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

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 56
    claire1 said:

    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!
    Since Apple can’t stop users from subscribing to services like Netflix via the browser I think Apple should allow them to offer a URL in-app which would re-direct users to the browser to sign up. Apple will still be making a shit-ton of money from developers who chose to use/offer Apple for payment processing, IAP with games, etc. But now that Apple has its own streaming music service and will have its own streaming original video content service does it really seem fair for them to charge Spotify and Netflix 30% or 15%? Seems like an unfair advantage. Honestly I think Netflix has the upper hand here. Apple is never going to remove them from the App Store and users won’t have any issue signing up via their website. The writing was on the wall when Netflix refused to be part of Apple’s TV app.
  • Reply 42 of 56
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,656member
    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.
    iOS depends on the apps. Not the other way around.

    Would you still buy into an iOS device if it were limited to stock iOS apps?

    If Facebook pulled WhatsApp from iOS, what impact do you think losing that one app on the platform would have?

    WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating.

    At present there is a somewhat symbionic relationship and the 'ecosystem' is made up of both iOS and the apps, not simply iOS.
    gatorguy
  • Reply 43 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,662member
    avon b7 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.


    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 

    Ecosystems like iOS are necessary for Apps to succeed.

    FTFY.
    iOS depends on the apps. Not the other way around.

    Would you still buy into an iOS device if it were limited to stock iOS apps?

    If Facebook pulled WhatsApp from iOS, what impact do you think losing that one app on the platform would have?

    WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating.

    At present there is a somewhat symbionic relationship and the 'ecosystem' is made up of both iOS and the apps, not simply iOS.
    I'm impressed the with amount of "chicken and egg" discussion that goes on about Apps, some 10 years on.

    "WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating",

    Only in China, and then only if the Chinese Government couldn't figure out something else for the convenience of spying on its "citizens".

    Must be why Google is reconsidering it's stance on China; all that data going to waste in a bureaucracy, when it could be put to good use for ads.
  • Reply 44 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,662member

    claire1 said:

    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!
    Since Apple can’t stop users from subscribing to services like Netflix via the browser I think Apple should allow them to offer a URL in-app which would re-direct users to the browser to sign up. Apple will still be making a shit-ton of money from developers who chose to use/offer Apple for payment processing, IAP with games, etc. But now that Apple has its own streaming music service and will have its own streaming original video content service does it really seem fair for them to charge Spotify and Netflix 30% or 15%? Seems like an unfair advantage. Honestly I think Netflix has the upper hand here. Apple is never going to remove them from the App Store and users won’t have any issue signing up via their website. The writing was on the wall when Netflix refused to be part of Apple’s TV app.
    I still haven't figured out why you give a shit about Netflix, as if they are an injured party. They aren't. If their users are literally too fucking lazy to search for Netflix.com to sign up, saving some small amount of revenue for Netflix, according to the article, then Netflix isn't trying very hard. Seriously, all Netflix and its investors care about is adding subscribers. 

    WRT Spotify, I can understand your concerns, and that simply for the fact that they are, and will be forever, a money losing operation, no matter how hard they try an blame Apple subscription rules, and Apple Music, for their problems.
  • Reply 45 of 56
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,656member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 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.


    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 

    Ecosystems like iOS are necessary for Apps to succeed.

    FTFY.
    iOS depends on the apps. Not the other way around.

    Would you still buy into an iOS device if it were limited to stock iOS apps?

    If Facebook pulled WhatsApp from iOS, what impact do you think losing that one app on the platform would have?

    WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating.

    At present there is a somewhat symbionic relationship and the 'ecosystem' is made up of both iOS and the apps, not simply iOS.
    I'm impressed the with amount of "chicken and egg" discussion that goes on about Apps, some 10 years on.

    "WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating",

    Only in China, and then only if the Chinese Government couldn't figure out something else for the convenience of spying on its "citizens".

    Must be why Google is reconsidering it's stance on China; all that data going to waste in a bureaucracy, when it could be put to good use for ads.
    It is impossible to envisage Apple's current business model without China. 

    Losing China would be devastating as it would have a huge negative impact on the company as a whole and be hugely favourable to Apple's competitors.

    Losing WeChat would be synonymous of losing China.
  • Reply 46 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,662member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 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.


    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 

    Ecosystems like iOS are necessary for Apps to succeed.

    FTFY.
    iOS depends on the apps. Not the other way around.

