• dan@upvote.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Why does Apple feel they deserve a 30% cut? In cases like this, Apple aren’t providing any value at all.

    • Apple aren’t providing the content - the creator is.
    • Apple aren’t providing a platform for the content - Patreon is.
    • Apple aren’t providing a platform for discovery - people aren’t finding Patreon creators solely via Apple products.

    Sure, Apple are providing a payments platform, but why do they deserve 10x what Stripe charges?

    • lofuw@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Why does Apple feel they deserve a 30% cut?

      Because they can. Time and time again, useful idiots have proven their dipshittery by sucking off the people taking them for a ride.

      A main tenant of business decisions is to fuck over your customers as hard as they’re willing to be fucked. Since nobody has any standards these days, corporations make a killing.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      This is THE way that Apple gets any revenue from the enormous and highly successful app platform and ecosystem they created. They say “go nuts, make money on our platform, but share some with us in exchange for our maintaining that platform.” This is reasonable. Apple is providing a service to Patreon, and access to their tremendous user base. That ain’t nothing.

      I agree that subjecting creator donations to the 30% is about the shittiest use case for this and I wish they would make an exception. But your post about how Apple is doing absolutely nothing here is garbage.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Apple is doing nothing in this particular case, not in general. There’s cases where the 30% is more justified.

    • Flagstaff@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s just platform-milking, just like Meetup.com’s latest antics; there isn’t deep analysis needed to everything, haha. “Capitalism” is totally a legitimate answer despite being just one word.

      • Munkisquisher@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Meetup is now owned by Bending Spoons, who have also enshittified wetransfer, Evernote, eventbrite, AOL, vimeo. They buy decent products that never exploded to ipo status, fire everyone and milk the rest for whatever they can charge.

    • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      They provide the payment system. They also mandate it.

      If you subscribe on the website you don’t have to pay the extra. It’s only for subscriptions initiated via the app