Facebook wants to help digital creators sidestep Apple's 30% commission on digital goods

Posted:
in General Discussion edited June 9
Facebook hopes to promote "offline transactions," between creators and companies, allowing creators to sidestep Apple's 30% in-app purchase fee.




Apple's 30% fee on in-app purchases has always been a hot button issue, with many companies attempting to figure out ways to skirt the fee entirely. One notable case was Epic, who allowed customers to purchase items via credit card from within the Fortnite app. Unsurprisingly, this resulted in Fortnite being removed from the App Store, and spurred an ongoing legal battle.

Facebook, and its subsidiary, Instagram, now have plans to sidestep the fee, too, but without incurring the wrath of Apple's legal team.

"When there are digital transactions that happen on iOS, Apple insists that they take 30% of that." Adam Mosseri, Instagram's CEO told CNBC. "There's a very few number of exceptions. For transactions that happen in iOS, we're going to have to abide by their rules... but in general we're going to look for other ways to help creators make a living and facilitating transactions that happen in other places."

To avoid the 30% cut on digital goods, Instagram may push creators to connect with customers outside of the app, which would enable them to skirt Apple's commission fee and still do business. Facebook would likely create a framework for creators to use that could be mutually beneficial to both creators and Facebook itself, who would be able to charge its own commission fee.

CNBC notes that Facebook has yet to disclose what cut it would take from creators. However, the report does note that the cut would be less than 30%.

Facebook's framework would exist solely for those who create digital content, ranging from artwork to services. Sales of physical goods do not incur a 30% fee on Apple's platforms.

Facebook is known as one of several companies leading the charge against Apple. In May, it was discovered that the social media giant would consider adding new screens for both its main app and Instagram, to educate users that enabling tracking under Apple's App Tracking Transparency policy will "help keep" the apps free to use.

Follow all the details of WWDC 2021 with the comprehensive AppleInsider coverage of the whole week-long event from June 7 through June 11, including details of all the new launches and updates.

Stay on top of all Apple news right from your HomePod. Say, "Hey, Siri, play AppleInsider," and you'll get latest AppleInsider Podcast. Or ask your HomePod mini for "AppleInsider Daily" instead and you'll hear a fast update direct from our news team. And, if you're interested in Apple-centric home automation, say "Hey, Siri, play HomeKit Insider," and you'll be listening to our newest specialized podcast in moments.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    lmasantilmasanti Posts: 97member
    quote: “allowing creators to sidestep Apple's 30% in-app purchase fee.”

    Translated with George Orwell's 1984 ‘Newspeak/doublethink’ dictionary…

    “We want to cash on your Apple's 30% payments…”
    williamlondonmagman1979Beatsbaconstangthtjony0watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 16
    Facebook is just providing more confirmation that the issue isn't really about 30% being too high, but rather that other companies (like Facebook, like Epic)  want to cut out a share of that commission revenue for themselves without having the added complication of developing phones/tablets and a mobile operating system as well. 
    edited June 9 williamlondondocbburkmwhitetenthousandthingsmagman1979rob53Beatsbaconstangapplguywilliamh
  • Reply 3 of 16
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 2,409member
    without having the added complication of developing phones/tablets and a mobile operating system as well
    Agreed. But Apple provides more free services for developers than just that. By “free services” I’m referring to 20 or more services that are covered through the 15% to 30% cut. 
    ronnbaconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 16
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,227member
    without having the added complication of developing phones/tablets and a mobile operating system as well
    Agreed. But Apple provides more free services for developers than just that. By “free services” I’m referring to 20 or more services that are covered through the 15% to 30% cut. 
    Apple should really get serious about games, social media, ad networks, and search. They should also take the gloves off on music. Increase the price a little on their products and all services become an included 4 year license. Make it free just like the OS upgrades are now. 

    These companies want to awaken the bear, so let them have it. Or maybe they should have a spin off for these initiatives called Apple Juice. 
    edited June 9 Beatswatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 16
    JinTechJinTech Posts: 764member
    genovelle said:
    without having the added complication of developing phones/tablets and a mobile operating system as well
    Agreed. But Apple provides more free services for developers than just that. By “free services” I’m referring to 20 or more services that are covered through the 15% to 30% cut. 
    Apple should really get serious about games, social media, ad networks, and search. They should also take the gloves off on music. Increase the price a little on their products and all services become an included 4 year license. Make it free just like the OS upgrades are now. 

