Floatplane creator split

[BlitzkriegPotato]

In a recent video, Linus seems to throw a bit of criticism Apples way for not mentioning their revenue split, while also keeping it private regarding Floatplane.

As far as I can tell, it has never been posted publicly regarding Floatplane, but I would love to know otherwise, @LinusTech?

[lewdicrous]

Apple is a publicly traded company, a lot of information regarding their finances are/should be made public. At least that's my understanding of it (not of what Linus said, didn't watch).

While Floatlane, and LMG, are not public, thus their finances (and intricacies like revenue splits) don't have to be disclosed to the public. Especially when you're talking about a "per creator" agreement, where there might be differences between one creator and another (not saying that there is, just saying that it complicates things)

[BlitzkriegPotato]

Of course he isn't obligated to, but neither is Patreon, probably floatplane's biggest competitor, yet Patreon mentions all their fees on their support page.

 

*Edit:

I would also like to mention I understand their are pretty substantial difference between them, probably the most costly being that Patreon doesn't appear to host any video, so I'm not trying to call Floatplane out for high fees or anything, just know what they are for transparency sake. 

[lewdicrous]

From what I remember, it's in the single digit percentages (that Floatplane themselves take). It goes something like this: a small % goes to the payment processor, a small % to Floatplane, the rest to the creator. Both the payment processor and Floatplane take single digit %, if I'm not mistaken.

I think they mentioned this before, but I don't know if they mentioned specific, or ballpark, numbers.

[LogicalDrm]

From the early days, the estimate was that from $3 original payment, $1 would go to payment processor (minimum fee) and rest would be split between FP and creator. I don't remember whether it was half or 1-3 split.

[LinusTech]

It's not done on a percentage basis.

[LAwLz]

On 5/7/2021 at 8:48 PM, LinusTech said:

It's not done on a percentage basis.

Could we get some rough estimates at least? 

Seems a bit hypocritical to throw shit at some companies for not being transparent, or taking big cuts, and then doing the same thing yourself. 

[Roswell]

On 5/7/2021 at 2:48 PM, LinusTech said:

It's not done on a percentage basis.

As others have said, I think that transparency is expected when you criticize other company's fees to creators.

 

You guys often rail on Apple and suggest the take should be lower. Are there instances where floatplane takes 30% or more? If so, that would kinda be speaking out of both sides of one's mouth.

[wanderingfool2]

1 hour ago, Vitamanic said:

As others have said, I think that transparency is expected when you criticize other company's fees to creators.

 

You guys often rail on Apple and suggest the take should be lower. Are there instances where floatplane takes 30% or more? If so, that would kinda be speaking out of both sides of one's mouth.

I think a key distinction between Apple and Floatplane would be the cost of operation.  Apple is clearly making a really healthy profit from App development, and their overall cost of running an App Store is likely minimal.  Actually, if I had to guess *and this is clearly a guess not even speculation*, they would be charging based on the amount of content being uploaded. (It would be how I would structure it anyways...to help offset the cost of hosting/views and make creators think twice about setting a low subscription cost while posting multiple long videos a day)

 

For something such as Floatplane, I'd imagine costs would be significantly higher (smaller operation, 4k video streams using tons of bandwidth).  I wouldn't be surprised if some people could potentially be charged more than 30% (low pricing for subs and high upload/view count).  If my guess *again just a wild guess* the more fixed structure pricing would create better opportunities for creators because they would be able to choose effectively the percentage they make (with the caveat that there is a base cost)

 

*Guessing over take it with a grain of salt what I said*

[LAwLz]

27 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

For something such as Floatplane, I'd imagine costs would be significantly higher (smaller operation, 4k video streams using tons of bandwidth).  I wouldn't be surprised if some people could potentially be charged more than 30% (low pricing for subs and high upload/view count).  If my guess *again just a wild guess* the more fixed structure pricing would create better opportunities for creators because they would be able to choose effectively the percentage they make (with the caveat that there is a base cost)

I think this as well.

 

I'm just not a fan of the whole hypocrisy of "company X is bad for doing this, but please don't ask me questions about if I am doing the same thing".

If you're going to throw shit at someone and prime your viewers that "doing this thing is bad" then you should be prepared that your audience will question your behavior, and act accordingly to the answer you give. If you give a non-answer then be prepared that people will judge that as whichever answer they want.

[LinusTech]

We have a fixed cost menu for features that creators can provide to their audiences. The costs are based on bandwidth/maintenance costs for us for the feautres. Creators charge whatever they want - that's their profit.

