or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › App Store wildly successful, but not hugely profitable for Apple
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

App Store wildly successful, but not hugely profitable for Apple

post #1 of 42
Thread Starter 
Despite a record quarter for the largest mobile application store on the market and Apple taking a 30 percent cut of all sales, the App Store for the iPhone and iPod touch is still not a big revenue generator for the handset maker.

Apple Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer revealed Monday that neither the App Store or iTunes create much revenue for Apple. He said the focus is on adding to the user experience by providing easy access to new content.

"Regarding the App Store and iTunes stores, we are running those a bit over break even, and that hasn't changed," Oppenheimer said during a conference call following Monday's quarterly earnings report. "We are very excited to be providing our developers with a fabulous opportunity and we think that is helping us a lot with the iPhone and iPod touch platform."

Apple has long maintained that the App Store isn't meant to be a profit generator, as much as a means of attracting customers to the iPhone and iPod touch. But with more than 3 billion downloads from the App Store, Apple's near-break-even might come as a surprise to some.

Apple executives were also quizzed about the App Store approval process, which has come under fire for not being responsive enough to the needs of developers. Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook said over 90 percent of applications submitted are approved within 14 days.

Some of the rejections, he said, are applications that "degrade the core experience of the phone." Apple said last year that it did not accept the Google Voice application because it too closely mimicked the core functionality of the iPhone. Other rejections are due to objectionable content, such as pornography, but Cook said that doesn't apply to the bulk of software not seen fit for the App Store.

"Most of the rejections, however, are actually bugs in the code itself," Cook said. "This is protecting the customer and the devleoper to a great extent, because they don't want customers who are unhappy with the app."

Cook also revealed that Apple has not conducted any research on the App Store regarding customer satisfaction. The revelation came after analyst Charles Wolf with Needham & Co. asked him if iPhone owners are "comfortable and happy" with the App Store.

No new statistics on the App Store were revealed Monday, with Oppenheimer merely repeating the 3 billion download figure first revealed earlier this month. The App Store is available to iPhone and iPod touch users in 77 countries.

Oppenheimer said Apple is reluctant to provide any additional information for competitive reasons. The company noted that it was a "record" quarter for iTunes, but did not give specifics.

Apple's next-closest competitor in the mobile application space is Google's Android Market, which, in December, was said to have passed the 20,000 threshold. That total lags well behind the 100,000 apps announced by Apple in November.

"We are way ahead of our competitors with over 100,000 apps on our store," he said. "That dwarfs anybody we are competing with. We provided many, many great applications with our developers to customers. That is helping us with both iPhone and iPod touch. It was one of a few reasons why iTunes set a record in the quarter."
post #2 of 42
Even if this is accurate it has to be said if Apple made nothing it is a huge sales aid for the iPod / iPhone products and will also be for the iPad.
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #3 of 42
I wonder how other stores would survive and provide quality service especially if they don't have
any users and downloads (paid). I guess they would lose money in running it.
post #4 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Even if this is accurate it has to be said if Apple made nothing it is a huge sales aid for the iPod / iPhone products and will also be for the iPad.

Right, it's a huge differentiator for the iPhone and iPod Touch. The app store sells hardware because the consumer instead of having 14 apps to play with has 150,000. Without the app store, the iPhone looks a whole lot less compelling. (think back to the pre-app days). Even if the app store was run at a loss, it's still a win overall.


Sheldon
post #5 of 42
If the IPhone had been kept as is and Apple had done the app store, they'd be probably be selling about 5% of the units they're selling now. Without the success of the Iphone, they might not be selling as many Macs. So, it has been hugely profitable for them.
post #6 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Despite a record quarter for the largest mobile application store on the market and Apple taking a 30 percent cut of all sales, the App Store for the iPhone and iPod touch is still not a big revenue generator for the handset maker.

