# Apple policy & app that takes a bite out of everyone else's sales now official.



## kb7uen Gene (Mar 13, 2009)

The Apple Mafia has made their stand on the app only purchases official. If you can't earn it honestly, then just steal it. Of course, this is the same company who had 91 children in china working in their plants last year, I read an article on this last night. Way to go Apple, I've bought my last product from your company.

Gene

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9209580/Apple_s_new_App_Store_rules_affect_Amazon_s_Kindle?taxonomyId=12


----------



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

And the world gets a tiny bit worse, just so some obscenely rich people can grab a little bit more money.


----------



## Seamonkey (Dec 2, 2008)

I guess it is no surprise they'd act like little piggies (or really big hogs).


----------



## kkay5 (Feb 1, 2010)

I am SO mad about this.  It just makes Apple look greedy to take a 30% cut.  I have had my Verizon iPhone for 9 days and I think when I signed up, I read I had 15 days to return it and I am seriously thinking about returning it and getting an Andriod.


----------



## vermontcathy (Feb 18, 2009)

kkay5 said:


> I am SO mad about this. It just makes Apple look greedy to take a 30% cut. I have had my Verizon iPhone for 9 days and I think when I signed up, I read I had 15 days to return it and I am seriously thinking about returning it and getting an Andriod.


If you did plan on reading your kindle books on your iPhone, I would return it, and make sure the store knows why. Apple seems to get more and more restrictive with their devices. You'll probably be plenty happy with an Android phone.


----------



## royerhouse (Nov 22, 2008)

The way I read the article, you can still read books on your iPad or iPhone, but if you purchase them through the app, they get 30%.  I don't purchase that way, anyway.  Can't we all just choose to purchase through amazon.com and then download after we sync our phones?


----------



## kkay5 (Feb 1, 2010)

royerhouse said:


> The way I read the article, you can still read books on your iPad or iPhone, but if you purchase them through the app, they get 30%. I don't purchase that way, anyway. Can't we all just choose to purchase through amazon.com and then download after we sync our phones?


The problem is YOU may purchase your books that way, but the majority of users won't care that Apple is taking a 30% cut. Most users will just want to purchase their books the easiest way possible. Amazon will not be allowed to link to their website. So they could stand to lose a lot of income in this deal and may decide that it's not worth being on the iDevices if they aren't making anything. Plus, I read that's it's a big question mark whether they would be allowed to only have their app be a reader and not have the store at all.

And it's the same with Netflix. Someone will download the Netflix app and sign up. The average user is not going to think "Oh, I should sign up at the website so Netflix gets the money." They will sign up through the app because it's quick and easy and have no idea about this issue. So Netflix will either have to raise prices to cover what could be a significant loss of income each month or leave the iDevices.


----------



## vermontcathy (Feb 18, 2009)

My impression is that if they sell a book anywhere (such as Amazon.com), then they have to have the option in the app to sell the book in the app (Apple getting 30%). Since Amazon only gets 30%, from both Agency Model books AND self-published books that are in the 70% commission bracket, Amazon would get NO money from those books. Worse, Amazon would actually loose money since they have to pay AT&T some money for 3G book transmission (I'm not sure how that works on iPhones, but if someone bought all their books in-app, and then wanted to download them to their kindle also, Amazon would be making zero money off of books, yet would have to support the download of those books over 3G forever, plus website hosting of the books, CS costs, etc.). 

SO, if my assumptions above are correct, I think that Amazon would simply choose not to have an iPhone app at all, rather than loose money. So THAT'S the problem.

Some people will be pissed at Amazon for removing the apps rather than modifying the apps to fit Apple's demands, but I think far more people will be mad at Apple, and choose not to get an iPhone or iPad (or sell the one they have) and buy a kindle. Or choose not to sell their kindle (as many people did when they got iPads). I think it would hurt Apple more than Amazon especially since this doesn't just affect Amazon customers, but also Netflix, hulu, the B&N ebook store, etc.


----------



## Ctychick (Jan 5, 2011)

royerhouse said:


> The way I read the article, you can still read books on your iPad or iPhone, but if you purchase them through the app, they get 30%. I don't purchase that way, anyway. Can't we all just choose to purchase through amazon.com and then download after we sync our phones?


I was confused about this too. From the linked article:

"Sans the "Shop in Kindle Store" link, users can still purchase books outside of the App Store -- on Amazon's Web site, for instance, or through a non-Apple Kindle app -- then have them loaded to an iPhone or iPad."

