Netflix's iOS App Store fee avoidance will only give 'modest' revenue boost

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 56
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,921member
    seankill said:
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.


    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 

    Ecosystems like iOS are necessary for Apps to succeed.

    FTFY.
    Without the internet iOS App Store couldn’t succeed. Should ISPs get a cut too?
    gatorguyclaire1Carnage
  • Reply 22 of 56
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,921member

    Solution A: Apple buys Netflix. Solution B: Apple prohibits Netflix from their devices.

    Why would Apple remove Netflix from their app stores? There is no requirement that Apple has to get a cut of media purchases/subscriptions. Amazon currently doesn’t give Apple a cut of anything. Barnes & Noble doesn’t allow book purchasss from the Nook app. Anyone can sign up for Spotify, Netflix etc. from a company’s website bypassing Apple altogether.
  • Reply 23 of 56
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,921member
    mac_128 said:
    OK, I’ll be the guy who points out, and likely take the abuse, that Apple streaming devices would be a lot less attractive if they did not have access to Netflix. There’s two sides to this issue, and neither is very pretty. Apple wanting to take a cut of a subscription service which does need their platform to succeed is kind of ridiculous. Netflix developed the iOS and tvOS app primarily for the convenience of their Apple customers, not to leverage the Apple platform to increase their visibility. If I couldn’t get Netflix on my Apple TV, I probably wouldn’t have bought one, and gone with a Roku instead, which is how I handled Amazon Prime (literally switching boxes to watch Prime content, and some others). We’ve already seen this play out with Amazon pulling the Apple TV from their website because it didn’t offer a Prime App, which was entirely up to them to provide or not, likely over similar issues, which is why we likely now have an Prime app that doesn’t allow in app purchases. Fortunately, this is not a major issue for me.  Going to the Amazon app with one click purchasing is no more difficult than buying it in app.
    I currently use my Roku smart TV to stream media. It has all the apps available on the Apple TV. I can’t remember the last time I used my Apple TV. Like I said, Uber and Lyft are more dependent on Apple than Netflix. Yet Apple takes no commission from those transactions.
  • Reply 24 of 56
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,921member
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    Apple isn’t providing access. Consumers provide the access. Apple simply provides a very well done and truested MEANS means of access - the App Store. But to force a company making an app to hand over so much of their hard earned money for the “privilege” of having their app available is kind of messed up. Especially when their is no real alternative. The Mac App Store is the better way as users have the option of going through apples curated (and safer) route, or choosing to go direct via some other source. 

    However, on a phone or tablet, it does make more sense to lock things down a bit more for security reasons. But to say that an app dev should pay for access is like saying windows PC program makers should have been doing that since windows held such a dominant command of the market at one point.
    If a company wants to use Apple for payment, fine, and Apple should get a commission for that. Where it gets more gray is the notion that Apple/the Apple ecosystem is responsible for customer acquistion. in some cases it’s true (like games) others it’s not. But if Apple deserves a cut then does an ISP too? What about a cellular provider? Without the internet none of this works.
    cropr
  • Reply 25 of 56
    sandorsandor Posts: 507member
    Apple hasn’t said anything, right?

    I, like many, was a Netflix subscriber long before iOS existed, so my fees have always been outside the App Store.

    I think many subscription services do not like services like the App Store as it makes it easier for end users to manage their subscriptions, and therefore easier to change month-to-month. This is the kind of income stream that investors find comforting, and one of the things that can make a company more beholden to shareholders than customers.

    This mentality is similar to Adobe’s move to subscription-based software. Form a constant income stream, make it relatively onerous to cancel, etc.
  • Reply 26 of 56
    What is needed is Payola Streamola.  Oh, wait...

    Payola, in the music industry, is the illegal practice of payment or other inducement by record companies for the broadcast of recordings on commercial radio in which the song is presented as being part of the normal day's broadcast, without announcing that there has been consideration paid in cash or in kind for its airplay adjacent to the recording's broadcast. Under US law, a radio station can play a specific song in exchange for money, but this must be disclosed on the air as being sponsored airtime.[1]

    The term has come to refer to any undisclosed payment made to cast a product in a favorable light (such as obtaining positive reviews). Some radio stations report spins of the newest and most popular songs to industry publications. The number of times the songs are played can influence the perceived popularity of a song.

    The term payola is a combination of "pay" and "-ola", a common suffix of product names in the early 20th century, such as PianolaVictrolaAmberolaCrayolaRock-OlaShinola, or brands such as the radio equipment manufacturer Motorola.[2]Payola has come to mean the payment of a bribe in commerce and in law to say or do a certain thing against the rules of law, but more specifically a commercial bribe. The FCC defines "payola" as a violation of the sponsorship identification rule that in 2005-06 resulted in tens of millions of dollars in fines to cable corporations in New York.[citation needed]


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola


  • Reply 27 of 56
    brucemc said:
    Sounds like a bit of media hyperbole.  Apple has always allowed apps where subscriptions are made outside of App Store, and then user has to sign-in on the app (they do not allow the app to direct them with links to outside sites).  It is how I signed up for Netflix in the first place.  Amazon Prime as well.  However, those are the only two services I have done that with.  I won't do it for the small ones - so those services whose names are not large enough, generally have to work with app stores to get their digital subscribers.

    Big companies can do this if they want, as they have the brand recognition and $$ to spend on advertising.  That is generally a handful of companies in any one market.

    If the expectation is that it will only have a modest revenue boost for Netflix, then conversely it will only have a minor impact on Apple.

    IMO, Apple should consider some updates to the App Store pricing to keep the developers and content creators from straying - move the one-time fee to 25%, and the longer term subscription fee to 10% (or perhaps two tiers - down to 5% after 2 years of a subscription being maintained).  Overall impact on revenue growth should be muted.
    I'm willing to bet the analysts are going to say that if Netflix can avoid paying Apple it's going to impact Apple immensely. They're also going to claim that every company is going to try to avoid paying Apple a commission and hurt Apple even worse. Conversely, those same analysts are going to claim it's going to give Netflix a huge boost in revenue and say that Netflix's value should skyrocket even more. Those analysts will say this loss of commission will be greatly detrimental to Apple but greatly beneficial to Netflix. They can reason this even before it happens. Let's see what happens when Netflix starts inserting ads into their programming after consumers were sure they paid to cleanly cut the cord from commercial interruption.

