Apple has set a new deadline of November 1, 2026 for all Patreon creators to switch from Patreon's legacy billing system to the App Store's in-app purchase system in the Patreon app on the iPhone and iPad, as reported by TechCrunch. Note: This image has been edited to include a pile of cash. Patreon is a platform where creators such as YouTubers can receive payments from fans, which can be a valuable revenue stream alongside ads and sponsorships.
Why does Apple feel they deserve a 30% cut? In cases like this, Apple aren’t providing any value at all.
Sure, Apple are providing a payments platform, but why do they deserve 10x what Stripe charges?
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.
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.
Why does one company need to own meetup and eventbrite?
Is that not a monopoly? How does it not violate any anti-trust laws?
Edit to add: how long before we see a fediverse events app?
There is one, Mobilizon
You got a link to what meetup has been up to?
No, but I used to be more active until I saw that they started to increasingly prevent you from talking to other participants, and even seeing who other people are (can’t even tell gender or anything) unless you paid for their higher tier. I literally saw it get added out of the blue after years of no such restrictions, and they’ve only dug deeper and deeper. I couldn’t even connect with someone with whom I met just because I didn’t attempt to get their number immediately on the spot.
Thank you. I havent used meetup in 10 or so years. Cant remember paid features then. People also had a profile, with a picture, so as you could see interests and groups they were part of, there was also a message board for the group and messaging members wasnt an issue. Sad to see what its become.
Yeah, we can no longer msg other participants without paying. I guess they’ve picked up on it having dating potential since it has a “Single” designation so it may get added to Match’s ever-growing portfolio down the years, haha.
They were sued by Epic Games for the same shit and Epic won on one count which allows them to put links to alternative payment methods and go around Apple.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Games_v._Apple
So couldn’t patreon just argue in court that this precedent was already set with epic?
That is how case law works, yes.
I’m just wondering then why Apple would even push this if a president was already set with Epic. What a bunch of greedy corporate bastards.
Expecting Patreon to not want to bother fighting them over it, and they are correct in that assumption.
Edit, adding my source: https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/patreon-creators-have-to-switch-to-subscription-billing-by-november-thanks-to-apple-203759852.html
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
An app you can only get via the Apple store, mandated by Apple?
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.
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.
Apple is doing nothing in this particular case, not in general. There’s cases where the 30% is more justified.
Oh is there some case where Apple is creati by the content inside the app??? Do tell.
I meant more if people wouldn’t have found your app without Apple’s App Store. In that case, they’re essentially handling marketing for you.
Being in the AppStore gives you access to a lot of people. I don’t feel it’s at all relevant whether you happen to also have other exposure elsewhere. Apple charges you for the exposure you get from them, period. If you don’t want to pay for it, because you’re so successful on other channels, just don’t. Don’t have an iOS app. But for years we’ve had people who want an iOS app but also want to complain about sharing what they make from it. They still make too much to be willing to pull their app, but they complain anyway: because who doesn’t want higher margins.