15% for small developers for some time now.
And even 15% for certain large developers too.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Epic Games to Charge 12% Fee for App Sales From Alternative iPhone Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And even 15% for certain large developers too.
Apple revenue for the 1Q 2024 has approximately 50% from the Americas and 30% from the EU. I doubt if Jobs would have said goodbye to this kind of revenue.
Apple sales revenue by country/region 2024 | Statista
The Americas are Apple’s largest regional market, bringing in net sales of 50.43 billion U.S.
www.statista.com
And Apple’s Board would have fired him for costing them sales. The EU is a big market not just consumer but professional as well.
iPhones and Macs are not cheap devices. macOS used to carry a £99 upgrade fee. iOS was free to iPhone but iPods there was a small fee.
If that’s the limitation of your understanding, I can see why you’ve reached the conclusion you have. Thank you for making it clear to me. Have a nice day.
Most of you are missing the point. This is not about developers. Small developers are obviously perfectly fine paying the 30% fee to Apple. The problem is related to in-app purchase. Epic was supposed to pay 30% for every skin sold in Fortnite. Spotify is supposed to pay for every subscription. The same goes for Netflix, Microsoft etc. Amazon can’t use the app to sell stuff. This is what makes Apple’s position absurd. Epic will not charge anything for in-app purchases. It’s a huge difference
I'd look at Epic's actions with Fortnight as an example. Epic doesn't allow alternative stores in it, requires the use of Bucks, and the T&Cs outlaw the sale of accounts. Why can't I sell a Fortnight account to someone else and not have Epic suspend it?
Epic expects payment for use of the Unreal engine in many cases. Why should they get a forever cut from a game they didn't develop if it is successful?
Epic is doing similar things to protect its revenue streams while whining about paying Apple for doing the same things. There's nothing wrong with that, but find it hypocritical to complain about another company doing it when you do the same; and acting like you are on some great crusade for fairness when in the end it's about getting a bigger share of the pie.
Consumers don't benefit from lower prices due to competition.
Who knows?
But I suspect in the end Epic and other will still wind up paying Apple for access to the App Store an Apple's technology around it. It just remains to be seen how Apple does it to satisfy the EU. I hope smaller developers won't become collateral damage.
If we are talking percentages of small percentages then sure. If we are dissecting the entire mobile user market into smaller segments, such as people who play AAA titles on their mobile phone, then sure Epic and game developers have an opportunity to capitalize and make money on those users. If kept as a narrow focus with smaller numbers of users then maybe this would work. But for the vast majority of apps and developers, they would never give us the volume of users the main App Store brings them because they would never make up the loss in revenue by a larger cut.
The OP and I were talking math. Not sure where judges came in, nor why you are pushing the conversation that direction. However, I agree they could do that assuming they could get land some another country. Should we pivot again to Settlers of Catan strategies?
It will be a gaming store which will have gaming apps. Also, apps that do not use its payment services do not have pay anything so every game can list theirs in the store. This is the advantage with alt stores. You do not have to search for games in the Appstore for games. The entire store is for games. There may be demo games that one can play. Same case with Mobiventure will open store exclusively for corporate apps. So, there can be specialized stores and that eases the discovery. Who will wade through 1.8 million apps and the crappy search interface of the Appstore when you can easily do that on the alt app stores.
It feels to me that you like finding "injustice" in things and then pushing hard to "make things right"
I don't want to take that personal drive away from you but it isn't great when trying to be open to all sides of a topic. I will attempt though.
Sure, there are always fringe cases. Those cases where Apple made the wrong call and a developer gets screwed. However, it is not a large percentage of the apps in the App Store. It is a small percentage.
Also, remember these changes are not happening because the independent small developers care. This is happening because of large businesses wanting more profit (which I am not judging as bad).
So unless a very massive organization, that would bring in tens or hundreds of millions of dollars for Apple goes to another App Store, I don't think that Apple is going to pursue them to come back. Also, if that happens, chances are good they still won't pursue them because it wouldn't make financial sense for either party.
