I believe that companies such as the apple brand should get a portion of the income coming from peoples apps. They are using their site to showcase their app and if there was no ap store there would be no aps! On the other had, I feel that 30% is way too much of the income that people receive. It should be substantially lowered. I feel like that is just an embarrassing number and really trying to take advantage of the clients they have. Apple may have started the app store, but since they are charging so much their client will go to other places where they charge less. They will loose all of their clients and it would be their own fault.  

I do believe that a company should be allowed to charge for the services they provide, however it seems Apple is taking it a little too far. 30% is a huge chunk for apps and although I do not find it unreasonable to charge for a subscription, I do feel Apple should re-evaluate the amount they want to charge. Apple seems to be taking the gambling with publishers too far by making them give up their revenue. I find that if Apple continues their hunger for more power, they may just find themselves in a bind because many companies may choose not to work with them.

Playing the role of devil's advocate:

From a business perspective, Apple's decision to impose a 70/30 revenue sharing model for subscription-based services that now can be purchased within the application is spot on. With the addition of this new feature, publishers and developers have mistook Apple for a transaction processor similar to credit card companies, which typically collect a fee equal to two or three percent of the transaction from the seller but have little to do with selling the product or the environment in which it is sold. In fact, Apple is more comparable to a retail store which often collects more than half of the revenue from sales while developing a facility in which other companies' products can be sold and establishing a brand that consumers trust and are loyal to. Apple's App Store hosts content on its own servers and provides publishers with access to more than 120 million devices via a platform through which apps can be easily purchased with the push of a button. More importantly, the App Store enables customers to purchase subscription-based services within the app itself, requiring them to submit their personal information just once before they begin purchasing apps with the assurance that their information will remain with Apple and not be distributed to third parties. Consumers find more comfort in this new system than they do in purchasing subscription services from their individual publishers, a process that often directs consumers outside of the App Store to complete the transaction by the publisher's own means.

Those who believe that Google OnePass's 10% revenue sharing model is a more fair and realistic approach to integrated subscription-based services, arguing that developers and publishers will be persuaded to defect from Apple, are forgetting that Apple captured 82.7% of the app store market in 2010. Abandoning such a substantial portion of the market is a financially unviable option, and Apple knows this. In a 21st century example of "survival of the fittest," developers and publishers will be forced to either adapt their business models to the changing mobile landscape or face dissolution. Per its business model, Apple has always favored vertical integration and control of consumer experience over the attititudes and needs of small business partners, usually coming out on top, and there is nothing about this situation that leads me to believe Apple will cave to dissenting opinion. Apple is providing a valuable service to publishers, and to ensure profitability and future growth, it is seizing the opportunity to create a better product for its consumers and establish its position in the digital publishing industry.

Like most of my classmates, I also believe that 30% is too large of a cut to be taking from publishers. After all, it is the web developers who are making creating the apps. However, I am not surprised at this information. In a market as large and developing as the mobile market, I don't blame Google and Apple for trying to increase their profits. That's just life. Unfortunately, web developers will suffer from these cuts and will probably be quite upset with these companies.

I guess what I don't understand is why Apple has to be sort of "greedy" in all of this.   They are an amazing company that makes millions of dollars a year, so I feel if they wished to put a tax on these services it should match that of Google's or be slightly above it and not 3 times as much.  It just makes the company look very greedy when they already are so successful in the first place so have no reason to be.

I think the 30% fee is absolutely ridiculous. It would be one thing if the company was having financial issues, but it just looks really greedy for them to be taking money away from smaller companies who want to go through Apple for mobile, iPad apps, etc. I think it reflects poorly on our society today that they're that eager to monopolize that medium - just because they can. I think it would be a better move for them to satisfy the needs of their customers in order keep them coming, while still making enough profit to make both sides happy. I think this problem could be solved very easily. It reminds me of the NFL controversy going on right now, a bunch of money-hungry businessmen trying to ruin a good thing. It can be simple - just compromise, meet halfway so everyone wins.