I wouldn't be bothered sending traffic to Gruber but he had a story a long while back that when Apple says they aren't making much from iTunes they are sort-of lying. Well they are lying. I believe the app store is similar, they want to go under the radar with them so users can never say Apple's creaming them, and they'll just buy more hardware. It's more about them keep this reputation for basically giving content away, thus being good PR.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #7 of 42
It's a feature. A BIG one.
post #8 of 42
In truth, I actually think it would be worth Apple making a loss on iTunes, since it brings people into the Apple ecosystem and helps them sell massively profitable hardware.

That they make a small profit is a bonus.
post #9 of 42
it's ALL about the bottom line! No more, no less, well, with Apple there might be a few other things taken into effect, but even after that, it's still the bottom line.

If not, the cube would still be here. I and many others feel Apple never gave the Cube a chance.

Skip
post #10 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

I wouldn't be bothered sending traffic to Gruber but he had a story a long while back that when Apple says they aren't making much from iTunes they are sort-of lying. Well they are lying. I believe the app store is similar, they want to go under the radar with them so users can never say Apple's creaming them, and they'll just buy more hardware. It's more about them keep this reputation for basically giving content away, thus being good PR.

Lying to shareholders about your company's finances is very, very illegal. I doubt Apple is doing it.

Note also that Oppenheimer says the stores are running "a bit over" break even - a small profit margin may add up to significant dollars on huge volume.
post #11 of 42
[CENTER]For many, the apps store (and the added functionality apps give the device(s)), is the reason for buying an iPod Touch/iPhone, so it all works out.[/CENTER]
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #12 of 42
I read it in a prior post, that it is a feature, a BIG feature.

And I believe it's flexible nature will
drive innovation,
more adoption,
more consumer/business/professional interest

and these driven forces taken together from a holistic view of business, will drive more profits for Apple and more innovation and more interest in a circular reinforcing loop.
post #13 of 42
Cheap plentiful content often justifies buying a piece of expensive hardware.

iTunes > iPod.

App Store > iPhone

???? > iTablet


??? = possible newspaper, magazine content?

See the front page for free and buy a full electronic copy for much less than the paper copy? Click "buy now" or click "subscribe"?

Would explain Apple's purchase of a ad company and the rumors of a device to be "used by the whole family".

And we all know how much Apple loves to sell hardware...

hmmm....
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #14 of 42
Got a question for people who have used one or more Android devices for awhile. When they say the Android Marketplace has 20,000 apps, do all of those apps run across all variations of Android handsets??? Android-based devices seem to come in all shapes and sizes, screen resolutions, and now multiple versions of the OS with some devices not able to upgrade to the latest version. So how does the marketplace work???

Does each app list a series of requirements to run, like specific device or specific OS version?

It should be obvious why I ask. Even at 20,000 apps, if not everyone can use them, then really for an individual user, they wouldn't really have access to 20,000 apps, only those that would actually function on their unit.

Not unlike Apple app store where an iPod touch user who didn't pay to upgrade to OS 3 or an app that needs a camera or GPS wouldn't work either. But at least at 100,000+ apps, the total amount accessible to any user is much higher just by sheer volume.
post #15 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncee View Post

If not, the cube would still be here. I and many others feel Apple never gave the Cube a chance.

@Skip
With all respect to the Cube, it is gone (for a while now). Why bring it up again?
post #16 of 42
The app store is mainly about Apple building a platform. So it's no surprise that they are trying to run it at break even. If they made the entry-point for iPhone OS development too high, it would severely limit it's growth as a platform.

Consider that most "smart phones" (for lack of a better term) which came before the iPhone were closed systems. Typically running a custom-developed operating system with very limited support for 3rd parties to create software for them (only via a very expensive developer kit), and virtually no upgrade path. They were basically designed as "throw away" technology. If you want an upgrade, get a new phone. If you want more functionality, get a new phone.

Apple realized that a portable device could be designed a lot more like a PC: upgradable, expandable -- a true "platform" to build upon and not just throw away technology. It's the very reason that the original iPhone (3 years old this year), is still a very usable device. How many previous "smart phones" had a 3+ year lifespan?

Apple's gain out of all of this is that they can now use that nicely designed platform to build and profit from a multitude of portable devices with less upfront investment. And all of the applications written for one device will work on the new ones. So any new devices are immediately capable of doing everything the previous devices could (don't need to wait for people to support them).
 
