Apple Fires Back at Spotify in official press release

[dashausman]

Spotify wants to receive 100% of all the revenue gained from subscriptions that are processed by App Store-regulated payments. Apple asserts that it does not handicap Spotify's update distributions and that Spotify doesn't want to play by the same rules everyone else does, and that by asking for these concessions from Apple that they hurt the ecosystem that they benefited from, which would hurt other rising developers from also being supported by it. https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2019/03/addressing-spotifys-claims/

[TheSLSAMG]

8 minutes ago, dashausman said:

Spotify wants to receive 100% of all the revenue gained from subscriptions that are processed by App Store-regulated payments. Apple asserts that it does not handicap Spotify's update distributions and that Spotify doesn't want to play by the same rules everyone else does, and that by asking for these concessions from Apple that they hurt the ecosystem that they benefited from, which would hurt other rising developers from also being supported by it. https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2019/03/addressing-spotifys-claims/

You know, this is one of those rare situations in which I'm with Apple. I don't think what Apple's ultimately asking for here is unconscionable and I think Spotify is ultimately trying to cheat the system by wanting 100% of the transactions that go through Apple. Unless it's against Apple's rules, I'm pretty sure Spotify has the choice to tender payments for iOS based subscribers through their own backend instead of using Apple's. I know my subscription isn't through Apple because I signed up on the Spotify website.

[mr moose]

The issue I have is that in order too offer a sub service on the app store they have to increase the cost of the sub to cover the apple charges.  This is like an extra tax just for being an apple customer.  Is there a way to offer the sub to apple users without going through the app store?

[DrMacintosh]

11 minutes ago, mr moose said:

This is like an extra tax just for being an apple customer. 

Errr. Wrong. 

 

This is Spotify paying to be on the platform that Apple put millions of dollars developing. It's also how Spotify manages to exist. I don't want to sound like a capitalist hawk, but if they don't like it....there is always the Google Play Store 

Spotify can't go crying wolf about the fees that everyone else pays just because Spotify can't figure out a better business model. 

[mr moose]

Just now, DrMacintosh said:

Errr. Wrong. 

 

This is Spotify paying to be on the platform that Apple put millions of dollars developing. It's also how Spotify manages to exist.

Spotify can't go crying wolf about the fees that everyone else pays just because Spotify can't figure out a better business model. 

It's like I never asked this question:

13 minutes ago, mr moose said:

  Is there a way to offer the sub to apple users without going through the app store?

 

[justpoet]

I gotta go with Apple here.  Spotify just wants in app purchasing for no price, unlike all the other apps.  Other apps have, in the past, taken out links to signing up or subscribing in their apps and only offered the service sign up on their websites.  This makes the app content delivery only, and then no fee ever goes to Apple for it for that user, subscription or not.  The in app charge, even for a subscription payment, is how Apple breaks even for hosting everything for everybody and distributing and promoting the apps in the store.

[DrMacintosh]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

It's like I never asked this question:

Rip. I missed that. 

 

In short I’m not aware of any reason why Spotify would not be able to host payment on its own site. Hosting payments in app is apparently convenient enough that they want to keep it but not so important enough that they want to pay for it. 

[Master Disaster]

29 minutes ago, mr moose said:

The issue I have is that in order too offer a sub service on the app store they have to increase the cost of the sub to cover the apple charges.  This is like an extra tax just for being an apple customer.  Is there a way to offer the sub to apple users without going through the app store?

The exact same thing happens on Android too btw, maybe not quite as much but it does.

 

One example, Twitch. Subs cost $1 on mobile than buying from the website and bits cost 10% more.

 

Solution, subscribe and buy bits from Twitch.tv instead.

[MetEishYa]

They knew the terms before they released on the Platform. Cant cry now about them when you not making all the money in the world.

 

Why cant they just have 2 options in App for payment, "pay via website" link and a "pay via app". They can then have different rates eg website $10, In app $14 (assuming 30% fee for in-app), that way they get the $10 regardless. For the customer you either use the website or pay extra for the convenience of in-app.

[mr moose]

20 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

Rip. I missed that. 

 

In short I’m not aware of any reason why Spotify would not be able to host payment on its own site. Hosting payments in app is apparently convenient enough that they want to keep it but not so important enough that they want to pay for it. 

If so then they have to pay for the service. It's hardly rocket science, suffice to say streaming music is not a profitable business to be in and I can see why they are looking to save money anywhere they can.

 

10 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

The exact same thing happens on Android too btw, maybe not quite as much but it does.

 

One example, Twitch. Subs cost $1 on mobile than buying from the website and bits cost 10% more.

 

Solution, subscribe and buy bits from Twitch.tv instead.

I would then call that an android tax. 

[Master Disaster]

Just now, mr moose said:

If so then they have to pay for the service. It's hardly rocket science, suffice to say streaming music is not a profitable business to be in and I can see why they are looking to save money anywhere they can.

 

I would then call that an android tax. 

It's simply because any transaction made through the Android store costs the supplier 30% in the exact same way as it does on the Apple store.

 

I can understand it, if they have to pay more to be on a platform then passing some of that to the consumer is inevitable. Personally I just avoid it and buy any subscriptions direct from whichever website.

[Soppro]

Didn't Netflix also bypass Apple's IAP system too hmm ... not sure if Spotify's going to do the same but as far as I'm aware, Apple doesn't usually like apps which redirect payments to an external platform  

[mr moose]

https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/276066-netflix-experiments-with-bypassing-apple-app-store-subscription-fees

 

So it seems if you buy through the app store (either brand) you get charged extra for the privilege.  