    Would you still buy into an iOS device if it were limited to stock iOS apps?

    If Facebook pulled WhatsApp from iOS, what impact do you think losing that one app on the platform would have?

    WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating.

    At present there is a somewhat symbionic relationship and the 'ecosystem' is made up of both iOS and the apps, not simply iOS.
    I'm impressed the with amount of "chicken and egg" discussion that goes on about Apps, some 10 years on.

    "WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating",

    Only in China, and then only if the Chinese Government couldn't figure out something else for the convenience of spying on its "citizens".

    Must be why Google is reconsidering it's stance on China; all that data going to waste in a bureaucracy, when it could be put to good use for ads.
    It is impossible to envisage Apple's current business model without China. 

    Losing China would be devastating as it would have a huge negative impact on the company as a whole and be hugely favourable to Apple's competitors.

    Losing WeChat would be synonymous of losing China.
    Well, since neither of those "cataclysms" has occurred, nor the tariffs, nor the banning, Apple hasn't lost China,

    But have hope; there's always a chance of collapse after the release of the three new iPhone models on September 12.

    That or yet another run of accelerated iPhone sales in China.


    I forgot to paste this earlier;

    https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/22/australia-bans-huawei-and-zte-from-supplying-technology-for-its-5g-network/

    “the Government considers that the involvement of vendors who are likely to be subject to extrajudicial directions from foreign government that conflict with Australian law, may risk failure by the carrier to adequately protect a 5G network from unauthorized access or interference.”

    What happens in China stays in China...
    edited August 2018
  • Reply 47 of 56
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,922member
    tmay said:

    claire1 said:

    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!
    Since Apple can’t stop users from subscribing to services like Netflix via the browser I think Apple should allow them to offer a URL in-app which would re-direct users to the browser to sign up. Apple will still be making a shit-ton of money from developers who chose to use/offer Apple for payment processing, IAP with games, etc. But now that Apple has its own streaming music service and will have its own streaming original video content service does it really seem fair for them to charge Spotify and Netflix 30% or 15%? Seems like an unfair advantage. Honestly I think Netflix has the upper hand here. Apple is never going to remove them from the App Store and users won’t have any issue signing up via their website. The writing was on the wall when Netflix refused to be part of Apple’s TV app.
    I still haven't figured out why you give a shit about Netflix, as if they are an injured party. They aren't. If their users are literally too fucking lazy to search for Netflix.com to sign up, saving some small amount of revenue for Netflix, according to the article, then Netflix isn't trying very hard. Seriously, all Netflix and its investors care about is adding subscribers. 

    WRT Spotify, I can understand your concerns, and that simply for the fact that they are, and will be forever, a money losing operation, no matter how hard they try an blame Apple subscription rules, and Apple Music, for their problems.
    Wait I thought signing up via iTunes was a good thing, good user experience, safe and secure credit card billing. Now it’s users are too lazy to sign up via the web? 
  • Reply 48 of 56
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,656member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 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.


    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 

    Ecosystems like iOS are necessary for Apps to succeed.

    FTFY.
    iOS depends on the apps. Not the other way around.

    Would you still buy into an iOS device if it were limited to stock iOS apps?

    If Facebook pulled WhatsApp from iOS, what impact do you think losing that one app on the platform would have?

    WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating.

    At present there is a somewhat symbionic relationship and the 'ecosystem' is made up of both iOS and the apps, not simply iOS.
    I'm impressed the with amount of "chicken and egg" discussion that goes on about Apps, some 10 years on.

    "WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating",

    Only in China, and then only if the Chinese Government couldn't figure out something else for the convenience of spying on its "citizens".

    Must be why Google is reconsidering it's stance on China; all that data going to waste in a bureaucracy, when it could be put to good use for ads.
    It is impossible to envisage Apple's current business model without China. 

    Losing China would be devastating as it would have a huge negative impact on the company as a whole and be hugely favourable to Apple's competitors.

    Losing WeChat would be synonymous of losing China.
    Well, since neither of those "cataclysms" has occurred, nor the tariffs, nor the banning, Apple hasn't lost China,

    But have hope; there's always a chance of collapse after the release of the three new iPhone models on September 12.

    That or yet another run of accelerated iPhone sales in China.