Reply
 
Reply
post #17 of 42
the simple answer is that when you go into the supermarket to buy a quart of milk, occasionally you will stop off for a steak unless you are a vegan.

otherwise who wants to sell milk at break even, but the customers want it.
post #18 of 42
I'm not surprised by this at all. App store apps are poor so people don't expect to pay a lot of money for them and this has created a culture of very low pricing as well as a trend for developers to create throw-away apps vs substantial apps (think MGS Touch vs MGS on the PSP or Star Wars the Force Unleashed). Many users gravitate towards free equivalents, especially for the apps that do very basic functions (most of them).

Some developers are making the effort like Gameloft and EA and now Rockstar porting their full GTA ChinaTown wars and pricing it at 1/3 the cost of the other consoles but the others need to wake up and stop treating the iphone like a mobile phone and more like a PDA and console. The first two are only half the speed of the PSP and the 3GS is faster.

The App Store has so much potential but content providers keep holding it down and they are only doing themselves harm. If I could rent every movie from itunes and have it stream down instantly, I'd be spending tons of money that I'm currently not spending. I'd pick up a reasonable subscription plan in no time. But the content providers don't allow it.

I'd be happy to spend £15 on the full Star Wars the Force Unleashed like the PSP version but I'm not buying the cut down one even at £3.50. Maybe over time it will develop into something better but I just wish there was a way to sift out the 90,000 or so junk apps that inevitably exist due to lazy developers trying to make a quick buck so that the real gems get seen.

I just can't find anything outside of Apple's top lists any more, which is pointless because they just keep pushing Doodle Jump down my throat. Is it the ball-in-a-cup fanclub playing this game or what?

If I can't find good content, I don't buy content, app store makes no profit. Simple.
post #19 of 42
It's coming...along with the slew of non-computer computers they are bringing to the market. The iPad will herald the future of where Apple wants to go with their platform. As computing power of smaller devices increases, Apple will continue to drive traditional computers into niche groups (for professionals). Within 5-10 years, home users will not be offered a Mac computer but will have a variety of Apple smart products to choose from (extending out the iPhone, iTouch and iPad ecosystem). One will not be able to buy content for these consumer products via any other means than via the Apple App Store. This expansion of the ecosystem to more substantial applications will drive a tremendous amount of revenue for Apple.

-Bloop
post #20 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokessd View Post

Right, it's a huge differentiator for the iPhone and iPod Touch. The app store sells hardware because the consumer instead of having 14 apps to play with has 150,000. Without the app store, the iPhone looks a whole lot less compelling.

Absolutely. That's the likely reason why Apple has fared so poorly on the desktop: lack of software.

Back in the old days, when I was replacing my //c, I was tempted to get a Mac. But a stroll down the many aisles of windows and DOS software, compared with a glance at the paltry selection of Mac software, made my mind up for me immediately. I have no idea if the cool new software is now usually all available for a Mac, but back then, it certainly wasn't.

So I agree that software selection for the iPhone is a huge plus.

I also wonder, however, if other phone OSs have an adequate selection, and whether they will eventually have enough so that the iSore's "more" is rendered meaningless. I dunno.

WebOS seems to have lost any critical mass it may have had. I don't quite understand the need or desirability of MAMEO. I'm sceptical as to whether either of these will attract a reasonable number of titles.

But Android seems to be going gangbusters, and is accelerating rapidly. I'm very interested in it.
post #21 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio View Post


Consider that most "smart phones" (for lack of a better term) which came before the iPhone were closed systems. Typically running a custom-developed operating system with very limited support for 3rd parties to create software for them


That doesn't accurately describe what was then and now the biggest smartphone OS, Symbian. Come to think of it, that is pretty much the opposite of another popular mobile OS of that era, the PalmOS. Oh, and then there's WinMo, another dominant OS which is pretty much the opposite of what you describe.

Which pre-iPhone smartphone OS are you thinking about?
post #22 of 42
And I believe they are in their rights to lie also...