 

Credit card processing fees are passed through unchanged to the channel operator.

 

We target a 70/30 split at 'reasonable' membership fees, which is competitive with YouTube Memberships.

 

[Roswell]

6 hours ago, LinusTech said:

We target a 70/30 split at 'reasonable' membership fees, which is competitive with YouTube Memberships.

 

Wow.

 

Apple also targets a 70/30 split, which is competitive with Android, Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony and many others. Yet you somehow think you're above your own criticism of others?!

 

Maybe in like... the 200 bazillion videos that you complain about Apple's split, you could have prefaced the rants with "Oh by the way, my own platform takes 30% from the creators on it just like the company I'm about to complain about".

 

 

But we're a special case and need to take so much to cover our costs...

Apple in 2019 had over 300 employees (just for the US) manually validating and approving apps and their updates. That's likely at least 15 million in salary. How much more in healthcare? Another 5? 

 

What about the teams in all the other countries? Millions upon millions of more dollars spent. What about the developers of Apple's dev tools? The software engineers that work on the store? The infrastructure (and army of network engineers) to support over a billion users constantly downloading/updating apps, making purchases, etc?

 

 

 

I realize this sounds super combative but it's just... disappointing with the amount of hypocrisy. Put your money where your mouth is andlower your split to something like 85/15 if you truly believe in what you're saying. Otherwise, all of this criticism from you guys is entirely invalid and in bad faith.

[Mihle]

Apple and Floatplane is a very different situation.

Apple have Monopoly on iPhones, Floatplane do not have Monopoly on any devices.

 

Also, Floatplane is smaller, so the income to expenses ratio is worse.

[DaiGurenMK42]

17 hours ago, Vitamanic said:

Wow.

 

Apple also targets a 70/30 split, which is competitive with Android, Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony and many others. Yet you somehow think you're above your own criticism of others?!

 

Maybe in like... the 200 bazillion videos that you complain about Apple's split, you could have prefaced the rants with "Oh by the way, my own platform takes 30% from the creators on it just like the company I'm about to complain about".

 

 

But we're a special case and need to take so much to cover our costs...

Apple in 2019 had over 300 employees (just for the US) manually validating and approving apps and their updates. That's likely at least 15 million in salary. How much more in healthcare? Another 5? 

 

What about the teams in all the other countries? Millions upon millions of more dollars spent. What about the developers of Apple's dev tools? The software engineers that work on the store? The infrastructure (and army of network engineers) to support over a billion users constantly downloading/updating apps, making purchases, etc?

 

 

 

I realize this sounds super combative but it's just... disappointing with the amount of hypocrisy. Put your money where your mouth is andlower your split to something like 85/15 if you truly believe in what you're saying. Otherwise, all of this criticism from you guys is entirely invalid and in bad faith.

 

 

Buddy, distributing an app around the world is leagues different than maintaining/providing a video streaming platform. There is a reason YouTube was mentioned and not game stores. Your comment makes no sense with the context. You are also explaining the costs of development which is still different use case than high bandwidth streaming.

Microsoft switched to 12% BTW.

 

Floatplane allows for each creator to apply their own prices which helps with the 30% cut. Yet for apps on both Android and Apple stores they need to match the same rates. So Floatplane can't charge 5 dollars on android/browser and 6.5 on Apple to cover some cost.

 

The Apple 30% cut applies to everyone. The android cut applies only to app developers that use the Android payment processing. Any company that has their own payment processing like Floatplane would take a loss using Apples system. That is one of the points in the Epic v Apple case. I believe you need to review the actual argument Epic has made, they have quick read points.

 

There are a lot more detail but it is clear that you have not understood the conversation.

[GDRRiley]

17 hours ago, Vitamanic said:

Wow.

 

Apple also targets a 70/30 split, which is competitive with Android, Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony and many others. Yet you somehow think you're above your own criticism of others?!

running an app store is very different from hosting videos

[LinusTech]

21 hours ago, Vitamanic said:

Wow.

 

Apple also targets a 70/30 split, which is competitive with Android, Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony and many others. Yet you somehow think you're above your own criticism of others?!

 

Maybe in like... the 200 bazillion videos that you complain about Apple's split, you could have prefaced the rants with "Oh by the way, my own platform takes 30% from the creators on it just like the company I'm about to complain about".

 

 

But we're a special case and need to take so much to cover our costs...

Apple in 2019 had over 300 employees (just for the US) manually validating and approving apps and their updates. That's likely at least 15 million in salary. How much more in healthcare? Another 5? 

