Andy Reitz (blog)

 

 

This Apple subscription thing

| Comments

I've been thinking of writing about this Apple subscription controversy for awhile now, but luckily, Marco Arment has weighed in, and hit many of the same points that I would have. This is the most important thing:

"But one argument that Apple should care about: this policy will prevent many potentially great apps, from many large and small publishers, from being created on iOS at all."

The entire article is well worth a read, but that is the heart of the issue, in a nutshell. Will this prevent apps that I currently love, and future apps that haven't even been created yet, from coming to iOS? This going to be something that I consider very carefully, especially as I weight further investments in iOS. Unfortunately, the answer to this question won't fully be revealed until the end of June. That is the date that Apple has set for existing applications to come into compliance with the new rules. Until then, we'll hear about new applications that get rejected, but there won't be any way to know the status of existing applications.

Tangent: Why is Apple doing this?

The weirdest thing about this whole fiasco, to me, is just why is Apple doing this? In the short term, this new policy only creates confusion for application developers, and possibly delays some applications coming to the store. In the long term, it helps foster the connotation that Android is a more open, predictable, and freer platform for developers.

Most analysts are just chalking this up to simple greed. But with Apple sitting on over $50 Billion in cash, I find that a little hard to believe.

My guess (and this is just a guess), is that Apple wants to price iOS devices more like video game consoles. In the video game market, most manufacturers sell the console at a loss, and make a profit on the games.

Applied to iOS devices, Apple could make cheaper iPhones, iPod touches, and iPads, if they could sell them at a loss, and make a handsome profit post sale. But in order to do this, Apple has to figure out just what the "attach rate" is. In the video game world, the attach rate refers to the number of games and accessories that occur on average, per console sold. In the iOS world, the attach rate refers to Apps bought on the store, in-app purchases, iTunes media purchased, and now, in-app subscriptions.

My guess is that Apple is trying to achieve the highest amount of post-sale revenue per iOS device, and once they feel that they have a predictable pattern, then they can confidently subsidize iOS hardware.

Either that, or they're just greedy bastards, that are trying to squeeze the maximum amount of profit out of each iOS sale. It could go either way.

End Tangent

While these kinds of controversies make it interesting to follow Apple, and speculate on their intensions, it really is frustrating as a customer. And as a customer, I wish that Apple would stick to what they are great at (i.e. making devices that they sells to end-users), and stay out of the areas that they stink at (i.e. censoring content).

-Andy.