Hacker News Reader

Comment by Kukumber | Hacker News Reader

> TikTok clearly states that users are not allowed to explicitly solicit gifts, so this is a clear violation of their own terms of services, as well as the rights of these people

Why does the headline want to suggest otherwise?

To me it sounds like users want to profit from the donations, they get 30%

If they used proper infrastructures to encourage people to donate, they'd get 0%

BBC yet again is using and spreading the "TikTok bad" propaganda

Instagram scam:

https://dailytargum.com/article/2021/11/its-time-to-call-out...

It's a systemic problem in the west from western users, where is journalism?

View on HN

Having an under-the-table way for users to beg and skimming 70% of the proceeds is bad in my book. This isn't just Tiktok allowing scams, it's Tiktok profiteering as middleman in the scams.

Instagram scams are also bad, however I don't any place in your link Instagram is active participant, they lazily fail to crack down. Claiming these prove "the West" is ganging up on TikTok is the worst form of "what-about-ism".

LOL, I wonder if HSBC tried to make that claim. "Money laundering is against our TOS, so clearly we aren't money launderers."

https://www.investopedia.com/stock-analysis/2013/investing-n...

>Why does the headline want to suggest otherwise?

Because TickTock isn't following its own stated policy as the article demonstrates without a doubt. But you kYounow this because you obviously read the article since that quote is from it

Plus the article mentions middle men; does tiktok take 70%, or do the mediators?

TikTok. They post the full math toward the bottom. TikTok took 69% off the top, the money transfer shop took 10% of the remainder, and the middleman got a 35% cut of what was left, leaving the family with $19 of the original $106 donation

> TikTok took 69% off the top

So, is the App store not taking 30% off the top (29.68)?

TikTok would end up with $43, and the result is $33. Withdrawing from the Local Money transfer shop is outside of TT, and then after that, I don't know what "TT middlemen" are, but that happens after the withdrawal happens to get the numbers they are sharing.

The shop and the middleman are outside the control of TikTok.

But you can't ignore the app store's cut.

You’re right. I didn’t consider the AppStore.

From the article, a $103 donation ended up as a balance of $33 in the TikTok account. If we assume TikTok has not negotiated a better rate (doubtful), then the math looks like:

Donation: $106

After App Store 30%: $74.20

After TikTok: $33

Which puts the TikTok commission at a (still egregious IMO) 55%

Considering the amount of video bandwidth a person watches and the lack of obvious ads, 55% isn't egregious in the big picture of things.

Fair point. I guess Twitch takes 50% from their streamers (and runs ads for the folks who don’t sub). YouTube takes 30%. So TikTok is at the high end, but the number is not as insane as it first appeared to me.

TikTok does the heavy lifting here of getting people to your stream.

45% vs 55% of the remaining 74.

A 100% diff. You can argue whether that is fair, but it's a 10% difference.

Or 38% and 31% of the total $106.

So, when comparing the 70% number, we have to look at the actual comparative percentage, or 38%.

So, not 70%, but 38%.

Not at all doubtful. Apple isn't in a weak negotiating position here.

This pales in comparison to the 100% of nothing they'd receive if they didn't use TikTok.

> But when the BBC used the in-app system to report 30 accounts featuring children begging, TikTok said there had been no violation of its policies in any of the cases.

Why the headline is suggesting otherwise.

I totally agree. If we (for the sake of argument) were to assume that TikTok allowed this, obviously there's nobody offering these people any better alternatives. So why should TikTok be demonized? The people who critizise TikTok are free to build a better and cheaper platform themselves.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com