Comment by ryancarson | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ryancarson | Hacker News Reader

A lot of you are focusing on content subscriptions in your comments. I don't think that's the real story.

I'm hugely concerned about all of us who are running SaaS apps that are complemented by an iOS app.

We've worked our assess off to reach profitability and now Apple thinks they can come along an extort 30% of our revenue.

The power of the App Store is in reaching the mass market. That's awesome for people who are building apps/services that service that market. They benefit hugely from this powerful distribution channel. But all of us folks who have built up a following in a niche market (web design and development, for us) don't need this and we're certainly not going to put up with Apple demanding we fork over 30% of our revenue just so our customers can have an iOS experience.

IMHO, this is the push we all need to go HTML5, CSS3, jQuery for our next 'iOS' app (the way 37s recently did with the mobile version of Basecamp).

I'm a huge Apple fan (probably spent $30K+ over the years for our company) but this is bullshit.

From Apple's press release:

Publishers who use Apple’s subscription service in their app can also leverage other methods for acquiring digital subscribers outside of the app. For example, publishers can sell digital subscriptions on their web sites, or can choose to provide free access to existing subscribers. Since Apple is not involved in these transactions, there is no revenue sharing or exchange of customer information with Apple.

Ryan,

The HTML5 route only works where Mobile Safari has access to what bits of iOS you need eg. You still can't upload content via mobile safari.

Also how will this work with freemium models? What about trial models?

If they enforce this for SaaS there are a ton of use cases where it looks like it fails entirely.

Hell even for non SaaS stuff. Cineworld has an app which takes Credit Cards. Will this be barred? Banks have an app. Banks charge rates. Will this be barred?

This works for content, and only some content at that.

This will definitely need some work, to work.

This is actually great for consumer SaaS. Getting consumers to subscribe to software is extremely hard, and this adds a low-friction way to get new subscribers.

If they come through App Store one-click, you get additional revenue that is at least 30% more likely to happen than if you stuck up a credit card form. If they come through your website, your revenue is the same.

If you serve a niche vertical, this is NOT great. You don't need Apple.

Indeed - it only helps for services that target many "normal" people. For B2B and prosumer services with a high cost per subscriber, you're a lot less likely to get a 30% boost in sales.

Are you serious? I just subscribed to a stock trading app's data service in-app. So Apple gets to keep 30% of my monthly fee in perpetuity although I've had a relationship with the brokerage longer than I've had with Apple.

This is frigging bullshit. And the sad thing is that Google et al will seek to emulate this ($800 tablet anyone?) rather than demolish it. Also Android devices' UX sucks, which is why I had to reluctantly buy an iPhone.

Stock trading apps' data services are decidedly not consumer SaaS for the mass market. They're business/prosumer, a world that already has success in getting small numbers of profitable subscribers.

The winners are apps that weren't even possible before - $1/month subscriptions for normal people.

Umm, I think you're missing the point. The point was about a pre-existing relationship that was exercised on a Apple-designed device. How does it matter whether it's prosumer or not.

My point is that the relationship you describe doesn't exist in the mass consumer space, and Apple is enabling something exciting and new there. Your point is that the pro/business space Apple's "must go through the app store" rule is a nuisance. I think we're both right.

I thought you sold subscriptions through your site, and they could then be viewed on the iPhone? Can you purchase your content via in app purchases presently? I don't see how it changes for you guys.

Apple only takes 30% if you use their payment platform - if you offer a subscription service outside of the iOS application, you're free to use authentication and let users transfer their subscription from the web to iOS and Apple never takes a cut.

One key point that ryancarson points out in his post (http://thinkvitamin.com/web-industry/why-you-should-fight-ap...) is this:

".. publishers may no longer provide links in their apps (to a web site, for example) which allow the customer to purchase content or subscriptions outside of the app."

I sort of understand why Apple has this language, in addition to the same-or-better pricing clause. Otherwise, a publisher could effectively circumvent Apple's 30% cut by offering subscriptions at a much cheaper price off the platform and link to the sign-up form from within the app. To prevent these crafty workarounds, Apple needs rules.

Unfortunately, SaaS web app developers who create companion iOS apps become collateral damage in Apple's efforts to grab profit from content publishers' subscription revenues. Apple could and should keep the same-or-better pricing constraint and remove the in-app link restriction.

This is Apple's version of suicide -- attacking the developer's that made the platform popular in the first place.

"Apple® today announced a new subscription service available to all publishers of content-based apps on the App Store℠, including magazines, newspapers, video, music, etc."

I'm hoping they aren't going to classify a SaaS client as a content-based app .. we definitely need clarification on this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com