    I forgot to paste this earlier;

    https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/22/australia-bans-huawei-and-zte-from-supplying-technology-for-its-5g-network/

    “the Government considers that the involvement of vendors who are likely to be subject to extrajudicial directions from foreign government that conflict with Australian law, may risk failure by the carrier to adequately protect a 5G network from unauthorized access or interference.”

    What happens in China stays in China...
    Seeing as you are throwing everything bar the kitchen sink into the soup, I take it you agree with me that it is the apps that are key to platform viability and not the platform itself.

    Australia's decision is politically motivated (following pressure from the US) as (just as with the US situation) no evidence has been provided. Australian's will now pay more as a result and face a difficult future relationship with its most important trading partner.

    Ah yes, the annual iPhone refresh, its annual peak. Same story, nothing new with that.

    A 'run' will happen, just like it does every year. What needs to happen though is to break the cycle of flat sales.

    Ah, I forgot to post this:

    https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/22/17768966/huawei-xiaomi-idc-smartphone-market-europe-statistics

    Yes, that's competition when politics isn't involved and Apple needs to compete. Right now, it isn't. We'll see what happens after the refresh.

    Everything points to three full screen iPhones. The rest will have huge chins and foreheads while Apple's competitors have entire series with virtually bezeless devices. Looks count. Prices count, features count.

    Samsung seems to have dropped the ball (inexplicably) so all eyes will be on the iPhone and Mate 20 series this October but after Apple's single shot, it will have to deal with the Honor Magic 2 and the P30 Pro just a few months later.

    My out on a limb bet this year is for an across the board reduction in iPhone pricing and something game changing in Huawei's battery tech.


  • Reply 49 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,662member
    tmay said:

    claire1 said:

    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!
    Since Apple can’t stop users from subscribing to services like Netflix via the browser I think Apple should allow them to offer a URL in-app which would re-direct users to the browser to sign up. Apple will still be making a shit-ton of money from developers who chose to use/offer Apple for payment processing, IAP with games, etc. But now that Apple has its own streaming music service and will have its own streaming original video content service does it really seem fair for them to charge Spotify and Netflix 30% or 15%? Seems like an unfair advantage. Honestly I think Netflix has the upper hand here. Apple is never going to remove them from the App Store and users won’t have any issue signing up via their website. The writing was on the wall when Netflix refused to be part of Apple’s TV app.
    I still haven't figured out why you give a shit about Netflix, as if they are an injured party. They aren't. If their users are literally too fucking lazy to search for Netflix.com to sign up, saving some small amount of revenue for Netflix, according to the article, then Netflix isn't trying very hard. Seriously, all Netflix and its investors care about is adding subscribers. 

    WRT Spotify, I can understand your concerns, and that simply for the fact that they are, and will be forever, a money losing operation, no matter how hard they try an blame Apple subscription rules, and Apple Music, for their problems.
    Wait I thought signing up via iTunes was a good thing, good user experience, safe and secure credit card billing. Now it’s users are too lazy to sign up via the web? 
    Too lazy to sign up for Netflix directly after that "good user experience, safe and secure credit card billing", which aligns with what I said previously about my own Netflix experience. I'd prefer a single sign on for all my media streams to be Apple, but since I started with Netflix so long ago, even I am "too lazy" to switch over to Apple for that now.

    Maybe, and just for your sake, I'll kill my Netflix subscription, and reinitiate it through Apple, so Apple sees something like an additional revenue of $3.30 every month, at the expense of Netflix.
  • Reply 50 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,662member

    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 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.


    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 

    Ecosystems like iOS are necessary for Apps to succeed.

    FTFY.
    iOS depends on the apps. Not the other way around.

    Would you still buy into an iOS device if it were limited to stock iOS apps?

    If Facebook pulled WhatsApp from iOS, what impact do you think losing that one app on the platform would have?

    WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating.

    At present there is a somewhat symbionic relationship and the 'ecosystem' is made up of both iOS and the apps, not simply iOS.
    I'm impressed the with amount of "chicken and egg" discussion that goes on about Apps, some 10 years on.

    "WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating",

    Only in China, and then only if the Chinese Government couldn't figure out something else for the convenience of spying on its "citizens".

    Must be why Google is reconsidering it's stance on China; all that data going to waste in a bureaucracy, when it could be put to good use for ads.
    It is impossible to envisage Apple's current business model without China. 

    Losing China would be devastating as it would have a huge negative impact on the company as a whole and be hugely favourable to Apple's competitors.

