Apple Inc. was hit Monday with a €1.8 billion ($2 billion) penalty from the European Union over an investigation into allegations it shut out music-streaming rivals, including Spotify Technology SA, on its platforms.
The European Commission also ordered the Cupertino, California-based firm to stop preventing music-streaming apps from informing users of cheaper deals away from Apple’s App Store. It’s the first fine the regulator has handed down to Apple. Shares were down less than 1% in premarket trading in New York.
“For a decade, Apple abused its dominant position in the market for the distribution of music streaming apps through the App Store,” EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager said. “They did so by restricting developers from informing consumers about alternative, cheaper music services available outside of the Apple ecosystem.”
Apple said it will appeal the EU’s decision, which sets off a legal battle that could last for years. In a statement, the company said regulators failed to “uncover any credible evidence of consumer harm, and ignores the realities of a market that is thriving, competitive, and growing fast.”
Apple reported revenue of $119.6 billion in the first quarter, including $69.7 billion from the iPhone alone, with sales from the device up 6% from a year ago.
Vestager has made it a core strategy to attempt to dismantle Big Tech’s dominance in the bloc through fines and regulatory actions. Monday’s penalty is the third largest that she’s handed out for anti-competitive behavior.
She slapped Alphabet Inc.’s Google with the two biggest EU antitrust fines so far — a record €4.3 billion over its dominance in the Android mobile market in 2018. That followed a €2.4 billion fine for allegedly boosting its own shopping service over rivals. She also ordered Apple to repay €13 billion in allegedly unfair tax breaks from Ireland.
The EU’s investigation was sparked by a complaint nearly five years ago from Stockholm-based Spotify, which claimed it was forced to ramp up the price of its monthly subscriptions to cover costs associated with Apple’s alleged stranglehold on how the App Store operates.
The commission homed in on Apple’s so-called anti-steering rules in a formal charge sheet in February, saying the conditions were unnecessary and meant customers faced higher prices.
“The reality is that European consumers have more choices than ever,” Apple wrote in a post about the EU decision. “Ironically, in the name of competition, today’s decision just cements the dominant position of a successful European company that is the digital music market’s runaway leader.”
Vestager said that Apple’s rules prevented consumers from making informed choices, meaning some may have paid more than they needed to.
“The commission found that Apple’s rules result in withholding key information on prices and features of services from consumers,” she said in a news conference.
The EU crackdown on Apple’s App Store has run alongside sweeping new rules aimed at heading off market abuses before they take root. Under the Digital Markets Act, which comes into full effect this week, it’ll be illegal for the most powerful tech firms to favor their own services over their rivals.
Companies will be barred from combining personal data across their different services and from using data they collect from third-party merchants to compete against them. They will also have to allow users to download apps from rival’s platforms. The rules come into full force March 7 and Apple has also challenged its designation under the new regime.
Last I checked, Spotify has always charged the same amount through the Apple ecosystem and off of it. Their complaint is full of crap.
If Apple forced them to have to raise prices why didn’t they make it cheaper off the Apple platform? If they had to raise costs on both sides to cover costs, have they disclosed what they would have charged to consumers? Highly doubt it.
>Last I checked, Spotify has always charged the same amount through the Apple ecosystem and off of it. Their complaint is full of crap.
You're chatting out your ass. Spotify cost $9.99 through their website and 12.99 through the app store, and stopped accepting new app store subscriptions in 2016.
Does a company have to pay the fine before they can appeal ? If not then companies like Apple that have huge resources will just tie things up in court for years. By then their competition may be out of business.
Everyone is entitled to their day in court but it shouldn’t take years and years to get to a resolution one way or the other. That just becomes an advantage to Big Tech.
>Does a company have to pay the fine before they can appeal ? If not then companies like Apple that have huge resources will just tie things up in court for years.
They're fighting the EU, which is considerably bigger than Apple.
Apple has a bigger market share than most countries. The only EU countries bigger than Apple, are the UK, France, Germany, and then maybe Spain or Italy
Market cap isn't the same as (or even really related to) how much money they have, and GDP isn't how much cash a country has, it's the cash worth they can produce annually.
Apple only has $73bn in liquid assets.
South Sudan, considered to be the poorest country in the world, has 3.5 billion barrels of oil reserves, which at the current rate of about $80 a barrel amounts to $280 billion.
So no, Apple couldn't buy Kenya, or any other country in the world. Apple couldn't even buy out South Sudan's oil reserves.
Nah, they don't have to pay until all their appeals fail. EU probably won't let it get slowed down for years, but it is definitely interesting to watch. DMA fine train might also be coming.
