Developer says Apple rejected update for not forcing auto-billing on users

Jump to First Reply
Posted:
in General Discussion
Yoga app developer Down Dog reports that Apple has rejected an update because its free trial version doesn't automatically turn into a paid subscription.

Down Dog remains in the App Store
Down Dog remains in the App Store


Following the recent App Store dispute over Hey email, another developer is claiming that Apple has rejected an update to its app. This time, it's reportedly specifically because the app offers a free trial, but does use Apple's App Connect service to turn that into an automatically-billing paid subscription.

Wow! Apple is rejecting our latest update because we refuse to auto-charge at the end of our free trial. They can choose to steal from their customers who forget to cancel, but we won't do the same to ours. THIS IS A LINE THAT WE WILL NOT CROSS. pic.twitter.com/s9HwD4ay4h

-- Down Dog (@downdogapp)


The tweet's attached screengrab references terms and conditions that developers producing iOS apps must abide. The full documentation says that apps may offer such a free trial, transitioning to a paid one, but it does not appear to mandate it.

The developer goes on to say that it has "experimented with auto-charging trials in the past" and that it's been problematic. "[It leads] to 1) fewer users trying the product... 2) a huge number of refund requests by users who forget to cancel and 3) complete disbelief from those users when we explain that Apple won't allow us to issue refunds."

Apple has yet to comment, and it is not clear why the issue arose over this particular update. However, Down Dog does promote on its website how users can avoid paying more to Apple.

"Purchasing through our website avoids commission fees commonly charged by Apple or Google," says the site, "and will usually get you the best price!"

Down Dog's yoga app is still available in the App Store, and the developer does not say what the latest update was adding or fixing. The existing app continues to offer in-app purchases of various levels of subscription, but the company also offers direct subscriptions via its website.

The company's complaint is similar to one it made in June 2020 regarding Google. Down Dog's yoga app had been removed from the Google Play Store for the same practice of offering subscriptions via its official site. However, Google allowed the app back after an appeal.

"This is all done under the guise of protecting their users," said Down Dog about Google's initial decision to remove the app, "but is clearly a monopolistic attempt to get 30% of our revenue, as is the case when users subscribe via Google."

Separately, Apple has said that it is listening to developers and their concerns about the pricing and management of the App Store.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 75

    "This is all done under the guise of protecting their users," said Down Dog about Google's initial decision to remove the app, "but is clearly a monopolistic attempt to get 30% of our revenue, as is the case when users subscribe via Google."
    I’ve found, in my own experience, if one feels the need to add “clearly” to a statement, then the issue probably isn’t as clear as one would like. If a simple declarative sentence isn’t enough, you should think again about what you’re saying.
    edited July 2020
    equality72521doozydozenStrangeDayswatto_cobra
     4Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 2 of 75
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 3,430member
    I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
    williamlondonPezamuthuk_vanalingamOferchemengin1elijahgcroprGeorgeBMactobian
     8Likes 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 3 of 75
    boboliciousbobolicious Posts: 1,188member
    ...is this what is left when an operations zeitgeist succeeds a visionary...?
    edited July 2020
    Oferelijahg
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 75
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,150member
    dysamoria said:
    I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
    And I’m firmly in the Apple camp.  Apple is the one doing all the work obtaining and keeping its large base of customers willing to pay for apps.  If 30% is too high given what Apple does they’re more than happy to go to the Android camp, where they probably make zero money.

    70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

    whiners.
    edited July 2020
    fotoformatRayz2016bloggerblogjony0aderuttercharlesatlaswilliamlondondoozydozenmacplusplus
     9Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 75
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    It's annoyed me in the past that the default for trial was to auto renew on a paid subscription.  I never knew that it was Apple mandated behaviour.  Pretty shady policy.
    muthuk_vanalingamOferwilliamlondonelijahgMplsPGeorgeBMacdysamoriatobian
     7Likes 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 6 of 75
    What I notice is that their web site doesn't actually make a guarantee that the price charged will always be lower than what would be paid via Apple or Google app stores. They use the term "usually". 
    jony0
     0Likes 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 7 of 75
    Pezapeza Posts: 198member
    sflocal said:
    dysamoria said:
    I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
    And I’m firmly in the Apple camp.  Apple is the one doing all the work obtaining and keeping its large base of customers willing to pay for apps.  If 30% is too high given what Apple does they’re more than happy to go to the Android camp, where they probably make zero money.

