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

Holding Apple Accountable: The Future of the Internet Economy Depends on It

newsroom.spotify.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 88 posts

Re: Holding Apple Accountable: The Future of the Internet Economy Depends on It

#61

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

menus wrote: post #31
etchalon wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do not seem to know how retail works, and have created an arbitrary definition of it to exclude the App Store.

What is your definition of retail?

I checked Wikipedia and it had a pretty terse definition: the sale of goods and services to consumers. I have to agree with GP that another definition seems to have been selected for the sake of excluding the App Store.

Whether or not one thinks they deserve a 30% cut, Apple definitely works to make sure the App Store can at least deliver the application to the hardware and their interfaces ultimately bring Spotify's interface to the user. That fairly reasonably fits in with "the sale of goods and services to consumers". In-app purchases are more arguable (keep in mind it necessarily uses Apple Pay) but this thinking that the App Store is not comparable to retail seems to be a little narrow-minded.

Re: Holding Apple Accountable: The Future of the Internet Economy Depends on It

#62

Post by imchillyb »

mjamesaustin wrote: post #59

The biggest issue is that Apple can compete directly with companies like Spotify without playing by any of the rules they force on their competitors. The owner of a marketplace should not be able to compete on that marketplace without strict separation of power. Apple has huge advantages compared to Spotify when it can advertise any way it wants, doesn't pay commission fees, and can give itself priority for integrati…

You’re treading on thin ice here.

Every retail chain has in house brands.

Your rule change would affect every retailer, grocer, technology company in the USA; negatively.

Profits in other areas don’t come close to profits from their own brands.

Re: Holding Apple Accountable: The Future of the Internet Economy Depends on It

#63

Post by imchillyb »

the_third_wave wrote: post #55
etchalon wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes Walmart entitled to a cut of General Mills revenue?

Walmart is to General Mills as is Spotify to artists. Apple is to Spotify as is the construction company which made the building Walmart is using to Walmart. I have not heard of construction companies claiming entitlement to a cut of Walmart's turnover.

Apple is a retail store that charges a fee to place an item on one of their shelves.

Every grocer in the USA does this. Want shelf space? Pay me.

Digital assets don’t preclude this transaction.

Re: Holding Apple Accountable: The Future of the Internet Economy Depends on It

#64

Post by imchillyb »

Spotify… poor, we don’t fairly pay the artists, Spotify.

Don’t like the market? Build one. Don’t like the devices? Build one.

Don’t like Apple’s walled garden? Build your own.

Just like the federal judge told Epic: ‘The marketplace allows you to build a competing service, do so. Also, you signed a contract. Heed it.’

Re: Holding Apple Accountable: The Future of the Internet Economy Depends on It

#65

Post by imchillyb »

freejazz wrote: post #10

>-Tell customers what our prices are to upgrade Premium membership options; surely if I upgrade it tells me the price before I purchase the upgrade? they are complaining that they can't advertise it in the app? >-Let our customers request an email or other communication telling them about the ways they can save money; seems like "let our customers request" is doing a lot of work here >-Provide our customers with diff…

Spotify is pulling an Epic-Fortnite here.

Whine and cry that the contract they have with Apple is egregious.

Hopefully a federal judge stuffs Spotify just like Epic was stuffed.

Re: Holding Apple Accountable: The Future of the Internet Economy Depends on It

#66

Post by Veuxdo »

imchillyb wrote: post #63
the_third_wave wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Walmart is to General Mills as is Spotify to artists. Apple is to Spotify as is the construction company which made the building Walmart is using to Walmart. I have not heard of construction companies claiming entitlement to a cut of Walmart's turnover.

Apple is a retail store that charges a fee to place an item on one of their shelves. Every grocer in the USA does this. Want shelf space? Pay me. Digital assets don’t preclude this transaction.

I'm pretty sure retailers pay wholesalers, not the other way around.

Re: Holding Apple Accountable: The Future of the Internet Economy Depends on It

#67

Post by ghusto »

kepler1 wrote: post #45
ecshafer wrote: post #11

If I write an app for the app store and sell it for $10, apple gets $3. If I sell it for $5, apple gets $1.5. If I sell a subscription for $10/month they get $3 a month. Apple's work is the same for all of these. Their monopolistic position is how they can demand a pretty exorbitant 30% cut. Walmart, Costco, et al wish they had a 30% profit on everything the sold. For the record I don't even really like Spotify that…

What's the principle you're advocating? That the number of 30% is too high, but 20% would be ok? How are we to decide what number is right? Isn't the principle that parties entering into an agreement voluntarily and with competition get to set their own prices? Do you follow the same rule you're advocating for? When your app some day makes more than 30% margin on customers revenue, you're going to lower your prices,…

> Isn't the principle that parties entering into an agreement voluntarily and with competition get to set their own prices?

Yes. Though since this is voluntary in the same way that having internet access is "voluntary", I'm going to say that isn't relevant here. Similarly, there is competition in the same sense that you have a choice of more than 2 parties to vote for.

> How are we to decide what number is right?

Don't know, but I do know that 30% is wrong.

If there really was competition, and this was voluntary, there would be no way they could charge 30%.

Re: Holding Apple Accountable: The Future of the Internet Economy Depends on It

#68

Post by etchalon »

Veuxdo wrote: post #66
imchillyb wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is a retail store that charges a fee to place an item on one of their shelves. Every grocer in the USA does this. Want shelf space? Pay me. Digital assets don’t preclude this transaction.

I'm pretty sure retailers pay wholesalers, not the other way around.

Look up "slotting fees".

Behold.

Re: Holding Apple Accountable: The Future of the Internet Economy Depends on It

#69

Post by WirelessGigabit »

imchillyb wrote: post #62
mjamesaustin wrote: post #59

The biggest issue is that Apple can compete directly with companies like Spotify without playing by any of the rules they force on their competitors. The owner of a marketplace should not be able to compete on that marketplace without strict separation of power. Apple has huge advantages compared to Spotify when it can advertise any way it wants, doesn't pay commission fees, and can give itself priority for integrati…

You’re treading on thin ice here. Every retail chain has in house brands. Your rule change would affect every retailer, grocer, technology company in the USA; negatively. Profits in other areas don’t come close to profits from their own brands.

Yet when you go to your local Walmart you don't need to go through extra hoops to buy non-house brand stuff.

In fact, the non-house brand stuff is actually displayed MORE prominently.

Re: Holding Apple Accountable: The Future of the Internet Economy Depends on It

#70

Post by rumori »

Spotify does the exact same thing to its third party developers. They took away the possibility to play their content in third party apps without having to bounce back and forth to the Spotify app. That too is a horrible user experience, yet they didn't have any problem with it. They also leave reasonable questions and bug reports unanswered on their developer forums for _years_.

While I agree with some of their points, it really is hard to root for them as a company.

Post reply on HN