But the 30% cut by Apple has been standard from the beginning. Why does that suddenly come into question once they have been successful? Serious question, I'm not an expert in antitrust laws.
It isn't the size of the cut that's the problem. Focusing on that is misdirection.
The problem is that Apple require vendors not to advertise, link to, or even mention that other payment methods are available outside of the walled garden.
That's the stunning uppercut. The size of the fee is merely a follow-up kick to the nuts.
No doubt Apple's PR team have been feeding Bloomberg background that pulls them towards only thinking about percentages, because "high prices bad" is an much easier story for lazy hacks to write than "Apple's T&Cs are distorting a marketplace and forcing vendors to mislead consumers", and much easier for Apple to leak about and subsequently respond to without addressing the core problem, especially when they're eventually forced to sit down and haggle with consumer/anti-trust regulators.
> Why does that suddenly come into question once they have been successful
Because people don't have a choice. If you want to build a successful software as a service offering in 2020, chances are you need to offer apps for it. Those apps have to be available for iOS and Android else they're dead on arrival, especially for iOS.
While Android lets you easily sideload apps (but even that is rarely enough as most users won't deal with that), iOS is a very strict walled garden. You have to play by the rules, and the rules are finicky and vague.
Like in the Hey mail saga, Apple's whim can make or break an entire business. That's not okay.
The problem is that Apple require vendors not to advertise, link to, or even mention that other payment methods are available outside of the walled garden.
That's the stunning uppercut. The size of the fee is merely a follow-up kick to the nuts.
No doubt Apple's PR team have been feeding Bloomberg background that pulls them towards only thinking about percentages, because "high prices bad" is an much easier story for lazy hacks to write than "Apple's T&Cs are distorting a marketplace and forcing vendors to mislead consumers", and much easier for Apple to leak about and subsequently respond to without addressing the core problem, especially when they're eventually forced to sit down and haggle with consumer/anti-trust regulators.