    Losing WeChat would be synonymous of losing China.
    Well, since neither of those "cataclysms" has occurred, nor the tariffs, nor the banning, Apple hasn't lost China,

    But have hope; there's always a chance of collapse after the release of the three new iPhone models on September 12.

    That or yet another run of accelerated iPhone sales in China.


    I forgot to paste this earlier;

    https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/22/australia-bans-huawei-and-zte-from-supplying-technology-for-its-5g-network/

    “the Government considers that the involvement of vendors who are likely to be subject to extrajudicial directions from foreign government that conflict with Australian law, may risk failure by the carrier to adequately protect a 5G network from unauthorized access or interference.”

    What happens in China stays in China...
    Seeing as you are throwing everything bar the kitchen sink into the soup, I take it you agree with me that it is the apps that are key to platform viability and not the platform itself.

    Australia's decision is politically motivated (following pressure from the US) as (just as with the US situation) no evidence has been provided. Australian's will now pay more as a result and face a difficult future relationship with its most important trading partner.

    Ah yes, the annual iPhone refresh, its annual peak. Same story, nothing new with that.

    A 'run' will happen, just like it does every year. What needs to happen though is to break the cycle of flat sales.

    Ah, I forgot to post this:

    https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/22/17768966/huawei-xiaomi-idc-smartphone-market-europe-statistics

    Yes, that's competition when politics isn't involved and Apple needs to compete. Right now, it isn't. We'll see what happens after the refresh.

    Everything points to three full screen iPhones. The rest will have huge chins and foreheads while Apple's competitors have entire series with virtually bezeless devices. Looks count. Prices count, features count.

    Samsung seems to have dropped the ball (inexplicably) so all eyes will be on the iPhone and Mate 20 series this October but after Apple's single shot, it will have to deal with the Honor Magic 2 and the P30 Pro just a few months later.

    My out on a limb bet this year is for an across the board reduction in iPhone pricing and something game changing in Huawei's battery tech.


    I'm sure Huawei will do very well shipping at half the yearly cycle of Apple and Samsung, but, I'm still not seeing their Pro model's being the great sellers that you do.

    Still, maybe 2019 will be the year the Huawei finally outsells Apple. 

    I expect that 70% of Apple's sales next year won't have "huge chins and foreheads"; some 154 million units, leaving about 66 million units that do. Do you think that any other company will do anything close to that? It surely won't be Huawei.
  • Reply 51 of 56
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,656member
    tmay said:

    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 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.


    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 

    Ecosystems like iOS are necessary for Apps to succeed.

    FTFY.
    iOS depends on the apps. Not the other way around.

    Would you still buy into an iOS device if it were limited to stock iOS apps?

    If Facebook pulled WhatsApp from iOS, what impact do you think losing that one app on the platform would have?

    WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating.

    At present there is a somewhat symbionic relationship and the 'ecosystem' is made up of both iOS and the apps, not simply iOS.
    I'm impressed the with amount of "chicken and egg" discussion that goes on about Apps, some 10 years on.

    "WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating",

    Only in China, and then only if the Chinese Government couldn't figure out something else for the convenience of spying on its "citizens".

    Must be why Google is reconsidering it's stance on China; all that data going to waste in a bureaucracy, when it could be put to good use for ads.
    It is impossible to envisage Apple's current business model without China. 

    Losing China would be devastating as it would have a huge negative impact on the company as a whole and be hugely favourable to Apple's competitors.

    Losing WeChat would be synonymous of losing China.
    Well, since neither of those "cataclysms" has occurred, nor the tariffs, nor the banning, Apple hasn't lost China,

    But have hope; there's always a chance of collapse after the release of the three new iPhone models on September 12.

    That or yet another run of accelerated iPhone sales in China.


    I forgot to paste this earlier;

    https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/22/australia-bans-huawei-and-zte-from-supplying-technology-for-its-5g-network/

    “the Government considers that the involvement of vendors who are likely to be subject to extrajudicial directions from foreign government that conflict with Australian law, may risk failure by the carrier to adequately protect a 5G network from unauthorized access or interference.”

    What happens in China stays in China...
    Seeing as you are throwing everything bar the kitchen sink into the soup, I take it you agree with me that it is the apps that are key to platform viability and not the platform itself.

    Australia's decision is politically motivated (following pressure from the US) as (just as with the US situation) no evidence has been provided. Australian's will now pay more as a result and face a difficult future relationship with its most important trading partner.

