| One camp says "it is their store, take it or leave it, they already have competitors - if the value proposition wasn't there, it would fail - and if they screw up it will fail" and I'm in this camp. I would have more sympathy for that position if having one of two types of smartphone were not now assumed by so many organisations and if people buying those phones hadn't dramatically reduced the alternative devices those people might otherwise have bought. Like an essential utility, a smartphone has become a practical necessity for many people to be able to live a normal life. When you have attracted so much influence, you are no longer just another business, and again like an essential utility, regulation is appropriate for the protection of the little guy. Apple as a company does not owe anything to anyone. Can they discontinue the app store tomorrow if they wanted? Sure they can, it is their store and platform. Sure, but if they did that, Apple's influence would rapidly diminish and the problem I described would solve itself as well. If the value proposition isn't there, it will fail on its own. Well, that's really the big question here, isn't it? Does Apple's App Store actually provide good value for what it costs, or is it being artificially supported through other means? One of those is just good business. The other is a potential violation of competition law in many places. |
Netflix for instance can choose to refuse being on the platform under Apple's terms. It must be worth it so they stay. If Apple wanted 99% cut, would they stay? No. So the current cut must be somewhat appropriate.