    70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

    whiners.
    I bet you own Apple shares. Never on the side of the customer, and this developer never stated they don’t want to give Apple its cut, their complaint is clearly over Apple forcing them to take money from the apps customers, basically here’s a free trial, enter all your payment details and we will charge you if you don’t cancel, it’s a dirty trick purely designed to milk money from the customer, putting the giant corporation Frits and foremost and the customer a very far behind lonely second. 
    It’s not only an anti competitive move but very clearly anti consumer and I’d argue in come countries potentially illegal. I’m glad the developer stood up to Apple on this one.
    muthuk_vanalingamjony0Oferwilliamlondonchemengin1elijahgcroprGeorgeBMacdysamoriatobian
     9Likes 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 8 of 75
    Rayz2016rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    dysamoria said:
    I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
    Of course you are 🙄
    edited July 2020
    williamlondonStrangeDayslamboaudi4
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 9 of 75
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,150member
    Peza said:
    sflocal said:
    dysamoria said:
    I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
    And I’m firmly in the Apple camp.  Apple is the one doing all the work obtaining and keeping its large base of customers willing to pay for apps.  If 30% is too high given what Apple does they’re more than happy to go to the Android camp, where they probably make zero money.

    70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

    whiners.
    I bet you own Apple shares. Never on the side of the customer, and this developer never stated they don’t want to give Apple its cut, their complaint is clearly over Apple forcing them to take money from the apps customers, basically here’s a free trial, enter all your payment details and we will charge you if you don’t cancel, it’s a dirty trick purely designed to milk money from the customer, putting the giant corporation Frits and foremost and the customer a very far behind lonely second. 
    It’s not only an anti competitive move but very clearly anti consumer and I’d argue in come countries potentially illegal. I’m glad the developer stood up to Apple on this one.
    As a developer myself, I remember easily the years of boxed software and the difficulty of actually making money in that market.  Factor in overhead, marketing, distribution, and everything else associated with selling independently, a 30% cut to access that market is chump change.

    Apple created this market that developers have access to.  Not the other way around.

    keep whining.
    Rayz2016jony0aderutterwilliamlondondoozydozenAppleZululamboaudi4macplusplustobian
     9Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 10 of 75
    Rayz2016rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member


    "This is all done under the guise of protecting their users," said Down Dog about Google's initial decision to remove the app, "but is clearly a monopolistic attempt to get 30% of our revenue, as is the case when users subscribe via Google."
    I’ve found, in my own experience, if one feels the need to add “clearly” to a statement, then the issue probably isn’t as clear as one would like. If a simple declarative sentence isn’t enough, you should think again about what you’re saying.
    Very true, and note they drop the 'monopoly' bomb in the hope they can use it to strong-arm Apple into letting them get away without paying the 30%, which is what this is about.

    Still, if I were Apple I'd call their bluff. Give devs the choice of setting the subscription to non-renewing before they load the app onto the store. I think it's a friendlier way to do it, and it'd be interesting to see how many devs actually set it.



    jony0aderutterwilliamlondon
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 11 of 75
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    dysamoria said:
    I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
    So you think developers should have free access to the App Store and Apple should get nothing in return. Because that's what this guy is wanting. He wants the marketing clout of the App Store but doesn't want to pay for it. He offers his app as a free trial but if you want to buy it you go to his website. Yeah, cut Apple out of the deal even though Apple provides the platform, the marketing, the server space. All the developer has to do is upload their app, get it approved and they enjoy all the clout of the world's most valuable marketing platform. The developer doesn't need to advertise, they don't even need a website. 
    Rayz2016jony0williamlondonwonkothesaneJinTechmacplusplusAppleSince1976
     7Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 12 of 75
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member

    Peza said:
    sflocal said:
    dysamoria said:
    I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
    And I’m firmly in the Apple camp.  Apple is the one doing all the work obtaining and keeping its large base of customers willing to pay for apps.  If 30% is too high given what Apple does they’re more than happy to go to the Android camp, where they probably make zero money.