    See this analyst BS:  http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/08/23/apple-could-lose-16-billion-in-war-triggered-by-netflix.html
    This is how news is presented when it comes to Apple.

    edited August 2018
  • Reply 28 of 56
    Now let's watch Netflix hug the line. First add a link to open the Netflix subscribe page in the Safari browser. If that passes App Store review in the following version open the Safari browser within the app (simple to do via the SDK). Finally, open the Safari browser within a pane of the app. If Apple rejects any of these app versions, sue them and make a big stink with the regulators.
  • Reply 29 of 56
    claire1claire1 Posts: 497unconfirmed, member
    Apple’s commission is ridiculous. A 30/70 model is unsustainable for many companies and I totally understand why the likes of Spotify and Netflix don’t want it.
    The problem is that they’ll have to deal with a less than favorable user experience by not having a sign up in-app, but that’s really Apple’s fault and not theirs.

    Apple Pay for physical purchases is way more reasonable for subscriptions, or say 90/10 from the get go. 

    I wish the EU would fight Apple on this. Having two ecosystems out there that abuse their market share is a problem. At some point an ecosystem is so big it directly influences economy on a macro scale. This is not Apple from the 90s anymore. It’s a trillion dollar company that dictates how millions of apps are monetized. They are the gatekeepers. They control information, news, everything.  

    Apple delivered me over $5M in revenues. I wish that was profit though; net profit was actually not that high. They enabled developers like me. But at the same time they allowed an influx of millions of apps to be sold for $0 and changed the perception of value of content. The only way to make money is through IAPs now and offer the game for free, and to corrupt gameplay for monetization schemes. Their practices causes the charts to be dominated by apps that make millions a day and the chart never changes because these devs buy their way to the charts. It’s sickening. 

    I sincerely hope that the future platform, whatever OS it is, embraces decentralized blockchain based app stores where the rules are rewritten in favor of developers. No marketing bullshit but actually empower devs to monetize properly. 
    Waahhh Waahhhh Wahhhh Apple should  develop everything for ME and give all their money to ME!

    And of course it's Apple's fault that developers put free games on the App Store. My neighbors dog ran away, that also is Apples fault!!

    tmay said:
    mac_128 said:
    OK, I’ll be the guy who points out, and likely take the abuse, that Apple streaming devices would be a lot less attractive if they did not have access to Netflix. There’s two sides to this issue, and neither is very pretty. Apple wanting to take a cut of a subscription service which does need their platform to succeed is kind of ridiculous. Netflix developed the iOS and tvOS app primarily for the convenience of their Apple customers, not to leverage the Apple platform to increase their visibility. If I couldn’t get Netflix on my Apple TV, I probably wouldn’t have bought one, and gone with a Roku instead, which is how I handled Amazon Prime (literally switching boxes to watch Prime content, and some others). We’ve already seen this play out with Amazon pulling the Apple TV from their website because it didn’t offer a Prime App, which was entirely up to them to provide or not, likely over similar issues, which is why we likely now have an Prime app that doesn’t allow in app purchases. Fortunately, this is not a major issue for me.  Going to the Amazon app with one click purchasing is no more difficult than buying it in app.
    If by streaming devices, you mean iOS and tvOS devices, than I don't disagree that there would be some reduced sales with that scenario. At the same time, Netflix would see greatly reduced revenues in that scenario, and open the door to competitors, of which their are many. 

    Apple customers are just too valuable to ignore for long, or to attempt to leverage to other devices.

    Exactly. If Netflix wasn't on Apple TV, I would have gotten Hulu instead. This is probably what he mean by "neither is very pretty". Or he was describing his ugly Roku box.


    mbenz1962 said:
    nunzy said:
    Netflix should pay Apple every time somebody uses an Apple product to watch Netflix. Every time.

    They use loopholes to screw Apple. That's not fair to any of us.
    Either you meant to say "every time someone uses and Apple product to subscribe to Nextflix" or I missed your /s tag, because someone paying apple a per stream commission would be nuts. Like Seankill said:
    seankill said:
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    Why stop there? Should PC manufacturers get a cut for all the stuff bought on their computers? Or how about the IP made on their computers?

    I only think Apple should get a cut if their services are used, how it currently is. I don’t see any issues with the Apps, say Netflix, routing the user through a web browser to sign up outside of Apples services. Thus, Apple should get nothing. 
    No TV manufacturers are getting a cut per showing if someone watches a certain network's programming on their set.  No radio manufacturers are getting a cut per hour when you listen to a certain channel with your head unit.  

    I do think Apple should get some kind of commission for linking/facilitating the subscription initially, but I don't think 30% for a year is fair and obviously neither do Netflix, Spotify and a few other big players.  Apple should get a bigger cut initially, maybe the first (paid) month or quarter maximum and then a cut of subscription pricing (5-10%) for ongoing costs (payment processing, App hosting, support, etc.)  The Netflix app is pretty small (not even 100MB) and the streaming traffic isn't running over Apple's servers, so the actual costs to Apple for handling this App are pretty low.  

    For the big players, the payoff for the "Marketing Service" that they get included in their 30% is pretty moot.  Everyone and their dog has heard of Netflix in the US.  Perhaps Apple could have a tiered system per country storefront.  For example, Apps with a monthly subscription revenue of $1 million or less are in the 30%/15% tier (with the larger percent cut being limited to 1-3 months) and get marketing and Highlights and feature spots in the App Store.  For Apps $5 million or less to $1 million 20%/10% and so on so that the bigger the company behind the app, the less they would pay as a percent and consequently the less Apple could waste time in marketing apps that everyone already has.  No one needs an Ad for Netflix in the US App Store.  Maybe in other countries Netflix could benefit from some marketing boost according to their revenue numbers and consequently pay more via their tier in that storefront and receive the appropriate marketing and other features.
    Ah, let the big guys get away from exploiting you and screw the little guy.

    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    Apple isn’t providing access. Consumers provide the access. Apple simply provides a very well done and truested MEANS means of access - the App Store. But to force a company making an app to hand over so much of their hard earned money for the “privilege” of having their app available is kind of messed up. Especially when their is no real alternative. The Mac App Store is the better way as users have the option of going through apples curated (and safer) route, or choosing to go direct via some other source. 