    Ah yes, the annual iPhone refresh, its annual peak. Same story, nothing new with that.

    A 'run' will happen, just like it does every year. What needs to happen though is to break the cycle of flat sales.

    Ah, I forgot to post this:

    https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/22/17768966/huawei-xiaomi-idc-smartphone-market-europe-statistics

    Yes, that's competition when politics isn't involved and Apple needs to compete. Right now, it isn't. We'll see what happens after the refresh.

    Everything points to three full screen iPhones. The rest will have huge chins and foreheads while Apple's competitors have entire series with virtually bezeless devices. Looks count. Prices count, features count.

    Samsung seems to have dropped the ball (inexplicably) so all eyes will be on the iPhone and Mate 20 series this October but after Apple's single shot, it will have to deal with the Honor Magic 2 and the P30 Pro just a few months later.

    My out on a limb bet this year is for an across the board reduction in iPhone pricing and something game changing in Huawei's battery tech.


    I'm sure Huawei will do very well shipping at half the yearly cycle of Apple and Samsung, but, I'm still not seeing their Pro model's being the great sellers that you do.

    Still, maybe 2019 will be the year the Huawei finally outsells Apple. 

    I expect that 70% of Apple's sales next year won't have "huge chins and foreheads"; some 154 million units, leaving about 66 million units that do. Do you think that any other company will do anything close to that? It surely won't be Huawei.
    I'm actually very open minded regarding Apple's refresh. Last year, and probably for the first time, it offered a spread that was very wide and offered basically something for everyone and at very varied price points. The only real point of contention was that a large part of that spread and pricing came in the form of old hardware. However, it was worth trying.

    This year we will see if last year was just an experiment and they will go back to the previous model or not, we will see if the refresh again includes three models or not, and how competitive pricing is. Apart from the hardware itself, there is a lot that could happen and remember that guidance for this quarter is unusually high so there could be surprises and Apple itself is very optimistic.

    Next week the Kirin 980 will be formally presented so Huawei might pip Apple to 7nm but that will set the ball rolling. After that, the big news will be with Huawei and Apple seeing as Samsung seems to be giving this quarter a miss and holding things back for the S10.
  • Reply 52 of 56
    tmay said:
    tmay said:

    claire1 said:

    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!
    Since Apple can’t stop users from subscribing to services like Netflix via the browser I think Apple should allow them to offer a URL in-app which would re-direct users to the browser to sign up. Apple will still be making a shit-ton of money from developers who chose to use/offer Apple for payment processing, IAP with games, etc. But now that Apple has its own streaming music service and will have its own streaming original video content service does it really seem fair for them to charge Spotify and Netflix 30% or 15%? Seems like an unfair advantage. Honestly I think Netflix has the upper hand here. Apple is never going to remove them from the App Store and users won’t have any issue signing up via their website. The writing was on the wall when Netflix refused to be part of Apple’s TV app.
    I still haven't figured out why you give a shit about Netflix, as if they are an injured party. They aren't. If their users are literally too fucking lazy to search for Netflix.com to sign up, saving some small amount of revenue for Netflix, according to the article, then Netflix isn't trying very hard. Seriously, all Netflix and its investors care about is adding subscribers. 

    WRT Spotify, I can understand your concerns, and that simply for the fact that they are, and will be forever, a money losing operation, no matter how hard they try an blame Apple subscription rules, and Apple Music, for their problems.
    Wait I thought signing up via iTunes was a good thing, good user experience, safe and secure credit card billing. Now it’s users are too lazy to sign up via the web? 
    Too lazy to sign up for Netflix directly after that "good user experience, safe and secure credit card billing", which aligns with what I said previously about my own Netflix experience. I'd prefer a single sign on for all my media streams to be Apple, but since I started with Netflix so long ago, even I am "too lazy" to switch over to Apple for that now.

