Yes, I know, the web is free...and the App Store search is broken so discovery isn’t what it was... but still. Market access is VERY significant and worth something and the incremental cost to Apple has no bearing on what it is worth.
As discussed, prior mobile cuts were far more one sided. We payed the carrier 50% and then Qualcomm 20% of what was left. Bottom line, we walked away with 40% and we were happy.
More often than not, I can't find a named, non-popular app, even when searching for its exact name. The only way I can find it, is if they have a web-page and an direct link to their appstore entry on that web-page.
So ironically I have to search Google/DDG on the open web to find the apps I'm looking to install on my iPhone.
"Broken" doesn't fully convey just how mismanaged the AppStore is.
It's interesting that few people don't understand the difference between permission to distribute versus actual distribution.
If Apple was doing any distribution for you at all, you wouldn't need to pay Facebook and Google for distribution.
Note how this was different in the early days, where simply being on the app store would get downloads. That has not been true for 7-8 years now.
Not sure what distinction you're trying to draw here but in order for Apple to take their 30% cut, someone has to download the app, at which point Apple have de facto distributed it to someone.
> If Apple was doing any distribution for you at all, you wouldn't need to pay Facebook and Google for distribution.
This makes very little sense to me. Are you saying that if I pay Apple to distribute my app on the App Store then they should also distribute it on every app store? And that if they aren't then they're somehow failing me?
> Note how this was different in the early days, where simply being on the app store would get downloads. That has not been true for 7-8 years now.
The App Store is a shit-show in terms of discoverability, this is true. I'm not even sure what they can do to improve things at this stage.
Having worked with low-end shareware payment processors at the time, they charged between 15 and 30% and most of them are now out of business.
I remember people complaining about the 15% cut, too. No matter how fair you make it, people will scream that it's too much. Even when it's free. Just look at how people complain about open source software that they don't pay for and don't contribute to. Nothing is ever fair for some people.
The challenge was to massage the numbers of the deal so he could see his 30% and approve it.
Also the 30% is often the budget for the Sales and Marketing operation in a typical organization.
Gawd I hope the web can remain competitive with the proprietary platforms!
Additionally, there is related precedent in areas like publishing (ebook stores usually charge 30% or more commission).
I don't think 30% is outlandish, though I do think it would be nice if Apple reduced that cut, especially if they wanted to consider some form of graduated rate.
They supposedly have a tiered cut, something like 30% off first X million, 25% of next X amount, etc.
The minimum price for an app was $0.99 as was the minimum in app purchase.
I am not saying it should scale as price scales to remain 30%.
And, IIRC at the time it was seen as a great deal. It may not be such a good deal now, though, and in-app purchases are really a whole other kettle of fish.
Here on HN most of us probably feel that product manager at Apple licked their finger, felt the wind and said “Yeah 30% seems about the most we can get away with”
And what irks even more is once Apple set the precedent, as their we’re no outcries Google was like “Let’s copy that!”. Let’s hope there was no collusion ...