    However, on a phone or tablet, it does make more sense to lock things down a bit more for security reasons. But to say that an app dev should pay for access is like saying windows PC program makers should have been doing that since windows held such a dominant command of the market at one point.

    Consumers don't provide access that's just ridiculous. I don't have to ask my neighbor who owns an iPad permission to watch Netflix. I found Spotify and others by Apples heavy and free promotion of these apps. Apple made Spotify the monster it is today. ACCESS.

    "But to force a company making an app to hand over so much of their hard earned money for the “privilege” of having their app available is kind of messed up."

    Right because the billions that went into developing iPhone, Mac, iPad, Watch, App Store, iOS, iTunes, Apple Music etc. wasn't hard work at all....

    "Especially when their is no real alternative. "
    *FACEPALM*...... You just contradicted yourself. This is EXACTLY why Apple deserves a cut for their hard work.
    If Netflix doesn't like it maybe they should develop their own phone, computers, OSes, streaming boxes, store front etc.
  • Reply 30 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,648member
    Apple’s commission is ridiculous. A 30/70 model is unsustainable for many companies and I totally understand why the likes of Spotify and Netflix don’t want it.
    The problem is that they’ll have to deal with a less than favorable user experience by not having a sign up in-app, but that’s really Apple’s fault and not theirs.

    Apple Pay for physical purchases is way more reasonable for subscriptions, or say 90/10 from the get go. 

    I wish the EU would fight Apple on this. Having two ecosystems out there that abuse their market share is a problem. At some point an ecosystem is so big it directly influences economy on a macro scale. This is not Apple from the 90s anymore. It’s a trillion dollar company that dictates how millions of apps are monetized. They are the gatekeepers. They control information, news, everything.  

    Apple delivered me over $5M in revenues. I wish that was profit though; net profit was actually not that high. They enabled developers like me. But at the same time they allowed an influx of millions of apps to be sold for $0 and changed the perception of value of content. The only way to make money is through IAPs now and offer the game for free, and to corrupt gameplay for monetization schemes. Their practices causes the charts to be dominated by apps that make millions a day and the chart never changes because these devs buy their way to the charts. It’s sickening. 

    I sincerely hope that the future platform, whatever OS it is, embraces decentralized blockchain based app stores where the rules are rewritten in favor of developers. No marketing bullshit but actually empower devs to monetize properly. 
    The irony of complaining about Apple's abuse of marketshare when both of those two companies, Spotify and Netflix, are leaders in their segments.

    I mean, WTF are you thinking? Netflix's valuation today is $147 billion. 


    edited August 2018
  • Reply 31 of 56
    claire1claire1 Posts: 497unconfirmed, member
    Now let's watch Netflix hug the line. First add a link to open the Netflix subscribe page in the Safari browser. If that passes App Store review in the following version open the Safari browser within the app (simple to do via the SDK). Finally, open the Safari browser within a pane of the app. If Apple rejects any of these app versions, sue them and make a big stink with the regulators.
    They're stupid. Whenever a company bites the Apple that feeds them it just opens an opportunity for Apple(Spotify I'm thinking of you). Does anyone really think Apple is sitting back and saying "well, this sucks..."? No, this is just more inspiration to release a video service that's customer friendly, user friendly and better than Netflix.
    tmay
  • Reply 32 of 56
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,921member
    claire1 said:
    Apple’s commission is ridiculous. A 30/70 model is unsustainable for many companies and I totally understand why the likes of Spotify and Netflix don’t want it.
    The problem is that they’ll have to deal with a less than favorable user experience by not having a sign up in-app, but that’s really Apple’s fault and not theirs.

    Apple Pay for physical purchases is way more reasonable for subscriptions, or say 90/10 from the get go. 

    I wish the EU would fight Apple on this. Having two ecosystems out there that abuse their market share is a problem. At some point an ecosystem is so big it directly influences economy on a macro scale. This is not Apple from the 90s anymore. It’s a trillion dollar company that dictates how millions of apps are monetized. They are the gatekeepers. They control information, news, everything.  

    Apple delivered me over $5M in revenues. I wish that was profit though; net profit was actually not that high. They enabled developers like me. But at the same time they allowed an influx of millions of apps to be sold for $0 and changed the perception of value of content. The only way to make money is through IAPs now and offer the game for free, and to corrupt gameplay for monetization schemes. Their practices causes the charts to be dominated by apps that make millions a day and the chart never changes because these devs buy their way to the charts. It’s sickening. 

    I sincerely hope that the future platform, whatever OS it is, embraces decentralized blockchain based app stores where the rules are rewritten in favor of developers. No marketing bullshit but actually empower devs to monetize properly. 
    Waahhh Waahhhh Wahhhh Apple should  develop everything for ME and give all their money to ME!

    And of course it's Apple's fault that developers put free games on the App Store. My neighbors dog ran away, that also is Apples fault!!

    tmay said:
    mac_128 said:
    OK, I’ll be the guy who points out, and likely take the abuse, that Apple streaming devices would be a lot less attractive if they did not have access to Netflix. There’s two sides to this issue, and neither is very pretty. Apple wanting to take a cut of a subscription service which does need their platform to succeed is kind of ridiculous. Netflix developed the iOS and tvOS app primarily for the convenience of their Apple customers, not to leverage the Apple platform to increase their visibility. If I couldn’t get Netflix on my Apple TV, I probably wouldn’t have bought one, and gone with a Roku instead, which is how I handled Amazon Prime (literally switching boxes to watch Prime content, and some others). We’ve already seen this play out with Amazon pulling the Apple TV from their website because it didn’t offer a Prime App, which was entirely up to them to provide or not, likely over similar issues, which is why we likely now have an Prime app that doesn’t allow in app purchases. Fortunately, this is not a major issue for me.  Going to the Amazon app with one click purchasing is no more difficult than buying it in app.
    If by streaming devices, you mean iOS and tvOS devices, than I don't disagree that there would be some reduced sales with that scenario. At the same time, Netflix would see greatly reduced revenues in that scenario, and open the door to competitors, of which their are many. 

    Apple customers are just too valuable to ignore for long, or to attempt to leverage to other devices.