They don't want the studios/record labels, and COMPETITORS to know just how much they are profiting off of APPS/ITUNES...

It's a trade secret for the time being... I'm sure there is a way around fudging the numbers in a shareholder meeting in order to maintain a trade secret and keep your competitors guessing.

I am a shareholder of Apple and I really don't care how much they lie to me if they keep their accounting secrets from their competitors.... As long as they keep having record breaking quarters and the stock keeps rising toward 300...
post #23 of 42
One only has to think about the enormous sums that Apple (and virtually every other large high-tech company) spends on advertising to realize how immensely profitable it is for Apple to be running the "wildly successful" app store, whether or not this facet of their business generates huge direct profits. Instead of paying through the nose for more exposure via advertising, they're getting paid to spread the Apple brand to the four corners of the earth. Now that's brilliant!
post #24 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiQuLABS View Post

I wonder how other stores would survive and provide quality service especially if they don't have
any users and downloads (paid). I guess they would lose money in running it.

Remember that Apple also has the biggest collection of censors on its payroll.

I'd be just happy to see "Allow applications outside AppStore" switch in the future iPhoneOS...what difference one little checkbox can do ;-)
post #25 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by hypercommunist View Post

Lying to shareholders about your company's finances is very, very illegal. I doubt Apple is doing it.

They are sort of misleading people. They aren't lying, and they are careful to use language like: "above break even", as to be legal. They never say how much above, for example. Somewhere along the way there's was the rumor Apple makes no money from iTunes and the analysts have started to believe it, Apple merely leave them believe it. They aren't force to announce specific figures, so they don't. But in a round about way they are sort of misleading people, albeit in a legal manner.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #26 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by ezduzit View Post

the simple answer is that when you go into the supermarket to buy a quart of milk, occasionally you will stop off for a steak unless you are a vegan.

otherwise who wants to sell milk at break even, but the customers want it.

Bad example, there is big money in milk
post #27 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by blurpbleepbloop View Post

It's coming...along with the slew of non-computer computers they are bringing to the market. The iPad will herald the future of where Apple wants to go with their platform. As computing power of smaller devices increases, Apple will continue to drive traditional computers into niche groups (for professionals). Within 5-10 years, home users will not be offered a Mac computer but will have a variety of Apple smart products to choose from (extending out the iPhone, iTouch and iPad ecosystem). One will not be able to buy content for these consumer products via any other means than via the Apple App Store. This expansion of the ecosystem to more substantial applications will drive a tremendous amount of revenue for Apple.

-Bloop

I support this vision.
post #28 of 42
I am pretty sure that the App Store gets more revenue and income for Apple then iTunes (music and movies). Since most movies and songs are stolen, but apps are not. Part of the reason why this is true is because these apps are cheap enough and useful enough that people are happy to pay the .99 cents to 1.25 for these apps. Even more expensive ones rarely go above $10 (of course Wolfram' $50 app is an exception). So running app store at about break even is as good as you can get in a world where a lot of digital content is obtained illegally for free.
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
--SHEFFmachine out
Da Bears!
Reply
post #29 of 42
What are the expenses for running the App Store besides obvious items like:
  • bandwidth
  • storage
  • the SDK
  • API development
  • approvals
  • accounting/payments

I can't come up with enough expenses to see it as anything but hugely profitable.

I'm not saying my list is all-inclusive, but what else comes to mind??
post #30 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by walshbj View Post

What are the expenses for running the App Store besides obvious items like:
  • bandwidth
  • storage
  • the SDK
  • API development
  • approvals
  • accounting/payments

I can't come up with enough expenses to see it as anything but hugely profitable.

I'm not saying my list is all-inclusive, but what else comes to mind??

