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

Posted:
in iOS edited August 2018
Removal of in-app payments for a Netflix subscription in some markets may be modestly beneficial to the company's overall revenue, but bringing the concept to the U.S. version of the app may not be that beneficial overall for the streaming service.




Following a report from Tuesday revealing the trial, an analyst note from Macquarie Research discusses the attempt to circumvent the App Store's commission fee increases the number of major apps pushing back against the mobile platforms, joining Spotify. Rather than accepting a subscription through the app, paying Apple a commission, Netflix instead points new users in a number of markets to sign up via the website, avoiding the App Store payment mechanism entirely.

While the firm suggests regulatory and legal pressures could affect how the app store model operates, the move by Netflix is a competitive pressure, and one most likely to cause changes in the short term than the other two types.

Apple's 30-percent commission fee was modified in 2016 to allow subscriptions lasting longer than a year to be charged a lower 15-percent rate. Macquarie notes this worked for some time to keep apps with subscriptions on the store, but the decisions of Spotify and Netflix to move away from it is seen as a test of how far they can take it.

Apple could retaliate against Netflix for the move, the analyst note adds, as some of Netflix's tests do include in-app links to subscribe elsewhere, which Apple could argue violates the terms of the App Store. While Apple's guidelines do not prohibit web-based service sign-ups, it does not allow apps to direct users to sign up via a service's website.

Even so, the regulatory and legal pressures may limit Apple's response to the move, leaving the video streaming app to continue with its trial.

It is thought these two pressures could influence Apple's response, due to Apple's existing music subscription service alongside a rumored video streaming offering. As these would directly compete with Netflix, Spotify, and other major subscription services, and are naturally not affected by the App Store commission, taking its competitors to task could draw unwanted attention from regulators, or a lawsuit.

The competitive pressure also arrives in the form of Google Play, as Netflix's app has already disabled in-app subscription sign-ups on Android since May.

The trial could have a "modest" impact on Netflix's revenue, Macquarie speculates, with it increasing by one percent across the 2019 financial year, but only if Netflix can drive all sign-ups outside of the iOS ecosystem.

The analysts suggest the trial is an early step to "prevent any drags" on international streaming average revenue per user (ARPU), with international subscriber growth thought to be still in the middle of the S-curve.

The trial is unlikely to arrive in the U.S. anytime soon, as Macquarie believes there isn't much long-term benefit to be gained, due to its existing subscriber base, unless the company can come up with a way to tempt current iOS subscribers to re-subscribe directly to avoid Apple's charges.

The firm adds that the "under penetrations of iPhones abroad presents less risk" for Netflix to perform its trials outside the US, then if a similar decision was made at the height of Netflix's U.S. growth.

Even with the potential financial benefit from the trial, the analysts also suggest there could be a "downside risk" if Netflix were to make the changes permanent, as this could drag down on mobile sign-ups. According to the firm's data, approximately 35 percent of all of Netflix's sign-ups are performed through app stores on smartphones and tablets.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 56
    It's not such a hardship leaving the app to perform a one-time procedure (sign-up). What has rattled me a few times is when I want to purchase something on another store such as Amazon Prime Video, I cannot do it within the app - I have to browse via safari then go back to the app to view the content. Come to think of it, doesn't Safari technically break the rules by allowing access to third party competing marketplaces ? :wink: :trollface: 

  • Reply 2 of 56
    irelandireland Posts: 17,571member
    The biggest problem with Neflix as of late is many of the moves they seem to making or pushing for are against their users.

    Those pre-rolls when you open their website, for one. I've told them several times I hate them, even in chat the support people told me many people are giving them the same complaint but Netflix corporate don't seem to be listening. More public company shit: going public ruins most companies IMO. Eventually I'll be looking for a way out. And then their apps are horrid, and always getting worse. The only bearable one is the ATV3 template one, which is why I'm still using my ATV3 (and youtube). Or they now hide 'my list' in some menu, if you want to see your full list. Or how now when you view your list in a grid they have renamed it with a name (Netflix suggests. Really?) that means they also can also add to your list. How fucked up is that?

