While there are 100s of millions of iOS devices, the majority of them aren't iPads. That's where I think these subscriptions actually matter - for newspapers, magazines and the like. And Apple doesn't have as big of a lead as some seem to think.
So while this decision doesn't necessarily matter for companies like Netflix, it may do for the Economist, the Times etc. I bought my subscription in anticipation of this announcement.
It'll be interesting to see if iOS apps end up being more expensive than those on other platforms. HP is already sorting out content as well as Google of course. Apple won't be the only game in town for long.
Without content, Apple wont be in the game for long. The Apple TV will be dead, The iPad will be an overpriced web browser, and the iPhone will become less usefull and probably less "cool". Apple is working hard to get the evil reputation the Microsoft had, and when you are evil you cannot sell trendy premium priced products.
The pain to the content providers of paying the 30% may be higher and in some cases much higher than the pain of dumping Apple. I think the people who discount the possibility of content being pulled are WAY WAY overestimating the size of actual content sales driven by iOS and the profitability of those sales, and they are completely ignoring the consumers EXTREMELY likely behavior of buying the content through other means. Not Apps, content, the sales are extremely small compared to the rest of the market.
Well, yesterday afternoon and evening my wife was catching up on recorded TV shows she missed last week while she was away on a conference... that gave me couple of nice, quiet hours I just had to fill with something
What do you mean by this? At least expand on your point (if there was one).
Apple is says they can not make the content more expensive in iTunes despite the massive increase in cost structure they are imposing. I think he was responding to your line "It'll be interesting to see if iOS apps end up being more expensive than those on other platforms" although you said apps and not content.
The answer is, yes, if Apple cannot control the price is will be 30-50% more expensive in iTunes. If Apple can maintain price control authority and evade antitrust and legislative responses, then content will simply leave the iOS platform and Apple product sales will suffer.
What do you mean by this? At least expand on your point (if there was one).
If a cheaper price for content exists ANYWHERE outside iOS, the developer must make that same price available within iOS.
This is one of the reasons publishers can't just switch to ibooks if they want to. they'll basically be FORCED to make their pricing the same across all platforms, which might not work with other deals they have with more lucrative distributors (Kindle)
I did spend couple of hours googling for "Apple, Amazon, Sony, subscription" and, reading through various threads, was surprised about the number of people who plainly said what you did - if iOS looses Kindle App, they will switch from iPad/iPhone to Android devices in a blink.
In fact, this is the only forum (I have came across so far) where majority is convinced Amazon will blink. And bow.
It will be darn interesting to see how this unfolds
Last week I would have said my wife and I were 99.9% likely to get new iPhone 5's this summer rather than any Android device expected to be on the market. Without Kindle that drops to exactly 0% chance. There is no way I will buy another iOS device until I am convinced Apple has lost this battle and the content will be available for the devices I am commiting to.
Apple is says they can not make the content more expensive in iTunes despite the massive increase in cost structure they are imposing. I think he was responding to your line "It'll be interesting to see if iOS apps end up being more expensive than those on other platforms" although you said apps and not content.
The answer is, yes, if Apple cannot control the price is will be 30-50% more expensive in iTunes. If Apple can maintain price control authority and evade antitrust and legislative responses, then content will simply leave the iOS platform and Apple product sales will suffer.
I thought so, but how are they going to argue you're getting the same content on and Android or WebOS device than you're getting on iOS? They can control the pricing for apps you can get for iOS, but even the great Apple cannot leverage control over the pricing for similar services on competing platforms.
I thought so, but how are they going to argue you're getting the same content on and Android or WebOS device than you're getting on iOS? They can control the pricing for apps you can get for iOS, but even the great Apple cannot leverage control over the pricing for similar services on competing platforms.
Yes they can. That's part of their deal. If content is available ANYWHERE else for a lower price, that developer must offer the same price to iOS users or have their app rejected.
Yes they can. That's part of their deal. If content is available ANYWHERE else for a lower price, that developer must offer the same price to iOS users or have their app rejected.
