undefined | Better HN

0 pointsTheDong4mo ago0 comments

The even more anti-competitive thing Apple does vs Spotify and all competitors is avoiding app store fees, while forcing all competitors to pay them.

To have the same profit, Spotify has to charge $13/mo when apple music charges $10/mo with all else being the same.

That's very obviously the App Store monopoly being used to give Apple Music a massive unfair advantage that is practically impossible to break through.

Steam does not have anything like that, if someone else decides to make "Epic Game Launcher" tomorrow for PC, that new company doesn't need to distribute it on the "Steam App Store" and pay valve 30% of all sales.

0 comments

Retric4mo ago

> To have the same profit, Spotify has to charge $13/mo when apple music charges $10/mo

Last I checked as long as an App Store is not handling subscriptions Apple doesn’t take a cut. Did that change?

TheDongOP4mo ago

Yes, subscribing outside the app does avoid the cut. Which is why you can't subscribe to spotify in the iOS app, you have to open a browser: https://support.spotify.com/us/article/cant-subscribe-to-pre...

Until this year, Spotify couldn't even tell you in the iOS app that you could pay for premium: https://newsroom.spotify.com/2025-05-01/following-landmark-c...

This meant in apple music, the user could open the app and it would work including paid features.

In spotify, you could open the app and it would tell you "You can't subscribe here, sorry" and couldn't even link you to a webpage you could subscribe at.

I'm certain a non-zero number of users couldn't understand what to do with that apple-approved error and gave up.

Maybe there's a reason that apple lost in court for that one.

Retric4mo ago

> subscribing outside the app does avoid the cut. > Maybe there’s a reason Apple lost in court for that one.

The App Store as a sales channel isn’t a monopoly. The App Store as an installation method is.

It’s an interesting separation, but Apple really didn’t want to make that clear to customers which is probably why they lost.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsTheDong4mo ago0 comments

The even more anti-competitive thing Apple does vs Spotify and all competitors is avoiding app store fees, while forcing all competitors to pay them.

To have the same profit, Spotify has to charge $13/mo when apple music charges $10/mo with all else being the same.

That's very obviously the App Store monopoly being used to give Apple Music a massive unfair advantage that is practically impossible to break through.

0 comments

Retric4mo ago

> To have the same profit, Spotify has to charge $13/mo when apple music charges $10/mo

Last I checked as long as an App Store is not handling subscriptions Apple doesn’t take a cut. Did that change?

TheDongOP4mo ago

Until this year, Spotify couldn't even tell you in the iOS app that you could pay for premium: https://newsroom.spotify.com/2025-05-01/following-landmark-c...

This meant in apple music, the user could open the app and it would work including paid features.

In spotify, you could open the app and it would tell you "You can't subscribe here, sorry" and couldn't even link you to a webpage you could subscribe at.

I'm certain a non-zero number of users couldn't understand what to do with that apple-approved error and gave up.

Maybe there's a reason that apple lost in court for that one.

Retric4mo ago

> subscribing outside the app does avoid the cut. > Maybe there’s a reason Apple lost in court for that one.

The App Store as a sales channel isn’t a monopoly. The App Store as an installation method is.

It’s an interesting separation, but Apple really didn’t want to make that clear to customers which is probably why they lost.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse