|
rob53 3259 comments · 13 Years About 1 year ago
I've never had a problem with Apple's 30% fee. This is nothing when comparing it to a regular store's up-charge over what they pay for their "products." I keep seeing a note in the window of a health food store that give customers a 30% discount over list price when buying in bulk, in other words, their wholesale price. This wholesale price still gives the store owner enough money to operate their store sho I continue to wonder why these chintzy developers keep complaining about a standard fee. They simple want all the money for themselves. All they have to do is charge more for their software.
neoncat 152 comments · 5 Years About 1 year ago
rob53 said: I've never had a problem with Apple's 30% fee. This is nothing when comparing it to a regular store's up-charge over what they pay for their "products." I keep seeing a note in the window of a health food store that give customers a 30% discount over list price when buying in bulk, in other words, their wholesale price. This wholesale price still gives the store owner enough money to operate their store sho I continue to wonder why these chintzy developers keep complaining about a standard fee. They simple want all the money for themselves. All they have to do is charge more for their software. Common in retail arrangements like you describe is the ability for the producer (the company that creates the product sold) to not only choose which retailers they want to feature their product, but to set minimum (and maximum) advertised markups. Apple does this quite deliberately, for example, setting different markups for different retailers (Amazon, for example). Apple also has an "authorized dealer" program where specific stores are granted direct access to products and marketing support. Other stores are not afforded such blessings, and are instead referred to as the "gray market," where warranty and other concerns are called into question.
racerhomie3 1264 comments · 7 Years About 1 year ago
Developers should use Web sites if they want free distribution and avoid all taxes by Apple. If you are making native iOS apps with iAP or subscription ,you should abide by Apple rules. Or you should make your app free, like you know millions of apps on the App Store
danox 3023 comments · 11 Years About 1 year ago
neoncat said:
rob53 said: I've never had a problem with Apple's 30% fee. This is nothing when comparing it to a regular store's up-charge over what they pay for their "products." I keep seeing a note in the window of a health food store that give customers a 30% discount over list price when buying in bulk, in other words, their wholesale price. This wholesale price still gives the store owner enough money to operate their store sho I continue to wonder why these chintzy developers keep complaining about a standard fee. They simple want all the money for themselves. All they have to do is charge more for their software. Common in retail arrangements like you describe is the ability for the producer (the company that creates the product sold) to not only choose which retailers they want to feature their product, but to set minimum (and maximum) advertised markups. Apple does this quite deliberately, for example, setting different markups for different retailers (Amazon, for example). Apple also has an "authorized dealer" program where specific stores are granted direct access to products and marketing support. Other stores are not afforded such blessings, and are instead referred to as the "gray market," where warranty and other concerns are called into question.You understand here how the power is ultimately in the hands of the producer. Now compare that to Apple's adversarial relationship with developers in the App Store. You don't have to agree with me whether or not that's a problem, nor am I trying to convince anyone here that's a problem, but when the snide Apple White Knights rush to defense of a two trillion one trillion dollar company and declare developers "chintzy" for not toeing the line, it's hard not to roll my eyes. There's nuance in every relationship. I don't disagree that Apple provides a valuable service to end users with how they've structured the App Store. I disagree that it's worth the cost and/or that developers receive value on their end as well. But again, we can agree to disagree. Just do so fairly and acknowledge your desire to represent your own selfish needs, the same way a developer wishes to do for themselves. To sit on the shelf in any store Walmart, Macy’s, Kroger’s Costco, Sam’s Club you have to pay the fees or you don’t get to be in their store, What is the problem? Yes Apple is very successful, but they definitely are small part of the total computer market.
rob53 3259 comments · 13 Years About 1 year ago
neoncat said:
rob53 said: I've never had a problem with Apple's 30% fee. This is nothing when comparing it to a regular store's up-charge over what they pay for their "products." I keep seeing a note in the window of a health food store that give customers a 30% discount over list price when buying in bulk, in other words, their wholesale price. This wholesale price still gives the store owner enough money to operate their store sho I continue to wonder why these chintzy developers keep complaining about a standard fee. They simple want all the money for themselves. All they have to do is charge more for their software. Common in retail arrangements like you describe is the ability for the producer (the company that creates the product sold) to not only choose which retailers they want to feature their product, but to set minimum (and maximum) advertised markups. Apple does this quite deliberately, for example, setting different markups for different retailers (Amazon, for example). Apple also has an "authorized dealer" program where specific stores are granted direct access to products and marketing support. Other stores are not afforded such blessings, and are instead referred to as the "gray market," where warranty and other concerns are called into question.You understand here how the power is ultimately in the hands of the producer. Now compare that to Apple's adversarial relationship with developers in the App Store. You don't have to agree with me whether or not that's a problem, nor am I trying to convince anyone here that's a problem, but when the snide Apple White Knights rush to defense of a two trillion one trillion dollar company and declare developers "chintzy" for not toeing the line, it's hard not to roll my eyes. There's nuance in every relationship. I don't disagree that Apple provides a valuable service to end users with how they've structured the App Store. I disagree that it's worth the cost and/or that developers receive value on their end as well. But again, we can agree to disagree. Just do so fairly and acknowledge your desire to represent your own selfish needs, the same way a developer wishes to do for themselves. Fine, but remember that the product these developers are selling only work on Apple products so in essence they are software contractors, nothing more. They could, and probably do, sell the same software to other mobile devices but I bet they aren't getting anywhere near the same amount of income. |