Apple Says Plan for Nearly 50% Commission on Metaverse Purchases 'Lays Bare Meta's Hypocrisy' (macrumors.com) 34
Apple has responded to Meta's plan to take a nearly 50% commission for digital asset purchases made inside the metaverse after complaining about fees in the App Store, calling the decision hypocritical. From a report: Yesterday, it was revealed that Meta, more commonly known as Facebook, plans to take a steep 47.5% commission for digital asset purchases made inside the so-called "metaverse." The 47.5% cut includes a 30% hardware fee on top of a 17.5% platform fee. Responding to the plan, Apple spokesperson Fred Sainz told MarketWatch that Facebook is simply being hypocritical and that while it complains about Apple's own platform fees, it wants to charge creators even more. "Meta has repeatedly taken aim at Apple for charging developers a 30% commission for in-app purchases in the App Store -- and have used small businesses and creators as a scapegoat at every turn," Apple spokesman Fred Sainz stated in an email to MarketWatch. "Now -- Meta seeks to charge those same creators significantly more than any other platform. [Meta's] announcement lays bare Meta's hypocrisy. It goes to show that while they seek to use Apple's platform for free, they happily take from the creators and small businesses that use their own."
Apple makes a point (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
No - that is hypocrisy. If someone complains about their wife cheating while they are also cheating, that's hypocrisy.
"Hypocrisy is the practice of engaging in the same behavior or activity for which one criticizes another"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
No one is saying Meta isn't entitled to charge a fee. Everyone is saying that Meta is complaining about Apple's 30% fee, when Meta wants to charge nearly 50% for the same thing.
It would be a non-news item if Meta just charged 30% like everyone else.
It's not even news that Epic complains, because Epic charges 18%.
Basically Meta complained loudl
Re: (Score:3)
They were complaining back then. But with the lawsuits being ruled on, it legitimized that you can fully abuse your market position to charge whatever arbitrary amount you want.
And now Apple is complaining that others play using the rules they helped to legitimize? If they were consistent with their own logic, they'd cheer for Meta for finally having come around to take advantage of their liberties.
Re: (Score:2)
No one is saying Meta isn't entitled to charge a fee. Everyone is saying that Meta is complaining about Apple's 30% fee, when Meta wants to charge nearly 50% for the same thing.
Except that it isn't really the same thing. After all, if Meta raises prices, content creators selling content can switch to any of a hundred competing apps or websites. If Apple raises prices, app creators have to convince users to buy a new phone from another manufacturer first.
The amount of power resulting from owning a hardware platform, with the inherent high barrier to switching platforms, is considerable, and should be weighed into any such comparisons.
Also, bear in mind that out of Facebook's 50%,
Note to the reader (Score:1)
They are both evil and greedy.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree. As is Google, Microsoft, Amazon and a whole raft of others.
Which bring me to this question:
Are there *any* large companies that don't fall into either "Evil" or "Greedy" because I cannot think of any.
Re: Note to the reader (Score:3)
Aldi.
Re: (Score:1)
You never even hear about small companies which aren't greedy, unless you're reading the bankruptcy news. There are no reasons for companies to avoid greed, and executives caught failing to be greedy tend to be treated harshly by owners, once their bad-faith actions are detected.
Re: (Score:3)
They are both evil and greedy.
Isn't that just the fundamental underpinnings of capitalism? The desire to make the most profit from the least effort?
Re: (Score:3)
The desire to make the most profit from the least effort is a universal human desire, equally present in communism/socialism. For example, under communism, people tend to do the bare minimum work necessary to meet their labor quota, and then claim as much government providence as they can. This winds up severely harming production overall, so nobody has their needs met.
The "fundamental underpinning of capitalism" is that private individuals can own businesses (or stock in businesses). And, more poignantl
Note to self (Score:5, Funny)
The "Metaverse" is no better than a strip club. You may think you're going to get laid but you'll leave getting fucked instead.
Re: (Score:3)
Nitpick: people generally don't go to strip clubs with the expectation of getting laid. That's what a brothel is for.
Re:Note to self (Score:4, Insightful)
Do you mean buying all those champagne cocktails for the dancers was a waste of time?!?!? Dammit!
Re: (Score:2)
This just in... (Score:3)
phallus watch (Score:1)
I agree with Apple in this case, but there's a pretty important distinction between operating a store and operating a shared world in which your servers and code are responsible for the content.
If Apple accidentally allows an app that just shows you pictures of Harvey Weinsteins dick, the impact is limited to users who downloaded the app.
If FB accidentally allows hats modeled on Harvey Weinstein's dick, the impact can become more widespread and poisonous to the platform as a whole.
The level and complexity o
It may be hypocritical... (Score:3)
Pot, meet Kettle (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple: We "only" charge 30%!
Re: (Score:2)
What Apple is forgetting to mention is that most of Facebook's sales are likely to happen on mobile devices, which means Facebook must charge a 30% commission just to break even. A 50% commission, then, means a 30% commission for Apple and a 20% commission for Facebook.
So no, Apple, you aren't "laying bare Meta's hypocrisy". You're actually laying bare just how badly consumers are harmed by your high fees.
9% Linden Labs... (Score:3)
...Second Life charges nothing to sell there (there are regions/services to pay for if desired), but takes 3.5% converting their currency to USD and then 5% when cashing out.
Proving once again... (Score:2)
There's no honour among thieves.
First they have to build a functioning metaverse (Score:2)
Then they have to actually attract sellers who have products that a significant number of people want to buy.
Then and only then can Meta get their cut.
IMO, facebook's success is built solely on capitalizing on a serious human fault, FOMO, Fear Of missing out.
I am not convinced that this fault will translate to a poorly constructed, ad riddled fake version of reality.
I am convinced that Meta shareholders will not be happy when the
Rent seeking (Score:2)
Oh, of course, usury masquerading as rent seeking ⦠Iâ(TM)ll pass.
Apple Is Jealous (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure their profit margin on hardware is a bit above that.
The actual Metaverse will not be owned by anyone. (Score:1)
Follow The Leader (Score:2)
They saw Apple could get away with it so they figured they shouldn't be the only scumbags in town.
Fuck Apple and Fuck Meta. Both of these companies have done a stupid amount of harm to the tech world.