"Publishers who use Apple’s subscription service in their app can also leverage other methods for acquiring digital subscribers outside of the app."

-David

So bottom line - apps can't link to their own signup page without offering the same option within the Apple infrastructure? So, a Netflix app can't say "click here to subscribe" and send people to netflix.com if they don't offer the same option through the app store (and lose 30% of their profit)?

I know I'm a bit of an Apple hater in this forum, but surely this can't be a good thing for companies? Credit card fees for a company like Netflix are probably 2-3%, and now suddenly someone wants 30%.

And while I agree that Apple and iOS devices have been a huge boost for many companies, this really does change things for how they do business. It'll be interesting to see how many just bend over and take it, or whether any actually have the balls to tell Apple to .... ...

Agreed, and I thought what I posted corrected that. Amazon takes 30% PLUS an additional amount for delivery over the air. So the Amazon charges are HIGHER than the same purchase at Apple.



What Apple has said is that you can't AVOID selling through the app store by offering a link to an outside website, but you can sell the same item through a website. Apple seems to have taken the pro-consumer position that if you offer it at $xxxx on your website you must offer it at $xxxx on the app store as well, no pricing differences based on the delivery mode.


I wonder, how many people think Walmart would allow third parties to place products in their stores and then sell them over the internet with no consideration to Walmart for providing the store and access to the steady stream of customers?

For some companies, it's a very good thing. You don't have to build and maintain your own subscription billing system - you can let Apple deal with all that for you. For people that own their own content, it's probably closer to a wash - pay 30% to Apple, or pay a small percentage to your CC processor and pay for maintaining your own payment system. For resellers of content, it bites, because you're loosing all your margin.

It'll be interesting to see how this all shakes out. I think some resellers (like Amazon) will eventually be able to negotiate a smaller cut to Apple.

The flip side of this is that the system is VERY pro-consumer, especially given that you have to specifically opt-in before Apple will share your info (email, zip code, etc) with the content provider. That has the publishing industry steaming at the ears, because they think they're entitled to that marketing info.

joe

So whats going to happen to Netflix? No way can they support the 30% cut on a monthly sub. No more mobile Netflix? I'm not interested in rentals from the iTunes store; poor encoding and support are my experience. Oh, and you have to buy the Pro to watch fullscreen on a second monitor

I trust Apple less than I trust the publishers and I loathe them. There's nothing "proconsumer" about a gateway like Apple taking a 30% cut.

Very possible. Did you note that Apple didn't co-launch this with a bunch of content providers?

Note that Google's OnePass model will have a 10% fee. With Apple requiring the pricing through them to be the same or lower, taking a bigger cut, content creators selling through OnePass will net nearly 30% more revenue. It could be interesting.

In two minds re Apple at the moment, on one hand I think that their closed approach restricts growth and innovation, on the other hand the consistency of experience and lack of issues shows that keeping that kind of control is the easiest way to deliver a high end user experience. Ultimately I think apple have got it right (excluding flash support which was just wrong IMHO).

Be interesting to see which way this plays out, there's a lot of media currently about Apple's approach.

Except for the streaming only service, Netflix would be exempt because thrstreqming is tossed in if you buy DVD rentals. The alternate ebook suppliers will be forced to pull their buy in book options. You may still be able yo buy Kindle books from Amazon and push them to your Kindle App.

Although it's a slightly different context, and clearly a different time, but I wonder if the concepts of the Carterphone decision could apply here. The Carterphone decision basically required phone companies to open their networks and permit customers to use equipment that wasn't supplied/leased by the phone company.

Apple seems to be operating in much the same fashion as the old telcos operated.

Except there is no monopoly in smart phones and people have many choices.

I just have to ask again, do you think you could set up shop inside a Walmart and not pay Walmart for access to their store, their customers and their billing system?

Oh, by the way, Amazon take more than 30% of every Kindle book purchased, but I must have missed the thread bemoaning that practice.

So the latest twist here is that there is a reported email from Steve Jobs floating around that says the new rules will not apply to SaaS subscriptions. I don't know where you draw the line between something like SalesForce or DropBox compared to Netflix compared to the WSJ, though I guess that is for Apple to take the heat and decide.