operating in a limited choice environment, consumers can't just opt to not use both Apple and Play store. You need to choose one in practice.
At this point the regulators should investigate what the barriers are to new entrants and if it's too costly and nobody has managed to cut in the last few years, establishing some rules is probably a good thing. This happens as industries mature and become critical, it happened in transportation (most bus, train companies), energy, water supply, trash, etc, depending on the country and market conditions.
Re: Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app
#375Apple’s App Store profits on commissions from digital sales Revenue $32 B Operating Costs $7 B [1] Estimated Profit $25 B Operating Margin ~78% [1] R&D, security, hosting, human review, and including building and maintaining developer tools Xcode, APIs, and SDKs. Apple could take just 7% cut and still make 20% profits. Fun Fact: During the Epic trial, it was revealed that Apple's profit margins on the App Store were…
> Apple could take just 7% cut and still make 20% profits. We can say this to any company, "$X could reduce price by $Y and still make $Z profits", but it doesn't really make any sense. Making profits is what makes a company a company instead of a non-profit organization.
I think it's a little known fact that societies don't exist for the benefit of companies. It's actually the other way around.
Re: Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app
#376Apple’s App Store profits on commissions from digital sales Revenue $32 B Operating Costs $7 B [1] Estimated Profit $25 B Operating Margin ~78% [1] R&D, security, hosting, human review, and including building and maintaining developer tools Xcode, APIs, and SDKs. Apple could take just 7% cut and still make 20% profits. Fun Fact: During the Epic trial, it was revealed that Apple's profit margins on the App Store were…
> Apple could take just 7% cut and still make 20% profits. We can say this to any company, "$X could reduce price by $Y and still make $Z profits", but it doesn't really make any sense. Making profits is what makes a company a company instead of a non-profit organization.
It does make sense to highlight, because this kind of statistic is a very strong indicator that the market is not competitive. This is not a normal kind of profit margin and basically everyone except for Apple would benefit from them lowering the margins.
In normal markets there are competitors who force each other to keep reasonable profit margins and to improve their product as opposed to milking other people's hard work at the expense of the consumer.
Re: Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app
#377Well, I certainly won't sell my fiction to Apple for them to turn it into a series in the future.
Unless they pay me 30% of all hardware and software revenue because popularity is a vehicle to sell more under the Apple brand.
Re: Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app
#378Earlier quoted context omitted.
You joke, but legally they could. If game engines can charge a licence fee as a % of revenue from games developed on those engines, then legally there's not much to stop apple doing the same. Of course consumers and enterprises wouldn't tolerate it, but the barrier is commercial rather than legal.
[flagged]
This is based on the controversial Unreal licensing, which is percent of revenue: https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/license
Re: Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app
#379Re: Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app
#380How long until they make the argument that they're entitled to 30% of your salary because you use Apple hardware to do your work?
It made sense in the early days, phone operators were charging up to 90% for the infrastucture to send an SMS, and get a download link to a J2ME/Windows CE/Pocket PC/Symbian/Palm/Blackberry download link to install the app. So everyone raced to the iOS app store, it was only 30%, what a great deal! The problem is that two decades later it is no longer that great deal in mobile duopoly world.
It's kind of interesting that while the structure is largely the same, the underlying behaviour/intent has morphed from a disruptor-model into being toxic rent-seeking behaviour.