    These companies want to awaken the bear, so let them have it. Or maybe they should have a spin off for these initiatives called Apple Juice. 
    Or maybe these big time developers should suck it up and stop whining? 
    williamlondonmagman1979rob53baconstangjony0watto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 16
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,296member
    Facebook would likely create a framework for creators to use that could be mutually beneficial to both creators and Facebook itself, who would be able to charge its own commission fee.
    Not to mention incorporating information about the things you buy into their profile of you.  No thanks.
    Dogpersonwilliamlondonronnsocalbrianrob53baconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 16
    DogpersonDogperson Posts: 92member
    29% for uckerberg and all your info🤮
    williamlondonsocalbrianBeatswatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 16
    earthkidearthkid Posts: 23member
    try to look good for who? you think we all eat hay for our meal?  who are you trying to fool?  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 16
    dewmedewme Posts: 3,699member
    Not sure why Facebook is acting like this is a big deal.

    Amazon has the Kindle reader app on all of Apple’s platforms but you can’t purchase books directly from Amazon from within Amazon’s apps. You have to purchase books on Amazon and then they get delivered and maintained out-of-band into your Kindle apps. Other than the clumsiness for customers it does work.  

    If you want to call  it a “framework” go ahead. As a customer I call it a workaround or a kluge, but it’s worth it for me because Amazon’s Kindle reader apps are far superior to anything Apple has on these same platforms. It’s not even close.

    The big difference between what Amazon is doing and what Facebook is trying to do is that Amazon’s “framework” is their massive online store. Facebook doesn’t have a store. But if they had a store and had a way for their herd of data cattle to consume the social silage they feed them, they wouldn’t find themselves beholden to Apple. Heck, they could do it using web technology, just like Amazon does.

    Face it, Facebook is just plain lazy and doesn’t want to do the work necessary to take control over their own destiny. They have all that cash on hand and unquestioned influence and loyalty from their compliant herd. But still they refuse to invest in the proper care and feeding of their own herd. It’s cruel. It’s mean. It’s pathetic. It’s Facebook. 
    edited June 9 baconstangapplguywatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 16
    KuyangkohKuyangkoh Posts: 683member
    I wonder if Apple remove FB in apps store, would that be anti competitive hahahaha
    genovelleDogpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 16
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,227member
    Kuyangkoh said:
    I wonder if Apple remove FB in apps store, would that be anti competitive hahahaha
    Facebook’s App is what makes them and it was free until they started limiting post reach to force boosting and ads. So, they want to bite the hand that gave them life. And billions in revenue 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 16
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,432member
    Kuyangkoh said:
    I wonder if Apple remove FB in apps store, would that be anti competitive hahahaha

    I doubt it could be seen as such, as Apple does not really compete with Facebook… And their service is still available via web browser. However, it would be an anti-user move as it is a bit more convenient to use the app over the website.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 16
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,830member
    Kuyangkoh said:
    I wonder if Apple remove FB in apps store, would that be anti competitive hahahaha
    Nope. 

    It’s their store so they can refuse any app they like. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 16
    lmasanti said:
    quote: “allowing creators to sidestep Apple's 30% in-app purchase fee.”

    Translated with George Orwell's 1984 ‘Newspeak/doublethink’ dictionary…

    “We want to cash on your Apple's 30% payments…”
    Or Jeff Bezos: "Your margin is my opportunity."
    baconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 16
    JonGJonG Posts: 13unconfirmed, member
    What the entire article fails to take into account is that if you are a "little guy" developer, then your cut ISN'T 30%.  Apple has given no indication that it will change the under $1MM shift to a much lower cut.

    So this is one mega-corporation trying to shift a revenue share from another mega-corporation to them, for the slight benefit of large enterprise developers.

    And yes, I am firmly stating that if you take in more than $1MM in revenue per year from being a developer, then you are not a "Little Guy"
  • Reply 16 of 16
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 2,409member
    JonG said:
    What the entire article fails to take into account is that if you are a "little guy" developer, then your cut ISN'T 30%.  Apple has given no indication that it will change the under $1MM shift to a much lower cut.

    So this is one mega-corporation trying to shift a revenue share from another mega-corporation to them, for the slight benefit of large enterprise developers.

    And yes, I am firmly stating that if you take in more than $1MM in revenue per year from being a developer, then you are not a "Little Guy"
    I agree $1M is extremely generous of Apple, and I've never heard anyone praise Apple for helping the little guy out in this way. I would have set the minimum to $250K, but I guess Apple really likes nice round numbers.
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.