    Maybe, and just for your sake, I'll kill my Netflix subscription, and reinitiate it through Apple, so Apple sees something like an additional revenue of $3.30 every month, at the expense of Netflix.
    Apple cult members are a weird bunch...
    Carnage
  • Reply 53 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,662member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:

    claire1 said:

    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!
    Since Apple can’t stop users from subscribing to services like Netflix via the browser I think Apple should allow them to offer a URL in-app which would re-direct users to the browser to sign up. Apple will still be making a shit-ton of money from developers who chose to use/offer Apple for payment processing, IAP with games, etc. But now that Apple has its own streaming music service and will have its own streaming original video content service does it really seem fair for them to charge Spotify and Netflix 30% or 15%? Seems like an unfair advantage. Honestly I think Netflix has the upper hand here. Apple is never going to remove them from the App Store and users won’t have any issue signing up via their website. The writing was on the wall when Netflix refused to be part of Apple’s TV app.
    I still haven't figured out why you give a shit about Netflix, as if they are an injured party. They aren't. If their users are literally too fucking lazy to search for Netflix.com to sign up, saving some small amount of revenue for Netflix, according to the article, then Netflix isn't trying very hard. Seriously, all Netflix and its investors care about is adding subscribers. 

    WRT Spotify, I can understand your concerns, and that simply for the fact that they are, and will be forever, a money losing operation, no matter how hard they try an blame Apple subscription rules, and Apple Music, for their problems.
    Wait I thought signing up via iTunes was a good thing, good user experience, safe and secure credit card billing. Now it’s users are too lazy to sign up via the web? 
    Too lazy to sign up for Netflix directly after that "good user experience, safe and secure credit card billing", which aligns with what I said previously about my own Netflix experience. I'd prefer a single sign on for all my media streams to be Apple, but since I started with Netflix so long ago, even I am "too lazy" to switch over to Apple for that now.

    Maybe, and just for your sake, I'll kill my Netflix subscription, and reinitiate it through Apple, so Apple sees something like an additional revenue of $3.30 every month, at the expense of Netflix.
    Apple cult members are a weird bunch...
    Oh, gee, did I need a snark tag...
  • Reply 54 of 56
    tmay said:
    tmay said:

    claire1 said:

    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!
    Since Apple can’t stop users from subscribing to services like Netflix via the browser I think Apple should allow them to offer a URL in-app which would re-direct users to the browser to sign up. Apple will still be making a shit-ton of money from developers who chose to use/offer Apple for payment processing, IAP with games, etc. But now that Apple has its own streaming music service and will have its own streaming original video content service does it really seem fair for them to charge Spotify and Netflix 30% or 15%? Seems like an unfair advantage. Honestly I think Netflix has the upper hand here. Apple is never going to remove them from the App Store and users won’t have any issue signing up via their website. The writing was on the wall when Netflix refused to be part of Apple’s TV app.
    I still haven't figured out why you give a shit about Netflix, as if they are an injured party. They aren't. If their users are literally too fucking lazy to search for Netflix.com to sign up, saving some small amount of revenue for Netflix, according to the article, then Netflix isn't trying very hard. Seriously, all Netflix and its investors care about is adding subscribers. 

    WRT Spotify, I can understand your concerns, and that simply for the fact that they are, and will be forever, a money losing operation, no matter how hard they try an blame Apple subscription rules, and Apple Music, for their problems.
    Wait I thought signing up via iTunes was a good thing, good user experience, safe and secure credit card billing. Now it’s users are too lazy to sign up via the web? 
    Too lazy to sign up for Netflix directly after that "good user experience, safe and secure credit card billing", which aligns with what I said previously about my own Netflix experience. I'd prefer a single sign on for all my media streams to be Apple, but since I started with Netflix so long ago, even I am "too lazy" to switch over to Apple for that now.

    Maybe, and just for your sake, I'll kill my Netflix subscription, and reinitiate it through Apple, so Apple sees something like an additional revenue of $3.30 every month, at the expense of Netflix.
    I did exactly that in December of 2016 shortly after it first became possible to pay through the app store.  I didn't do it with any malice toward Netflix or any pro-Apple sentiments however, I did it because I can easily find iTunes gift cards for 15-25% discounts.  What I would caution you or anyone else looking to switch from some supported payment method on the web to in App billing is that you have to actually cancel your account and open a new one.  You will loose all of your viewing history, profiles, and personalized recommendations (these are not too valuable to me, YMMV). 
    When the support agent told me that the only way to switch to in App billing was to cancel and sign up in the app,  I thought right then, "Hmmm...It's sure doesn't seem like Netflix prefers me to pay this way."  Now I see that they sure don't prefer it and likely only added this to drive subscriber growth after they had a pretty stagnate 2016 in US subscriber growth. 
  • Reply 55 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,662member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:

    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 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.


    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 

    Ecosystems like iOS are necessary for Apps to succeed.

