Apple updates App Store Price Flexibility | Paid apps now from $0.29 to Up To US$ 10K

[AlTech]

Summary

 

Apple is updating the pricing flexibility of apps on the App Store. Among these changes, Apple will allow developers to change subscription prices and one off purchases as cheap as $0.29 and as expensive as US$ 10,000 .

 

Prior to this apps had to charge at least $0.99 and couldn't charge more than $1000.

 

It should be noted that prices above $1000 are upon request only and in theory Apple can decline to offer it to a developer.

 

Apple is also allowing devs to charge different amounts per country if they don't want to use Apple's suggested pricing.

 

This change will affect app subscriptions right now but won't affect one time purchases until Spring 2023. No reason was given for the delay for apps not using subscriptions.

 

Quotes

Quote

Apple unveiled the most sweeping change yet to the App Store pricing model it applies to all apps submitted to its app stores on Tuesday. In the new system, app developers will have substantially more control over how they price their apps.

Apple's App Store has a history of offering relatively limited price point options to app and game developers. With the new policies, the minimum app price has dropped from $0.99 to $0.29, and the maximum has risen from $1,000 to $10,000. Prices can include $0.10, $0.50, $1, $5, $10, and $100. Supported conventions include X.99, X.00, X.90, and X.95.

 

My thoughts

This is good news for app developers, but until we have App side loading on IOS  inevitably forced by the EU there still won't be any competition on IOS against Apple's app store monopoly.

 

Also, this presumably still doesn't allow app devs to explain to customers that they charge more on IOS or why they do so.

 

Sources

 https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/12/apple-announces-sweeping-changes-to-app-store-pricing/

[dizmo]

I am shocked they didn't allow this earlier. It's just more revenue for them. There will be app developers rushing to be the first ones to offer $2k, $5k, etc apps, and there will be people who buy them just for the clout. 

 

Cha-ching. 

[hishnash]

19 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I am shocked they didn't allow this earlier. It's just more revenue for them. There will be app developers rushing to be the first ones to offer $2k, $5k, etc apps, and there will be people who buy them just for the clout. 

 

Well there is a risk for apple.  As apple is the retailer if a user challenges a charge that is a charge back agaist apple (not the developer) if by the time the charge back completes apple has already paid out the developer then it can be very hard to get that money back.  

There are apps out there (for the Mac) that (not on the App Store) that cost well over $1k (applications for very niche industries) however even if devs use the App Store as these are apps targeted at companies (not consumers) devs do not need to use apples purchase system. 

[dizmo]

2 minutes ago, hishnash said:

Well there is a risk for apple.  As apple is the retailer if a user challenges a charge that is a charge back agaist apple (not the developer) if by the time the charge back completes apple has already paid out the developer then it can be very hard to get that money back.  

There are apps out there (for the Mac) that (not on the App Store) that cost well over $1k (applications for very niche industries) however even if devs use the App Store as these are apps targeted at companies (not consumers) devs do not need to use apples purchase system. 

I don't imagine the cost associated with that fringe case would counter the additional profits made. 

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, hishnash said:

Well there is a risk for apple.  As apple is the retailer if a user challenges a charge that is a charge back agaist apple (not the developer) if by the time the charge back completes apple has already paid out the developer then it can be very hard to get that money back.  

There are apps out there (for the Mac) that (not on the App Store) that cost well over $1k (applications for very niche industries) however even if devs use the App Store as these are apps targeted at companies (not consumers) devs do not need to use apples purchase system. 

That risk is part of the game if you want to run your own store.  While apple don't permit sideloading or competing stores then they must shoulder that risk and not foist it onto consumers or developers who play by the rules.

[hishnash]

57 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I don't imagine the cost associated with that fringe case would counter the additional profits made. 

If apple let any app charge this then the majority would be scam apps.  So the number of such charge backs would be very high.  

 

 

51 minutes ago, mr moose said:

That risk is part of the game if you want to run your own store.  While apple don't permit sideloading or competing stores then they must shoulder that risk and not foist it onto consumers or developers who play by the rules.

Auditing apps such that only those that are at leas somewhat light can charge such high prices hardy counts as harming developers. 

[Commodus]

I'd like to see the apps that only cost 29 cents. I could see that being useful for developers who want to gate an app by charging money, but don't really need profit.

[dalekphalm]

5 hours ago, hishnash said:

If apple let any app charge this then the majority would be scam apps.  So the number of such charge backs would be very high.  

How is this any different from now? Devs can already try and sneak scam apps for $1 onto the app store, or $100. The higher tier, $10K, is by special approval only. Can you elaborate what you mean here?

 

I can pretty much guarantee that if Apple discovers a dev scamming customers, that dev will get banned.

[SeriousDad69]

16 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

My thoughts

This is good news for app developers, but until we have App side loading on IOS  inevitably forced by the EU there still won't be any competition on IOS against Apple's app store monopoly.

The EU is planning to force side loading into iOS? That would be great. It would definitely make Android completely redundant for me. The Apple AppStore is a complete wasteland just filled with garbage, would be great to see a high quality FOSS AppStore for iOS like F-Droid.

[AlTech]

19 minutes ago, SeriousDad69 said:

The EU is planning to force side loading into iOS?

Not sure if it's been officially confirmed but the EU is leaning that way as they are quite unhappy with the state of IOS competition. They see sideloading as a way to significantly improve competition within IOS.

19 minutes ago, SeriousDad69 said:

That would be great. It would definitely make Android completely redundant for me. The Apple AppStore is a complete wasteland just filled with garbage, would be great to see a high quality FOSS AppStore for iOS like F-Droid.

 

[mr moose]

23 hours ago, hishnash said:

If apple let any app charge this then the majority would be scam apps.  So the number of such charge backs would be very high.  

 

And still a problem for apple and not for the consumer or every other developer who is being fair and reasonable.

 

23 hours ago, hishnash said:

 

Auditing apps such that only those that are at leas somewhat light can charge such high prices hardy counts as harming developers. 

 

No, but limiting what honest developers can and can't do because apple don't want to take financial responsibility for the only ios app store fits the description of harming developers.