 

What about the teams in all the other countries? Millions upon millions of more dollars spent. What about the developers of Apple's dev tools? The software engineers that work on the store? The infrastructure (and army of network engineers) to support over a billion users constantly downloading/updating apps, making purchases, etc?

 

 

 

I realize this sounds super combative but it's just... disappointing with the amount of hypocrisy. Put your money where your mouth is andlower your split to something like 85/15 if you truly believe in what you're saying. Otherwise, all of this criticism from you guys is entirely invalid and in bad faith.

Others already said it, but it bears repeating: You have misunderstood the Epic/Apple dispute. 

 

It's beside the point, but here's some basic math: Apple's total payroll for 300 employees (assuming $25/hr) is $15.6M per year. That's less than half of what they were making off Fortnite *ALONE*. I think they'll be okay.

 

Of course, Apple is an independent company in a capitalist society. They are allowed to make however much margin they can - according to whatever the market will bear. It's not a crime to run a profitable business.

 

But Epic's argument is that if Apple had to compete with other App stores, they would be forced to lower their margin to be competitive. The 30% is not the problem. The monopolistic behavior is.

 

If Apple wants to prove they need it, then all they have to do is allow other app stores to compete on even footing and prove their quality/service cannot be beat. Most people will probably continue to choose that, but at least consumer will have a choice.

 

If you're anything but a large Apple shareholder or executive, you should be on Epic's side here.. and Floatplane's rate structure has nothing to do with it because Floatplane is a tiny player in a space that's full of competition.

 

Hope that helps clear things up for you.

 

 

 

[Tristerin]

Just now, LinusTech said:

-snip-

 

 

 

THE GOD-KING HATH SPOKEN

[Helpful Tech Witch]

13 minutes ago, LinusTech said:

Others already said it, but it bears repeating: You have misunderstood the Epic/Apple dispute. 

 

It's beside the point, but here's some basic math: Apple's total payroll for 300 employees (assuming $25/hr) is $15.6M per year. That's less than half of what they were making off Fortnite *ALONE*. I think they'll be okay.

 

Of course, Apple is an independent company in a capitalist society. They are allowed to make however much margin they can - according to whatever the market will bear. It's not a crime to run a profitable business.

 

But Epic's argument is that if Apple had to compete with other App stores, they would be forced to lower their margin to be competitive. The 30% is not the problem. The monopolistic behavior is.

 

 

If Apple wants to prove they need it, then all they have to do is allow other app stores to compete on even footing and prove their quality/service cannot be beat. Most people will probably continue to choose that, but at least consumer will have a choice.

 

If you're anything but a large Apple shareholder or executive, you should be on Epic's side here.. and Floatplane's rate structure has nothing to do with it because Floatplane is a tiny player in a space that's full of competition.

 

Hope that helps clear things up for you.

 

 

 

Finally some one who understands it.

No one seems to understand the fact that apple has and abuses a complete monopoly of their platform, not the cut amount.

google can charge that amount, but they don't have the monopoly on android that apple has on ios.

[Roswell]

3 hours ago, LinusTech said:

Others already said it, but it bears repeating: You have misunderstood the Epic/Apple dispute. 

 

It's beside the point, but here's some basic math: Apple's total payroll for 300 employees (assuming $25/hr) is $15.6M per year. That's less than half of what they were making off Fortnite *ALONE*. I think they'll be okay.

 

Of course, Apple is an independent company in a capitalist society. They are allowed to make however much margin they can - according to whatever the market will bear. It's not a crime to run a profitable business.

 

But Epic's argument is that if Apple had to compete with other App stores, they would be forced to lower their margin to be competitive. The 30% is not the problem. The monopolistic behavior is.

 

If Apple wants to prove they need it, then all they have to do is allow other app stores to compete on even footing and prove their quality/service cannot be beat. Most people will probably continue to choose that, but at least consumer will have a choice.

 

If you're anything but a large Apple shareholder or executive, you should be on Epic's side here.. and Floatplane's rate structure has nothing to do with it because Floatplane is a tiny player in a space that's full of competition.

 

Hope that helps clear things up for you.

 

 

 

You can't monopolize your own product... Come on, you know that. Even if one was to dive down that absolutely illogical rabbit hole, they're not even close to being the majority platform in the mobile space.