Given that you have no facts to offer to support your hypothetical, the very nature and wording of your original post and this reply are entirely disingenuous. In other words, it would seem you are trolling and trying to be dodgy enough in your posts to be able to deny you claimed anything..
What trolling? I don't have facts, I'm asking IF the margins are below 30% (margins I don¡'t know), what stops Netflix to give up Apple App Store offering, Nothing more. He said that 100 million customer won't stop any offering.
I ask you, if the margins are below 30%, why Netflix or other companios won't leave the App Store?
Yes, that in my opinion is the big problem. If Apple wants them to OFFER in app purchases through iTunes and allows them to pass on the 30% Apple tax to the customer there is no problem. The problem, and potential legal issue, is Apple trying to control the pricing in an anti-competitive manner to make sure no one undercuts the iTunes price.
The issue facing Google is getting their Android customers to actually buy apps. Their offering may sound good on the surface but if no one is buying then they are just wasting money following Apple around copying their business model.
They say "The Android market is increasing faster than the Apple iOS market."
All one has to do is look to see the slope of the Apple curve is much steeper. Android['s rate of growth is only greater as a percentage growth. How can this be? Android is growing from nothing, so any change is a huge percentage change (even if the actual change is a drop in the bucket. Apple is actually growing much faster than Android. (No wonder it has the interest of developers.
The issue facing Google is getting their Android customers to actually buy apps. Their offering may sound good on the surface but if no one is buying then they are just wasting money following Apple around copying their business model.
.
That has NOTHING to do with onepass whatsoever. One Pass is a payment system that's made to work ANYWHERE there is a browser. This is to facilitate online payments for people who don't have the funds to create their own system (like a small indie publisher).
Furthermore, it's an OPTION for them, not a requirement.
Android has NOTHING to do with the ire devs are showing about apple's moves. The point isn't that Apple's store becomes "less" profitable it is that it becomes UNPROFITABLE. Even if those developers didn't port to Android, they would STILL drop iOS under these terms.
iOS is ONLY attractive so long as it gives providers a chance to make a profit. This new rule makes it impossible for services like Kindle, Netflix, and Hulu.
the big problem to my mind is not that they take 30% of the subscription. They have the store and so on.
BUT whats the real kicker here is the "you must give us the best deal" part.
Just imagine any retailstore would demand that the supplier must give their customers a best price assurance. And now comes the best part, this "as good as" becomes unbeatable good if you factor in the possibility to buy discounted giftcards.
Here in germany there are often sales for itunes giftcards for 20-33% of the nominal value (e.g 20? for a 25? giftcard).
so people can get the subscription in the appstore cheaper then anywhere else, which ofc is bad for the publisher cause they get 30% less revenue from appstore costumers.
On the otherhand we have to look at the cost structure of Apple. How much of every $ spent in the appstore goes really to Apple (credit card processing, itunes giftcard share for retailstores etc).
But if we look through apples point of view, if the subscription in app is more expensive then through any other channel, the share of people will be minimal. Why? because subscriptions are rather expensive compared to your normal App, and if you can save, lets say 15% by going to the website of the NY Times, most people will do that and apple loses out on this revenue.
My guess is that failing industry (read: magazines, newspapers) will jump on this and stay with the story of "apple to the rescue" while profitable content providers of the digital age (read: amazon, netflix) will leave the iOS plattform.
This may even be the larger goal of Apple, having iTunes movierentals and iBooks as direct competition to the two former.
It will be intresting if apple repeats the mistake of the Mac vs. windows fight. Its all about the content (software). Apple won the mp3-Player fight because of iTunes (and pirated mp3, which did make the content avilable to everyone), has a lead in the tablet/smartphone race because the appstore was/is very developer friendly but will they will it last?
who will win the next big "format war"? if its true that the porn industry decides well, time for apple to revise their approval guidlines *joke* (i know its a urban myth that this decided betamax vs. vhs, but c'mon the parallel is just toooooo inviting )
I don't get how Netflix is in this discussion. Why would anyone buy anything through the Netflix app? You sign up for a subscription on your PC or Mac and thats it.