    And now with them "testing" pre-rolls before you watch your show (i.e. ads for shows, which are annoying, and which will pave the way for ads for other shit). Ads will be the end of my enjoyment of Netflix. Many of the modern films on Netflix are terrible as is. With most of them which appear like they are shot by inexperienced cinematographers who've barely graduated away from still cameras, and who naively assume they same rules apply. Read: generic cinematography. Netflix keep throwing money at the wall to see what sticks, in the content department. They should be far more conservative with their spend and keep the majority of it for people who have already produced truly great entertainment or critically acclaimed works. They no longer have any clue what they are doing.
    edited August 2018 superjunaid
  • Reply 3 of 56
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,929member
    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.
    jbdragon
  • Reply 4 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,667member
    ireland said:
    The biggest problem with Neflix as of late is many of the moves they seem to making or pushing for are against their users.

    Those pre-rolls when you open their website, for one. I've told them several times I hate them, even in chat the support people told me many people are giving them the same complaint but Netflix corporate don't seem to be listening. More public company shit: going public ruins most companies IMO. Eventually I'll be looking for a way out. And then their apps are horrid, and always getting worse. The only bearable one is the ATV3 template one, which is why I'm still using my ATV3 (and youtube). Or they now hide 'my list' in some menu, if you want to see your full list. Or how now when you view your list in a grid they have renamed it with a name (Netflix suggests. Really?) that means they also can also add to your list. How fucked up is that?

    And now with them "testing" pre-rolls before you watch your show (i.e. ads for shows, which are annoying, and which will pave the way for ads for other shit). Ads will be the end of my enjoyment of Netflix. Many of the modern films on Netflix are terrible as is. With most of them which appear like they are shot by inexperienced cinematographers who've barely graduated away from still cameras, and who naively assume they same rules apply. Read: generic cinematography. Netflix keep throwing money at the wall to see what sticks, in the content department. They should be far more conservative with their spend and keep the majority of it for people who have already produced truly great entertainment or critically acclaimed works. They no longer have any clue what they are doing.
    I fucking love how streaming media companies are attempting to mimic all of the bad behaviors of cable, all the while attempting to find a winning formula of original content, padded with a plethora of mostly crappy licensed content, always the winning formula for more growth.

    One of the benefits for the consumer with streaming accounts curated via the iTunes Store, is that you can mix and match what you want, when you want it, all with a central, and convenient, payment management, and curated media via Apple TV or iTunes.
  • Reply 5 of 56
    I want to sell my goods in Walmart because they get a lot of traffic. I want prominent shelf space. Oh, and I don’t want to pay Walmart any retail markup. 
    tmaylkruppclaire1
  • Reply 6 of 56
    seankillseankill Posts: 462member
    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. 

    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 
    jbdragonrogifan_newavon b7
  • Reply 7 of 56
    seankill said:
    I think the whole Apple as a marketplace and what cut should they get is a fascinating discussion. For those that argue these commissions are legit because Apple’s providing access to a billion consumers willing to spend money etc. then why does Apple allow free apps in the App Store? Why shouldn’t every app cost something and Apple gets a percentage of the sale? And if we’re talking customer acquistion, couldn’t one make the case that Uber and Lyft owe their success to Apple/iOS more than Netflix? Yet Apple doesn’t take a cut of Uber and Lyft transactions.


    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 

    Ecosystems like iOS are necessary for Apps to succeed.

    FTFY.
    superjunaidtmayracerhomie3claire1
  • Reply 8 of 56
    nunzynunzy Posts: 662member
    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.
  • Reply 9 of 56
    racerhomie3racerhomie3 Posts: 1,062member
    If they do this in the US store, they won’t be getting my money anymore. I want Apple’s list to be a centralized zone for subscriptions.
    claire1
  • Reply 10 of 56
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,527member
    Sounds like a bit of media hyperbole.  Apple has always allowed apps where subscriptions are made outside of App Store, and then user has to sign-in on the app (they do not allow the app to direct them with links to outside sites).  It is how I signed up for Netflix in the first place.  Amazon Prime as well.  However, those are the only two services I have done that with.  I won't do it for the small ones - so those services whose names are not large enough, generally have to work with app stores to get their digital subscribers.

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

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

    IMO, Apple should consider some updates to the App Store pricing to keep the developers and content creators from straying - move the one-time fee to 25%, and the longer term subscription fee to 10% (or perhaps two tiers - down to 5% after 2 years of a subscription being maintained).  Overall impact on revenue growth should be muted.
  • Reply 11 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,667member
    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. 

    Apps like netflix are necessary for the iPhone to succeed. 
    I pay Netflix directly, but I've been with Netflix from before streaming became their thing. At some point, Netflix's content is going to suck enough comparative to other streaming companies, that I will end up favoring short subscription stints of a wide range of providers, all payable through the App store if I had my choice. That is a very consumer friendly strategy.

