Patreon: adding Apple’s 30 percent tax is the price of staying in the App Store

Apple and Google stores are classic rent seeker behavior.

Deny them profit.

You don't have to use the Google store though.

Apple forces you to the their app store, and they have a huge list of requirements they impose on apps to which dicks around developers
- You don't have to use Google's store, but they've done a lot of anticompetitive shenanigans to snuff out competition and ensure they remain the dominant storefront.
  
  After Google saw how much money Apple was making, they seemed to immediately regret having Android be an open platform. It was a convenience when they acquired the product early on because they could bring it to market quickly, but they've done everything in their power since then to close it up.
- Not only do they force you to use the App Store, developing an app for iOS is a nightmare. Without special tools you must have a mac and a $100/yr apple developer license.
  
  After having to deal with that shit at my old place of work I've moved to never touch app development again.
- I don’t think this difference matters that much in Patreon’s case. Convincing users to sideload an app on Android is likely much harder than just getting them to visit the Patreon website on their phone and subscribe to users that way. Heck, they could probably make the mobile site virtually identical to the app anyway.
- You also don’t have to use the Patreon iOS app. Most people just use the services and don’t search for alternatives. If you’re on Lemmy then you’re not in the “most people” category by default.
- Yeah, you don't have to, but then nobody is getting your app. Most people don't have other stores and will look at you weird if you mention side loading. Samsung/Galaxy Store maybe, but even Samsung users mostly don't use it.
  
  So technically your don't have to use it and your app is obtainable without it, but If you want to actually reach some users, you have to be on Google Play.
  
  Google search was just declared a monopoly, when there are obviously other searched engines anyone can use. If that's a monopoly then Google Play is a bigger monopoly.
Patreon is also a platform taking 12% of their users money.

The "platform economy" is just another term for digital landlords.

Fuck 'em.

Techno feudalism is the term, look it up
- Oh I know, I just thought using landlords would be a more concise term since most people don't know the term techno-feudalism as widely.
  
  I'll definitely try to incorporate it in my writing more though, it's a term that I think should be known much more widely.
- look up en passant
lol, the irony is patreon is also a platform. Its platforms all the way down. They take 12%. If Apple wanted to be the good guy, they’d take 30% of patreon’s 12%.
Middle man skimming off the top.
- Pretty sure they are the top man
If digital platforms didn't add any value, every android app would just be available for sideloading on the dev's website. Not that I agree with Apple's pricing tactics, but running and moderating a marketplace isn't free
- Landlords don't create the value themselves, they are an intermediary for value.
  
  Platforms don't create the value themselves, they are also an intermediary for value.
  
  The value app stores provide is reach, but they don't get that value without the developer's effort. The only thing they provide is the network effect, which is nothing more than a consequence of making themselves the default option for users of these phones.
  
  For the same reason that landlords don't provide inherent value, but still capture so much of the housing market, platforms don't provide inherent value, but still capture so much of the app market.
  
  They push out competition. If a landlord buys a house, there's one less house for someone to buy. If an app store brings in another user, there's one less user that will use other means to acquire an app.
  
  I myself primarily use alternative means of installing apps. Direct APK downloads, or F-Droid. The only reason these exist is because the apps I use are specifically targeting a privacy-conscious user base that is likely to be using alternative means to acquire apps in the first place.
  
  Because these platforms immediately monopolize user acquisition by bundling themselves with the OS, they directly fight any pressure to use alternative means, which makes most app developer efforts to create alternative means not worth the time.
  
  App stores can and should be free. Without an app store, Apple and Google would have barely any market for their phones.
  
  These platforms exist to give the hardware & OS itself value. The only reason these fees exist is because they are monopolies.

The fee will only apply to memberships purchased on Patreon’s iOS app starting November 4th, 2024.

Good, I hope they shed light on Apple's shitfuckery.

Yeah, I actually think this policy is 100% correct and, if more services did this instead of eating the costs, we could have a real discussion about the harm caused by arbitrary fees.

It will likely result in Apple seeking a special deal with Patreon to avoid this mess though. It's really not a good look for Apple especially as they cater themselves to the creatives market.
- they cater themselves to the creatives market
  
  LOL only in advertising.
- Being as this is very similar to the apple epic legal fight that epic lost earlier this year, I doubt apple will make a deal. My understanding is that patreon can cave, choose to pay 27% commission, or make their own store.
  
  Though skimming the news around epic's attempts to make a store, you "can" make a store in compliance with EU and UK laws, but apple made it kinda impossible to actually do and epic is fighting it in court again?
  
  So patreon seems to have read the lay of things and said I guess we just have to make the best of a shitty situation and communicate everything to try to limit the pain.
  
  It's almost like apple feels like they have the power to do whatever they want because they've created a market where they don't have competition...
- Until recently, apps were not even allowed to charge less outside their apps than on the app store or to link to outside stores.
Yeah this is well overdue

This is a given for many kinds of services. Always purchase subscriptions on another device or direct through their website - never use your Apple devices' app store.

I'm just worried for the content creators on patreon. Their choices are a significant reduction in income, jacking up prices and pricing out some of their patrons (thus reducing their income), or if patreon pulls from apple there's a significant reduction in visibility and additional hurdles (thus reducing income).

So it seems that no matter the outcome, creators suffer the consequences of the Apple tax.

Fuck apple. Rotten to the core. Class action lawsuit in the very least.

Vote. We need House, Senate, and President to not be corporate fascists so that we can impeach at least 2 or 3 supreme court judges, replace them with rational human beings, reverse the overturning of Chevron Deference, and then let a stronger FTC gut these fucking companies.