I would also return your iPhone if you still can. I have an Android (100x more functional that the iPhone, btw!), so phone-reading isn't an issue for me. But, my parents bought an iPad for my kids, partly so we could download children's books onto it. I still intend to do so, but the more statements Apple issues on proprietary issues, the greater my commitment to Apple's competitors. I happen to really like the iPad, but it's lack of Flash is a serious drawback in more ways that I would have thought. Just another example. I would think they'd be digging their own grave, but there are so many people committed to the Apple brand that it will be a slow process. With so many Android tabs in the pipeline, there are bound to be more converts over time (following the current trend in growing Android smart phone sales), forcing Apple's hand. Maybe. Who knows.


----------



## pidgeon92 (Oct 27, 2008)

Still a complete non-issue for me.


----------



## kindlegrl81 (Jan 19, 2010)

pidgeon92 said:


> Still a complete non-issue for me.


Well I have a feeling it is going to end up being an issue for Amazon and other companies such as netflix. They are not going to accept Apple taking their entire profit margin (and who could blame them) so they will mosy likely get rid of the apps. Leaving me and anyone who has purchased the iPad, with a very exspensive portable internet browser. I would certainly have a problem with that.


----------



## pidgeon92 (Oct 27, 2008)

kindlegrl81 said:


> Well I have a feeling it is going to end up being an issue for Amazon and other companies such as netflix. They are not going to accept Apple taking their entire profit margin (and who could blame them) so they will mosy likely get rid of the apps. Leaving me and anyone who has purchased the iPad, with a very exspensive portable internet browser. I would certainly have a problem with that.


This is always the way that Apple has operated. There is no way companies as smart as Amazon and Netflix did not see this coming.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Amazon doesn't seem to be a paragon of giving people a break on pricing, either:

"The true cost of publishing on the Amazon Kindle"

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2011/02/15/the-true-cost-of-publishing-on-the-amazon-kindle/

Mike


----------



## Trophywife007 (Aug 31, 2009)

I wonder what percentage of Amazon's eBook sales actually come from the other devices themselves -- iPhones, iPads, Androids, etc. (excluding Kindles)?  I suppose those kinds of stats are not generally available, but I would also suppose that it's still worth it for Amazon to keep the "Kindle for Whatever" apps up and running.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

So the thing with this is if Amazon wants an app on Apple's devices, they have to give 30% of app sales to Apple. If they want to avoid this, they have to remove the app. The idea that people will go around the app to purchase direct from Amazon is naive. A few will, but most won't. 

If Amazon removes the app, they drive book sales to Apple. Users don't care who they buy from -- the latest Stephen King is the same if it's from iBooks, Amazon, or B&N. If the price is the same at all three, the ease of buying -- that is through an app -- will win. 

If Amazon doesn't sell much to Apple's iOS, they might choose to remove the app. If they sell a lot, well, who knows? That's a lot of market to give up, but that 30% is probably all their profit per sale, and more. 

The bottom line is Apple gobbling up 30% will probably push prices up for us, the consumer. 

And just imagine if Microsoft wanted 30% of every transaction that was based on Windows software, or your internet provider wanted a piece of every sale over the internet. It's not a happy thought.


----------



## Xopher (May 14, 2009)

I smell a class action suit coming up.

Something that Amazon might play is the Agency Model card. If I remember correctly, the Agency Model states that Amazon isn't selling the ebooks, but are just agents for the publishers. The publishers are the ones setting the price and selling the ebooks through Amazon's website. Since Amazon isn't the one making the actual sale, they could argue that the Apple 30% fee comes (in part) out of the publisher's cut. Amazon could then still offer ebooks through iTunes and still make a profit. After all, publishers aren't selling wholesale to Amazon anymore.

Publishers won't like it, but they forced the Agency Model format. It could be a step that Amazon could use to try and replace the Agency Model (since the contract year is almost up). It might also get publishers to put pressure on Apple as well.


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

Seems like it would make Android tablet competitors more viable, so far they have been MIA, but I really like being able to read my books on my Kindle, phone and tablet. I never buy iBooks


----------



## pidgeon92 (Oct 27, 2008)

Asher MacDonald said:


> So the thing with this is if Amazon wants an app on Apple's devices, they have to give 30% of app sales to Apple. If they want to avoid this, they have to remove the app.


*Not* true. Only if you purchase content THROUGH the app on the Apple device will Apple take a cut.