    Exactly. If Netflix wasn't on Apple TV, I would have gotten Hulu instead. This is probably what he mean by "neither is very pretty". Or he was describing his ugly Roku box.


    mbenz1962 said:
    nunzy said:
    Netflix should pay Apple every time somebody uses an Apple product to watch Netflix. Every time.

    They use loopholes to screw Apple. That's not fair to any of us.
    Either you meant to say "every time someone uses and Apple product to subscribe to Nextflix" or I missed your /s tag, because someone paying apple a per stream commission would be nuts. Like Seankill said:
    seankill said:
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    Why stop there? Should PC manufacturers get a cut for all the stuff bought on their computers? Or how about the IP made on their computers?

    I only think Apple should get a cut if their services are used, how it currently is. I don’t see any issues with the Apps, say Netflix, routing the user through a web browser to sign up outside of Apples services. Thus, Apple should get nothing. 
    No TV manufacturers are getting a cut per showing if someone watches a certain network's programming on their set.  No radio manufacturers are getting a cut per hour when you listen to a certain channel with your head unit.  

    I do think Apple should get some kind of commission for linking/facilitating the subscription initially, but I don't think 30% for a year is fair and obviously neither do Netflix, Spotify and a few other big players.  Apple should get a bigger cut initially, maybe the first (paid) month or quarter maximum and then a cut of subscription pricing (5-10%) for ongoing costs (payment processing, App hosting, support, etc.)  The Netflix app is pretty small (not even 100MB) and the streaming traffic isn't running over Apple's servers, so the actual costs to Apple for handling this App are pretty low.  

    For the big players, the payoff for the "Marketing Service" that they get included in their 30% is pretty moot.  Everyone and their dog has heard of Netflix in the US.  Perhaps Apple could have a tiered system per country storefront.  For example, Apps with a monthly subscription revenue of $1 million or less are in the 30%/15% tier (with the larger percent cut being limited to 1-3 months) and get marketing and Highlights and feature spots in the App Store.  For Apps $5 million or less to $1 million 20%/10% and so on so that the bigger the company behind the app, the less they would pay as a percent and consequently the less Apple could waste time in marketing apps that everyone already has.  No one needs an Ad for Netflix in the US App Store.  Maybe in other countries Netflix could benefit from some marketing boost according to their revenue numbers and consequently pay more via their tier in that storefront and receive the appropriate marketing and other features.
    Ah, let the big guys get away from exploiting you and screw the little guy.

    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    Apple isn’t providing access. Consumers provide the access. Apple simply provides a very well done and truested MEANS means of access - the App Store. But to force a company making an app to hand over so much of their hard earned money for the “privilege” of having their app available is kind of messed up. Especially when their is no real alternative. The Mac App Store is the better way as users have the option of going through apples curated (and safer) route, or choosing to go direct via some other source. 

    However, on a phone or tablet, it does make more sense to lock things down a bit more for security reasons. But to say that an app dev should pay for access is like saying windows PC program makers should have been doing that since windows held such a dominant command of the market at one point.

    Consumers don't provide access that's just ridiculous. I don't have to ask my neighbor who owns an iPad permission to watch Netflix. I found Spotify and others by Apples heavy and free promotion of these apps. Apple made Spotify the monster it is today. ACCESS.

    "But to force a company making an app to hand over so much of their hard earned money for the “privilege” of having their app available is kind of messed up."

    Right because the billions that went into developing iPhone, Mac, iPad, Watch, App Store, iOS, iTunes, Apple Music etc. wasn't hard work at all....

    "Especially when their is no real alternative. "
    *FACEPALM*...... You just contradicted yourself. This is EXACTLY why Apple deserves a cut for their hard work.
    If Netflix doesn't like it maybe they should develop their own phone, computers, OSes, streaming boxes, store front etc.
    If there were no apps other than Apple’s stock apps the iPhone and iPad would be mostly worthless. It’s in Apple’s interest to have a platform people want (and can afford) to develop for. My Netflix subscription has nothing to do with Apple. I signed up because of the programming Netflix has not anything Apple did. As far as free promotion, care to provide some screen shots of all of Apple’s free promotion of Netflix and Spotify?
    hammeroftruthclaire1
  • Reply 33 of 56
    @claire1 ;

    I’m not suggesting the big guys “get away” with exploitation and the little guys get screwed. I’m saying that the little guys benefit much more from the services their 30% cut buys than the big guys.
    Additionally, look at the total pay out for the proverbial big and little guy. Which would you rather have: 30% of $100k or 10% of $10 million? What could you do with that difference in capital?
    Basically, Apple doesn’t do more work for the big guy for his 30% than the little guy. There aren’t 20 featured spots for Netflix for every 1 of XYZ streaming app. Payment processing costs are in the 3% neighborhood. Some more money goes to hosting, support, some innovation/R&D, but do those things add up to 30%? Is the marketing for big names like Netflix worth the difference?
    edited August 2018
  • Reply 34 of 56
    claire1claire1 Posts: 497unconfirmed, member
    claire1 said:
    Apple’s commission is ridiculous. A 30/70 model is unsustainable for many companies and I totally understand why the likes of Spotify and Netflix don’t want it.
    The problem is that they’ll have to deal with a less than favorable user experience by not having a sign up in-app, but that’s really Apple’s fault and not theirs.

    Apple Pay for physical purchases is way more reasonable for subscriptions, or say 90/10 from the get go. 

    I wish the EU would fight Apple on this. Having two ecosystems out there that abuse their market share is a problem. At some point an ecosystem is so big it directly influences economy on a macro scale. This is not Apple from the 90s anymore. It’s a trillion dollar company that dictates how millions of apps are monetized. They are the gatekeepers. They control information, news, everything.  

    Apple delivered me over $5M in revenues. I wish that was profit though; net profit was actually not that high. They enabled developers like me. But at the same time they allowed an influx of millions of apps to be sold for $0 and changed the perception of value of content. The only way to make money is through IAPs now and offer the game for free, and to corrupt gameplay for monetization schemes. Their practices causes the charts to be dominated by apps that make millions a day and the chart never changes because these devs buy their way to the charts. It’s sickening. 

    I sincerely hope that the future platform, whatever OS it is, embraces decentralized blockchain based app stores where the rules are rewritten in favor of developers. No marketing bullshit but actually empower devs to monetize properly. 
    Waahhh Waahhhh Wahhhh Apple should  develop everything for ME and give all their money to ME!

