EU Fines Apple $2 Billion for Anti-Competitive Behavior Toward Spotify

[sw1tcher]

We can? Spotify has no means of advertising their service to the world? What prevents Spotify from advertising their services, on their own, through every single available outlet minus one?

This is about Apple preventing the product maker (Spotify) from advertising on their own product (the Spotify app). Why is that ok with you? Why?

In the physical world, this is like Walmart telling a cereal maker (Post) they cannot advertise on the cereal box and offer discounts.

Or Walmart telling a magazine publisher (MacAddict) they cannot advertise within their magazine through inserts a lower subscription price vs the cover price you'd pay in-store because it would take away from Walmart's in-store magazine sales.

 

[vipergts2207]

They could have also decided not to allow any third party apps, and stick to native ones. That was iPhoneOS 1.0. The fact that some people think all smartphones should allow sideloading doesn’t mean that everyone should be forced to do it like that.

If Apple had gone that route, we’d probably have Android and BlackBerry OS or Windows Phone instead as the duopoly. What’s stunning to me is the number of folks that don’t recognize that Apple needs third-party devs just as much as the devs need Apple. If Apple hadn’t alllowed non-Apple apps, consumers would’ve moved on a long time ago.

 

[tehabe]

Open Safari. Type in "spotify.com." On the iphone.

But you knew that already. Right? Right?

If Spotify could offer their app this way, they wouldn't have a reason to complain about it but they can't do that.

They could have also decided not to allow any third party apps, and stick to native ones. That was iPhoneOS 1.0. The fact that some people think all smartphones should allow sideloading doesn’t mean that everyone should be forced to do it like that.

Yes, but that was unrealistic from the start, third party apps what made the iPhone a viable platform. Also if you don't want to sideload an app, don't sideload an app. You don't have to like it.

 

[threesixty360]

I still feel the EU is overreaching to help an EU based company primarily. The argument doesnt make much sense. To get a fine in court you must show actual harm done to your business. Where is the harm? Spotify have grown and are the market leader in streaming! They have over 50% of the market. If Apple didn't have a music product the company would own 90%+ of the streaming market. Is that what the EU think is fair?

The other side of the argument is why do Spotify get an exception because apple have a similar product to them? Then that would mean anywhere where Apple have a product their competitor could claim its disrupting their business. YES it should disrupt their business. They are using the Apple platform to make money for free! Apple Music is NOT FREE TO RUN!! If you looked at their books you would see that Apple Music also costs money. So where is the favouritism? Does the EU think everything runs on thin air??

Companies invest and build platform to profit off those platforms.. duh!
This is normal behaviour. Does a landlord not rent land to shops who make money? If the landlord puts his own shop there is it now illegal?
The EU is coming out with some madness.

But it doesnt matter, if they own the 350m people you want to sell to then you have to do what they say. Because thats the system, whether it makes sense or not. Might is right.. As we continue to learn in this world. Logic be damned.

 

[AppliedMicro]

I actually would be happier with Apple's position that "we should be paid" if it was consistent. If they took a commission from everyone including Microsoft (Office), Netflix, Target, Walmart, McDonalds, etc...

This - charge everyone the same, without discriminating developers of of digital products/services - that you’re competing with. It would at least be fair and honest.

 

[jimothyGator]

“Apple is currently the sole provider of an App Store where developers can distribute their apps to iOS users throughout the European Economic Area (‘EEA')”

You need just read the press release:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_1161

Sure, if you define a market narrowly enough, any company can be a monopoly.

For example, Walmart has a monopoly on selling stuff at stores named Walmart, and in the buildings and land occupied by their stores. Likewise for Target, Delhaize, etc.

If I listed my house for sale, I’d have a monopoly on houses at this physical address.

So yes, until later this month or this week, Apple operates the only App Store on the platform they created.

I’ve got three televisions: one Vizio, one Samsung, one LG. Each of them operate the only app stores on their respective TVs. So what? It would be absurd to call any one of them a monopoly.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Does a landlord not rent land to shops who make money? If the landlord puts his own shop there is it now illegal?

There are more than just one or two landlords in most towns or nations.

(bracing for @I7guy again claiming there are more than two smartphone manufacturers - whereas devices (unlike operating systems or the app stores on them) aren’t part of the relevant discussion or issue of competition regulators).

 

[123]

If you read Apple's response, the core message is pretty simple: "We'll show you evidence with numbers that our policies have helped the app economy. And we'll also show you now much money and effort we put to make it happen. Why won't you show us the evidence with numbers that our policies have hurt the app economy?"

There's no such evidence. It's OK, next fine will be $5 billion and then 20.

 

[jimothyGator]

The App Store and iOS app distribution and installation is an absolute Apple monopoly.

Apple has an Apple monopoly. Got it.

 

[CarAnalogy]

So? If Apple wanted to earn revenue from big app devs they shouldn't have created the reader app exemption. They created this mess with their own inconsistent rules.

This big fine is also because Apple wants to be more than a platform, they want to compete with apps on their platform, and they can't do that while simultaneously putting in place rules that make it more expensive for their competition.

Or maybe they shouldn't have created this Byzantine system of arbitrary rules.

"Reader apps" weren't a thing until Apple made it up.