Dont forget the following things -

- Apple has to pay for Bandwidth, storage, etc., even on the Free Apps, where they make nothing
- Apple only gets paid for the first download of a paid app - zilch for upgrades.
- Credit Card companies would be eating up 2% of the payments. 2% seems small, but from Apple's perspective, 7% (2% of 30%) of the money they get goes to the Card processors. Not a tiny sum by any means.
- Bandwidth, Storage, Hardware, Employees are not exactly cheap.
- Apple has to pay more to ensure 100% reliability and good performance. If the downloads take too long, or if the store is down, it hurts their image way too much. See how much bad press Apple got when the approval process was slightly delayed. And remember, Apple has to pay for the Approval process for the Free Apps. Also, the bandwidth and hardware is determined by the peak load - when a new version of the OS is launched, etc. That is the reason we get such fabulous performance from the AppStore on most days.
- If the ratio of paid to total apps is 20% in the store, it would be like 5% when it comes to total downloads - most people pick free apps.
post #31 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by macarena View Post

- Credit Card companies would be eating up 2% of the payments. 2% seems small, but from Apple's perspective, 7% (2% of 30%) of the money they get goes to the Card processors. Not a tiny sum by any means.

Apple is not paying 2% on their credit card companies, they will be paying under 1%
post #32 of 42
The App- and iTunes store are part of the Apple experience.
It's like saying iLife isn't profitable. Of course it's not.

I think the App- and iTunes store (as well as iLife and OSX itself) are helping Apple to differentiate itself from its rivals, and help them sell a lot of hardware.

With billions in cash on the bank you gotta admit they're doing something right. And I think the app store is one of those things.
post #33 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot View Post

@Skip
With all respect to the Cube, it is gone (for a while now). Why bring it up again?

Because I think to this day the Cube is one of the best aesthetically designed machines ever to grace this planet.

Beige box? Cube!

Nuff said.
The devils that drive us do not discriminate
Reply
The devils that drive us do not discriminate
Reply
post #34 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncee View Post

it's ALL about the bottom line! No more, no less, well, with Apple there might be a few other things taken into effect, but even after that, it's still the bottom line.

If not, the cube would still be here. I and many others feel Apple never gave the Cube a chance.

Skip

be happy o sad faced duded

the cube is the mini !!!
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #35 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

I'm not surprised by this at all. App store apps are poor so people don't expect to pay a lot of money for them and this has created a culture of very low pricing as well as a trend for developers to create throw-away apps vs substantial apps (think MGS Touch vs MGS on the PSP or Star Wars the Force Unleashed). Many users gravitate towards free equivalents, especially for the apps that do very basic functions (most of them).

Some developers are making the effort like Gameloft and EA and now Rockstar porting their full GTA ChinaTown wars and pricing it at 1/3 the cost of the other consoles but the others need to wake up and stop treating the iphone like a mobile phone and more like a PDA and console. The first two are only half the speed of the PSP and the 3GS is faster.

The App Store has so much potential but content providers keep holding it down and they are only doing themselves harm. If I could rent every movie from itunes and have it stream down instantly, I'd be spending tons of money that I'm currently not spending. I'd pick up a reasonable subscription plan in no time. But the content providers don't allow it.

I'd be happy to spend £15 on the full Star Wars the Force Unleashed like the PSP version but I'm not buying the cut down one even at £3.50. Maybe over time it will develop into something better but I just wish there was a way to sift out the 90,000 or so junk apps that inevitably exist due to lazy developers trying to make a quick buck so that the real gems get seen.

I just can't find anything outside of Apple's top lists any more, which is pointless because they just keep pushing Doodle Jump down my throat. Is it the ball-in-a-cup fanclub playing this game or what?

If I can't find good content, I don't buy content, app store makes no profit. Simple.

even if they wrote STAR wars unleashed or even CALL for duty direct to iphone os and not ported over ...
isn't the iphone screen too small for war games ??

and isn't time for apple to commision all the top game companies to create top line best selling games for the whole apple family OR out right buy EA or bungie .

and if i sold 3 billion of anything i would make a profit .

really something is off with the whole app store
something fishy



peace

9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #36 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingKuei View Post

Got a question for people who have used one or more Android devices for awhile. When they say the Android Marketplace has 20,000 apps, do all of those apps run across all variations of Android handsets??? Android-based devices seem to come in all shapes and sizes, screen resolutions, and now multiple versions of the OS with some devices not able to upgrade to the latest version. So how does the marketplace work???