    FTFY.
    iOS depends on the apps. Not the other way around.

    Would you still buy into an iOS device if it were limited to stock iOS apps?

    If Facebook pulled WhatsApp from iOS, what impact do you think losing that one app on the platform would have?

    WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating.

    At present there is a somewhat symbionic relationship and the 'ecosystem' is made up of both iOS and the apps, not simply iOS.
    I'm impressed the with amount of "chicken and egg" discussion that goes on about Apps, some 10 years on.

    "WeChat is an ecosystem in itself running on iOS. Losing that would be devastating",

    Only in China, and then only if the Chinese Government couldn't figure out something else for the convenience of spying on its "citizens".

    Must be why Google is reconsidering it's stance on China; all that data going to waste in a bureaucracy, when it could be put to good use for ads.
    It is impossible to envisage Apple's current business model without China. 

    Losing China would be devastating as it would have a huge negative impact on the company as a whole and be hugely favourable to Apple's competitors.

    Losing WeChat would be synonymous of losing China.
    Well, since neither of those "cataclysms" has occurred, nor the tariffs, nor the banning, Apple hasn't lost China,

    But have hope; there's always a chance of collapse after the release of the three new iPhone models on September 12.

    That or yet another run of accelerated iPhone sales in China.


    I forgot to paste this earlier;

    https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/22/australia-bans-huawei-and-zte-from-supplying-technology-for-its-5g-network/

    “the Government considers that the involvement of vendors who are likely to be subject to extrajudicial directions from foreign government that conflict with Australian law, may risk failure by the carrier to adequately protect a 5G network from unauthorized access or interference.”

    What happens in China stays in China...
    Seeing as you are throwing everything bar the kitchen sink into the soup, I take it you agree with me that it is the apps that are key to platform viability and not the platform itself.

    Australia's decision is politically motivated (following pressure from the US) as (just as with the US situation) no evidence has been provided. Australian's will now pay more as a result and face a difficult future relationship with its most important trading partner.

    Ah yes, the annual iPhone refresh, its annual peak. Same story, nothing new with that.

    A 'run' will happen, just like it does every year. What needs to happen though is to break the cycle of flat sales.

    Ah, I forgot to post this:

    https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/22/17768966/huawei-xiaomi-idc-smartphone-market-europe-statistics

    Yes, that's competition when politics isn't involved and Apple needs to compete. Right now, it isn't. We'll see what happens after the refresh.

    Everything points to three full screen iPhones. The rest will have huge chins and foreheads while Apple's competitors have entire series with virtually bezeless devices. Looks count. Prices count, features count.

    Samsung seems to have dropped the ball (inexplicably) so all eyes will be on the iPhone and Mate 20 series this October but after Apple's single shot, it will have to deal with the Honor Magic 2 and the P30 Pro just a few months later.

    My out on a limb bet this year is for an across the board reduction in iPhone pricing and something game changing in Huawei's battery tech.


    I'm sure Huawei will do very well shipping at half the yearly cycle of Apple and Samsung, but, I'm still not seeing their Pro model's being the great sellers that you do.

    Still, maybe 2019 will be the year the Huawei finally outsells Apple. 

    I expect that 70% of Apple's sales next year won't have "huge chins and foreheads"; some 154 million units, leaving about 66 million units that do. Do you think that any other company will do anything close to that? It surely won't be Huawei.
    I'm actually very open minded regarding Apple's refresh. Last year, and probably for the first time, it offered a spread that was very wide and offered basically something for everyone and at very varied price points. The only real point of contention was that a large part of that spread and pricing came in the form of old hardware. However, it was worth trying.

    This year we will see if last year was just an experiment and they will go back to the previous model or not, we will see if the refresh again includes three models or not, and how competitive pricing is. Apart from the hardware itself, there is a lot that could happen and remember that guidance for this quarter is unusually high so there could be surprises and Apple itself is very optimistic.

    Next week the Kirin 980 will be formally presented so Huawei might pip Apple to 7nm but that will set the ball rolling. After that, the big news will be with Huawei and Apple seeing as Samsung seems to be giving this quarter a miss and holding things back for the S10.
    Apple has had an increasing "spread" since the the iPhone 4. The singular change is that Apple decreased it's entry level price to $349, for a single model. I do note that Apple ships the iPhone 6 models to carriers and other outlets, that are at promotional pricing similar to Huawei, Samsung, Xaiomi, et al, primarily for emerging markets.