    And of course it's Apple's fault that developers put free games on the App Store. My neighbors dog ran away, that also is Apples fault!!

    tmay said:
    mac_128 said:
    OK, I’ll be the guy who points out, and likely take the abuse, that Apple streaming devices would be a lot less attractive if they did not have access to Netflix. There’s two sides to this issue, and neither is very pretty. Apple wanting to take a cut of a subscription service which does need their platform to succeed is kind of ridiculous. Netflix developed the iOS and tvOS app primarily for the convenience of their Apple customers, not to leverage the Apple platform to increase their visibility. If I couldn’t get Netflix on my Apple TV, I probably wouldn’t have bought one, and gone with a Roku instead, which is how I handled Amazon Prime (literally switching boxes to watch Prime content, and some others). We’ve already seen this play out with Amazon pulling the Apple TV from their website because it didn’t offer a Prime App, which was entirely up to them to provide or not, likely over similar issues, which is why we likely now have an Prime app that doesn’t allow in app purchases. Fortunately, this is not a major issue for me.  Going to the Amazon app with one click purchasing is no more difficult than buying it in app.
    If by streaming devices, you mean iOS and tvOS devices, than I don't disagree that there would be some reduced sales with that scenario. At the same time, Netflix would see greatly reduced revenues in that scenario, and open the door to competitors, of which their are many. 

    Apple customers are just too valuable to ignore for long, or to attempt to leverage to other devices.

    Exactly. If Netflix wasn't on Apple TV, I would have gotten Hulu instead. This is probably what he mean by "neither is very pretty". Or he was describing his ugly Roku box.


    mbenz1962 said:
    nunzy said:
    Netflix should pay Apple every time somebody uses an Apple product to watch Netflix. Every time.

    They use loopholes to screw Apple. That's not fair to any of us.
    Either you meant to say "every time someone uses and Apple product to subscribe to Nextflix" or I missed your /s tag, because someone paying apple a per stream commission would be nuts. Like Seankill said:
    seankill said:
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    Why stop there? Should PC manufacturers get a cut for all the stuff bought on their computers? Or how about the IP made on their computers?

    I only think Apple should get a cut if their services are used, how it currently is. I don’t see any issues with the Apps, say Netflix, routing the user through a web browser to sign up outside of Apples services. Thus, Apple should get nothing. 
    No TV manufacturers are getting a cut per showing if someone watches a certain network's programming on their set.  No radio manufacturers are getting a cut per hour when you listen to a certain channel with your head unit.  

    I do think Apple should get some kind of commission for linking/facilitating the subscription initially, but I don't think 30% for a year is fair and obviously neither do Netflix, Spotify and a few other big players.  Apple should get a bigger cut initially, maybe the first (paid) month or quarter maximum and then a cut of subscription pricing (5-10%) for ongoing costs (payment processing, App hosting, support, etc.)  The Netflix app is pretty small (not even 100MB) and the streaming traffic isn't running over Apple's servers, so the actual costs to Apple for handling this App are pretty low.  

    For the big players, the payoff for the "Marketing Service" that they get included in their 30% is pretty moot.  Everyone and their dog has heard of Netflix in the US.  Perhaps Apple could have a tiered system per country storefront.  For example, Apps with a monthly subscription revenue of $1 million or less are in the 30%/15% tier (with the larger percent cut being limited to 1-3 months) and get marketing and Highlights and feature spots in the App Store.  For Apps $5 million or less to $1 million 20%/10% and so on so that the bigger the company behind the app, the less they would pay as a percent and consequently the less Apple could waste time in marketing apps that everyone already has.  No one needs an Ad for Netflix in the US App Store.  Maybe in other countries Netflix could benefit from some marketing boost according to their revenue numbers and consequently pay more via their tier in that storefront and receive the appropriate marketing and other features.
    Ah, let the big guys get away from exploiting you and screw the little guy.

    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    Apple isn’t providing access. Consumers provide the access. Apple simply provides a very well done and truested MEANS means of access - the App Store. But to force a company making an app to hand over so much of their hard earned money for the “privilege” of having their app available is kind of messed up. Especially when their is no real alternative. The Mac App Store is the better way as users have the option of going through apples curated (and safer) route, or choosing to go direct via some other source. 

    However, on a phone or tablet, it does make more sense to lock things down a bit more for security reasons. But to say that an app dev should pay for access is like saying windows PC program makers should have been doing that since windows held such a dominant command of the market at one point.

    Consumers don't provide access that's just ridiculous. I don't have to ask my neighbor who owns an iPad permission to watch Netflix. I found Spotify and others by Apples heavy and free promotion of these apps. Apple made Spotify the monster it is today. ACCESS.

    "But to force a company making an app to hand over so much of their hard earned money for the “privilege” of having their app available is kind of messed up."

    Right because the billions that went into developing iPhone, Mac, iPad, Watch, App Store, iOS, iTunes, Apple Music etc. wasn't hard work at all....

    "Especially when their is no real alternative. "
    *FACEPALM*...... You just contradicted yourself. This is EXACTLY why Apple deserves a cut for their hard work.
    If Netflix doesn't like it maybe they should develop their own phone, computers, OSes, streaming boxes, store front etc.
    If there were no apps other than Apple’s stock apps the iPhone and iPad would be mostly worthless. It’s in Apple’s interest to have a platform people want (and can afford) to develop for. My Netflix subscription has nothing to do with Apple. I signed up because of the programming Netflix has not anything Apple did. As far as free promotion, care to provide some screen shots of all of Apple’s free promotion of Netflix and Spotify?
    So Apple should remove the app from iOS? Because hey, Apple has no influence at all.
    And what makes you or the developers the ones to say what Apple should do with their revolutionary platform? If you opened a store should the food manufacturers not share a penny with you? Because hey, you're not responsible for their success and you can buy their products elsewhere like Wal Mart.

    "As far as free promotion, care to provide some screen shots of all of Apple’s free promotion of Netflix and Spotify?"