The vast majority of the apps work across versions and screen sizes and resolutions. All the apps that I use work across versions. I think there was one app (ToggleSettings) which may have different versions. Not sure since I don't use it anymore. I'm running a custom 2.1 ROM on my G1. The same apps that I was using on a custom 1.6 ROM (with features of 2.0 added) continued to run on 2.1. I didn't have to re-download them. I had a backup from which I re-installed.

Every time a new version is released, I have to test the apps I have written and have had to make minor changes for each one. I'd say about a day's worth of effort cumulatively. But it's the same app that runs on various versions. I have kept my wife's G1 on a stock 1.6 ROM. And the other two phones are on different custom ROMs.
post #37 of 42
I use a full functioning non-jailbroken iPhone 3GS here in Vietnam,
and I have down loaded many Aoo's from the AppStore, but I am still not happy with the quality of stuff they put up there.

I like to customise my phone, so, I never update my phones OS to the latest, its always one version behind, so that I can always utilise Cydia. With Cydia lately I am able to TRULLY customise my iPhone to my hearts content!

Animated Lock Screen, Custom Icons n Arrangement/Rows, Custom sounds n Tones, Video Wallpapers, Video Ringtones and Random Ringtones

Its such a SHAME All of these are still UNAVAILABLE on AppStore.
The App Store has so much potential but content providers keep holding it down and they are only doing themselves harm.
There is no stopping anyone from customising their non-jailbroken iPhone.

AppStore 30% X 1 Billion = a bit over break even
Cydia + AppStore 30% X 1 Billion = Total Customer Expeerience n Satisfaction & hugely profitable!!!
post #38 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

That doesn't accurately describe what was then and now the biggest smartphone OS, Symbian. Come to think of it, that is pretty much the opposite of another popular mobile OS of that era, the PalmOS. Oh, and then there's WinMo, another dominant OS which is pretty much the opposite of what you describe.

Which pre-iPhone smartphone OS are you thinking about?

I'm thinking Blackberry OS around 3 years ago. Wasn't the Blackberry dev kit very expensive and limited in availability (much like game console dev kits)?

And I definitely remember hearing from other smartphone users over the years that major OS updates often required newer hardware. Or, at the very least, the older hardware couldn't take advantage of the newer OS features.

Aside from Bluetooth, the original iPhone supports pretty much every feature of the latest iPhone OS.
 
Reply
 
Reply
post #39 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

even if they wrote STAR wars unleashed or even CALL for duty direct to iphone os and not ported over ...
isn't the iphone screen too small for war games ??

I think the iphone screen is ok for size - Brothers in Arms was a decent war game. NOVA was pretty good too. The games just need to be more complex with more depth. They put a more advanced Force Unleashed on the DS. The iphone could easily handle the PSP version and the screen isn't much smaller.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

and isn't time for apple to commision all the top game companies to create top line best selling games for the whole apple family OR out right buy EA or bungie.

Definitely, I think Apple need to put in more financial support of companies like Aspyr and EA. They could easily get a port commissioned of Half-Life 2, Portal, Counterstrike etc and they would be massive sellers. The 3GS would be the only one with the advanced effects but well worth buying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

and if i sold 3 billion of anything i would make a profit

Microsoft and their XBox would love to believe you. The majority of the 3 billion will be free downloads and the others, very low prices where Apple only get 30%. After expenses, it's quite reasonable that they only made a couple of hundred million dollars profit, which for a company like Apple is good but nothing to write home about.
post #40 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas View Post

The App- and iTunes store are part of the Apple experience.
It's like saying iLife isn't profitable. Of course it's not.

I think the App- and iTunes store (as well as iLife and OSX itself) are helping Apple to differentiate itself from its rivals, and help them sell a lot of hardware.

With billions in cash on the bank you gotta admit they're doing something right. And I think the app store is one of those things.

You are Right On. Everything Apple sells is somehow connected to the other items. In the end, Apple is making money. I'm a happy camper as I have lots of Apple Stock.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › App Store wildly successful, but not hugely profitable for Apple