 

[Minato1990]

Man screw the EU and crap Spotify.
Apple will not lay down to these bozos

 

[m4mario]

Paying only the annual developer fee and nothing else while making a lot of money through the Apple App Store seems to be okay for companies such as McDonald's, Walmart, Amazon, Target, Uber, etc.

Or are you telling us that the Spotify app requires more resources than apps from McDonald's, Walmart, Amazon, Target, Uber, etc?

Paying a commission of the sales is a standard practice across many industries. It's like asking a real estate agent to take a flat fee instead of a percentage of the sales. Depending the size of the sale, the commission changes, doesn't it? Off course, so many people take the agent's time without actually making a purchase and its a waste of time for the agent. But that's just how several businesses work.
Also the companies you mention are selling physical goods and not digital goods. It will be difficult to take a commission from them. That's why Apple Pay exists. If they implement Apple Pay, then there is a small commission for Apple from there as well.

 

[wbeasley]

It isn't in Apple's "Store" if the link is in the app... Apple doesn't own the screens in the app itself...

Again, this rule doesn't make sense because Apple doesn't make any money from Spotify. Spotify already doesn't pay Apple anything. All this rule does is annoy consumers.

Hands up anyone who actually is annoyed that there isnt a pop up telling you to subscribe at Spotify.com in the app?

Anyone? Sounds rather first world problem doesnt it?

The app doesnt have it now and yet millions of people still managed to subscribe and use Spotify on various devices.
It's almost like word of mouth works or people arent stupid and know apps have websites and you can sign up there...

Perhaps Spotify could buy an Apple ad spot and tell people about their great app and how to pay?
Surely Apple would take their ad spend money?

 

[MilaM]

Further proof that Spotify is evil.

1 Billion Snoop Dogg streams... $45k

Earn 45k for not even lifting a finger? It think it's a great deal 😂.

If you want your favorite artist to make some money, go to a concert or buy some merch.

 

[gnipgnop]

Completely ridiculous fine, but I guess that's what the EU was really after.

 

[Timo_Existencia]

This is about Apple preventing the product maker (Spotify) from advertising on their own product (the Spotify app).

In the physical world, this is like Walmart telling a cereal maker (Post) they cannot advertise on the cereal box and offer discounts.

View attachment 2355333


Or Walmart telling a magazine publisher (MacAddict) they cannot advertise within their magazine through inserts a lower subscription price vs the cover price you'd pay in-store because it would take away from Walmart's in-store magazine sales.

View attachment 2355334

Look, it's a terrible analogy. As are most analogies on either side. But the point here, then, is that the remedy is that Spotify would simply choose to not use Apple IOS if they don't like the business policies of Apple. Not that the government would force Apple to change the way it operates.

I have several subscriptions to services that provide a free app on the iPhone but which I manage on their web site.

The idea that consumers can't figure this out is silly.

 

[AppliedMicro]

For example, Walmart has a monopoly on selling stuff at stores named Walmart, and in the buildings and land occupied by their stores. Likewise for Target, Delhaize, etc.

If I listed my house for sale, I’d have a monopoly on houses at this physical address.

There are more land or store owners than you or Walmart.

And it doesn’t cost a consumer hundreds of dollars to switch from Walmart to another supermarket for their purchases tomorrow.

 

[Timo_Existencia]

There are more land or store owners than you or Walmart.

And it doesn’t cost a consumer hundreds of dollars to switch from Walmart to another supermarket for their purchases tomorrow.

typing in "spotify.com" costs hundreds of dollars?

Keep digging...

 

[AppliedMicro]

The idea that consumers can't figure this out is silly

As silly as Apple is in preventing those app developers from telling you.

 

[M3gatron]

$2 billion is a lot of cheddar. While I am a believer of openness on where apps can be installed from (like the Macintosh framework), I have to wonder if Apple will eventually consider stopping business in the EU as there is the potential for these massive fines.

Well Google is still in the EU even if they were fined 5 times more than Apple.
But hey, I would love to see them try leave the EU.

 

[bcortens]

Hands up anyone who actually is annoyed that there isnt a pop up telling you to subscribe at Spotify.com in the app?

Anyone? Sounds rather first world problem doesnt it?

The app doesnt have it now and yet millions of people still managed to subscribe and use Spotify on various devices.
It's almost like word of mouth works or people arent stupid and know apps have websites and you can sign up there...

Perhaps Spotify could buy an Apple ad spot and tell people about their great app and how to pay?
Surely Apple would take their ad spend money?

None of what you wrote refutes the point that the app is worse without a way to signup from within the app.

 

[cupcakes2000]

Apple has an Apple monopoly. Got it.

 

[AppliedMicro]

typing in "spotify.com" costs hundreds of dollars?

Buying a new smartphone does.

Once invested in a smartphone, consumers stay with it for years - and have no choice where to download their apps from on iOS. Unless they pay for a new phones, There are barriers to switching.

 

[wbeasley]

If Apple contests the fine, it may or may not be removed. However, it will take years for the decision and Apple has to pay the fine now.

link to that?

 

[gnipgnop]

View attachment 2355342

Spotify started out on desktop computers. Then they branched out to smartphones with apps on iOS and Android. Pretty obvious that Spotify wasn't constrained by a monopoly. They can put their app on any platform they choose just like all the other developers.