Apple has released their pricing model AFTER discussing a variety of options with the Content Providers.
The model has been flushed out with the various markets of digital content.
This isn't a pull it out of your rear solution.
There have been articles which state that the content providers were caught off-guard by Apple's pricing. The furor in the past day actually supports that.
I guess some may have surmised Apple's plans based on the announced details of The Daily deal. But, I think Apple did a poor job of communicating with the content providers.
Exactly. And by offering a competing service, Google has killed the illogical "anti-competitive" argument. Apple isn't the only technology company offering media subscriptions through apps, and they're doing nothing to suppress competitors' success in that space.
There is some irony that Google has almost certainly foreclosed the possibility of Apple being charged for anti-competitive behavior.
Google seems to be waiting for apple to put out a business model then try to be innovating by under cutting apple
I think Google caught wind of Apple's terms and waited patiently for Apple to announce, only to undercut them.
It's not unlike what Apple does by making announcements to take the wind out of competitor's sales during Comdex or MWC, or to generally distract from a major event.
What Apple has figured out and consumers have voted on with thier pocket books is keep it simple stupid. Apple has shown that you need to keep the options limited, the business model simple. The reason everyone hates dealing with all the other options out there is you have no idea how much something costs and what you are paying for and these on going recurring costs are killing people.
Apple has a very simple to understand business model which everyone seems to like, and ever attempt made by companies and content owners to have all these tier costs people have rejected.
Companies have created all these complicated tier pricing models since it allows them to make lots of money and keep the consumer confuse on what exactly they are paying for over time.
Subscription and other in-app pricing is in the hands of the publisher or developer. There is not the same order as in the iTunes Store.
Comments
Read the terms of the agreement then come back.
What do you mean by this? At least expand on your point (if there was one).
While there are 100s of millions of iOS devices, the majority of them aren't iPads. That's where I think these subscriptions actually matter - for newspapers, magazines and the like. And Apple doesn't have as big of a lead as some seem to think.
So while this decision doesn't necessarily matter for companies like Netflix, it may do for the Economist, the Times etc. I bought my subscription in anticipation of this announcement.
It'll be interesting to see if iOS apps end up being more expensive than those on other platforms. HP is already sorting out content as well as Google of course. Apple won't be the only game in town for long.
Without content, Apple wont be in the game for long. The Apple TV will be dead, The iPad will be an overpriced web browser, and the iPhone will become less usefull and probably less "cool". Apple is working hard to get the evil reputation the Microsoft had, and when you are evil you cannot sell trendy premium priced products.
The pain to the content providers of paying the 30% may be higher and in some cases much higher than the pain of dumping Apple. I think the people who discount the possibility of content being pulled are WAY WAY overestimating the size of actual content sales driven by iOS and the profitability of those sales, and they are completely ignoring the consumers EXTREMELY likely behavior of buying the content through other means. Not Apps, content, the sales are extremely small compared to the rest of the market.
Quite the free time we have, don't we?
Well, yesterday afternoon and evening my wife was catching up on recorded TV shows she missed last week while she was away on a conference... that gave me couple of nice, quiet hours I just had to fill with something
What do you mean by this? At least expand on your point (if there was one).
Apple is says they can not make the content more expensive in iTunes despite the massive increase in cost structure they are imposing. I think he was responding to your line "It'll be interesting to see if iOS apps end up being more expensive than those on other platforms" although you said apps and not content.
The answer is, yes, if Apple cannot control the price is will be 30-50% more expensive in iTunes. If Apple can maintain price control authority and evade antitrust and legislative responses, then content will simply leave the iOS platform and Apple product sales will suffer.
What do you mean by this? At least expand on your point (if there was one).
If a cheaper price for content exists ANYWHERE outside iOS, the developer must make that same price available within iOS.
