Good.
I've been saying this awhile, most notably when Apple (of course followed by Google) introduced a discount on commission for smaller developers.
This is completely backwards.
I know why they did it. They wanted some positive PR that didn't cost them anything. Thing is, it's the larger publishers who are going to lobby regulators and challenge things in court. It's those same publishers who already have their own payment processing systems where the 30% is pure overhead (minus the CC fees). Small publishers actually get a lot of benefit for that 30% (IMHO).
So what Apple/Google should've done is give larger publishers a volume discount. Of course this should force them into binding arbitration and otherwise challenging the discount should void that discount.
Why? Because it changes the calculus for Epic, etc. Currently that is:
Option 1: Keep paying 30%
Option 2: Leave the app store
Option 3: Challenge the 30% cut in court
Game theory will tell you that there is essentially no downside to (3). Worst case you will be back on the app store at 30% or will leave.
But what if the options were:
Option 1: Keep a volume discount and pay 10%
Option 2: Leave
Option 3: Challenge the cut and possibly end up paying 30% or leaving
Now they have something to lose.
More importantly, it takes the sting out of efforts to lobby regulators because now we're talking about the difference between 1-2% (CC fees at volume) and 10% not 30%.
I stand by my position that end users don't actually want competing third-party app stores. That's just a usability nightmare. But backend payment processing is something else entirely and is the likely first step in breaking the stranglehold.
I've been saying this awhile, most notably when Apple (of course followed by Google) introduced a discount on commission for smaller developers.
This is completely backwards.
I know why they did it. They wanted some positive PR that didn't cost them anything. Thing is, it's the larger publishers who are going to lobby regulators and challenge things in court. It's those same publishers who already have their own payment processing systems where the 30% is pure overhead (minus the CC fees). Small publishers actually get a lot of benefit for that 30% (IMHO).
So what Apple/Google should've done is give larger publishers a volume discount. Of course this should force them into binding arbitration and otherwise challenging the discount should void that discount.
Why? Because it changes the calculus for Epic, etc. Currently that is:
Option 1: Keep paying 30%
Option 2: Leave the app store
Option 3: Challenge the 30% cut in court
Game theory will tell you that there is essentially no downside to (3). Worst case you will be back on the app store at 30% or will leave.
But what if the options were:
Option 1: Keep a volume discount and pay 10%
Option 2: Leave
Option 3: Challenge the cut and possibly end up paying 30% or leaving
Now they have something to lose.
More importantly, it takes the sting out of efforts to lobby regulators because now we're talking about the difference between 1-2% (CC fees at volume) and 10% not 30%.
I stand by my position that end users don't actually want competing third-party app stores. That's just a usability nightmare. But backend payment processing is something else entirely and is the likely first step in breaking the stranglehold.