Very fair, they developed an audience and a platform people trust, they deserve a cut.
Every online store gets a cut from sales.
It's already bizarre that they can't control their own store.
Nobody controls their own store. Before you can even open one there are huge amounts of rules and regulations to deal with.
On the face of it, this comment by Apple does not appear to be in the spirit of the rule but we'll have to see how it plays out.
At the end of the day all of this is basically part of a bigger puzzle and no one knows what it's going to look like yet.
Looks like plenty of stores control their stores. I don’t know of any store that allows vendors to use a store’s space for free. Apple provides the store, provides access to it by developers and they have to be paid just like any other store.
So wrong in so many ways. You make it sound like Apple is some victim and developers are out of their mind for thinking Apple should give them free rent.
The reality is, Apple is forcing developers to sell their product exclusively at Apple's App Store AND are forced to pay (what many call excessive) 30% on their sales.
Nobody wants free rent on the App Store. What developers want are choices. Choices to sell their iOS apps at other marketplaces at competitive rates. Does that just blow your mind that someone would want choices and competitive prices? Apple and competitive pricing doesn't usually appear in the same sentence, though, do they?
With less than 1/4 of the market, Apple can't force developers to do much of anything.
Very fair, they developed an audience and a platform people trust, they deserve a cut.
Every online store gets a cut from sales.
It's already bizarre that they can't control their own store.
Nobody controls their own store. Before you can even open one there are huge amounts of rules and regulations to deal with.
On the face of it, this comment by Apple does not appear to be in the spirit of the rule but we'll have to see how it plays out.
At the end of the day all of this is basically part of a bigger puzzle and no one knows what it's going to look like yet.
Looks like plenty of stores control their stores. I don’t know of any store that allows vendors to use a store’s space for free. Apple provides the store, provides access to it by developers and they have to be paid just like any other store.
So wrong in so many ways. You make it sound like Apple is some victim and developers are out of their mind for thinking Apple should give them free rent.
The reality is, Apple is forcing developers to sell their product exclusively at Apple's App Store AND are forced to pay (what many call excessive) 30% on their sales.
Nobody wants free rent on the App Store. What developers want are choices. Choices to sell their iOS apps at other marketplaces at competitive rates. Does that just blow your mind that someone would want choices and competitive prices? Apple and competitive pricing doesn't usually appear in the same sentence, though, do they?
You seem to have the misguided idea that Apple is forcing developers to only sell on the App Store. That is obviously false as lots of developers sell on the Google Play store and other Android stores, the App Store, and possibly elsewhere as well (epic, steam, Xbox store etc). What Apple has done is say, if you want to sell to our customers on our platform, then you follow our rules and pay our commissions. Which is no different than most other platforms and their customer bases. Developers have no innate right to sell iOS apps. They accept the restrictions and they are granted that right by the owner of the market.
Very fair, they developed an audience and a platform people trust, they deserve a cut.
Every online store gets a cut from sales.
It's already bizarre that they can't control their own store.
Nobody controls their own store. Before you can even open one there are huge amounts of rules and regulations to deal with.
On the face of it, this comment by Apple does not appear to be in the spirit of the rule but we'll have to see how it plays out.
At the end of the day all of this is basically part of a bigger puzzle and no one knows what it's going to look like yet.
Looks like plenty of stores control their stores. I don’t know of any store that allows vendors to use a store’s space for free. Apple provides the store, provides access to it by developers and they have to be paid just like any other store.
So wrong in so many ways. You make it sound like Apple is some victim and developers are out of their mind for thinking Apple should give them free rent.
The reality is, Apple is forcing developers to sell their product exclusively at Apple's App Store AND are forced to pay (what many call excessive) 30% on their sales.
Nobody wants free rent on the App Store. What developers want are choices. Choices to sell their iOS apps at other marketplaces at competitive rates. Does that just blow your mind that someone would want choices and competitive prices? Apple and competitive pricing doesn't usually appear in the same sentence, though, do they?
Your comment is nothing but a more stupid way of saying that you think Apple have a "monopoly" with the Apple App Store in iOS. Something that even Sweeney, with an army of high price lawyers, couldn't prove in a Federal court.
Very fair, they developed an audience and a platform people trust, they deserve a cut.
Every online store gets a cut from sales.
It's already bizarre that they can't control their own store.
Nobody controls their own store. Before you can even open one there are huge amounts of rules and regulations to deal with.
On the face of it, this comment by Apple does not appear to be in the spirit of the rule but we'll have to see how it plays out.
At the end of the day all of this is basically part of a bigger puzzle and no one knows what it's going to look like yet.
Looks like plenty of stores control their stores. I don’t know of any store that allows vendors to use a store’s space for free. Apple provides the store, provides access to it by developers and they have to be paid just like any other store.
Indeed, but I don't know any store where the vendor has to pay a commission to the store owner. Normally this is a fixed fee per month.
Very fair, they developed an audience and a platform people trust, they deserve a cut.
Every online store gets a cut from sales.
It's already bizarre that they can't control their own store.
Nobody controls their own store. Before you can even open one there are huge amounts of rules and regulations to deal with.
On the face of it, this comment by Apple does not appear to be in the spirit of the rule but we'll have to see how it plays out.
At the end of the day all of this is basically part of a bigger puzzle and no one knows what it's going to look like yet.
Looks like plenty of stores control their stores. I don’t know of any store that allows vendors to use a store’s space for free. Apple provides the store, provides access to it by developers and they have to be paid just like any other store.
Indeed, but I don't know any store where the vendor has to pay a commission to the store owner. Normally this is a fixed fee per month.
eBay and Amazon MarketPlace. Vendors there have to pay a fee and a commission. But the fee is a listing fee and not by the month. The amount of the fee is determine by how long you want your item listed and might vary with how many items you have listed and the its cost. Plus the listing fee amount to pennies, compared to the cost of the item and the commission.
Before eBay and craigslist, I use to visit a handful of "antique malls", that were in a short time driving distance. Inside these malls, there would be dozens of dealers selling their merchandise under one roof. Like an indoor flea market. Often these dealers will sell items on consignment, in their mall space. But they get to choose what items to sell on consignment and only selected items that they were pretty sure would sell. And if it don't sell it a certain amount of time, it was returned. The dealer got a commission only if the item sold.
Most stores in a shopping mall might have a lease where they must pay a percentage of their monthly gross revenue to the mall owner, along with rent. But usually only after making a certain amount. This is a form of commission on all the items the store sold.
The idea that Apple shouldn’t not collect a commission is just plain bizarre. To use their store you pay. That’s it. That’s the comment. On what planet would it be otherwise?
Comments
With less than 1/4 of the market, Apple can't force developers to do much of anything.
And your point is?
Before eBay and craigslist, I use to visit a handful of "antique malls", that were in a short time driving distance. Inside these malls, there would be dozens of dealers selling their merchandise under one roof. Like an indoor flea market. Often these dealers will sell items on consignment, in their mall space. But they get to choose what items to sell on consignment and only selected items that they were pretty sure would sell. And if it don't sell it a certain amount of time, it was returned. The dealer got a commission only if the item sold.
Most stores in a shopping mall might have a lease where they must pay a percentage of their monthly gross revenue to the mall owner, along with rent. But usually only after making a certain amount. This is a form of commission on all the items the store sold.
https://www.thebalancesmb.com/average-percentage-commercial-rent-3515423