Hacker News Reader

Comment by halpmeh | Hacker News Reader

Android allows 3rd party app stores, you can side load apps, and you can install a different OS.

Isn't the fact that Google Play charges 30% even when Android allows 3rd party app stores an indication that the 30% fee is not caused by a lack of competition in app stores?

Perhaps, or maybe the revenue generated by Android is so small that it isn’t worth the effort to change app stores.

You overestimate the size of the app store. It is big, but that doesn't mean the remaining 37% of app economy is small.

> iOS was responsible for 63% of total app revenue in 2021

Those numbers are global. In certain markets, like the U.S., that number is likely to be very much skewed towards iOS. Even if you look at the global numbers, iOS was responsible for 75% of app revenue once games are excluded, and 78% of subscription revenue in 2021.

https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-revenues/

I think you could say the same thing with Steam. Developers are incentivized to publish on Steam because this is where they can reach the most players, even though they'll have to take a big cut for it.

It’s also apparently the same ballpark for video game consoles (which are also general-purpose computers that are similarly locked down to restrict third-party software).

Is Spotify on any of those 3rd party app stores other than Amazon's (which also has a fee)?

They could be if they wanted, is the point. So it's harder to go after them for the fee.

Why aren’t they if they’re so upset about fees?

Are they actually so upset about fees?

Its only really in there to cover googles ass in a situation like this, it's not practical to get users to download your app elsewhere. Even fortnite couldn't really get people to do it.

Why does it matter? Spotify wants the freedom to set their own margins. Compensating artists fairly starts by kicking out useless middlemen, and Apple plays that role in this instance. Every developer deserves the right to distribute software on their own terms, that's not some extremist or abhorrent ideal to advocate for.

> Compensating artists fairly starts by kicking out useless middlemen, and Apple plays that role in this instance.

Spotify needs the cooperation of the major record labels to operate and they have no interest in compensating artists fairly or kicking middlemen out of the process.

Hard to say, Apple never gave them a chance.

Do they do it on Android or desktops? They’d have a much stronger moral case if they said that on every other platform they take the cut they’d give Apple and forward it to the artist instead.

And it isn’t like Apple hasn’t tried using their weight before to fix market prices in their favor. See the debacle with eBooks.

I agree Spotify wants more revenue but I seriously doubt compensating artists is top of mind despite what their CEO says

Reply on news.ycombinator.com