Originally Posted by Carniphage
Apple have built a empire working closely with content creators, and providing them with platforms to profitably sell their content.
But it has to be profitable for both parties.
I suspect something has happened which demands a slightly fore forthright negotiating tactic.
Something did happen - Amazon last quarter started selling more Kindle books than paperback for the first time ever. Apple isn't able to make the deals with publishers fast enough with their limited, competing iBookstore, so rather than compete, they'll just start taking a cut off Amazon and Sony. Good for Apple, bad for everyone else, including us.
Originally Posted by penchanted
This is more akin to the commonplace slotting fees paid by manufacturers to retailers for (premium) shelf space. Apple wants a shot at being compensated for providing the shopping venue as well as recovering their costs for providing infrastructure.
Apple should have thought of that before they allowed developers to develop on their platform. Also, Apple does *NOT* provide the infrastructure for services like Kindle - Amazon does. Apple only provides bandwidth for the application, which obeyed and followed all the rules set by Apple. Now, Apple is changing the rules. Again.
Originally Posted by TenoBell
How exactly is Apple going to charge them 30% for their services?
Every in-app purchase gives 30% of the transaction to Apple. If Amazon and Sony have to start providing in-app purchase options to all of their books in order to remain in the App Store, that means Apple starts taking a major chunk of their revenue on any sale that takes place inside the app. Not every transaction, but enough to affect your business.
Originally Posted by TenoBell
Its a myth because it cannot happen.
No the alert of the breach itself was a phishing scam.
Dude.... Apple vetting applications doesn't ensure security. That's a fallacy. How many times have you read stories of applications that steal your info or otherwise break app store rules still being approved, but then later removed from the store? Vetting an app doesn't guarantee security. Its better than the wild west, but not perfect. Don't kid yourself.
How does Apple get 30% if Amazon is selling the same book for the same price and Apple gets none of the money?
Again, in-app purchases give Apple 30%.
I have no clue of how you came up the 10X figure. Seeing as books on Kindle are typically $3-$5.
The 10x figure refers to POS systems, which stand for "Point of Sale." They're the services that handle the transactions you make on your credit or debit card. Typically, these services charge around 3% of your transaction. Apple's in-app purchase does the same thing and charges 30%, hence, 10x the cost just to handle the credit card.
You really think that $99 developer fee really covers the costs of doing any of this?
Its simply a barrier to keep some of the riff raff out.
If Apple felt that the $99 fee isn't enough, they shouldn't have come up with that figure in their development program. Apple is a corporation, friend. They're some small startup that's getting exploited and bullied by bigger companies. Apple sets a price, developers sign an agreement with them to follow the rules, and Apple provides the service. Its no more complicated than that.
No they don't the 30% comes out of Amazon's end. The publisher isn't involved in that.
The publisher is absolutely involved with that. Amazon is authorized to sell books through their own channel. By allowing in-app purchase, Amazon is now involving Apple through the sale of books. Do you really think publishers are going to allow revenue from the sales of their products go to another company (Apple) without permission? Absolutely not. Take a business course at your local community college and they will teach you about this sort of stuff.