[bagacrap]

Without robust* competition, how can you put a value on the services they provide? They wrote an entire, very successful, platform, upon which someone's business depends. They employ an army of engineers that are probably more highly skilled than the average app developer to keep this going. They've even done the hard work of attracting almost all the consumers who spend money freely to their platform.

Auction houses such as Christie's take up to 25% for a similar service (connecting sellers with affluent buyers), although one that's probably far easier to replicate.

*robust meaning low switching costs, but it's hard to imagine how one could have low switching costs on smart phone platforms

[IncRnd]

> Auction houses such as Christie's take up to 25% for a similar service (connecting sellers with affluent buyers), although one that's probably far easier to replicate.

When you want to place an item up for auction, there are more auction houses to use than only Christie's. That might be why their price fixing scandal was discovered in 2000.

[ulimn]

I understand all that and if I wouldn't like the core of the concept, I wouldn't have switched to the Apple ecosystem.

But they also get money if the software for their hardware is easy to find and browsing the App Store is a fun experience instead of getting the same "few" apps. (No wonder apps like AppRaven exist.)

If the App Store was a different company unrelated to the hardware, I think it would be a different story. But since it's all tied together, it's like their own Sales platform.

[ChrisLTD]

Imagine also having to buy a $1,000+ ticket to be able to bid in a Christie's auction.