It’s logical but it probably scares away some customers. That’s why the “just eat it” option exists. iOS gives you access to an enormous market and payments are slick and easy. Creators may want $5 but if they can get 30% less from 500% more people, it’s still a good business for them. There’s no strict reason why they must obsess over taking 100% of the sticker price. There are a million examples of businesses who are willing to accept a discount for high volume business.

It reminds me of gas stations that only accept ATM cards and not credit cards, because they don’t want to lose the 3% that credit card companies take per transaction. They’re trying not to lose that 3%, but it will inconvenience some customers and lose them some business. That could easily be worse than 3%.

So yes Patreon could say “go find a laptop and enter your credit card number in our web page” but there are people who won’t do all that because they expect to be able to pay with one tap. And businesses are on the AppStore because that great payment experience makes it super easy for them to convert customers.

It’s just not as straightforward as saying “fuck you Apple, I’ll take my business elsewhere.”

This is THE way that Apple gets any revenue from the enormous and highly successful app platform and ecosystem they created. They say “go nuts, make money on our platform, but share some with us in exchange for our maintaining that platform.” This is reasonable. Apple is providing a service to Patreon, and access to their tremendous user base. That ain’t nothing.

I agree that subjecting creator donations to the 30% is about the shittiest use case for this and I wish they would make an exception. But your post about how Apple is doing absolutely nothing here is garbage.

I really think this move blows and I wish they would reverse this decision and make an exception.

However Tim Cook didn’t wake up one day and wonder how he could fuck creators. Apple takes a 30% cut of all app transactions. This is how they benefit from the enormous and highly successful app platform and ecosystem they created. It’s not pure evil to say “hey use this platform all you want but you must share some of what you make there with us.”

It does suck that they won’t let creators off the hook though. This is like taxing rips.

There’s definitely a breed of douche bag out there whose entire justification is “well I can’t quite afford the Rivian…”

If the decline was expected, that had already affected the stock price. If you look ONLY at what happens on the day that expectation is finally official, in writing, then yes it’s counterintuitive. But it makes perfect sense that if a huge decline was already built into the price, then that price would rise a little when it’s found out that the decline wasn’t as bad as expected.

Another way of saying it is that shares had already gone down because this was expected. When it wasn’t quite as bad as expected, they got a little bump back.

Thanks for noting this. People get all gleeful without knowing how connected everything is. The other thing I like to remind them is that fatcat bankers aren’t the only ones invested in the stock market. Regular people with 401ks or college savings set aside for their kid are exposed as well.

I’m so out of the loop after deleting my Twitter account a while ago. Is it now just a porn generator instead of a website?