Since Apple has so much power in the App industry, it makes sense that they would try to take advantage of an opportunity to make money on App purchases. I think companies will still use Apple even with the 30% commission Apple is taking; however, if Apple wants to establish stronger, lasting relationships with different businesses, it should use a more acceptable and compromising commission. Google's rate of 10% seems a bit more reasonable than Apple's rate which may help Google establish a stronger relationship with companies and make them a stronger competitior in the App market. I think it will be exciting to see how the battle between Apple and Google plays out in the future.

Apple may have all the money in the world, and just when you think they can’t get greedy, they do. 30% is ridiculous. I can understand if it was 10%. That’s more understandable considering that application designers already have to pay just to create the applications. I like how Apple has no concrete reason in doing this. I believe the reason Apple is doing this is to keep other users from branching out into other websites and keeping Apple top of mind. They want consumers to go directly through them for they know, most users won’t go to the publishers individual website. This would force a lot of publishers to continue going through the store if they ever want to see revenue.  

I think think it is crazy for companies like Google or Apple to take a percentage of your profit from an app if someone purchases it through their site. After all, in cases like Apple, without their product that people are buying the apps for, the developers would be out of a job. That being said, I do think 30% is too sizable of a percentage to be asking for. The situation with the internet still is that people expect everythign to be free, and companies are still determining ways to make money off of what they are doing online. You can't blame Apple and Google for trying to take advantage of this opportunity, but I can see how web developers, especially those that are currently making a living off of making apps, would be upset about companies wanting a cut of their pay.

I think that people have a right to charge whatever they would like for products they have created. I also think that people want to and are willing to pay more to be associated with Apple products. Going through Apple means to people that it is verified through them and therefore trustworthy. As Android and Google technologies gain popularity and validity, and they are, Apple will be forced to give publishers a fairer price. Apple might be one of the most innovative companies but they are not the only one out there and in my opinion are a little bit overrated. Not that their products aren’t wonderful just that a name isn’t everything.

While Apple continues to push the boundaries of how we access and view information and entertainment, I believe that they are being a bit greedy with their new 30% cut. There will be a lot of other businesses out there that will be hurt by Apple's large profit cut, since everything will have to go through that one megabrand. Maybe this new process will be better for consumers or will be easier for consumers to get the info. they want, but no one knows for sure yet. I am an Apple brand supporter, but I don't know if I would want everything I do to go through Apple.

I have an Apple Macbook Pro. I understand a company wanting to make a profit off of apps. I do not understand why Apple is taking 30%, especially since the big APP boom is just beginning. They risk alienating app creators and competition for better apps could dwindle. Apple also is coming off as a little bit greedy, and I do not think their customers appreciate it (we will be the ones suffering soon enough). 

I don't really know if this is Apple being over the top about their percentage, or the fact that the more Apps are being used, the more people are going to complain about how much it costs them. Apple provides a great audience of people that can be reached with their service, and in my opinion they have the rights to take profits from their product. One of the main reasons why everyone wants to develop Apps through Apple is because they are the best, and if you want the best you have to pay for it.

I agree with what most people before me are saying that 30% is a bit much for apple to want of App fees when they are bought through apple. I think that I have this perspective because I have a good friend who codes for a start up company in San Fransisco and to make extra revenue for their start up. When you know the people who do these apps it makes it a bit more real to look at the companies who are trying to take a piece of the subscripton fees.

I do feel like Apple may seem like they are going a little too high when it comes for their fees.  However, with the credibility that you are getting with Apple you are almost guarenteed to get your name out their.  On the other hand, with Google getting as large as they have, it certainly looks like it would be a better route and still a good way to get your name out their.  I feel like both sides have great advantages and yet both could have their own disadvantages.  I am a big supporter of Apple and have many of their products so my opinion could be seen as biased and could be leaning towards one side because of my own experiance with Apple, however, I have yet to try and go down the route of making my own app.

I believe Apple is going a little over the top with wanting 30% if you subscribe through Apple. However, as others have pointed out, it's because they're able to. Apple has come a long way and proved that they are an innovative company that plans on being around for awhile. Apple has very loyal customers that continually buy their products. It seems to me that Apple is always one step ahead of their competitors. I think it will be this way, and Apple will be able to basically do what they want, until another competitor is able to come and prove that they are able to do what Apple has for less of the cost. Until then, it seems like Apple is the future. I do think it is unfortunate though how they seem to take too much advantage of this.

