It's a fine line to walk and one that I don't think they can sustain for much longer.

On one hand, they deny it and the app developer posts a medium sob story about Apple crowding out independent devs. that gets traction on Hacker News.

On the other hand, they let it through and this article gets posted.

I wonder how heavy the head that wears the crown gets before it's chopped off.

They don't need to walk a fine line. They decided to make a walled garden, but they do a terrible job of moderating it such that there are way too many of both false positives and false negatives.

I doubt it is much compared to Apple's balance sheet. Doesn't seem like a real motivation.

If it were a real motivation they could execute it much more effectively by not including their first-party app at all.

Doesn’t App Store utilization by both end users/consumers and perhaps more importantly developers, who make apps for end users, reflect indirectly in the share price?

If this were the case, the revenue to app developers in this instance could motivate Apple to not discourage this type of confusion.

I doubt leaving a BP app on there has any influence at all.

You're just restating the original point in a more convoluted way. Yes, Apple makes money from scams such as this. No, it's unlikely to be anywhere near the amount where it would matter, even in aggregate.

Do you think Apple had that 1 trillion dollars entry in their balance sheet spontaneously appear in one majestic swoop of same sale?

Do you?

Thinking about zero dollars. The App Store states the developer name prominently. The graphics look nothing like an official Apple app. It nowhere claims any official anything.

I think GP was referring to Apple’s 30% cut (just 15% if this dev is clearing less than $1M annually).

Edit: subbed < for >

It’s 15% if it’s less than a million annually.

Only when applied and approved. Lots of Dev are still paying for 30% to this day.

https://mjtsai.com/blog/2022/04/05/apple-sitting-on-applicat...