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

Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 593 posts

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#411

Post by ALittleLight »

chrisseaton wrote: post #311
ALittleLight wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they wouldn't. That's the point. Apple and Google control the market for mobile phone apps. You could invent the best possible app store and take nothing as a cut and get no users because Apple wouldn't permit your app store and so you'd lose. Apple uses their hardware market dominance to control the software market and extracts rent from people who want to sell software on their hardware. That's what people are…

> No, they wouldn't. I don't know why you think that. If someone developed a compelling new mobile platform that supported side-loading apps why wouldn't you move to it since that's what you value? > Apple uses their hardware market dominance It's dominant because it's good. Part of the reason it's good is because it's locked down. If it wasn't locked down it wouldn't be as good. The Android experience is miserable b…

The point is that in order to create a competitive app store the notional competitor would have to create an entire hardware ecosystem to rival Apple. Apple is tying the sale of products together (their phone hardware with the app store software) in order to profit from their app store and they prohibit the app stores of competitors. This is the definition of anti-competitive monopoly[1].

You also write that Apple is dominant because it is good and good because it is locked down. This is an argument that's first impossible to verify and second irrelevant. We can't know if "locking down" and preventing other app stores from existing makes Apple better or worse since we can't look at the counter-factual reality where Apple isn't locked down. My intuition would be that more choices would be better, but again, we can't know. The argument is irrelevant because it's still anti-competitive behavior and illegal regardless of if it makes the product better or not. I might sell more soda if I included a bit of cocaine in every bottle, but I couldn't argue that it was legal to do so because it made the product better. Bundling IE with Windows for free may have made Windows better, and yet...

1 - https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#412

Post by LatteLazy »

otterley wrote: post #343
LatteLazy wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the point here What they get 30% of? Do they get 30% of what the end user pays or 30% of the revenue the app maker keeps (30% of Fanhouses 10% is 3%)?

Apple gets 30% of what the end user pays. IaP has always worked this way. It's a high tax to be sure, but it's not like Apple gets half, or more than half. If you can't run a self-sustaining business with the remaining 70%, then you have two choices at the moment: (1) find a new business to be in, or (2) do what similarly situated businesses do, and use a different mechanism for collecting revenue than IaP.

Saying "That's just how it is" is basically admitting admitting it's wrong but refusing to support fixing it.

I get where you're coming from. I think Fanhouse is a bad example case. I won't die on this hill. But if that's the best reason for something, we are admitting there is no good reason for it.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#413

Post by qayxc »

valparaiso wrote: post #390

That’s just ridiculous. Person wants to make money on Apple install user base which they were growing for years by investing billions and doesn’t want to pay fee for possibility to make business on platform in which they didn’t invest a penny.

Am I understanding you correctly here: so a company that sells hardware, which they sell at a profit, has the right to exploit the works of others because it runs on their hardware?

That's a very strange point of view. So you would be OK with Google taking money from every website they list, because according to your logic it's Google who invested billions to make your website searchable and thus deserves a cut from whatever you earn with it? Because that's kind of what's going on here.

Developers pay to get their app into the store. This should cover the cost of maintaining the app store. If you charge for your app, there might be an argument to be had. But if you sell products and services using the app, there's no way Apple is involved with that other than that the app runs on their hardware, which doesn't cost them a single cent.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#414

Post by valparaiso »

bgandrew wrote: post #23

Apple is just milking people at this point. Their devices are subpar for the cost and customer treatment is sometimes even worse.

So don’t use it. Oh, most of Google engineers over the world and Silicon Valley are using iPhones. They even are given for free on par with Pixels when you are being hired. Are they that dumb and don’t understand that Apple is milking them?

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#415

Post by Animats »

valparaiso wrote: post #394
Animats wrote: post #314

Jasmine from Fanhouse is likely to get a speaking slot at the upcoming Congressional hearings on Apple.

It would be interesting to hear how she wants to make money on Apple platform by not following the rules and not paying fees for access to Apple user base. It seems zoomers live in alternative version of Universe where everyone is owing them something.

"Paying fees for access to Apple's user base" is called an "illegal tie-in sale" in antitrust law.[1]

[1] https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#417

Post by valparaiso »

Daishiman wrote: post #215
Jcowell wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree about one partly. It’s two (well 3 really) clicks to add a PWA to the Home Screen. I would describe it more as having friction than not being easy.

3 clicks literally means you lost 90% of your potential users.

That’s how Epics failed with Epic Games Store and Fortnite and moved to Google Play and started paying 30% fee to the Google and then broke rules and were kicked out from the Play Store.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#418

Post by chrisseaton »

ALittleLight wrote: post #411
chrisseaton wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, they wouldn't. I don't know why you think that. If someone developed a compelling new mobile platform that supported side-loading apps why wouldn't you move to it since that's what you value? > Apple uses their hardware market dominance It's dominant because it's good. Part of the reason it's good is because it's locked down. If it wasn't locked down it wouldn't be as good. The Android experience is miserable b…

The point is that in order to create a competitive app store the notional competitor would have to create an entire hardware ecosystem to rival Apple. Apple is tying the sale of products together (their phone hardware with the app store software) in order to profit from their app store and they prohibit the app stores of competitors. This is the definition of anti-competitive monopoly[1]. You also write that Apple is…

> this is the definition of anti-competitive monopoly[1]

Keep reading your own link.

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

> Courts look at the firm's market share, but typically do not find monopoly power if the firm (or a group of firms acting in concert) has less than 50 percent of the sales of a particular product or service within a certain geographic area.

Apple has less than a 50% market share on smart phones.

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#419

Post by ec109685 »

amrrs wrote: post #93

One of the replies from the founder: >We removed the ability to subscribe in app, but Apple still required us to do their 30% or would remove our app. However, if you do have the current app, it's not yet subject to Apple's 30% and all creators still will receive 90% of their earnings. Web will also remain functional https://twitter.com/jasminericegirl/status/14027168228566876...

The approach others have done is to charge 30% more for in-app purchases and offer the ability to purchase on web for a discount (but not advertise the latter).

Re: Apple is threatening to remove Fanhouse unless they give 30% of creator earning

#420

Post by johnjj257 »

immackay wrote: post #331
manigandham wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are alternate ways to get software on those platforms. There isn’t on Apple mobile devices.

There is indeed alternative ways to get software on Apple mobile devices. Why is this such a common belief? Edit: your point seems to be revolving around the access to physical disks for playstation/xbox, which is 1. Limited to devices that have a disk drive, 2. Limited to software that would similarly be sold on the sony/xbox stores, and 3. Still gives sony/microsoft a cut of the sale. Edit 2: No, I'm not talking ab…

This is so not the point lol
Post reply on HN