    Sure let me step into my time machine to 2011 when Spotify was on the front page and promoted every day. I'll be back with those screenshots from my 4th gen iPod.
    Also not sure if you're new to Apple but they promote tons of 3rd party content for free in "featured". /s

    mbenz1962 said:
    @claire1 ;

    I’m not suggesting the big guys “get away” with exploitation and the little guys get screwed. I’m saying that the little guys benefit much more from the services their 30% cut buys than the big guys.
    Additionally, look at the total pay out for the proverbial big and little guy. Which would you rather have: 30% of $100k or 10% of $10 million? What could you do with that difference in capital?
    Basically, Apple doesn’t do more work for the big guy for his 30% than the little guy. There aren’t 20 featured spots for Netflix for every 1 of XYZ streaming app. Payment processing costs are in the 3% neighborhood. Some more money goes to hosting, support, some innovation/R&D, but do those things add up to 30%? Is the marketing for big names like Netflix worth the difference?
    I see what you're saying now but being unfair is never well received by the public and will start more wars against Apple than ever. That's not even considering the media frenzy, "Apple is greedy" meme and PayGate etc.

    30% of one dollar is still 30%.

    What really pisses me off is google creating a knockoff OS that made it easy for developers to port over. I believe if a developer creates exclusive content for Apple they should be rewarded with that. Meaning If I create an exclusive game for iOS 12+/iPhone 8+ devices I should receive 80% rather than 70. This will create even more compatibility and reduce crappy apps on Apple devices that were developed like crap to accommodate the millions of crap knockoffs. This hurt Apple and its customers a lot and slowed down app evolution. I don't think it's fair I have to play crappy games on my capable Apple device because it also runs on knockoffs I don't care for.
    A little off topic but this is the only reason I see developers should be awarded a higher rate of pay.
  • Reply 35 of 56
    rogifan_new said:
     And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    They do if you use Apple Pay.


  • Reply 36 of 56
    I want to sell my goods in Walmart because they get a lot of traffic. I want prominent shelf space. Oh, and I don’t want to pay Walmart any retail markup. 
    That's a pretty flawed comparison unless Walmart is the only place you can buy your goods and that is the crux of this revolt. 

    The "Apple tax" was in place years ago to help defray the costs of supporting an App Store platform and making Apple a decent profit. Now that Apple has mountains of cash, there is a feeling that the percentage that they collect should be a lot less than 30. 

    This is is something that will get resolved by next year after some pretty drastic steps between Apple and developers. 

    Grab some popcorn.  The fireworks are starting soon. 
    rogifan_new
  • Reply 37 of 56
    seankill said:
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.


    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 

    Ecosystems like iOS are necessary for Apps to succeed.

    FTFY.
    Without the internet iOS App Store couldn’t succeed. Should ISPs get a cut too?
    They do with metering your data these days. 
  • Reply 38 of 56
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,921member
    rogifan_new said:
     And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    They do if you use Apple Pay.


    Right but that’s Apple Pay not an App Store commission.
  • Reply 39 of 56
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,921member

    claire1 said:
    claire1 said:
    Apple’s commission is ridiculous. A 30/70 model is unsustainable for many companies and I totally understand why the likes of Spotify and Netflix don’t want it.
    The problem is that they’ll have to deal with a less than favorable user experience by not having a sign up in-app, but that’s really Apple’s fault and not theirs.

    Apple Pay for physical purchases is way more reasonable for subscriptions, or say 90/10 from the get go. 

    I wish the EU would fight Apple on this. Having two ecosystems out there that abuse their market share is a problem. At some point an ecosystem is so big it directly influences economy on a macro scale. This is not Apple from the 90s anymore. It’s a trillion dollar company that dictates how millions of apps are monetized. They are the gatekeepers. They control information, news, everything.  

    Apple delivered me over $5M in revenues. I wish that was profit though; net profit was actually not that high. They enabled developers like me. But at the same time they allowed an influx of millions of apps to be sold for $0 and changed the perception of value of content. The only way to make money is through IAPs now and offer the game for free, and to corrupt gameplay for monetization schemes. Their practices causes the charts to be dominated by apps that make millions a day and the chart never changes because these devs buy their way to the charts. It’s sickening. 

    I sincerely hope that the future platform, whatever OS it is, embraces decentralized blockchain based app stores where the rules are rewritten in favor of developers. No marketing bullshit but actually empower devs to monetize properly. 
    Waahhh Waahhhh Wahhhh Apple should  develop everything for ME and give all their money to ME!

    And of course it's Apple's fault that developers put free games on the App Store. My neighbors dog ran away, that also is Apples fault!!

    tmay said:
    mac_128 said:
    OK, I’ll be the guy who points out, and likely take the abuse, that Apple streaming devices would be a lot less attractive if they did not have access to Netflix. There’s two sides to this issue, and neither is very pretty. Apple wanting to take a cut of a subscription service which does need their platform to succeed is kind of ridiculous. Netflix developed the iOS and tvOS app primarily for the convenience of their Apple customers, not to leverage the Apple platform to increase their visibility. If I couldn’t get Netflix on my Apple TV, I probably wouldn’t have bought one, and gone with a Roku instead, which is how I handled Amazon Prime (literally switching boxes to watch Prime content, and some others). We’ve already seen this play out with Amazon pulling the Apple TV from their website because it didn’t offer a Prime App, which was entirely up to them to provide or not, likely over similar issues, which is why we likely now have an Prime app that doesn’t allow in app purchases. Fortunately, this is not a major issue for me.  Going to the Amazon app with one click purchasing is no more difficult than buying it in app.
    If by streaming devices, you mean iOS and tvOS devices, than I don't disagree that there would be some reduced sales with that scenario. At the same time, Netflix would see greatly reduced revenues in that scenario, and open the door to competitors, of which their are many. 

    Apple customers are just too valuable to ignore for long, or to attempt to leverage to other devices.

    Exactly. If Netflix wasn't on Apple TV, I would have gotten Hulu instead. This is probably what he mean by "neither is very pretty". Or he was describing his ugly Roku box.


    mbenz1962 said:
    nunzy said:
    Netflix should pay Apple every time somebody uses an Apple product to watch Netflix. Every time.

    They use loopholes to screw Apple. That's not fair to any of us.
    Either you meant to say "every time someone uses and Apple product to subscribe to Nextflix" or I missed your /s tag, because someone paying apple a per stream commission would be nuts. Like Seankill said:
    seankill said:
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    Why stop there? Should PC manufacturers get a cut for all the stuff bought on their computers? Or how about the IP made on their computers?

