• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Apple positioning anti-trust over subscriptions in their App Store?

A.Nonymous said:
I'm in the same boat. They make quality devices, but the fanboys are just rabid and insane. Granted you have Android fanboys who are the same, but there don't seem to be as many of them.
Click to expand...

Quality devices don't drop calls when you hold them the wrong way. :cool:
 
I don't see those companies pulling out of Apple and migrating to Android any time soon. You can slam Apple up, down and sideways all you want. The cold, hard truth is that Apple is more valuable to those businesses than Android for one very specific reason, and everyone here knows what that reason is...

Because iPhone owners pay for those kinds of things.

Hey I've often wondered myself why anyone would chose an iPhone over Android when most things are free on Android. And I'll continue to wonder that while millions of people continue to use and pay for things on their iPhones that they could get either cheaper or for free on Android.

But no matter how much I love Android, if I'm a business owner trying to turn a profit on the goods or services I'm peddling, guess which platform I'll be looking to break out on first! I'd be a fool not to be on the iPhone, cuz those folks LOVE to pay for things on their phones. They damn near take pride in it. So tell me again why I would pull my product off of the iPhone and put it on Android where most people are looking to get their stuff for free?

Now that Android devices are equal to or better than the iPhone we may see a larger buying population switch over. And the bigger the Android market share grows, the more businesses will look to them to carry their products and services. But for now Apple still owns the buyers crown by a large margin.
 
Outlaw71 said:
I'd be a fool not to be on the iPhone, cuz those folks LOVE to pay for things on their phones. They damn near take pride in it.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is that the world truly is upside down and paying more for the same thing is the cool thing?:D
 
byteware said:
What would REALLY be interesting, is if there was a backlash and everybody took their business to Android... I don't see it happening, but it would be VERY interesting.
Click to expand...

So perhaps what will happen is shareholder complaints and a drop in market share; as you say, a move to Android, perhaps. Developers upset and going elsewhere; there is an elsewhere as far as Apple and their market is concerned and much easier to access than it was a year or so ago.

It will be interesting to watch unfold.

Bob Maxey
 
Bob Maxey said:
So perhaps what will happen is shareholder complaints and a drop in market share; as you say, a move to Android, perhaps. Developers upset and going elsewhere; there is an elsewhere as far as Apple and their market is concerned and much easier to access than it was a year or so ago.

It will be interesting to watch unfold.

Bob Maxey
Click to expand...

If Rhapsody, Amazon, and other big name app developers pulled off of Apple, can you imagine the nightmare for Apple's PR team?
 
Here are the latest news on the subject:

Apple's app subscription plan gets Feds interested: Time to retreat ?
Click to expand...
The Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission are reportedly eyeing Apple’s new App Store subscription plan.
According to the Wall Street Journal, regulators are looking into Apple’s new subscription plan, which aims to keep customers in iTunes and taking a 30 percent cut of the revenue.
Click to expand...

More...
 
Crude said:
So what you're saying is that the world truly is upside down and paying more for the same thing is the cool thing?:D
Click to expand...


Oh abso-freakin-lotely. This has always been the trait of the upper middle class. They are of the mindset that you get what you pay for. And many stores are in tune with this. Take Abercrombie for instance, people who buy Abercrombie jeans do so not because they have been proven to last longer than a pair of Levi's. They buy them because they cost three times as much as a pair if Levi's. They equate the higher price with being a better product, even if there is absolutely no proof that it is.

Take any entry level college marketing class and they'll talk about this very thing. Many companies purposely raise their prices over that of the competition for no other reason than to appeal to that class of consumer who will then view their product as superior to the competition simply because it costs more.

It has absolutely nothing to do with comon sense in the least.
 
Outlaw71 said:
Oh abso-freakin-lotely. This has always been the trait of the upper middle class. They are of the mindset that you get what you pay for. And many stores are in tune with this. Take Abercrombie for instance, people who buy Abercrombie jeans do so not because they have been proven to last longer than a pair of Levi's. They buy them because they cost three times as much as a pair if Levi's. They equate the higher price with being a better product, even if there is absolutely no proof that it is.
Click to expand...

Actually my wife bought her a pair on our honeymoon (don't have them around here). They fit her better than any pair of jeans she's ever owned. She wasn't familiar with the company before we went into the store, and she hasn't really been familiar with them since... she just really felt good in that pair of jeans... wore them til they basically fell apart...

Outlaw71 said:
It has absolutely nothing to do with comon sense in the least.
Click to expand...

While I think Apple actually plans their finances around their customers NOT having common sense, I don't think this is one of those marketing tactics that are going to work very well on the majority of consumers.

Android is selling 3 to 1 in the US over iOS. Android has passed the iPhone in US subscriber market share. There is real pressure to bring these services to Android. As Android becomes more and more of a viable alternative for content providers, they are going to look at Apple more and more warily and start providing more and more content where they can make the most money.
 