This is one of the reasons publishers can't just switch to ibooks if they want to. they'll basically be FORCED to make their pricing the same across all platforms, which might not work with other deals they have with more lucrative distributors (Kindle)
I did spend couple of hours googling for "Apple, Amazon, Sony, subscription" and, reading through various threads, was surprised about the number of people who plainly said what you did - if iOS looses Kindle App, they will switch from iPad/iPhone to Android devices in a blink.
In fact, this is the only forum (I have came across so far) where majority is convinced Amazon will blink. And bow.
It will be darn interesting to see how this unfolds
Last week I would have said my wife and I were 99.9% likely to get new iPhone 5's this summer rather than any Android device expected to be on the market. Without Kindle that drops to exactly 0% chance. There is no way I will buy another iOS device until I am convinced Apple has lost this battle and the content will be available for the devices I am commiting to.
Apple is says they can not make the content more expensive in iTunes despite the massive increase in cost structure they are imposing. I think he was responding to your line "It'll be interesting to see if iOS apps end up being more expensive than those on other platforms" although you said apps and not content.
The answer is, yes, if Apple cannot control the price is will be 30-50% more expensive in iTunes. If Apple can maintain price control authority and evade antitrust and legislative responses, then content will simply leave the iOS platform and Apple product sales will suffer.
I thought so, but how are they going to argue you're getting the same content on and Android or WebOS device than you're getting on iOS? They can control the pricing for apps you can get for iOS, but even the great Apple cannot leverage control over the pricing for similar services on competing platforms.
I thought so, but how are they going to argue you're getting the same content on and Android or WebOS device than you're getting on iOS? They can control the pricing for apps you can get for iOS, but even the great Apple cannot leverage control over the pricing for similar services on competing platforms.
Yes they can. That's part of their deal. If content is available ANYWHERE else for a lower price, that developer must offer the same price to iOS users or have their app rejected.
Yes they can. That's part of their deal. If content is available ANYWHERE else for a lower price, that developer must offer the same price to iOS users or have their app rejected.
Fair enough - thanks for the explanation.
That's even worse then.
Given that you have no facts to offer to support your hypothetical, the very nature and wording of your original post and this reply are entirely disingenuous. In other words, it would seem you are trolling and trying to be dodgy enough in your posts to be able to deny you claimed anything..
What trolling? I don't have facts, I'm asking IF the margins are below 30% (margins I don¡'t know), what stops Netflix to give up Apple App Store offering, Nothing more. He said that 100 million customer won't stop any offering.
I ask you, if the margins are below 30%, why Netflix or other companios won't leave the App Store?
Fair enough - thanks for the explanation.
That's even worse then.
Yes, that in my opinion is the big problem. If Apple wants them to OFFER in app purchases through iTunes and allows them to pass on the 30% Apple tax to the customer there is no problem. The problem, and potential legal issue, is Apple trying to control the pricing in an anti-competitive manner to make sure no one undercuts the iTunes price.
The issue facing Google is getting their Android customers to actually buy apps. Their offering may sound good on the surface but if no one is buying then they are just wasting money following Apple around copying their business model.
https://www.mylookout.com/appgenome
Clearly, island hermit, you are as confused as the "analysts" who created the report that you cite.
The biggest of their many idiocies is the one you are apparently zeroing in on. When they show this graph:
https://www.mylookout.com/appgenome#platform-wars
They say "The Android market is increasing faster than the Apple iOS market."
All one has to do is look to see the slope of the Apple curve is much steeper. Android['s rate of growth is only greater as a percentage growth. How can this be? Android is growing from nothing, so any change is a huge percentage change (even if the actual change is a drop in the bucket. Apple is actually growing much faster than Android. (No wonder it has the interest of developers.
Originally Posted by DougEEE
The issue facing Google is getting their Android customers to actually buy apps. Their offering may sound good on the surface but if no one is buying then they are just wasting money following Apple around copying their business model.
.
That has NOTHING to do with onepass whatsoever. One Pass is a payment system that's made to work ANYWHERE there is a browser. This is to facilitate online payments for people who don't have the funds to create their own system (like a small indie publisher).
Furthermore, it's an OPTION for them, not a requirement.