    I only think Apple should get a cut if their services are used, how it currently is. I don’t see any issues with the Apps, say Netflix, routing the user through a web browser to sign up outside of Apples services. Thus, Apple should get nothing. 
    No TV manufacturers are getting a cut per showing if someone watches a certain network's programming on their set.  No radio manufacturers are getting a cut per hour when you listen to a certain channel with your head unit.  

    I do think Apple should get some kind of commission for linking/facilitating the subscription initially, but I don't think 30% for a year is fair and obviously neither do Netflix, Spotify and a few other big players.  Apple should get a bigger cut initially, maybe the first (paid) month or quarter maximum and then a cut of subscription pricing (5-10%) for ongoing costs (payment processing, App hosting, support, etc.)  The Netflix app is pretty small (not even 100MB) and the streaming traffic isn't running over Apple's servers, so the actual costs to Apple for handling this App are pretty low.  

    For the big players, the payoff for the "Marketing Service" that they get included in their 30% is pretty moot.  Everyone and their dog has heard of Netflix in the US.  Perhaps Apple could have a tiered system per country storefront.  For example, Apps with a monthly subscription revenue of $1 million or less are in the 30%/15% tier (with the larger percent cut being limited to 1-3 months) and get marketing and Highlights and feature spots in the App Store.  For Apps $5 million or less to $1 million 20%/10% and so on so that the bigger the company behind the app, the less they would pay as a percent and consequently the less Apple could waste time in marketing apps that everyone already has.  No one needs an Ad for Netflix in the US App Store.  Maybe in other countries Netflix could benefit from some marketing boost according to their revenue numbers and consequently pay more via their tier in that storefront and receive the appropriate marketing and other features.
    Ah, let the big guys get away from exploiting you and screw the little guy.

    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    Apple isn’t providing access. Consumers provide the access. Apple simply provides a very well done and truested MEANS means of access - the App Store. But to force a company making an app to hand over so much of their hard earned money for the “privilege” of having their app available is kind of messed up. Especially when their is no real alternative. The Mac App Store is the better way as users have the option of going through apples curated (and safer) route, or choosing to go direct via some other source. 

    However, on a phone or tablet, it does make more sense to lock things down a bit more for security reasons. But to say that an app dev should pay for access is like saying windows PC program makers should have been doing that since windows held such a dominant command of the market at one point.

    Consumers don't provide access that's just ridiculous. I don't have to ask my neighbor who owns an iPad permission to watch Netflix. I found Spotify and others by Apples heavy and free promotion of these apps. Apple made Spotify the monster it is today. ACCESS.

    "But to force a company making an app to hand over so much of their hard earned money for the “privilege” of having their app available is kind of messed up."

    Right because the billions that went into developing iPhone, Mac, iPad, Watch, App Store, iOS, iTunes, Apple Music etc. wasn't hard work at all....

    "Especially when their is no real alternative. "
    *FACEPALM*...... You just contradicted yourself. This is EXACTLY why Apple deserves a cut for their hard work.
    If Netflix doesn't like it maybe they should develop their own phone, computers, OSes, streaming boxes, store front etc.
    If there were no apps other than Apple’s stock apps the iPhone and iPad would be mostly worthless. It’s in Apple’s interest to have a platform people want (and can afford) to develop for. My Netflix subscription has nothing to do with Apple. I signed up because of the programming Netflix has not anything Apple did. As far as free promotion, care to provide some screen shots of all of Apple’s free promotion of Netflix and Spotify?
    So Apple should remove the app from iOS? Because hey, Apple has no influence at all.
    And what makes you or the developers the ones to say what Apple should do with their revolutionary platform? If you opened a store should the food manufacturers not share a penny with you? Because hey, you're not responsible for their success and you can buy their products elsewhere like Wal Mart.

    "As far as free promotion, care to provide some screen shots of all of Apple’s free promotion of Netflix and Spotify?"

    Sure let me step into my time machine to 2011 when Spotify was on the front page and promoted every day. I'll be back with those screenshots from my 4th gen iPod.
    Also not sure if you're new to Apple but they promote tons of 3rd party content for free in "featured". /s
    Using your logic, why then are any developers allowed to offer apps on the App Store for free? And what exactly is the $99/yr developer fee for?
  • Reply 40 of 56
    claire1claire1 Posts: 497unconfirmed, member

    claire1 said:
    claire1 said:
    Apple’s commission is ridiculous. A 30/70 model is unsustainable for many companies and I totally understand why the likes of Spotify and Netflix don’t want it.
    The problem is that they’ll have to deal with a less than favorable user experience by not having a sign up in-app, but that’s really Apple’s fault and not theirs.

    Apple Pay for physical purchases is way more reasonable for subscriptions, or say 90/10 from the get go. 

    I wish the EU would fight Apple on this. Having two ecosystems out there that abuse their market share is a problem. At some point an ecosystem is so big it directly influences economy on a macro scale. This is not Apple from the 90s anymore. It’s a trillion dollar company that dictates how millions of apps are monetized. They are the gatekeepers. They control information, news, everything.  

    Apple delivered me over $5M in revenues. I wish that was profit though; net profit was actually not that high. They enabled developers like me. But at the same time they allowed an influx of millions of apps to be sold for $0 and changed the perception of value of content. The only way to make money is through IAPs now and offer the game for free, and to corrupt gameplay for monetization schemes. Their practices causes the charts to be dominated by apps that make millions a day and the chart never changes because these devs buy their way to the charts. It’s sickening. 

    I sincerely hope that the future platform, whatever OS it is, embraces decentralized blockchain based app stores where the rules are rewritten in favor of developers. No marketing bullshit but actually empower devs to monetize properly. 
    Waahhh Waahhhh Wahhhh Apple should  develop everything for ME and give all their money to ME!