    Apple will be shipping it's three models withe the A12, in volume, in late September, so your "pip" of being first to introduce isn't much of a win. As I stated earlier, I expect Apple to ship some 154 million of the new models, all with the A12, during FY19, with a tiny number shipped during FY18. I expect that the 980 will be heavily favored for GPU and NPU, and Apple for its continued single thread performance, with the GPU performance being an unknown this year albeit;

    https://semiaccurate.com/2018/08/16/deimos-and-hercules-appear-on-the-arm-roadmap/

    "More importantly the vanilla ARM cores are designed for a wide frequency range so they leave some performance on the table to gain that flexibility. If you take an ARM core and design it for a small number of workloads and frequency ranges, you can get a lot more performance out of the SoC, and we mean a lot. The classic example of this is the Apple A11 which currently trounces the best Intel has at performance per Watt and in many cases raw performance. The numbers SemiAccurate has seen for the A12 show it gains about 50% more single threaded performance without changing energy use. Some of this is process related but most of it is architectural. You will see in a few weeks and you will be impressed."
    edited August 2018
  • Reply 56 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,662member
    mbenz1962 said:
    tmay said:
    tmay said:

    claire1 said:

    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!
    Since Apple can’t stop users from subscribing to services like Netflix via the browser I think Apple should allow them to offer a URL in-app which would re-direct users to the browser to sign up. Apple will still be making a shit-ton of money from developers who chose to use/offer Apple for payment processing, IAP with games, etc. But now that Apple has its own streaming music service and will have its own streaming original video content service does it really seem fair for them to charge Spotify and Netflix 30% or 15%? Seems like an unfair advantage. Honestly I think Netflix has the upper hand here. Apple is never going to remove them from the App Store and users won’t have any issue signing up via their website. The writing was on the wall when Netflix refused to be part of Apple’s TV app.
    I still haven't figured out why you give a shit about Netflix, as if they are an injured party. They aren't. If their users are literally too fucking lazy to search for Netflix.com to sign up, saving some small amount of revenue for Netflix, according to the article, then Netflix isn't trying very hard. Seriously, all Netflix and its investors care about is adding subscribers. 

    WRT Spotify, I can understand your concerns, and that simply for the fact that they are, and will be forever, a money losing operation, no matter how hard they try an blame Apple subscription rules, and Apple Music, for their problems.
    Wait I thought signing up via iTunes was a good thing, good user experience, safe and secure credit card billing. Now it’s users are too lazy to sign up via the web? 
    Too lazy to sign up for Netflix directly after that "good user experience, safe and secure credit card billing", which aligns with what I said previously about my own Netflix experience. I'd prefer a single sign on for all my media streams to be Apple, but since I started with Netflix so long ago, even I am "too lazy" to switch over to Apple for that now.

    Maybe, and just for your sake, I'll kill my Netflix subscription, and reinitiate it through Apple, so Apple sees something like an additional revenue of $3.30 every month, at the expense of Netflix.
    I did exactly that in December of 2016 shortly after it first became possible to pay through the app store.  I didn't do it with any malice toward Netflix or any pro-Apple sentiments however, I did it because I can easily find iTunes gift cards for 15-25% discounts.  What I would caution you or anyone else looking to switch from some supported payment method on the web to in App billing is that you have to actually cancel your account and open a new one.  You will loose all of your viewing history, profiles, and personalized recommendations (these are not too valuable to me, YMMV). 
    When the support agent told me that the only way to switch to in App billing was to cancel and sign up in the app,  I thought right then, "Hmmm...It's sure doesn't seem like Netflix prefers me to pay this way."  Now I see that they sure don't prefer it and likely only added this to drive subscriber growth after they had a pretty stagnate 2016 in US subscriber growth. 
    If that's the worst inconvenience, starting from scratch as a new user, is the same true if I theoretically went from in-App subscription, to one via Netflix. Were that the case, it would actually be a disincentive to switch from in-app payment.

    As I stated earlier, competition is creating a broader market, and Netflix isn't the only, or primary, option anymore. Since I am already an Amazon Prime user, I get all of the Prime benefits, albeit Amazon's media UI and curation are primitive compared to Netflix, in my opinion anyway. But picking and choosing media streams, and frequently changing to others, would likely give the widest range of content, at the best value, if the viewer isn't concerned about viewing at release.
Sign In or Register to comment.