Is Apple's App Store Greedy?

dbrown

Apple has won praise for the ease of use of their app store for iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. They have extended this functionality to the Mac by creating a similar app store for OSX. While this is a great way for smaller developers to have their software discovered by consumers, it also seems a bit greedy, since Apple charges 30% of the sales cost to the developer for maintaining the app store. Recently, publishers complained that the 30% charge on subscription sales was exhorbitant, (say, for a magazine app like Wired or Time) so Apple backed down. Is this pricing just a sign of Apple's greed or are they pushing the software distribution model in ways they never had with the iTunes music store?

Topic: Software
Answer this Question

Answers

5 total
jlister
Vote Up (22)

 

Last quarter, Apple doubled their profits by selling 80% more equipment. That suggests that Apple is receiving a substantial profit. Whether this is greedy or not is subjective; objectively, they are holding on to a considerably larger margin than most companies.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230366190457645641159079575...

 

delia25
Vote Up (22)

 

Maybe the DOJ needs to investigate Apple regarding their monopoly over iApp distribution. But it's usually a disaster when the lawyers get involved.

 

Apple's servers handling the sales and downloads of iApps costs money to operate. And if you look at the average price of an app ($1.55) and Apple's charge to defray the marketing, sales, and downloading of the app ($.22), it actually seems pretty reasonable.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/apples-app-store-economics-average-paid-ap...

 

I think the problem that subscription content has is that it is no longer a profitable business for many content providers. That's why the Daily has been kind of a bust. Many of us have been reading news and celebrity blogs for 10 years; why would we all of a sudden start PAYING for content? I wouldn't want to be a magazine publisher nowadays, that's for certain.

 

RomanZ
Vote Up (19)

As my daughter would say, "Duh."

 

Apple has always overpriced their products; now that they're hawking iPad apps and have ZERO competition for sales of iPad apps, they can treat developers as shoddily as they do their retail customers. When a computer vendor like HP would have to sell 7x as many pc's to make the same amount of profit as Apple, that's a sign of a serious incongruency in the marketplace. The only force that could turn this around is if HP or RIM or Android can develop tablets that are a serious competitor to the iPad, encouraging top-name developers to have a real choice over which platforms that they focus their develop efforts upon.

jimlynch
Vote Up (16)

Well, it's Apple's platform. It didn't exist until they created it, so developers have to play by their rules. If a developer isn't comfortable then they could develop for Android or some other mobile operating system and simply skip iOS altogether.

I doubt many will do that, however. The iOS ecosystem has proven quite lucrative for many developers, so it makes sense for them to continue developing for it.

Vote Up (13)

As to apps only and not subscriptions . . .

 

THe answer is simple - not simple to do, but uncomplicated to divine:  Developers, independents and companies, need to run the numbers, so to speak.  Compare Apple's 30% vs what it would cost the developer to sell their product using the usually channels.  The trick is that the cost is not simply money but also time and effort.

 

It may be that the developer is going the shareware route and content with the sales it generates and that might indeed make Apple's 30% look expensive.  And it may be that Apple's 30% compares very favorably for a developer that boxes their product and spends the time, money and effort in advertising.  Both scenarios have to also consider the market Apple opens them up to.  These are simply most likely scenarios - each developer has to do their own homework.  And whatever route the developers chooses does not lock them in to it.  Some do use Apple and continue to also sell on their own.   (I wish people would, in some way, post actual comparative numbers.  Someone with those numbers could write an article MANY people would be interested in.)

 

And that is the bottom line: each company has to decide for themselves, has to do the homework.  The system is not closed - the usual selling routes/alternatives are still there if it turns out that 30% is too much.   The blanket statement that Apples charges too much is only really, truly helpful to bloggers who get paid by the eyeballs/responses.  ;-)  

 

 

Ask a question

Join Now or Sign In to ask a question.
Mark Pincus, who founded Zynga in 2007 and gave up his CEO title less than a year ago, is now giving up all his operational duties at the company.
Quip has released an API for its browser-based word processor that it hopes enterprise developers will use to make the application do more jobs in workplaces.
China is working on a Linux operating system that can replace the now-vulnerable Windows XP and protect the country's networking infrastructure.
Roughly a year after settling an ugly, protracted legal battle with Oracle, Montclair State University is planning to implement a rival vendor's ERP (enterprise-resource-planning) system.
A notorious Windows leaker dubbed 'Wzor' says Microsoft will issue yet another update to Windows 8.1 later this year, evidence of an even-faster acceleration in the company's development tempo.
Apple today followed Microsoft in opening up pre-release, or beta, versions of its personal computer operating system to all comers.
If something about iOS 7.1 just didn't sit right for you, no worries: Here comes iOS 7.1.1 to give it another shot.
Small businesses increasingly turn to Square to process payments without the hassle (and expense) of custom card-reading hardware. There are other benefits to the service, including analytics and online sales modules, as well as opportunities for larger enterprises to better serve customers.
It's more about stability than new features, but still begins a new era for Ubuntu.
Microsoft may have retired Internet Explorer 6 last week, but it's still keeping track of the ancient browser's user share on a death watch-like website that's been running for more than three years.
Join us:
Facebook

Twitter

Pinterest

Tumblr

LinkedIn

Google+

randomness