Apple has grown tremendously over the past couple of years and customers have become loyal to the company as well as trust them. I think it is a bit drastic with the 30% but I feel that Apple believes that since they have so many loyal customers that they wont loose them because of the loyalty. I believe that at first it will be okay until another company comes in and delivers the same thing for a cheaper price then people may begin switching over. Since the future is mobile, there are going to be many new ideas to come up I just hope Apple has a plan just incase something like this does happen. 

I think Apple is being a little extreme. But the unique thing about Apple is: they can be. For the last 5 years or so, Apple has left a huge imprint in technology and mobile media. 30% may be a little drastic, but people will subscribe because they trust the company. Apple is reputable and "safe," and some businesses may look at developing their app or product through apple as the expensive, but easy way out because it will be associated with a top brand. I don't think Apple will take a turn for the worse as far as losing business for a long time, based on the empire they have created. Google is probably doing the right thing- so they'll have a loyal consumer base. Loyal, but not as extended as Apple's. 

Apple is clearly trying to get in on the mobile market by making a huge profit through a 30% cut, but it's absolutely crazy how they can charge as much. Publishers already have to pay a fee to create applications, and now they have to share a cut of subscriptions? I just don't think its justified. A company as big as Apple needs to maintain a good reputation among its consumers, but more importantly, it seems unethic for Apple to take such a huge cut. 

As an apple fan, I have to honestly say that although the 30% is pretty steep, I don't think it will hurt them much.  Granted some people won't like it, and depending on how this affects Apple, I also feel that they will either continue with it or drop the percentage.  Apple's been criticized before but they're known for listening to their audience when it comes to their flaws and fixing them. 

Honestly, I am usually an Apple defender and they are more protective information. But 10% seems a lot fairer than 30% from Apple on a subscription service where the market provider is continuously receiving money as is the content provider. 30% makes sense too much even as a one-time fee, but for a reoccurring fee it’s just going to drive content providers using subscription methods away. Of course, the other fits Apple's monopolistic ways. Apple wins either way with the 30% subscription charge because they either get a large slice of the content provider's pie or the content provider leaves the App Store, meaning less competition for iTunes. It’s smart business move, but it’s questionable ethics. It just doesn’t seem fair.

I agree with previous comments about this making Apple a monopoly in the industry. Good for them, but bad for everyone else. But also importantly, at least with Google One Pass, publishers will be able to keep control over consumer information.  Dear Apple, have you heard of antitrust laws?  Google also isn't gouging their providers by keeping 30% of the revenue.  The way I see this, Apple will have to drastically change their plans before they either get sued, lose customers, or both.

I feel like 30% is very steep.  Google is definitely being more reasonable with 10%.  But then again, what products of Apple aren't already why higher priced than other brands.  Coming from a Mac user myself I'll still agree I couldv'e had just as good of a computer for half the price, but I still decided to double my expense and get a Mac.  Apple sells iPods for insanely higher prices than competing mp3/mp4 players yet everyone still choses to buy an iPod nine times out of ten rather than a Zune or something along those lines.  They definitely are able to get away with charger consumers a premium and everyone still goes back to buy from them.  I don't feel they'll lose many customers at all even with the price difference.

photo by Jeff Weisbein

Actually I have a lot of thinking of this after reading this article. In the future, I think I couldn't take the oneside. The reason why I think both companies have strength and weakness. In Apple case, I am totally agree with Apple want to 30% about subscriptions fee because they do not include advertising in application or apple products. However, in google case, they always include the advertising in their application or products. So Google can want to 10% for subscriptions fee. Accoriding to this aspects, I feel like that Google is made by customers. However, Apple made their customers. For example, one of my friends are apple user. He always buy Apple's product such as i-pod, i-phone, i-pod touch, and so on. He insisted Apple's products are likely to sync with only Apple's sutff. However, other companies products is not. According to this aspect, Google and other is better than Apple. However, Apple always offer high quality informations and technology. But other is not. Google and other brands are too much open to the market. So they include unnecessary informations(valuable info.). Like these above aspects, it is hard to pick oneside. Therefore, I just expect something new that is mixed between Apple and Google in the future.

photo by JG Mason

I think that Apple is taking advantage of things a little bit here.  They do offer leading technology and have a lot of big fans of their products but 30% from publishers just from people subscribing to them is a little much.  They already are very successful in sales and I think they have room to be more reasonable.  Apple needs to realize their are other competitors out their that have the same technology on a lot of levels and if they want to stay in the place they are today they need to watch out.  The future is positive for both Google and Apple, but they need to stay in reason with one another.