Finally, let me address the "Apple has no business taking a cut" comment. I am not sure how many businesses you have run, where your decisions affect the paychecks of your employees and if they can pay their bills and put food on their tables. I have been in that position several times (currently I am) and I make decisions that allow my business to make money. I don't turn down revenue streams because consumers don't want to pay money. I think most business operate with a general set of business principles, so you are totally allowed to have that opinion. However, I don't think it really will ever happen as long as capitalism is the basis for our business principles. I think your energy might be better focused on that effort.
You do know that Mac OS was stuck on version 10 for 20 years? That didn't mean it was dead.
Microsoft just meant that they'd keep the name perpetuaty, not that they'd no longer update it. Part of the reason for that is that they made upgrades free. You only have to pay for a license again when you get a new PC.
It's still their 3rd biggest category behind server and office/365. It's ahead of both Bing and Xbox for revenue, for example.
While the comment you were responding to might have been constructed a bit better, the main point still stands. Apple provides much more to the entire ecosystem than Epic can or will. For the, relatively, small amount that Epic is going to add to the overall ecosystem, they are going to charge 40% of what Apple does. I will be willing to have my socks knocked off in surprise if they offer anything close to 40% of the value Apple adds to the ecosystem.
Now, if you feel like, as the consumer, you want to pay a business less for the products they are trying to sell at a high margin....that is a different topic. That is Apple operating as a business. If that is the issue than I think the direction of conversation should be more on capitalism as an engine rather than the gears and cogs (business, rules, etc...) operating inside of it, but that is completely just my personal perspective.
My example was to show that Apple no longer has a monopoly on the apps that can run on iOS so they cannot stop a developer from listing/selling their apps on alternative stores. Earlier they had so they could misuse it. Now they do not have it so they cannot misuse it because the consequences may be immediate.
Apple can take fees for listing the app in their Appstore. The quantum may be up for discussion but the fact is that nobody is telling that Apple has to do it free.
However, in-app purchases are extra features that an App offers. Apple has not contributed to the development of the extra features and is not sure why it feels it is entitled to a cut in that. Once the alt appstores come and offer their listing at a lower rate, Apple will also lower its rates to compete. That is what competition does and Apple is terrified that such a future will come to pass.
Just because it has a monopoly on the apps that can be listed in the store, they are exploiting it with many such irrelevant rules. I am sure all the governments are interested in attacking that part.
Why do I need to have run a business and paid salaries to employees to know that it is illegal to stifle competition using one's dominant position? Nobody is asking Apple to not make money. They Just should not make it at the expense of the competitors by stifling their legitimate rights.
do u really think developers create an app without any help from Apple? the iOS API is so good that anyone can write code and it just works? developers contact Apple for support and that support cost is part of the fee. if the developer makes a profit, shouldn’t Apple also get a percentage from that collaboration? EPIC app store is just hosting. i bet EPIC will take customer details, sell it, and also profit off advertisements.
No real apps use swift, only student projects, so apple would have the moral ground if they wanted to take 30% of those.
While I don't think a cosmetic store within a single game is equivalent to an App store for various reasons, this is a better angle at finding hypocrisy.
But most people in this thread are calling Epic hypocrites in response to a story about Epic charging a fee in the Epic Store.
Where has Epic criticized Apple for not allowing the sale of accounts? I must have missed that part.
Epic also has a one time fee option for the Unreal Engine. Also, end users buy operating systems ahead of time; they don't pay a hundred bucks for Unreal Engine.
It's the difference between selling a whole modified car and selling a modification to a car.
I have.
Oh come on! 🤣 I merely was pointing out the incorrect usage of “free“ and “open” markets. More importantly, the delusion that such a thing actually exists, if ever, as you pointed out so eloquently. 😉
Its important that we clarify such noble ideas as ”freedom” and “choice” in these discussions, as they are often used with gusto to support our opinions. Can any discussion ever get anywhere if we just throw these terms out there without care? Who would actually support more “oppression” and less “freedom“?
This is like the ever lovely “think about the children” mindset behind some discussions. It’s counter productive, especially if we don’t understand what we are working with. 😁
Yes. Many.
It’s not. It’s part of the developer subscription.
Uber, Amazon with their store app or booking.com/Expedia can make any profit they want, without paying an additional dime to Apple.