Honestly, this isn't really bad for the consumers if Apple can force the big boys to bend over for them. Consumers can buy content for the same price right in the app using their iTunes account. Great for consumers. It basically rapes developers and content providers though.
 
EarlyMon said:
^The Wal-Mart model.
Click to expand...

Little different from Wal-mart I think. Wal-marts model is to crush little guys by offering lower prices. Let's be honest, if you make widgets, you want Wal-mart to sell your widgets regardless of whatever cut they take. They buy in such big bulk that you get your money regardless. Apple is not only trying to take a cut of these companies profits (and a significant one at that), but it gets their customer list as well (which is more valuable in some ways) and they also prevent companies from competing with them outside the app store.

Look at someone like Amazon. If this sticks and they fold, then they are giving Apple (who competes with them in the ebook market) 30% of their gross right off the top. So you're giving your competitor a huge chunk of money right there. Then you're giving your competitor your client list. Anyone who has shopped with Amazon knows that if you buy a mystery book for example, Amazon will email you and recommend other mysteries it thinks you might like. This is extremely valuable for marketing purposes. Now Apple knows that customer A likes mysteries and it can now market stuff to him right from the iBooks store. Not only do you give Apple a share of your profits, but you give them an inroad to your customer as well. To make it worse, Apple blocks you from competing with them by offering lower prices elsewhere.

The best analogy I could think of is if Wal-mart went to a major vendor like Coca-Cola and demanded that Coca-cola not offer it's products at a lower price anywhere else. Yes, you could go to the local grocery chain and buy Coke, but it would have to priced the same or higher than Wal-mart. No store would be allowed to put Coke on sale unless Wal-mart did as well. It would be blatantly anti-competitive.
 
A.Nonymous said:
The best analogy I could think of is if Wal-mart went to a major vendor like Coca-Cola and demanded that Coca-cola not offer it's products at a lower price anywhere else. Yes, you could go to the local grocery chain and buy Coke, but it would have to priced the same or higher than Wal-mart. No store would be allowed to put Coke on sale unless Wal-mart did as well. It would be blatantly anti-competitive.
Click to expand...

Huh. You speak of that in the hypothetical.

I'm the only one remembering history? Remember the WalMart / RubberMaid story?

USATODAY.com - Wal-Mart's influence grows

Pacific Views: WalMart's Deal With the Devil

Wal-Mart Is Not a Business, It's an Economic Disease

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mkCUK3kcKs

Because all that talk about RubberMaid and WalMart certainly sounded exactly like your statement, to me:

A.Nonymous said:
Honestly, this isn't really bad for the consumers if Apple can force the big boys to bend over for them. Consumers can buy content for the same price right in the app using their iTunes account. Great for consumers. It basically rapes developers and content providers though.
Click to expand...

byteware said:
The Wal-Mart model, except there is a nearly identical store down the street selling the same stuff, but without raping the developers...

We shall see which one prospers.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

I'm hoping the Google model works - Angry Birds started making over $1million/month in advertising on Android, whereas it's a paid app on an iPhone.

It certainly puts me in a quandry.

On the one hand, how can I not want good prices for us consumers?

On the other, how can I know what actions I'll be taking that bites the hand that feeds me?

Not easy to see, not for me, anyway.
 
Any business model - good or bad, can only work with the cooperation of the consumer. If everybody runs to Walmart, the other guys will suffer.

In Germany, where the consumers are usually very alert, Walmart tried their luck for 7 years. They lost $350 Million each year and finally folded tent. If the consumer does not play, the best (or worst) model ain't working.

In the US the situation is a bit different. Consumers are more in "lemming" mode. One runs, everybody runs. That is also why the Apple hype works.
 
whs37 said:
Any business model - good or bad, can only work with the cooperation of the consumer. If everybody runs to Walmart, the other guys will suffer.

In Germany, where the consumers are usually very alert, Walmart tried their luck for 7 years. They lost $350 Million each year and finally folded tent. If the consumer does not play, the best (or worst) model ain't working.

In the US the situation is a bit different. Consumers are more in "lemming" mode. One runs, everybody runs. That is also why the Apple hype works.
Click to expand...

Which is really odd, because the iphone is a status symbol over there and Android is basically nonexistent.
 
whs37 said:
Any business model - good or bad, can only work with the cooperation of the consumer. If everybody runs to Walmart, the other guys will suffer.

In Germany, where the consumers are usually very alert, Walmart tried their luck for 7 years. They lost $350 Million each year and finally folded tent. If the consumer does not play, the best (or worst) model ain't working.

In the US the situation is a bit different. Consumers are more in "lemming" mode. One runs, everybody runs. That is also why the Apple hype works.
Click to expand...

I'm boycotting Wal-Mart. Just sayin'
 
It's hard to imagine with Androids global dominance in sales that they don't have much of a presence in Europe? That would indicate that Androids lead in the US is overwhelming, which isn't the case. I'd be interested in seeing the data that suggests Andoid is way behind Apple over there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom