Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by JangoSteve 2662 days ago
> They aren't, as far as I know, drastically undercutting the prices of their services to levels that aren't sustainable for other companies to compete.

The linked Spotify page says exactly the opposite.

> Because Apple Music doesn’t have to pay the 30% IAP charge, they are able to hugely undercut us and charge €9.99. To our fans, this just looked like we were ripping you off

2 comments

This particular part of the argument doesn't make a lot of sense to me, at least looking at the US pricing. Apple Music is $9.99 a month; Spotify Premium is $9.99 a month and includes Hulu. If not paying the IAP charge means Apple could "hugely undercut" Spotify, then shouldn't Apple Music be, well, cheaper? By at least 30%?

(N.B.: I'm not defending the specific 30% cut that Apple takes or any of their other demands, just going "hmm" at the bit you've quoted.)

Spotify is saying they had to increase the price to $13 to sell on the store. This price was not popular so they left the store to maintain the $10 price across the board. This was back in 2016, not what is offered now.

> 2014 June > So, we give IAP a try. That means we are now charged Apple's 30% tax and sadly have to increase our price for our fans... to €12.99 a month.

> 2015 June > Because Apple Music doesn’t have to pay the 30% IAP charge, they are able to hugely undercut us and charge €9.99. To our fans, this just looked like we were ripping you off

> 2016 May > We opt out of Apple's payment system and the artificially uncompetitive price we had to charge for using it

> Spotify Premium is $9.99 a month and includes Hulu

That's a very recent promotion (like, this week), and is the Hulu plan with ads [0], which has a marginal value of $0 or less in my opinion.

[0] https://www.spotify.com/us/hulu/

I was responding more so to the bundling of services rather than to the App Store specifically. Though, you could argue that the App Store and/or Apple Music are services that are bundled