Yikes! Apple taking 30% of publisher's revenue seems extreme. After all, the publishers are the ones creating the content that make up the applications. I understand why Apply would want to make a profit from this, but I really don't think 30% is fair. Google's OnePass taking 10% of subscription fees seems more appropriate for these social media giants. Without the publishers, Apple and Google wouldn't have many of their current apps. In the future, who knows if publishers would be able to afford giving 30% of their revenue to Apple, therefore Apple would lose apps. I think that it's a lot to expect people to give 30% right away. Maybe they could have started with a smaller percentage and worked their way higher over time.

Apple customers are willing to pay a premium on goods and services from Apple that they feel are worth an extra value. I don't believe that Apple will lose a significant amount of customers by raising fees. If you enjoy Apple products, the odds are you are going to stay by Apple and continue to enjoy their products. You may not be happy about the fees (obviously not) but I don't think that is what is going to make or break their customers. If anything, it may just lower customer perceptions.

Basically Apple needs to pump the brakes. Yes, they're a powerhouse of modern technology and have a stacked roster of elite products. BUT I'm not sure that warrants them the right to take 30% of profits. That's bull. I think they're smart though. I mean if you could tell someone to create an original technology but only let them sell it by your name and take a large percent of profit just because your name was...

Roque

, would you ? I would. Maybe I should? Anyway if they can get away with it then more power to them. I'm not an iPhone, iPad, or even iTouch user so at the moment I have no concern whether app developers are getting screwed. Which is sounds like they are. But if I were a user, or a developer for the matter, I would personally go with Google on this one. They seem to have a much more fair approach to the issue and I think thats legitimate because, it's Google. I don't know, but I feel the app market isn't the highest of priorities.

SOOOOOO, I say Apple gets to do things their way when it's all said and done, and Google continues to do it their way. Both got it, we all want it, we all are going to buy it someway or another 'cause we'll need it. Prediction: Apple will make more money and have more developers under its shoe purely for the sake of the Apple name.

BOOM.

Not only is Apple and Google breaking anti-trust laws they are creating an online monoply. They are the major players they understand that they have a majority of the market share for online media. A monoply is bad for a market because it cripples compeition which creates a lack of inginuity and creativity. For example, a product such as an app for your cell phone is only going to be successful if it is compatible with Apple and Google. There is less room for free market influences when the major players control that much of the market.

I do think it is time that Apple starts reaping some benefits for the apps, however, I do think 30% is too much. Consumers look to Apple for their service and the app store has been incredible for the iPhone. With this said, the use of mobile devices now is the norm. With the development of the iPhone 4g and rumors of a 5g phone coming out soon Apple definitely has a monopoly in this industry. I think it was only a matter of time before they started charging subscription fees. It is interesting the two different approaches being taken by Apple and Google. I'm not sure who has the right idea. Maybe Google OnePass has the right idea by playing nice and easing into things.

I think that Apple is finally capitalizing on the success of their loyal customers and honestly who could blame them. Honestly I don't think it will affect Apple's business that much because people love their products and are not going to switch so companies are just going to have to suck it up and pay the money. I do think that 30% is a lot of money but if it works then it works. Since Apple is an industry leader, I'm interested to find out who will be next in adopting subscriptions. 

To start, I can understand both sides of the argument. It's common business practice to base commission fees on compettition's rates and on the business' growth potential. I don't personally believe that the 30% is too high of a price for Apple, the top electronics company in the world. Customers' know they will be getting great service from Apple. They have a phenomenal track record. I'm certain along with this 30% Apple will provide assistance services along with their hosting service. Although, 10% is quite a cheaper difference if you go through Google OnePass but I'm sure like anything else in the world you get what you pay for. Using Google OnePass may or may not host the apps without any hiccups, but for the pros, the Apple App Store is probably the higher route to take. And with the higher prices to create apps, they will be more effectively made, more professionally made, and creators will bring more resources to the table to spend the money and create the apps the right/smarter way.