----------



## kb7uen Gene (Mar 13, 2009)

What if Amazon simply removed the ability to buy from the IOS Kindle app altogether?  When the owner of the IOS device installs the Kindle app, it would inform them of the current situation and explain that this is why the buy option has been removed from the app.  Allow owners of the IOS Kindle app to download samples and add books and so on to their wish list, but stop it there.  Then when IOS customers complain to Amazon, they can tell them that Apple is responsible for this problem in the first place and it will have to be taken up with them.  I don't think there is anything Apple could do to Amazon if their customer service reps redirected IOS Kindle app customers back to Apple on this issue.

So if Amazon doesn't have a buy button directing IOS device owners to the Kindle store, do they have to put in a button directing IOS device owners to the iTunes store?  But if I were Amazon, I would simply refuse to modify the app, and let Apple reject it.  Then run with it in the media showing how Apple has forced the issue on Amazon.  Then the IOS Kindle app users can go after Apple.  IOS device owners using the Kindle app, should file a class action law suite against Apple to put an end to this kind of predatory behavior.  Couldn't happen to a nicer company.

Gene


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

I don't know that what they are doing is illegal......Amazon does not have to allow iBooks or NookBooks on the Kindle either. Its their device.....but it does make it less attractive as a device....maybe increasing competition by other tablets will make them change


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

See blog here for another take:

http://dvice.com/archives/2011/02/opinion-reports.php

The 30% may apply to content subscriptions, not individual books purchased.

Mike


----------



## Trophywife007 (Aug 31, 2009)

jmiked said:


> See blog here for another take:
> 
> http://dvice.com/archives/2011/02/opinion-reports.php
> 
> ...


That sheds some light... thanks for posting that.


----------



## Emma Midnight (Feb 19, 2011)

I don't know why Apple would distinguish between a subscription service and any other app that is used for content purchased elsewhere. Why wouldn't Apple insist on a purchase button inside the Kindle app and take 30%? 

After all, Apple is effectively knocking Rhapsody and Netflix off their devices if they insist on a purchase button inside their apps and will take 30%. Why wouldn't they do the same to iBooks competitors?


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Newsweek column on this...no new info or anything though.

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/02/13/apple-vs-the-commoners.html


----------



## Gabriel Beyers (Jan 28, 2011)

What worries me most about this is if Amazon decides to keep the app and cover the 30% by reducing the amount the writer receives.  They could change the royalty rate from 70%/30% to 40% for the writer, 30% for Apple, then keep 30% for themselves.  That would be a big deal for indie authors.


----------



## geko29 (Dec 23, 2008)

Gabriel Beyers said:


> What worries me most about this is if Amazon decides to keep the app and cover the 30% by reducing the amount the writer receives. They could change the royalty rate from 70%/30% to 40% for the writer, 30% for Apple, then keep 30% for themselves. That would be a big deal for indie authors.


Indies don't make up a large enough portion of the market for them to worry about it. When 75% or better of their sales are from the top 5 publishers, losing money on every one of those sales is of much bigger concern. That will drive them off the platform long before they even think about changing the royalty rates for indies.


----------



## Casse (Oct 16, 2009)

I don't have a problem with this.... Apple is known to be proprietary and I still purchase their products.

I have an Android smartphone on Verizon and will switch to the i-Phone when our year is up.


----------



## Emma Midnight (Feb 19, 2011)

Gabriel Beyers said:


> What worries me most about this is if Amazon decides to keep the app and cover the 30% by reducing the amount the writer receives. They could change the royalty rate from 70%/30% to 40% for the writer, 30% for Apple, then keep 30% for themselves. That would be a big deal for indie authors.


They would have to do this for traditional publishers too, and they would scream bloody murder. They can direct to Apple's iBooks. They'd 
rather Amazon leave Apple's iOS ecosystem and cede those sales to Apple than give up 30%.

The issue for indies is that iBooks isn't as kind to them and it's harder to get on iBooks directly -- you need an ISBN and the ability to upload from a Mac. You can use Smashwords, but you lose 10% when you go through them. The big issue is that indie books are harder to find on iBooks. Apple tends to give more prominence to traditional books.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

I know iPad users who hate iBooks. Apple has a ways to go with a bookselling service to compare with Amazon.


