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

71–80 of 88 posts

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

#71

Post by freejazz »

flanked-evergl wrote: post #44
sleepybrett wrote: post #20

Wait is this seriously spotify complaining? Spotify who is fucked every band and musical act on the planet. They can fuck, and I mean this, all the way off.

> Spotify who is fucked every band and musical act on the planet. I have not really thought about this much until you brought it up, could you share some data in this regard? How much has the revenue of record labels declined since Spotify became prominent? I can't find good stats about that, I can just see the recorded music industry revenue has grown quite substantially and consistently since they came on the marke…

The labels aren't the musicians

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

#72

Post by kepler1 »

ghusto wrote: post #67
kepler1 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I guess developing an app on iOS for sale at a healthy profit margin just became a fundamental human right.

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

#73

Post by Gys »

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 is the percentage or part that spotify takes from the songs we listen to? I mean, not what they pay eventually to the artists, but before that.

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

#74

Post by imchillyb »

WirelessGigabit wrote: post #69
imchillyb wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Because, and hear me out here, those companies /pay$/ Wally for that opportunity, that end cap, that big glowing sign…

Which do you think nets them more money in that case? The one time Wally- tissue purchase, oooor…. The contract with Charmin?

See, Wally gets to feed from both troughs. Oink oink.

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

#75

Post by realusername »

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?

The only change of pricing ever made within a decade was made because of a threat of an anti-trust lawsuit and copied word for word by Google almost instantly after that.

Safe to say that the competition is dead.

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

#76

Post by flanked-evergl »

freejazz wrote: post #71
flanked-evergl wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Spotify who is fucked every band and musical act on the planet. I have not really thought about this much until you brought it up, could you share some data in this regard? How much has the revenue of record labels declined since Spotify became prominent? I can't find good stats about that, I can just see the recorded music industry revenue has grown quite substantially and consistently since they came on the marke…

The labels aren't the musicians

They are not Spotify either though and I am not sure how Spotify is responsible for their relationship with musicians.

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

#77

Post by johneth »

freejazz wrote: post #60
johneth wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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? You're basically not allowed to list your prices or describe how to subscribe ( unless it's via Apple's in-app purchases, where they take 30% for doing nothing). > ah, so no crypto? No, and no credit/debit cards, PayPal, etc. either. Only Apple's in-app purchases are allowed on Appl…

>You're basically not allowed to list your prices or describe how to subscribe (unless it's via Apple's in-app purchases, where they take 30% for doing nothing). I'm not here to argue the app store pricing, it's been discussed to death. that being said, I disagree with you that they do nothing. >No, and no credit/debit cards, PayPal, etc. either. Only Apple's in-app purchases are allowed on Apple platforms. You're no…

> How do you think people pay for things on the app store if not with a credit or debit card? You can also use paypal (https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202631).

No, I understand that Apple will take many payment methods, which are then used when purchasing an in-app purchase.

What I object to is why this is the only way apps are allowed to take payment. Why can't they take card payments themselves, without having to go via Apple?

> Seems like you are just going off your own misunderstanding of Spotify's phrasing.

No, I understand the issue. It's been around since long before Spotify's PR campaign. Just because I don't share the same viewpoint as you, it does not mean I 'misunderstand' the issue.

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

#78

Post by the_third_wave »

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.

Slotting fees are just at contentious as Apple's 30% cut but the comparison is not apt as it would only work if Walmart were the only outlet available to any supplier to sell their goods. Walmart does not have a monopoly whereas Apple does when it comes to selling to Apple users. If Walmart were to demand a 30% cut for your product there are many other venues you can turn to up to and including opening your own store. This does not work in the company town of Appleton where only one retailer - Apple - is allowed to sell goods. Want to sell in Appleton? You'll have to go through Apple who gets to set the rules.

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

#79

Post by freejazz »

johneth wrote: post #77
freejazz wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You're basically not allowed to list your prices or describe how to subscribe (unless it's via Apple's in-app purchases, where they take 30% for doing nothing). I'm not here to argue the app store pricing, it's been discussed to death. that being said, I disagree with you that they do nothing. >No, and no credit/debit cards, PayPal, etc. either. Only Apple's in-app purchases are allowed on Apple platforms. You're no…

> How do you think people pay for things on the app store if not with a credit or debit card? You can also use paypal ( https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202631 ). No, I understand that Apple will take many payment methods, which are then used when purchasing an in-app purchase. What I object to is why this is the only way apps are allowed to take payment. Why can't they take card payments themselves, without having…

>What I object to is why this is the only way apps are allowed to take payment. Why can't they take card payments themselves, without having to go via Apple?

That's a pretty obvious answer, no? because apps would be full of these attempts to charge customers and apple would still need to make standards about how it would have to work.

>No, I understand the issue. It's been around since long before Spotify's PR campaign. Just because I don't share the same viewpoint as you, it does not mean I 'misunderstand' the issue.

It's not because you disagreed, it's because you genuinely seemed confused as to whether or not you can use a credit card, debit card, or paypal to pay for spotify premium in the app, which you can do.

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

#80

Post by jannw »

flanked-evergl wrote: post #76
freejazz wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The labels aren't the musicians

They are not Spotify either though and I am not sure how Spotify is responsible for their relationship with musicians.

Labels ARE shareholders in Spotify. There is absolutely a conflict of interest regarding how Spotify handles its rights/royalties negotiations when the licensees are an oligopoly, who derive value from both sides of the transaction, and represent downstream beneficiaries who have no say in the deal struck or prices paid. Spotify and Labels together screw musicians, acting separately, and together.
Post reply on HN