Apple launches in-app Subscriptions…

  • Avatar

    Posted: 18 February 2011 10:46 AM #76

    Its all about the media giants not recognizing their demise can only be put off by a new business model.

    Technologically, trivial.

    Content is weak among the media empires.  The only reason that I read mainstream media is to find out where the herd is at the specific moment.

    If content and to a less extent, marketing are both strong, then new content has a chance.

         
  • Posted: 18 February 2011 10:56 AM #77

    adamthompson3232 - 18 February 2011 02:35 PM

    What negotiations? Apple didn’t really negotiate at all with anyone from what I can tell other than Rupert and The Daily. Apple simply stated its terms and will now let everyone take it or leave it. I expect nearly all of them to take it sooner or later, and most of them sooner.

    I do believe there were negotiations. They started even before the iPad first went on sale. And in recent weeks, there were lots of reports of negotiations. But in the end, it wasn’t the Daily that was slowing down its premiere, it was Apple’s software implementation. So the unsatisfying truth is that it was probably not any one thing but a combination of a whole lot of things that delayed the start of subscription publishing

    [ Edited: 18 February 2011 10:59 AM by FalKirk ]      
  • Posted: 18 February 2011 11:38 AM #78

    I’m really having a hard time understanding all the indignation of this innovative subscription model.

    I get offers ALL the time from publishers and website for mag subscriptions at 50-90% OFF the newsstand price.

    And don’t even get me started about all the school fund raising, GUILT-TRIPPING request from friends, family and neighbors to please, please, please order some magazines so little Suzy can go to band camp using the time honored free CHILD LABOR force soo effectively used by the publishing industry!

    Where is all the outrage against these tactics?? WHY are child labor laws ignored? Without these very effective marketing schemes, I doubt my wife and I would have subs to : Better Home & Garden, Time, Newsweek, Popular Science & Mechanic, Martha Stuart, Oprah bla… bla… bla…

    If the publisher can sell “dead tree subs” at such huge discounts PLUS donate a % of proceeds to the schools, surely they can get little Suzy to send you an email offering only a 50% off iPad version, save a few trees in the process and keep ALL the profits as they are not being “purchased” through the app store.

    Seems like much ado about nothing.

    What am I missing??

         
  • Posted: 18 February 2011 12:03 PM #79

    Another thing….

    If publishers (and all the whiners) would just think “outside the box”!!

    Imagine how hard it would be for them to enlist this child labor force to email their “parents” contacts (instead of snail mailing or door to dooring). Think how they would get all the demographic and personal emails from these campaigns since you would subscribe electronically all the while defeating Apple’s “evil & closed” ecosystem AND keep 100% of the price.

    They could even offer free iPads to Suzy’s school in return for X number of subs.

    Apple might even get behind these approaches (since they want iPad adoption in schools) making it a win-win-win situation.

    Just sayin…

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 18 February 2011 12:37 PM #80

    There’s a poll going on Dealmac with interesting results.

    Signature

    The study of money, above all other fields in economics, is one in which complexity is used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it. The process by which banks create money is so simple the mind is repelled.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 18 February 2011 01:03 PM #81

    chiefthinker - 18 February 2011 03:38 PM

    What am I missing??

    Nothing.

    I’d just note that the folks making the most noise aren’t the print publishers, it’s the streaming music group. Even streaming video (Netflix) hasn’t said much yet.

         
  • Posted: 18 February 2011 02:55 PM #82

    macglenn - 18 February 2011 04:37 PM

    There’s a poll going on Dealmac with interesting results.

    First, I wouldn’t trust a scientifically conducted poll on this subject because what people say and what people do are two very different things. This is particularly true when it involves something that they’ve never done before.

    Second, it’s an internet straw poll. “Nuff said.

    Third, is this poll supposed to be a joke?  grin  On my computer at least, Google was the one and only option listed followed by a lot of white space. I had to scroll down about a page and a half to find the three other options. It really made me laugh. That’s how I’ve always suspected most polls are conducted anyway!

         
  • Posted: 18 February 2011 02:58 PM #83

    Drew Bear - 18 February 2011 05:03 PM
    chiefthinker - 18 February 2011 03:38 PM

    What am I missing??

    Nothing.

    I’d just note that the folks making the most noise aren’t the print publishers, it’s the streaming music group. Even streaming video (Netflix) hasn’t said much yet.

    I read somewhere than Netflix was exempt from the 30% fee although there was no explanation given. Anyone else know anything about this?

         
  • Posted: 18 February 2011 03:06 PM #84

    adamthompson3232 - 18 February 2011 03:05 PM

    I, too, read those rumors about negotiations. A few questions:

    Who was Apple negotiating with?

    What is the current stance of those entities Apple was negotiating with?

    What were the results of those negotiations?

    Is the 30% cut a result of those negotiations?

    I have thoughts on all of these but it’s all just conjecture.

    Adam, just speculation, but I’m guessing that Jobs really wanted to hammer out some kind of an agreement that he could live with and that would have brought most of the big publishers into the fold. I think he would have loved nothing better than to announce the new plan followed by a long, long list of publishers who had signed up for it.

    However, my guess is that he just couldn’t make them happy. There were no terms that both he and they could agree to. So he said “Forget it, I’ll just lay out the rules and they can come on board when they realize that it’s the best deal going.”