Android has NOTHING to do with the ire devs are showing about apple's moves. The point isn't that Apple's store becomes "less" profitable it is that it becomes UNPROFITABLE. Even if those developers didn't port to Android, they would STILL drop iOS under these terms.
iOS is ONLY attractive so long as it gives providers a chance to make a profit. This new rule makes it impossible for services like Kindle, Netflix, and Hulu.
http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/16/why...fending-apple/
Yep, we know that's true because Jobs has never had to back down from a "Custer decision" before.
Apple apologists will never admit that Apple gave in to demand. They will spin it as "Apple was planning to do it all along".
BUT whats the real kicker here is the "you must give us the best deal" part.
Just imagine any retailstore would demand that the supplier must give their customers a best price assurance. And now comes the best part, this "as good as" becomes unbeatable good if you factor in the possibility to buy discounted giftcards.
Here in germany there are often sales for itunes giftcards for 20-33% of the nominal value (e.g 20? for a 25? giftcard).
so people can get the subscription in the appstore cheaper then anywhere else, which ofc is bad for the publisher cause they get 30% less revenue from appstore costumers.
On the otherhand we have to look at the cost structure of Apple. How much of every $ spent in the appstore goes really to Apple (credit card processing, itunes giftcard share for retailstores etc).
But if we look through apples point of view, if the subscription in app is more expensive then through any other channel, the share of people will be minimal. Why? because subscriptions are rather expensive compared to your normal App, and if you can save, lets say 15% by going to the website of the NY Times, most people will do that and apple loses out on this revenue.
My guess is that failing industry (read: magazines, newspapers) will jump on this and stay with the story of "apple to the rescue" while profitable content providers of the digital age (read: amazon, netflix) will leave the iOS plattform.
This may even be the larger goal of Apple, having iTunes movierentals and iBooks as direct competition to the two former.
It will be intresting if apple repeats the mistake of the Mac vs. windows fight. Its all about the content (software). Apple won the mp3-Player fight because of iTunes (and pirated mp3, which did make the content avilable to everyone), has a lead in the tablet/smartphone race because the appstore was/is very developer friendly but will they will it last?
who will win the next big "format war"? if its true that the porn industry decides well, time for apple to revise their approval guidlines *joke* (i know its a urban myth that this decided betamax vs. vhs, but c'mon the parallel is just toooooo inviting
time will tell.
Apple has released their pricing model AFTER discussing a variety of options with the Content Providers.
The model has been flushed out with the various markets of digital content.
This isn't a pull it out of your rear solution.
There have been articles which state that the content providers were caught off-guard by Apple's pricing. The furor in the past day actually supports that.
I guess some may have surmised Apple's plans based on the announced details of The Daily deal. But, I think Apple did a poor job of communicating with the content providers.
Exactly. And by offering a competing service, Google has killed the illogical "anti-competitive" argument. Apple isn't the only technology company offering media subscriptions through apps, and they're doing nothing to suppress competitors' success in that space.
There is some irony that Google has almost certainly foreclosed the possibility of Apple being charged for anti-competitive behavior.
Google seems to be waiting for apple to put out a business model then try to be innovating by under cutting apple
I think Google caught wind of Apple's terms and waited patiently for Apple to announce, only to undercut them.
It's not unlike what Apple does by making announcements to take the wind out of competitor's sales during Comdex or MWC, or to generally distract from a major event.
What Apple has figured out and consumers have voted on with thier pocket books is keep it simple stupid. Apple has shown that you need to keep the options limited, the business model simple. The reason everyone hates dealing with all the other options out there is you have no idea how much something costs and what you are paying for and these on going recurring costs are killing people.
Apple has a very simple to understand business model which everyone seems to like, and ever attempt made by companies and content owners to have all these tier costs people have rejected.
Companies have created all these complicated tier pricing models since it allows them to make lots of money and keep the consumer confuse on what exactly they are paying for over time.
Subscription and other in-app pricing is in the hands of the publisher or developer. There is not the same order as in the iTunes Store.