Apple to take 30% of all Patreon donations | Hacker News Reader

Apple to take 30% of all Patreon donations

twitter.com

55 pointssergiotapia24 comments

As a longtime YouTube creator who uses Patreon for financial support, the news is even worse: Patreon informed me that all creators must switch to a monthly subscription schedule instead of the per-creation schedule that I and many other currently use. The whole point of per-creation is that it allows me to take time off, and only charge people when I release something, thus incentivizing me, and being fair to my supporters. I'm really annoyed by this change, and will start pushing back, but if it happens as planned, I may be forced to switch to another platform, or come up with some other solution.

Sounds like it's time to find an alternative to Patreon.

This is exactly why Epic took Apple to court (and lost), and exactly what the EU DMA seeks to fix. There are a lot of people here who consider it fair for Apple to take a 30% cut of all payments in the App store, but I think it's patently unfair and should be stopped.

Kind of a polarizing topic.

It's not just the 30% from payments through their "system" it's the fact that they _force_ you to use their system or they ban you. Even oauth, you can't choose what oauth providers you want, if you have one you _must_ also provide login with apple. it's a gross platform.

Apple isn't unintelligent. They know what a horrible look this is and the press + government scrutiny it will generate. Thirty percent of all Patreon donations made on iOS is revenue so tiny it's completely insignificant.

Honest question: Why are they doing this? What's the angle I'm missing?

> Why are they doing this? What's the angle I'm missing?

Services are a more reliable source of revenue for Apple than hardware is.

If they make an exception for Patreon they have to begin arguing why they can't do that for everyone (and there's no good answer). From their perspective it's easier to try to hold the line absolutely.

i agree with this take

Why do CEO salaries keep beating inflation while the rest of us aren't? See money, take money.

>What's the angle I'm missing?

Greed

greed does not make you go after crappy returns.

I suspect that making exceptions to their "30% of all digital services" rule opens them up to lawsuits of favouring one company over another, not being a level playing field, etc.

Since they are in a near-monopoly position, claims of an uneven playing field might trigger really bad judgements against them (ie. 'Apple must split their hardware/software businesses', or 'Apple's hardware arm may not deal in mobile apps')

> so tiny it's completely insignificant.

What is even more insignificant is the number of people who will stop using iphones over this, which will be very close to zero.

their policy is to only allow donations/tips without taking a slice if they're to registered charities, or if the client receives one-on-one services (not access to some digital goods that other users also get, for instance). so this is strictly in line with their policy.

Honestly they're probably trying to get ahead of anti-trust, in a twisted way. Basically Apple has been caught being willing to negotiate with big app developers like spotify and applying the 30 percent fee to smaller developers while refusing to negotiate. This can be seen as collusion amongst the powerful silicon valley firms to give eachother sweetheart deals.

Apple is now ending these deals and then as blowback occurs they will try to aim the criticism at Lina Kahn saying, you know "she's the reason why your spotify on iphone got so expensive."

They could be - however foolhardy - closing off potential avenues for people to attack them in court? I could see someone making the argument "but you're letting <insert other app> use alternate payment methods!".

Discussion on official post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41224853

@dang merge these comments?

Seems like Apple has given up on being the good guys. Do they not care anymore? All the news I hear is them twisting on the rope over one obligation or another. This is just petty. Good job they are not involved in blood donations.

By the screenshot linked, Apple isn't taking 30% of all Patreon donations. This affects those paid through the app, after November. That is significant, but it's neither everything nor unprecedented.

I'm surprised Patreon is going along with this, rather than disabling purchases on iOS like other companies. iOS backers must be a significant portion of their revenue.

I wasn't even aware that Patreon had an app. What does it do that the website doesn't?

Editorialized headline: not all Patreon subscriptions are subject to Apple’s fee. Only the transactions done within the app.

"new memberships"

not donations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com