----------



## Jesslyn (Oct 29, 2008)

I'm starting to think that Amazon will avoid the whole fight with Apple by pulling the Kindle app (which shouldn't affect current users)and directing new users to Kindle for the Web. It's been around in Beta for awhile and works in it's current form (http://www.amazon.com/Dead-Family-Sookie-Stackhouse-Novel/dp/0441020151).

It needs refining, and would probably have to be modified and updated to reflect the bells and whistles that are available on the other apps, bur what if it wasn't? What if Amazon comes out with the tablet that has been rumored? What if only iPad/iPhone competitors got the full-fledged Kindle (and nook, Netflix, Hulu, Zinio) app? It would help break the iPad tablet monopoly and promote a potential Amazon tablet.

All of this is speculation, of course, but I do think the Kindle for the Web app is a viable option. Then again, I may just get another book light for nighttime Kindling and stop reading on my iPad altogether.


----------



## vermontcathy (Feb 18, 2009)

Jesslyn said:


> I'm starting to think that Amazon will avoid the whole fight with Apple by pulling the Kindle app (which shouldn't affect current users)...
> 
> It needs refining, and would probably have to be modified and updated to reflect the bells and whistles that are available on the other apps, bur what if it wasn't? ...


It seems like it WOULD affect current users, who use the app on their iPhone or iPad. The app currently installed _might_ continue to work, IF you never update your iPhone/iPad. An update would certainly stop the app from working. It's possible that even syncing to iTunes would cause the app to stop working. Apple isn't going to let the current app keeping working if they feel it breaks their rules (my guess).

Also, although I think the web version is a decent option, it does require one to be connected to the internet, so it wouldn't work well for people who want to read somewhere that they don't have a constant connection. I'm especially thinking of the non-3G devices (wi-fi iPad, and iPod Touch).

Regardless of these issues, I do think Amazon should NOT cave to Apple, and would prefer they pull their app if they can't find a reasonable agreement. Everyone will know it was Apple that was a di*k, not Amazon.


----------



## geko29 (Dec 23, 2008)

vermontcathy said:


> It seems like it WOULD affect current users, who use the app on their iPhone or iPad. The app currently installed _might_ continue to work, IF you never update your iPhone/iPad. An update would certainly stop the app from working. It's possible that even syncing to iTunes would cause the app to stop working. Apple isn't going to let the current app keeping working if they feel it breaks their rules (my guess).


Old apps won't stop working. There are plenty of people who still have HandyLight, which was pulled because it offered wireless tethering; or the earlier releases of Camera++, which allowed using the volume buttons as a shutter release, etc. etc. Once you have an app, it's yours forever. Updating would only break the app if A) Amazon issued an update that intentionally broke the app, which would be beyond stupid, and B) you downloaded it and overwrote your working version.



vermontcathy said:


> Also, although I think the web version is a decent option, it does require one to be connected to the internet, so it wouldn't work well for people who want to read somewhere that they don't have a constant connection. I'm especially thinking of the non-3G devices (wi-fi iPad, and iPod Touch).


A little more planning is required, but you don't have to be connected to read. You have to be connected at some point in advance of reading, but the book copies into your browser cache when you open it. You can try this yourself with the beta. Go to the test page, wait for the book to load, then unplug your network cable, disconnect from your wireless network, or set your browser to offline mode. You'll be able to read the sample straight through to the end with no issues.



vermontcathy said:


> Regardless of these issues, I do think Amazon should NOT cave to Apple, and would prefer they pull their app if they can't find a reasonable agreement. Everyone will know it was Apple that was a di*k, not Amazon.


We agree completely. There's no way Amazon will withdraw Kindle from the App store--they'll force Apple to yank it and make themselves look bad.


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

I'm not really worried about the fate of the Kindle app on advices, since I don't really like reading on my iPad or iPod Touch anyway.  Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple issued an iOS update that "just happened" to break the old Kindle and Nook apps, and I wouldn't even blame them for doing it if they do stick with their apparent policy.  There were several rounds of this on iTunes about 18 months ago when Palm foolishly tried to make a major feature of their Pre smartphone that it would sync with iTunes, and Apple understandably resented it.  I was a Pre owner, though not an iTunes user, at the time.

The part of all this that concerns me is that Apple insists on a 30% cut of sales from iThings, and insists that stuff can't sell for less elsewhere than on Apple products.  That means that either someone will get a smaller cut (probably authors) or that prices for everyone, even those who never owned an Apple product in their lives, will go up.  Apple already foisted the Agency Plan on us to raise ebook prices, now they want to raise them more!  Grrrrr....


----------

