They could even charge slightly higher fees than most credit card companies just like AmEx does. They have the infrastructure in place via Apple Pay.
Since Apple Pay already supports the industry standard Web Payments API. They could convince more companies to accept Apple Pay on the web without being “locked in” to Apple Pay since if you implemented the payments API, it would also work on Android with Android Pay.
Apple Pay is an open standard that integrates with your standard credit card processing flow.
I would be okay with a graduate app fee.
Tier 1: Hobbyists, you can have a “self signed” cert that allows you to have any app tied to your own device. You could also freely share source code for other people to compile themselves and put on their own device using their “self signed certificate”. This could be free. Of course you would still have to have a Mac.
Tier 2: a really cheap fee where you could sign apps that were distributed outside of the App Store for Macs. Signing apps that are distributed outside of the Mac App Store don’t require any manual approval or sandboxing.
Tier 3: the current App Store model. But the difference is that the first $x amount is charged at 30% and then it gradually goes down at larger volumes. Say the first $10K? Where eventually it is basically barely above payment processing fees. I’m sure the Epic’s of the world would be okay with this.
The Chardonnay Socialist in me reckons that should be completely the opposite. Let apps that make less than $10k a year (or perhaps apps from companies/brands with less than $1mil turnover per year) be free. As your revenue goes up, your percentage “tax” for using the AppStore goes up.
In my opinion, Epic needs a free ride way way less than a couple of high school kids or college grads with an innovative idea.
But with the limit being $10K. The difference between Apple taking a $3000 cut and a $500 cut is not going to make or break your business.
Ultimately, Apple would like to earn money from the products they make. There are a variety of models to do so:
* You can sell the hardware, sell OS upgrades, and let third parties sell apps without taking a cut. This was the original Mac model.
* You can sell the hardware, give away OS upgrades, and privilege third party developers who give you a cut, while preserving a way to side load. This is the current Mac model.
* You can sell the hardware, give away OS upgrades, and take a cut from third party apps. This is the current iOS model.
* You largely let others build and sell the hardware, give away OS upgrades, take a voluntary cut from developers, and sell or monetize the user's data. This is the Android model.
* You give away the hardware and OS upgrades and live off venture capital. This is a popular startup model.
Each of these is viable to some extent. None is 100% popular with customers.
But what some people seem to be asking for is "Gilette, but give away razors and adopt an open standard for the razor blades".