         
  • Posted: 19 February 2011 11:22 AM #85

    A good read from Kontra

    Store Wars: Opt out, opt in, sell out, capitulate?
    WED, FEB 16, 11
    Apple?s new App Store rules now mandate that users themselves must decide whether they want to give their own personal info to publishers when they subscribe. What would be the reaction of the publishing industry to this?

    http://counternotions.com/2011/02/16/stores/

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 19 February 2011 11:48 AM #86

    Hamourabi - 19 February 2011 03:22 PM

    A good read from Kontra

    Store Wars: Opt out, opt in, sell out, capitulate?
    WED, FEB 16, 11
    Apple?s new App Store rules now mandate that users themselves must decide whether they want to give their own personal info to publishers when they subscribe. What would be the reaction of the publishing industry to this?

    http://counternotions.com/2011/02/16/stores/

    The top 90 % is flawless in logic, appearance and prose.  Very prime.

         
  • Posted: 19 February 2011 02:55 PM #87

    Prior to Apple’s entry into the ebook market, Amazon was charging a SEVENTY PERCENT ROYALTY. See here.

    Just as importantly, Amazon has this contractual clause inserted into its terms and conditions for those wishing to distribute ebooks on its site. See here.

    The Amazon price must be the same or less than at competing ebook sellers

    So tell me again why Apple’s cut is so onerous and it’s conditions are so anti-competitive?

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 19 February 2011 03:15 PM #88

    FalKirk - 19 February 2011 06:55 PM

    Prior to Apple’s entry into the ebook market, Amazon was charging a SEVENTY PERCENT ROYALTY. See here.

    Just as importantly, Amazon has this contractual clause inserted into its terms and conditions for those wishing to distribute ebooks on its site. See here.

    The Amazon price must be the same or less than at competing ebook sellers

    So tell me again why Apple’s cut is so onerous and it’s conditions are so anti-competitive?

    I think most folks have price shock because they assume that publishers will need to raise prices to afford the 30% Apple is charging, but let’s quit feeling sorry for Amazon or Netflicks.

    Here is the pricing page Amazon charges others for their service.

    Lets say I’m selling software or a game for $10 and it is a digital deliver
    Here’s how it works:

      Sale price of the item
      Shipping credit
    -  Referral Fee of 6-25% of the sale price (15% for software)
    -  Variable Closing Fee           (1.35 Software)
    -  $0.99 Fixed Closing Fee
    ——————————————————-


    10- 1.5-1.35-.99=6.16 to me 3.84 to Amazon

    Obviously a gross oversimplification but looks like Apple charges 38.4% minimum on their store plus shipping.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 19 February 2011 03:24 PM #89

    Don’t forget Amazon’s proposed pricing structure for their upcoming Android app store.

    When developers submit apps to Amazon’s app store, they will be able to set a suggested retail price (“MSRP”). It can be free, it can be $50, whatever, but it has to be the same price as (or cheaper than) the app is selling anywhere else.

    Then Amazon—not the developer—will set the retail price. It can be full price, it can be a sale price, or it can be free.

    Developers will get to take home the standard 70% of the app’s retail price (what the app sells for) or 20% of the MSRP (what the developer thinks it should sell for), whichever is greater.

    So if your $10 app is sold for $10, you get $7. If it’s sold for $5, you get $3.50. But if it’s sold for $1 or free, you’re at least guaranteed $2, or 20% of your $10 MSRP.

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-android-app-store-pricing-2011-1#ixzz1EQzdGYvb

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 21 February 2011 04:22 PM #90

    Subscription issues roundup :

    1. Nobody complained when Amazon was taking a higher percentage than Apple.
    2. Publishers’ hidden secret:  they make money from selling customer info.  With the Apple Subscription terms, they won’t have access to customer info.
    3. Publishers’ hidden secret:  they will have to focus on content a lot more.  New publishers know this.  Old publishers are still crying over their stale martini.
    4. Apple is taking a 30 % cut, the same as for every other developer for the App Stores—>  IF the publisher is bringing a new subscriber.  Revenue from current subscribers don’t bring a penny to Apple.
    5. Apple takes a 30 % cut to mainly cover infrastructure and marketing costs.  It makes some money, but its not the gravy train that complaining publishers want us to believe.
    6. New publishers are likely to undercut the old publishers.
    7. Younger people have close to zero loyalty to old publishers.
    8. There are over 1700 iPad Apps, not including iPod/iPhone apps, that turn up with the word “magazine”.  How’s that for competition. 
    9. The Daily has the most recognition among “magazine” apps for now.  Why ?  Because they made a big splash, one way or another, in their marketing.  In other words, they did some marketing.
    10. Some apps don’t qualify for subscription marketing.  Some of these apps will change.  Netflix ?  don’t know since I haven’t been following it closely.
    11. Monopolies are not illegal.  Market domination is not illegal.  Certain actions under certain situations may be illegal. 
    12. The Apple subscription scheme doesn’t activate until June 2011, more or less.  Apple can made adjustments, tho I doubt it.  Some publishers will make adjustments, but we don’t know who yet.
    13. Some publishers are already happy with the App Store.  Count me as one.  (Xcode is another story.)
    14. Apple has a legal duty to maximize a return to shareholders.  Apple’s policy is generally that each item should make a profit.  Apple rarely, very rarely, makes any product line a loss-leader.  Example: Xserve.
    15. The complaining publishers are not saying that the very large Apple customer base is a market opportunity for them.
    16. We’re only at the early adopter stage, or even the innovator state, of product maturity.
    17. To get an anti-trust case into US courts is going to take a long time. 
    18. Amazon charges the customer 16 cents per megabyte of download for the Kindle in the UK.
    19. Google takes a smaller cut, but sells customer info (loosely worded).
    20. Apple is on the side of the customer.  Google is less so. 
    21. Publishers don’t have to publish anything for Apple.  They can decline to do so.
    22. The strong majority of publishers can never return to the model of the 20th century with the same degree of success, tho they would like to.
    23. Apple is a successful company because customers like their products.
    24. Android marketplace is not as trusted by customers as the Apple App Stores.

    pile on , everyone.