Self dealing, competition buying, corporate fascists. The lot of them.
- What we can work on is awareness. If iOS users are aware, they can choose to simply go to the website directly and make the purchase, instead of using the app. They can still use the app for consumption.
- Fuck apple. Rotten to the core. Class action lawsuit in the very least.
  
  We're well past class action territory. They've already been required to allow third-party app stores by the EU. They're simply not complying and no one is doing shit about it.
It’s all about trust. The problem is that people trust Apple not to steal your credit card information and to honor subscription rules etc. You probably trust the independent platform a bit less, such as many of those scammer platforms who might even charge people more than they should by “mistake”, then have an awful process to get reimbursed etc.

In that sense, most people will always prefer Apple to manage these things. Everything’s then in one place, and you trust that once you cancel it you won’t be charged again.

As an example, I had a Netflix subscription and after I cancelled it, I’ve got 2 or three emails saying “Thank you for reactivating your subscription” which I didn’t do. I suspect they make some pop up that my mom tapped without noticing, but that definitely shouldn’t happen without my password. I could only solve the problem by adding a second payment method (which doesn’t work) and only then it allowed me to delete my previous credit card data.

Someone's looking to get in on some anti-trust action.

I thought Apple's app store practices were found to be legal in the Epic Games trial? (unlike Google's)
- Which is kinda ridiculous since Apple's practices are what Google does but worse.
Who?
- Mike Jones.

I'm okay with paying 30% where the return on investment is worth it. Both the Appstore and Google Play do literally nothing for you, except distribution, and payment processing. These really don't deserve to take such a big cut, and I don't really want to hear any more excuses in their favor

Both the Appstore and Google Play do literally nothing for you, except distribution.

I mean distribution is not "nothing". They have to maintain the app store, and process payments, and filter (most) malicious software.

It's just not worth anywhere near 30%, not to mention the flurry of ads all over the place.

At least with Android it's completely possible to have a third-party app or app store and charge using their own payment processes without ever touching the Google Play store.

Apple is a whole other level of control and anti-competitiveness, and they've been profiting off of it for decades with no intervention in sight.
- It also is likely costs that are having to be done anyway because of web based sales or other distribution channels. So it’s even worse that Apple and Google act like they’re providing so much when they’re literally just preventing businesses from using their existing infrastructure.
- I’ll still say that when it comes to developers, Apple is a much better experience than Google.
  
  On the App Store you can appeal if your app is rejected and you have an actual human on the other side to explain you what are the issues.
  
  On the Google Play, anything goes usually, but later if your account gets flagged by their automated system, you might 1) get a generic email with no explanation and a threat that you should fix it or the app will be taken down and your account get 1 out of 3 warnings; 2) get your account simply banned without explanation, losing all your services associated with Google forever with no appeal or anything you can do; 3) have your Google account simply disabled for supposedly being “associated” with some other account that was banned.
  
  Many of these horror stories can be found on the Android development subreddits and I suspect this is the result of the Play Store being a big target of malicious or scam apps constantly.
- Dunno about Apple but Google does a very bad job of monitoring the Play Store. Outright malicious apps are one thing and deceiving apps are other. Latter is a very big problem. Low quality apps minced with in app purchases/subscriptions that are carbon copies of each other.
  
  Google arguably does a worse job of curating the Play Store (sponsored results) and has a non existent support.
- 30% is more or less the industry standard. Whether it's a physical store or an online store. They almost all take a 30% cut.
This is not about the App Store service's quality, this is about option. They could charge 50% for all I care, if we had the option to buy iOS apps from another store other than Apple's.

i'm so glad i'm on android

Permanently Deleted
- As opposed to just using a flip phone? I'd happily use a FOSS based Linux phone if it were well developed and readily available.
- Feels good to be on graphene (and Debian)
- I'm curious what this means. Personally I don't give a damn who uses what do what's good for you, but android is heavily customizable with different operating systems and apps for more minor tweaks. On top of all that switching from android to iPhone is IMMENSELY easier than iPhone to android.
  
  If you're referencing the Google apps that people get to involved with there's many options to get away from them nowadays. There's whole communities here on lemmy assisting with that for those in to deep or even those just joining the android community so they don't get pulled in.

This couldn’t have come at a worse time, given their DOJ suit.

patreon app store.

Is apple still blocking apps from telling users they can subscribe outside of the app store?

I.e A message on check out that says "You can save 30% if you subscribe directly the website. Apple charges a 30% processing fee for using Apple subscriptions, please just subscribe on the website."

- The oportunity was there, so I took it. What else would I link to? Actual pateron?
I believe this is related to that, yeah.

I wonder how quickly Apple would come up with new bullshit if apps started providing an interstitial page with a breakdown.

Membership (goes to creator): $4.75 Patreon fee: $0.25 Fee for using iOS (goes to Apple): $1.50 -- Total: $6.50

So if I read that correctly, Apple wants a cut from Patreon's iOS app, not all Patreon creetors that have iOS apps. People still have the option of contributing to Patreon directly via their website, or even their mobile website.

Apple takes a 30% cut from almost all transactions made within all apps installed from the App Store (which is literally all of them) and you're not allowed to advertise e.g. a website to avoid the tax. Patreon rightly passes the 30% onto consumers, as should all apps. Regardless of their own bad practices, Apple needs to be held accountable.
- Unless you're selling physical goods (e.g. Amazon or eBay)
Close. They want a cut from all users that use the Patreon IOS app. Since they can't quite stretch that far, they're insisting that Apple IAP functionality be built into the app and it be offered to the users. And as before, they can't tell the users that it's cheaper, or even available, elsewhere.