This is not true. Both Spotify, when they were in the App Store, and NYT have higher prices in the App Store than outside.

Apple enforce the rules capriciously, and change them on a whim.

Almost certainly, they allow Spotify and the NYT because iOS customers and potential customers would object too much if they were removed from the store.

A well as the 30% tax making all apps worse in quality by removing money from development, the unpredictableness and unfairness destroys many businesses before they even start.

So even though I pointed to two well known cases where that isn’t true, you’re getting your information from where exactly?

Yes and the 30% cut is moving money from poor Epic’s pockets so they can’t sell virtual coins for dance moves. Most money on the App Store comes from whales playing pay to win games like Candy Crush.

You have no proof - not in the rules that are published or anywhere else.

You can simply go to the App Store and go to NYT website to show that you are wrong.

The rule was 11.13 of the Apple App Store Review Guidelines:

11.13 Apps can read or play approved content (magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, video) that is sold outside of the app, for which Apple will not receive any portion of the revenues, provided that the same content is also offered in the app using IAP at the same price or less than it is offered outside the app. This applies to both purchased content and subscriptions.

The same-price rule was revoked in 2011 after legal challenges from newspapers & magazines. It was replaced with a rule that doesn't allow linking to any websites within the app.

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/09/apple-reverses-course-o...

As of 2020, rule 3.1.3(a) also does not allow you to recommend in any public business communications using payment methods other than Apple:

"you agree not to directly or indirectly target iOS users to use a purchasing method other than in-app purchase, and your general communications about other purchasing methods are not designed to discourage use of in-app purchase."

https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/

So we are talking about something that has happened since 2011.

Let’s do a thought experiment. Try selling something in a Best Buy and asking them will they allow you to publicize in Best Buy that you can get a lower price if you buy from their website. How do you think that will work out?

Perfectly fine. This is why the MSRP - Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price - or RRP, Recommended Retail Price, is common practice. The manufacturer publishes the suggested price on the box itself, so if a store tries overpricing by 30%, you know just by looking at the box that you're paying more than you should and should shop elsewhere.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/manufacturers-suggested...

Well, the App Store shows manufacturer suggested price. A manufacturer still doesn’t get to advertise the wholesale price nor do they get to advertise that you can get it cheaper somewhere else.

I fail to see how the MSRP is relevant.

The question was quite simple. Can I sell an item in Best Buy or GameStop and advertise in their store that a customer can get it cheaper online?

The App store advertises the app store price.

Your entire line of reasoning seems ridiculous to me, but even granting most of your premise, the wholesale price would be the price companies sell their software at with bulk discounts (purchasing 100+ seats instead of 1). What ancestors are referring to are the single unit sales price set by a company absent outside pricing interference by Apple, which is absolutely the MSRP equivalent.

What ridiculous premise? Can I go into any retail store and mark my product with the wholesale price and advertise the “tax” the retailer charged for letting me sell it in the store?

Words Mean Things.

A “tax” is a government imposed fee.

A wholesale price is the price that a manufacturer sells a product to a retailer. Every retailer has a markup from the price that they get a product from a consumer. Do you think retailers don’t make a profit from the goods they sell in their store?

When did the MSRP not include a margin for the reseller? Why would a retailer sell a product without any margin?

You realize that everything you buy from a store has “pricing interference” from the retailer don’t you?

I'm just going to go ahead and assume your posts on this are intentionally obtuse. If not, try considering how the situations might be differentiated and why that might make your chosen analogues of wholesale vs retail might be flawed.

Have fun with all your posts on this story.

Let’s keep it simple. Does any store allow goods to be sold without a markup for them to make a profit? When I walk into Walmart, how many of the items have a price labeled from the factory? Has any retailer of digital goods ever sold at cost? Does Epic charge a markup for their digital goods or do they sell at cost? Can I buy virtual goods for use in Fortnite and avoid the “Epic tax”?

No one said there is no markup. MSRP is explicitly not "at cost" or even wholesale. That is the actual point. MSRP is constant at all retailers though.

You really think that all retailers sell the same goods at the same price? Have you ever looked at the price of snacks at a movie theatre and compared the price anywhere else? Heck even at the grocery store a 20 ounce soda sold on the aisle is cheaper than the same soda sold at the checkout line refrigerated.

Are cars all sold at the same price everywhere? TVs? Computers?

You're right, I don't have tangible evidence of specifically disallowing charging different amounts on different platforms.

It's possible I've conflated that with not being able to call out the charge difference (e.g. by using the words "Apple Tax" on the payment page), and not being able to link to other payment methods (e.g. on web), which massively devalue any benefit from charging more.

I agree that Epic are in it to line already rich pockets, and extra money wouldn't improve their service. There are lots of smaller developers where an extra ~42% revenue would make a huge difference, and charging more doesn't work as the customer is price sensitive.

Is there a retailer that allows a company to label the wholesale vs retail price? Is there a retailer that allows a company to sell a product in their store and tell them that they can get it cheaper somewhere else?

Can a game retailer sell something at GameStop while advertising they can get at a lower price online in GameStop?

Where exactly are these indy developers? The time of most indy developers making it big on mobile left the train a decade ago. They have been drowned out by the makers of Candy Crush and Clash of Clans.

We already saw the race to the bottom after mobile became popular. Do you really think the bottom just wouldn’t get lower?

I remember back in 2008, when the mobile gold rush started and indy developers of popular apps were publishing how much they were making. I was making more working in corporate America writing field service apps for ruggedized Windows CE devices

Spotify, Netflix etc. are in a special category called "reader apps".

You’re conflating separate issues.

Controversy #1: some apps are allowed to be in the store and not have in app subscriptions but aren’t allowed to say how you subscribe - Netflix and Spotify come under the “reader apps” exemption and Hey didn’t.

Controversy #2: Epic isn’t allowed to have in app purchases that bypass the App Store.

Non Controversy #1: there is no rule against having different prices in an outside of the store. This has nothing to do with “reader apps”.

All of the loss of fake internet points doesn’t make a provable fact incorrect.

Go to App Store and look at NYT price. Then go to the website, the price is different.

I know you can have different prices. The problem is that the WordPress app was for all WP blogs, including self-hosted. Apple blocked them unless they add an IAP for .com services, but that's not really required.

Spotify can stay in the AppStore, presumably without having to offer an IAP, whereas apparently WordPress cannot, including for self-hosted blogs?

That's what I am getting at here.

Yes and apple would never bend/change/or randomly enforce rules on some devs and not others.... no no no....

Apple is as pure and holy as the driven snow, they are most ethical company in existence.. They do not really care about money at all, they are just looking out for their users...

So you don’t have any evidence that Apple has banned an app or forced them to sell everywhere at a single price?