    Example,

    January: subscribe to HBO Go and Hulu

    March: cancel HBO Go and Hulu, add Netflix and CBS All access.

    ad infinitum/ lather, rinse, repeat

    Under those circumstances, why shouldn't I use Apple as my primary payment site? 

    In the long term, with more and better competitors, do you really think that Netflix will have the luxury of ignoring app subscriptions?

    claire1
  • Reply 12 of 56
    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. 
    edited August 2018 hammeroftruth
  • Reply 13 of 56
    Solution A: Apple buys Netflix. Solution B: Apple prohibits Netflix from their devices.
  • Reply 14 of 56
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,414member
    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.
    edited August 2018 majorslrogifan_newhammeroftruth
  • Reply 15 of 56
    majorslmajorsl Posts: 83unconfirmed, member
    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.
    Yes, and if they were forced to, Netflix and Amazon could just optimize streaming on a web browser for iOS.  Of course, there are those who will say Apple should get a cut for anything that is streamed to their device be it via an app or a web browser because, you know, Apple.
    mac_128claire1hammeroftruth
  • Reply 16 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,667member
    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.
  • Reply 17 of 56
    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.
    edited August 2018 mac_128nunzyCarnage
  • Reply 18 of 56
    dewmedewme Posts: 2,024member
    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. 
    All very good points, especially about the depreciation of perceived value. The same depreciation model applies to media content. When services like Netflix, Hulu, Spotify, Amazon Prime, and Apple Music deliver content via an all-you-can-eat model the customer's perceived value of any individual content item or subset of content approaches zero. It turns into a gorging exercise at the Golden Corral buffet where customers take one bite out of a meatball and throw the rest in the trash on their way to grab four more chicken wings, half of which will also be wasted. Some people used to pride themselves on having a personally curated collection of media, including movies and music, that uniquely defined their tastes and was almost an extension of their personality. With the all-you-can-eat model it's all just a pile of chicken wings that commands your attention for a few minutes or hours before going back to the buffet to fill another plate up with somethings else. The ephemeral attraction of media content, in my opinion, results in the proliferation of copious amounts of low quality media content. Why bother putting your heart and soul into something that is going to get so little attention? May as well just crank of lots and lots of junk and gather up all the fractional rewards to be had based on sheer volume. 

    As far as Apple taking a cut of the transaction, it seems like this should always come down to a bang-for-the-buck exercise for people who are paying the bucks. Apple is essentially a middleman in the equation. What is the value that Apple is providing as a middleman? Is Apple adding value or simply reducing your profit? People who are paying for middlemen sometimes underestimate the value that middlemen provide, not just in dollars and cents but in removing friction on both ends: producers pushing into the channel and end customers pulling from the channel. Middlemen who are very efficient to the point of being nearly invisible, all the while keeping things flowing, are more prone to be undervalued.  Cutting out the middleman may reduce costs for producers but may make it harder for customers to acquire the producer's product. Companies like Netflix have to be smart, understand the whole system, and know what they are getting for their money at every transaction boundary along the way. 
  • Reply 19 of 56
    croprcropr Posts: 926member
    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.
    The crucial question is: is a user buying a Netflix subscription because he has an iOS device or would he buy a Netflix subscription anyhow independent of the device.  In the former case iOS brings value to Netflix and Apple can justify a serious cut on the revenue.  In the latter case it is not.  

    Apple has tried to convince us that the former model is always true.      There are cases where point of view Apple is indeed correct especially in the gaming business. But for other apps, where an iOS device is just one of the many methods to access valuable content, I am inclined to say that is not so obvious

    Netflix is challenging the point of view of Apple. Netflix has a very good marketing channel to get to its customers and can easily test the consumer behavior. If Netflix doubled the price of the iOS subscription, while maintaining the price via the web, what would happen?.  If consumers like the service of Netflix; they eventually switch to the lower priced web subscription. 

    I am the owner of an app development company and a survey among the customers of one of my apps showed that none of them came in contact with my app via the App Store app.  Basically this means that for this app the App Store has become a very expensive cloud storage facility.  The conclusion for me was the same as Netflix.  I informed my customers that the business model changed.  The app was free of charge but they had to pay access to the content via a web based interface. They would get 1 month free of charge when switching .  None of them complained.



  • Reply 20 of 56
    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.