[EthanHeilman]

>It doesn't avoid freemium it just means that the points/memberships have to be externally purchased. You just can't charge for the app

Yes, this is a good point.

I wonder if google would consider this a violation of the ToS since someone could offer an app that does not work at all except if you pay for a membership somewhere else. This would be equivalent as charging for an app but doesn't violate the letter of the law. I imagine google would probably decide on a case by case basis.

>App development as a paid endeavor is a very sustainable ecosystem.

It is a sustainable ecosystem for companies that have funding and know what they are doing but at the moment there is no doubt that a gold rush is happening is the mobile space. I think this gold rush has helped these platforms significantly, but I don't think developers are thinking rationally about their chances of actually producing a successful business(supply > demand). Once this correction takes place I expect that many app stores will suffer from a lack of new development which will hurt the public's expectations.

[roc]

> "I wonder if google would consider this a violation of the ToS since someone could offer an app that does not work at all except if you pay for a membership somewhere else."

Isn't one of their go-to app examples a headline feed from the NYTimes? Don't they still have a pay-wall?