    70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

    whiners.
    I bet you own Apple shares. Never on the side of the customer, and this developer never stated they don’t want to give Apple its cut, their complaint is clearly over Apple forcing them to take money from the apps customers, basically here’s a free trial, enter all your payment details and we will charge you if you don’t cancel, it’s a dirty trick purely designed to milk money from the customer, putting the giant corporation Frits and foremost and the customer a very far behind lonely second. 
    It’s not only an anti competitive move but very clearly anti consumer and I’d argue in come countries potentially illegal. I’m glad the developer stood up to Apple on this one.
    Baloney. That claim is a smoke screen. This developer thought they had figured out how to get around paying Apple its cut by offering a free trial and then telling their customer to visit their website if they wanted to buy/subscribe. 

    "Purchasing through our website avoids commission fees commonly charged by Apple or Google," says the site, "and will usually get you the best price!"

    There it is, right out in the open.
    Rayz2016aderutterjony0williamlondonmacplusplusAppleSince1976tobian
     7Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 13 of 75
    Rayz2016rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    crowley said:
    It's annoyed me in the past that the default for trial was to auto renew on a paid subscription.  I never knew that it was Apple mandated behaviour.  Pretty shady policy.
    Yup, it's annoying. I usually just set a reminder so I don't forget to cancel the subscription, or I cancel it straight away and then renew if I want to keep it.

     Before I started doing this though, I was caught out, and then I just go to reportaproblem.apple.com and get a refund.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 14 of 75
    Rayz2016rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    sflocal said:
    Peza said:
    sflocal said:
    dysamoria said:
    I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
    And I’m firmly in the Apple camp.  Apple is the one doing all the work obtaining and keeping its large base of customers willing to pay for apps.  If 30% is too high given what Apple does they’re more than happy to go to the Android camp, where they probably make zero money.

    70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

    whiners.
    I bet you own Apple shares. Never on the side of the customer, and this developer never stated they don’t want to give Apple its cut, their complaint is clearly over Apple forcing them to take money from the apps customers, basically here’s a free trial, enter all your payment details and we will charge you if you don’t cancel, it’s a dirty trick purely designed to milk money from the customer, putting the giant corporation Frits and foremost and the customer a very far behind lonely second. 
    It’s not only an anti competitive move but very clearly anti consumer and I’d argue in come countries potentially illegal. I’m glad the developer stood up to Apple on this one.
    As a developer myself, I remember easily the years of boxed software and the difficulty of actually making money in that market.  Factor in overhead, marketing, distribution, and everything else associated with selling independently, a 30% cut to access that market is chump change.

    Apple created this market that developers have access to.  Not the other way around.

    keep whining.
    When we were developing for the PalmPilot and Windows Mobile, the cut was 70% to the app store. When Apple said they were charging 30% I thought it was mistake in the news article.

    Amazon still charges up to 70% of the cover price for selling an eBook, and no one has to check that.
    edited July 2020
    aderutterjony0red oakwilliamlondonmacplusplusAppleSince1976tobian
     4Likes 0Dislikes 3Informatives
  • Reply 15 of 75
    DAalsethdaalseth Posts: 3,144member
    sflocal said:
    dysamoria said:
    I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
    And I’m firmly in the Apple camp.  Apple is the one doing all the work obtaining and keeping its large base of customers willing to pay for apps.  If 30% is too high given what Apple does they’re more than happy to go to the Android camp, where they probably make zero money.

    70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

    whiners.
    This is precisely why Apple is being investigated for, and will get nailed for, abusive monopolistic behaviour. Saying they can either follow Apple's rules or go to the Android store and go broke is not a choice. Apple has the ONLY app store that makes money. It's a choice of being where the customers are, or offering your product in a favela where nobody has the cash. That's a false choice and Apple stands a good chance of getting penalized for this sort of behaviour. To put it in clearer terms, yes Walmart has the right and what terms products can appear in their stores. But if Walmart demands onerous terms, and is the only store in town where you can sell, then that's wrong.

