Quote:
Originally Posted by murraypaul
No, the revenue to Amazon and others has been completely unchanged for a couple of months.
If they had added in-app purchasing using the iTunes system, then Apple would have taken 30% and left them with nothing, but in fact Apple has received no revenue from their book sales, either in the last couple of months, or now.
|
Kobo's phrasing when announcing the change in the app was:
Quote:
|
Earlier today Apple instituted new rules which affect your experience on iPhone and iPad apps. The biggest change is inability to shop within our app.
|
So the shopping was done within the app, which would mean that it would be subject to the 30%. At least that was my reasoning.
And I said a couple of months because I remembered that the deadline for the removal of the purchase option was in June, but I see now that it was the end of June, so this situation has been going on for just a month.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolenka
Can you back up this "zero revenues" claim? Apple can't take a cut of a sale that doesn't go through them, and for that to happen, devs have to update their apps. Apple hasn't yanked apps that failed to comply by the deadline, and those that have updated did so by removing links to their store, so I'm not sure where this figure comes from.
|
Same point of view as my reply to murraypaul.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolenka
Which in this case is semantics. The end result is the same either way.
|
Except for the fact that when you say a cut, it makes Apple seem like a victim because the book retailers have cleverly avoided paying their dues, while if you say that it's asking for the whole revenue, it makes Apple seem like a feudal lord that overtaxes his vassals.