 

EDIT: Also I don't care which company is charging it, 30% is a lot for this case,  Apple/google are essentially only processing a transaction, they are not streaming the service,  organizing content or a part of that content distribution.   30% for an admin fee (especially one that is automated) is way too high.

[captain_to_fire]

1 hour ago, DrMacintosh said:

In short I’m not aware of any reason why Spotify would not be able to host payment on its own site. Hosting payments in app is apparently convenient enough that they want to keep it but not so important enough that they want to pay for it. 

They have their own payment scheme on their own website. 

[Ashley MLP Fangirl]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

Is there a way to offer the sub to apple users without going through the app store?

yeah. just sign up on the website. i use spotify on my Apple devices and i signed up on the website. works perfectly fine. 

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/276066-netflix-experiments-with-bypassing-apple-app-store-subscription-fees

 

So it seems if you buy through the app store (either brand) you get charged extra for the privilege.  

 

EDIT: Also I don't care which company is charging it, 30% is a lot for this case,  Apple/google are essentially only processing a transaction, they are not streaming the service,  organizing content or a part of that content distribution.   30% for an admin fee (especially one that is automated) is way too high.

To answer your previous question the answer is yes. It is possible for Spotify and their users to avoid the Android/iOS 30% cut. If you login on their website and buy it from there 100% of the money goes to Spotify. It's only when you use the Android/iOS built in function for hooking into the stores and payment system that the fee is applied. 

 

However, sending a user to a website where they need to put in their card number is not as convenient as just popping up a little window for fingerprint verification and then the money is charged through the Google/Apple account. 

 

I don't agree with Spotify that they should get 100% of the revenue. I mean, they are using Apple's system for convince after all, but 30% is way too high. Maybe 5% would be a good compromise. 

[Trixanity]

19 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

To answer your previous question the answer is yes. It is possible for Spotify and their users to avoid the Android/iOS 30% cut. If you login on their website and buy it from there 100% of the money goes to Spotify. It's only when you use the Android/iOS built in function for hooking into the stores and payment system that the fee is applied. 

 

However, sending a user to a website where they need to put in their card number is not as convenient as just popping up a little window for fingerprint verification and then the money is charged through the Google/Apple account. 

 

I don't agree with Spotify that they should get 100% of the revenue. I mean, they are using Apple's system for convince after all, but 30% is way too high. Maybe 5% would be a good compromise. 

Isn't it possible for Apple/Google to punish for circumventing their platform for subscriptions if Spotify were to link directly to their website from the app? I seem to recall it causing issues in the past. The difference being that either users are paying a subscription beforehand and then using a companion app or users downloading an app and then being told to go to a website to subscribe with the implication that the store front sees no cash. It's at least very gray area.

[ZacoAttaco]

3 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

The exact same thing happens on Android too btw, maybe not quite as much but it does.

You're right, wasn't Fortnite on Android a similar story?

47 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I don't agree with Spotify that they should get 100% of the revenue. I mean, they are using Apple's system for convince after all, but 30% is way too high. Maybe 5% would be a good compromise. 

Agreed, like @DrMacintosh pointed out, Apple spends millions in developing and maintaining their App Store. It should also be noted that Spotify's success hinges on their availability on these platforms. Maybe some negotiation behind the scenes could take place regarding the percentage cut but it seems like this whole situation is getting messy now. 

 

[LAwLz]

2 hours ago, Trixanity said:

Isn't it possible for Apple/Google to punish for circumventing their platform for subscriptions if Spotify were to link directly to their website from the app? I seem to recall it causing issues in the past.

I mean, it's of course possible that Apple/Google could punish them for it, but I am not aware of it happening in the past. But then again, it might have happened but I haven't heard of it.

[Techstorm970]

So Spoofy did an oopsie???

Spoiler

Anybody get the reference?

 

[BuckGup]

7 hours ago, mr moose said:

The issue I have is that in order too offer a sub service on the app store they have to increase the cost of the sub to cover the apple charges.  This is like an extra tax just for being an apple customer.  Is there a way to offer the sub to apple users without going through the app store?

To be fair though the Apple market is a profitable one. Android you are basically walking into it knowing 80% of people will just pirate it

[HarryNyquist]

1 hour ago, Techstorm970 said:

So Spoofy did an oopsie???

  Reveal hidden contents

Anybody get the reference?

 

 

Spoiler

DAN, EHHHHHHH, CAN WE LISTEN TO IT ON SPOOFY??

 

[Techstorm970]

Just now, HarryNyquist said:

 

  Hide contents

DAN, EHHHHHHH, CAN WE LISTEN TO IT ON SPOOFY??

 

Yep!

[dashausman]

9 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I don't agree with Spotify that they should get 100% of the revenue. I mean, they are using Apple's system for convince after all, but 30% is way too high. Maybe 5% would be a good compromise. 

Apple asserts in their press release that as with normal app purchases, only the initial transaction with the customer does Apple receive 30%. All subsequent charges to existing subscriptions lets the developer take home 85% of the income, instead of the 70% of the initial transaction.

[S w a t s o n]

6 hours ago, BuckGup said:

To be fair though the Apple market is a profitable one. Android you are basically walking into it knowing 80% of people will just pirate it

What? You can't pirate a spotify subscription and most people are not pirating fucking android apps. Sure apple users will dump more money into the app store but be realistic about it