30% may seem like a bit much, but Apple has developed themselves as a reputable place to purchase applications.  Also, the Iphone has been added to Verizon and they know that with its increase in users they will be able to charge more because they will have more users.  i would imagine that when Google can develop the reputation that Apple has they will begin to charge more for their subscriptions.  I am assuming that people will be willing to pay Apple the extra 20% becuase they know that Apple is strongly recognized for their applications where Google is just beginning this process, but may become more recognizable if publishers decide to take the more economical route.

It was only a matter of time before Apple started charging people to subscribe or download their apps. Some people may believe the main issue is the amount they are being charged. They understand they are always going to have their loyal customers. Apple is a smart company, they are always coming out with the new and improved technology that everybody can't resist. It's always easier to decrease the price rather than increasing it; with that being said, I believe 30% is a fair price. You get what you pay for, Apple's has a good reputation of having only selling the best products and services. Now, I don't believe they have intensions of decreasing the price, it's always an option if they find they are losing their customers. I believe Apple did their research and have their reasons for charging 30%.

I think 30% is a bit steep. They could survive just fine with a lower percentage. However, I think Apple's plan seems like a sound business idea. They should charge commission for use of products sold through their store. That's how most stores operate. It's how they make money. Maybe if Apple lowered the percentage they made, they could keep their publishers happy as well. 

I think it was about time Apple started charging their publishers for their apps. In the begining it was so fresh and innovative there was no way they could have the subscription, they wanted everyone to explore the idea and open people up to applications by creating anything to get people buzzing about them. Apple is on the top of the market and they know exactly what they are doing, I think it is time that they get something back for their ideas. Although it may take away from people publishing apps because of the new subscription fee, but I believe that the applications will be better and the fee will push people to put more effort into create worthwhile apps. There are millions of applications out and this will filter out the pointless ones. Clearly, Ingenex and I'm sure other companies, are offering application develping services, the subscription will not take away from companies creating applications, it will only help the application world to creative more effective applications that people will really want.

Apple is at the top of their game and they know it. While asking for 30% of subscription may seem like a lot Apple knows exactly how to get what they are looking for.  They know their position in the market and that they can get that amount from consumers. While there are other resources out there, their names are not quite as recognizable as Apple. Companies, in my opinion, almost have to pay the large subscription fee if they want to make a presence in the app world. People have known and grown to trust the Apple name, therefore at this point in time they can demand such high fees. It will be interesting to see if in the future if any other companies are able to compare and compete with Apple.

From what I can tell, Apple is one of the most influential companies in the field of technology catering to consumers. People are buying up everything from iPods to Mac Books to iPads to iPhones. As you can imagine, a huge chunk of Verizon's customers are switching over to the iPhone now that it is available on their network. It seems to me that Apple is like the Walmart of the technology world. They can pretty much do what they want, which is apparently to take 30% of profits from application developers and also not allow them to offer their applications unless they are registered through Apple. Apple is a profitable business and they are only doing what businesses are supposed to do. You can make the argument that the company is being greedy but with the demand for their products being what it is, they will be able to get away with it for now. In the future, competitors such as Google and others will hopefully catch up to them and break up consumer technology into a more bipolar or multipolar industry so that better deals and options will be available for application developers.

Apple Inc. continues to gain scrutiny from antitrust enforcers in the United States and Europe. Apple executives are seeking new ways to increase profits, yet people view this tactic as taking advantage of loyal customers. Apple is a powerhouse in the media industry, with the ability to transform society based on elite innovation. Economic despair is a driving force behind the antitrust movement. In order to rock the boat, Apple needs a serious competitor to lower the cost(s) charged by the App Store. This is a simple economic law of supply and demand. Apple dominates how people use technology, and what upgrades they adopt as media performance consistently enhances. Executives are taking this authoritative approach by generating greater profits for the company. Although it may be immoral, Apple is just like any other business/company strategizing creative ways to improve their market share. I disagree with this motive due to the current economic status of the U.S., yet I don't blame Apple for their focused ideology on revenue expansion. Apple's public relations team should address this issue by amending application policy by establishing new guidelines for publishers. Google recently launched subscription services with terms that may win over Apple's "loyal" customers. Time and statistics will soon tell.