    And of course it's Apple's fault that developers put free games on the App Store. My neighbors dog ran away, that also is Apples fault!!

    tmay said:
    mac_128 said:
    OK, I’ll be the guy who points out, and likely take the abuse, that Apple streaming devices would be a lot less attractive if they did not have access to Netflix. There’s two sides to this issue, and neither is very pretty. Apple wanting to take a cut of a subscription service which does need their platform to succeed is kind of ridiculous. Netflix developed the iOS and tvOS app primarily for the convenience of their Apple customers, not to leverage the Apple platform to increase their visibility. If I couldn’t get Netflix on my Apple TV, I probably wouldn’t have bought one, and gone with a Roku instead, which is how I handled Amazon Prime (literally switching boxes to watch Prime content, and some others). We’ve already seen this play out with Amazon pulling the Apple TV from their website because it didn’t offer a Prime App, which was entirely up to them to provide or not, likely over similar issues, which is why we likely now have an Prime app that doesn’t allow in app purchases. Fortunately, this is not a major issue for me.  Going to the Amazon app with one click purchasing is no more difficult than buying it in app.
    If by streaming devices, you mean iOS and tvOS devices, than I don't disagree that there would be some reduced sales with that scenario. At the same time, Netflix would see greatly reduced revenues in that scenario, and open the door to competitors, of which their are many. 

    Apple customers are just too valuable to ignore for long, or to attempt to leverage to other devices.

    Exactly. If Netflix wasn't on Apple TV, I would have gotten Hulu instead. This is probably what he mean by "neither is very pretty". Or he was describing his ugly Roku box.


    mbenz1962 said:
    nunzy said:
    Netflix should pay Apple every time somebody uses an Apple product to watch Netflix. Every time.

    They use loopholes to screw Apple. That's not fair to any of us.
    Either you meant to say "every time someone uses and Apple product to subscribe to Nextflix" or I missed your /s tag, because someone paying apple a per stream commission would be nuts. Like Seankill said:
    seankill said:
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    Why stop there? Should PC manufacturers get a cut for all the stuff bought on their computers? Or how about the IP made on their computers?

    I only think Apple should get a cut if their services are used, how it currently is. I don’t see any issues with the Apps, say Netflix, routing the user through a web browser to sign up outside of Apples services. Thus, Apple should get nothing. 
    No TV manufacturers are getting a cut per showing if someone watches a certain network's programming on their set.  No radio manufacturers are getting a cut per hour when you listen to a certain channel with your head unit.  

    I do think Apple should get some kind of commission for linking/facilitating the subscription initially, but I don't think 30% for a year is fair and obviously neither do Netflix, Spotify and a few other big players.  Apple should get a bigger cut initially, maybe the first (paid) month or quarter maximum and then a cut of subscription pricing (5-10%) for ongoing costs (payment processing, App hosting, support, etc.)  The Netflix app is pretty small (not even 100MB) and the streaming traffic isn't running over Apple's servers, so the actual costs to Apple for handling this App are pretty low.  

    For the big players, the payoff for the "Marketing Service" that they get included in their 30% is pretty moot.  Everyone and their dog has heard of Netflix in the US.  Perhaps Apple could have a tiered system per country storefront.  For example, Apps with a monthly subscription revenue of $1 million or less are in the 30%/15% tier (with the larger percent cut being limited to 1-3 months) and get marketing and Highlights and feature spots in the App Store.  For Apps $5 million or less to $1 million 20%/10% and so on so that the bigger the company behind the app, the less they would pay as a percent and consequently the less Apple could waste time in marketing apps that everyone already has.  No one needs an Ad for Netflix in the US App Store.  Maybe in other countries Netflix could benefit from some marketing boost according to their revenue numbers and consequently pay more via their tier in that storefront and receive the appropriate marketing and other features.
    Ah, let the big guys get away from exploiting you and screw the little guy.

    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.
    Apple isn’t providing access. Consumers provide the access. Apple simply provides a very well done and truested MEANS means of access - the App Store. But to force a company making an app to hand over so much of their hard earned money for the “privilege” of having their app available is kind of messed up. Especially when their is no real alternative. The Mac App Store is the better way as users have the option of going through apples curated (and safer) route, or choosing to go direct via some other source. 

    However, on a phone or tablet, it does make more sense to lock things down a bit more for security reasons. But to say that an app dev should pay for access is like saying windows PC program makers should have been doing that since windows held such a dominant command of the market at one point.

    Consumers don't provide access that's just ridiculous. I don't have to ask my neighbor who owns an iPad permission to watch Netflix. I found Spotify and others by Apples heavy and free promotion of these apps. Apple made Spotify the monster it is today. ACCESS.

    "But to force a company making an app to hand over so much of their hard earned money for the “privilege” of having their app available is kind of messed up."

    Right because the billions that went into developing iPhone, Mac, iPad, Watch, App Store, iOS, iTunes, Apple Music etc. wasn't hard work at all....

    "Especially when their is no real alternative. "
    *FACEPALM*...... You just contradicted yourself. This is EXACTLY why Apple deserves a cut for their hard work.
    If Netflix doesn't like it maybe they should develop their own phone, computers, OSes, streaming boxes, store front etc.
    If there were no apps other than Apple’s stock apps the iPhone and iPad would be mostly worthless. It’s in Apple’s interest to have a platform people want (and can afford) to develop for. My Netflix subscription has nothing to do with Apple. I signed up because of the programming Netflix has not anything Apple did. As far as free promotion, care to provide some screen shots of all of Apple’s free promotion of Netflix and Spotify?
    So Apple should remove the app from iOS? Because hey, Apple has no influence at all.
    And what makes you or the developers the ones to say what Apple should do with their revolutionary platform? If you opened a store should the food manufacturers not share a penny with you? Because hey, you're not responsible for their success and you can buy their products elsewhere like Wal Mart.

    "As far as free promotion, care to provide some screen shots of all of Apple’s free promotion of Netflix and Spotify?"

    Sure let me step into my time machine to 2011 when Spotify was on the front page and promoted every day. I'll be back with those screenshots from my 4th gen iPod.
    Also not sure if you're new to Apple but they promote tons of 3rd party content for free in "featured". /s
    Using your logic, why then are any developers allowed to offer apps on the App Store for free? And what exactly is the $99/yr developer fee for?
    A developer having the option to download their app for free is good. But to think these developers don't want money is insane. They make money through in-app purchases and advertising etc.
    Google is also "free".
    But when someone wants to SELL on the App Store then it makes perfect sense for Apple to get a cut.

    Not sure what the $99 fee is but looking at the App Store numbers it's one heck of a deal!
Sign In or Register to comment.