    That said though, I'm not going to take sides in this one yet. There have been a number of developers that cried fowl over some Apple policy, and when the rest of the story came out it turned out they were the ones trying to do something shady, or were misunderstanding Apple's policy. there have even been several cases where they got rejected for doing something else, clearly wrong, and were trying to smokescreen the whole thing. I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop on this one.
    Oferwilliamlondonelijahgdysamoria
     3Likes 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 16 of 75
    Pezapeza Posts: 198member
    lkrupp said:

    Peza said:
    sflocal said:
    dysamoria said:
    I’m absolutely with the developer here, on this issue.
    And I’m firmly in the Apple camp.  Apple is the one doing all the work obtaining and keeping its large base of customers willing to pay for apps.  If 30% is too high given what Apple does they’re more than happy to go to the Android camp, where they probably make zero money.

    70% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

    whiners.
    I bet you own Apple shares. Never on the side of the customer, and this developer never stated they don’t want to give Apple its cut, their complaint is clearly over Apple forcing them to take money from the apps customers, basically here’s a free trial, enter all your payment details and we will charge you if you don’t cancel, it’s a dirty trick purely designed to milk money from the customer, putting the giant corporation Frits and foremost and the customer a very far behind lonely second. 
    It’s not only an anti competitive move but very clearly anti consumer and I’d argue in come countries potentially illegal. I’m glad the developer stood up to Apple on this one.
    Baloney. That claim is a smoke screen. This developer thought they had figured out how to get around paying Apple its cut by offering a free trial and then telling their customer to visit their website if they wanted to buy/subscribe. 

    "Purchasing through our website avoids commission fees commonly charged by Apple or Google," says the site, "and will usually get you the best price!"

    There it is, right out in the open.
    They are free to post what ever they like on their own website, that has absolutely nothing to do with Apple or it’s policies, and it’s also a fact that they were stating, so because they want to save their customers money they are the nasty bad person as it’s removing that money from Apples greed? For a trial...
    Sorry but I find your statement to be incorrect, this article and the tweet clearly stated the unfair customer treatment, NOT developer treatment, for a trial of the app. What’s next? Apple forcing minimum 12 month subscriptions with no refund? It’s quite obvious if this story is true Apple is putting its greed first and foremost, not the customer, and the last time I checked it was making a pretty few billion in profit from the App Store alone every quarter, so I think it’s more then covering the cost of any ‘services’ it’s supplying.
    It should be up to the developer how it wants to offer free trials of its software, as this sets the impression of the company, to be forced by Apple to be seen as the typical greedy one who wants all your payment details up front is disgraceful I find.

    The part about telling your customer to bypass the App Store you, is part of the now multiple on going anti competition investigations into Aplles App Store practices, we shall await the outcome of those.
    edited July 2020
    Oferwilliamlondonchemengin1elijahgmuthuk_vanalingamtobian
     5Likes 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 17 of 75
    Rayz2016rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    What I notice is that their web site doesn't actually make a guarantee that the price charged will always be lower than what would be paid via Apple or Google app stores. They use the term "usually". 
    Because they 'usually' charge the same price and pocket the 30%


    jony0williamlondonAppleSince1976
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 18 of 75
    red oakred oak Posts: 1,107member
    Down Dog was also removed by Google from the Play store in June over similar issues (and then re-instated).  This company is a drama queen

    Accusing Apple of "stealing" is plain wrong and a bad strategic move.  Who in their right mind would go to war so publicly with over the top rhetoric like this against their main platform and distribution partner?    Who in the hell is guiding this company?  

    AI needs to vet these complaints better before giving them press 


    jony0AppleSince1976
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 19 of 75
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 2,544member
    Firstly, I think this developer is not telling us the entire story.

    Secondly, 30% is not a lot. Apple gets to host, update, manage, and troubleshoot the store. Just think of all the employees that go through the code to make sure developers are behaving. Or the broadband connection needed to serve up petabytes of data daily. 
    Most importantly, Apple also has to host and manage all the free apps. In the end they end up with a much much lesser profit. 
    jony0AppleSince1976tobian
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 20 of 75
    riverkoriverko Posts: 251member
    When i subscribe to the trial, i immediately go and cancel... the subscription period is running, just the auto renewal is not happening. It is bit user unfriendly, but i get the point of Apple
    jony0tobian
     0Likes 0Dislikes 2Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.