In my opinion when it comes down to it there is no one company out there that compares to Apple. They have geniously developed products that stand out far above anything else its competitors have to offer and although there are many more options available, consumers know not only the superior level of product quality but the customer service that stands behind it. With that being said I have no personal problem with google charging what they feel is a fair percentage and although it might upset some of their consumers there are many more Apple loyal customers that will remain unmoved. There is really no one other company that a person could choose to sell their product such as Apple that would have as many potential consumers.

Personally, I can see both sides of this situation.  One way Apple as tried to justify this is by saying that when Apple brings a new subscriber to the app, they ear 30% share, but when the publisher brings an existing or new subscriber to the app, the publisher keeps 100% and Apple earns nothing.  Apple is an extremely well looked upon company and I can see why they feel they have the right to be doing this.  On the other hand, it does seem somewhat unfair in the fact that the percent that Apple charges is substantially larger than that of Google.  Maybe Apple could compromise and drop the percent just a bit? We'll have to wait and see how this issue gets worked out. 

I'm not a business guru. I don't own an iPhone. I don't own an iPad. And I don't buy apps. With that said, I don't think I have much right to say much of anything on this issue. However, my stance in this issue is to stand with Apple. I do love the company, my macbook, and my iPod. As a leader in innovation and smart business decisions, I tend to put my trust in Apple. If they believe 30% is fair. I tend to believe it is fair. Without Apple, publishers would be a lot less likely to get as many subscribers to their apps and therefore, Apple deserves a pretty reasonable cut to their profits from the apps. While I understand why publishers are frustrated with Apple's new requirements, I think it's a smart business decision for them.

Mobile devices are become more popular every second. I do not think that there are many people these days walking around without a cell phone. Even my 87-year-old grandmother has a cell phone! I own an Iphone and have accumulated many apps. Most of the apps that I have are free. Yet, I do have one or two that I have payed for through Apple and I do notice a difference between the payed apps and the free ones. The advertisements do not appear on payed apps! If you get a subscription to an app it shows less advertisements. I think the advertisements are a way to make up revenue for not having to pay for the app. Maybe this is an issue that Apple and Google will use differ on.

I am not surprised at all by this. Companies now a days are looking to make money wherever they can, especially companies such as Apple. Apples products have always been expensive and the most elite which makes them think that they have the right to take more money or honestly in some people's eyes take advantage. However this is the way that the world works and many people are just going to have to get used to it. Do I think that it is completey fair? No, but I know that there is nothing people can do about it. You are going to have to pay that amount of money whether you like it or not so you might a well get used to it. 

America used to be what we could call capitalistic economy, now with things such as the bail outs of the big three auto makers and government aid we as a country have strayed from the path. America is supposed to be about being entrepeneurial and crating for yourself, which apple and google both have done. Why should they be punished? Big corporations like Apple and Google do have an advantage, however, they have not become monopolies on my eyes there are still other options for consumers with such things as droids and different search engines. Apple and Google should be able to take some revenue from the people who want to run apps on their I pad or I phone, as they own both products.

As previously mention by several other students, recent reports published from Apple revealed that the company was merely breaking even on their production, promotion, and sale of Iphone and Ipad applications. From a pure business standpoint, it remains crucial that Apple not merely break even, but profit from the sale of applications. You give a portion of the profit from the sale of a house to the real estate agent whom marketed and assisted in the sale right? It's the same context here.  

It seems a little unfair that Apple takes 30% of the app revenue, and makes me wonder how companies even make money off those apps. Maybe that's not their point, but really just to drive traffic to their company. I really don't think Apple will change though - I mean they ARE Apple. People will continue to buy apps off iTunes because it's convenient (as said in one of the articles), so why bother going elsewhere? I think people who don't sell their apps via iTunes will lose out. Even if Apple takes that 30%...will it make a big difference to a companies revenue since you get more visibility on itunes anyway? My suggestion is to figure out how to become more visible on iTunes, so then you will have more buyers, more revenue, and a more successful company.