 

Beyond that, you know those aren't the only costs involved. What about the infrastructure and bandwidth costs to serve 100+ MB of updates to over a billion people every day or so? What about the manual app reviewers in every other county? What about the thousands and thousands of network engineers, support employees and developers behind the store and dev tools?

 

Fact of the matter is you don't know what that number is, which is half the issue when you criticize others with no personal knowledge of the details.

 

Finally, you ABSOLUTELY HAVE nitpicked their 30% on countless occasions.

 

I'll use your own flawed logic... You have monopolized your own platform (Floatplane) and unfairly set your 30% cut. You need to open your platform up (at your own expense) and let your creators dictate the fees they charge while providing their own method of video delivery.

 

Sounds like a swell idea when the entire point of your service is to streamline and vet the content on your platform, right? Right?!

[Mihle]

4 hours ago, Vitamanic said:

*snip*

That is not how it works.... 

But at this point it doesn't seem like you will ever understand how it actually works.

[GDRRiley]

4 hours ago, Vitamanic said:

I'll use your own flawed logic... You have monopolized your own platform (Floatplane) and unfairly set your 30% cut. You need to open your platform up (at your own expense) and let your creators dictate the fees they charge while providing their own method of video delivery.

 

Sounds like a swell idea when the entire point of your service is to streamline and vet the content on your platform, right? Right?!

last I checked, floatplane was a video service, not a device, software and app store company.

YT takes 45% of all the money you make on adsense. 30% for a video streaming platform is pretty low

[LogicalDrm]

5 hours ago, Vitamanic said:

You can't monopolize your own product...

And this is where you are wrong. Your preface is already wrong, making your argument as a whole wrong. Apple is not just App Store. They also make the device for those apps. They also make competing apps themselves. Only reason why they even allow others to make money on their platform is because it keeps customers on their platform and out of the competition platforms (Android etc.).

 

So Apple v Epic is about whole thing. Epic being for ability to run something on Apple device without using App Store. Floatplane is just equal to App Store. Its not like Linus here is saying to creators on FP that they must only be on FP, not using any other platform competing with FP. But FP itself is competing with other services.

 

So if you want to make comparisons, FP is more equal to iTunes as music, movie, book etc. distribution platform than to App Store on iDevice.

[Roswell]

On 5/12/2021 at 2:19 AM, LogicalDrm said:

And this is where you are wrong. Your preface is already wrong, making your argument as a whole wrong. Apple is not just App Store. They also make the device for those apps. They also make competing apps themselves. Only reason why they even allow others to make money on their platform is because it keeps customers on their platform and out of the competition platforms (Android etc.).

 

So Apple v Epic is about whole thing. Epic being for ability to run something on Apple device without using App Store. Floatplane is just equal to App Store. Its not like Linus here is saying to creators on FP that they must only be on FP, not using any other platform competing with FP. But FP itself is competing with other services.

 

So if you want to make comparisons, FP is more equal to iTunes as music, movie, book etc. distribution platform than to App Store on iDevice.

So if you think your logic is sound, you should also support the idea that Nintendo, XBOX, Sony, your smart refrigerator and everything else with a software delivery platform needs to open up and allow third party app stores.

 

Good luck with that and the obscene hardware prices that would follow when companies can no longer subsidize R&D/hardware cost with software cuts.

 

The fact that you can't monopolize your own product is exactly why every legal challenge has floundered and failed over the years. As much as you WANT it to be monopolistic, it isn't in the eyes of our legal system (or even the English language, for that matter).

[LogicalDrm]

39 minutes ago, Vitamanic said:

So if you think your logic is sound, you should also support the idea that Nintendo, XBOX, Sony, your smart refrigerator and everything else with a software delivery platform needs to open up and allow third party app stores.

 

Good luck with that and the obscene hardware prices that would follow when companies can no longer subsidize R&D/hardware cost with software cuts.

Yes, thats exactly correct. Ability to choose and having competition is always best for consumer as it improves quality, and brings costs down. Why would anyone stay on platform where they get worse than what competition has to offer? The consoles are not that different, and there has been efforts of opening them in past. Do you remember when Sony was hacked during Christmas holidays some years ago? The stated reason it was done was to improve Playstation service quality and to fight back Sony's stance on their closed platform.

 

39 minutes ago, Vitamanic said:

The fact that you can't monopolize your own product is exactly why every legal challenge has floundered and failed over the years. As much as you WANT it to be monopolistic, it isn't in the eyes of our legal system (or even the English language, for that matter).

Your understanding of word "monopoly" seems to be lacking, but I'm not too keen on correcting it. As I see no point on doing so.