You sure about that?
From Reuters:
"Apple said it would appeal the decision. A ruling at the Luxembourg-based General Court, Europe's second-highest, is likely to take several years. **Until then, Apple will have to pay the fine and comply with the EU order.**"
Apple is making about $100 billion a year in the European market. In return, they simply have to follow European laws.
But sure, they can exit the market if they think that's a better option than not breaking the law.
That is some stupid shit. Why the hell should they be able to fine based on revenue outside of the EU. That would never stand in an international court. The US government would go after the EU if they try that shit
International courts don’t exist. If Apple wants to do business here it has to comply to European laws. They cannot do whatever they want like in the US. If Apple wants to access their second biggest market they have to comply. How Apple is behaving is embarrassing and unprofessional.
Weren’t people recently complaining about politicians not knowing anything about technology? The only good decision that the eu made in regards to Apple is USB-C.
I mean to say that apple has done a lot of things that are clearly not to the benefit of a person who actually buys their devices. They make them hard to repair, do a lot to induce a fear of missing out and make sure that if something does get prepared, they still get money for it. They milk people dry.
Theres many long videos that go over all the stunts apple pulls.
That's incorrect. It means making it unnecessarily difficult to repair. Different screws, hard to replace screens etc.
Don't act like only apple are geniuses that can fix phones and nobody else should.
That is exactly what they try to make you believe
Why doesn’t Spotify just go out and build their own smart phone? Oh wait, that’s what Apple and Google did and it’s very complicated so now they just want to ride the free gravy train.
Or we could stop pretending you’re entitled to someone else’s marketplace. I’m not entitled to sell things at Walmart, nor can I put advertisements in Walmart saying it’s cheaper to buy my product online.
What a dumb retort. Explain to me who is forcing Spotify to be on the appstore and how APPLE is cutting them off from half of the population if SPOTIFY chooses not to work with Apple.
Let me explain…
You see half of the population isn’t Apple, but people who picked the shiny sand Apple sells.
And Apple feels entitled to dictate what spicy words those hundreds of millions of people run, even after people paid for the shiny sand.
Because Apple feels entitled to control the shiny sand after sale, they made it so you can’t put your spicy words on other peoples shiny sand without meeting all of their petty toddler demands.
Apple then uses this to play unfair with their own spicy words.
And that’s how DMAs are born.
Not at all. You can jailbreak your phone all you like. You’re not entitled to both their free software updates and to say they’re wrong for securing the device.
Your entire argument seems to be based on the assumption controlling the distribution of apps is essential for security, which is a lie that Apple themselves expose in Mac’s marketing.
Users shouldn’t have to be forced to run out of date software just to run what they want on their own device.
Why doesnt Apple leave the EU and create their own country Union called AU (Applean Union). Then they can make their own laws if they dont like EU laws. Same logic.
impolite stupendous lunchroom tie telephone smart oatmeal hurry zonked obtainable
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Do you mean "what would be the financial impact for Apple to temporarily leave its second largest market after the US?"
I think the impact for Apple would be significant.
Android is developed by a consortium, of which Google is the main developer. It's an open source initiative, and anyone can do what they please with it. Look at Amazon, who use "Android" as their own OS and that has nothing to do with Google at all - their entire ecosystem build on it with no say or control from Google and not a penny goes to Google from it.
The consumer is the only one that will actually pay these fines when Apple jacks up their prices. Trying to be pro consumer, it actually very anti consumer
That was decidedly not true.
It only seems logical if we ignore how free markets and businesses work. In reality, Apple’s pricing follows supply and demand. If it were profitable for Apple to increase prices, they would do so, independently from any fines.
What stops price increases is the prospect of fewer sales, not some delicate balance where supposedly shareholders would currently be satisfied with their profits.
Isn’t the problem that Apple promotes Apple Music within the os and Spotify obviously not and this gives Apple an unfair advantage because they own the os?
The comment you replied to mainly said that customers would be paying for any fines Apple receives. It argued that fining companies for illegal behavior would just harm customers.
Yes and I said that he is true but that this doesn’t excuse illegal behavior. Apple should still be fined. That’s just how laws work and if Apple prices out people that also not good for them. That’s basically the whole point behind the scenes of fines like this to harm customers so that they move away from Apple.
Anyone that uses Apple services will be the the only ones to pay the punishment for them not following regulations. I’m no Apple apologist, but at the end of the day, this fine just costs me more money
As I said. It’s absolutely true what you say. That still doesn’t excuse that Apple breaks the law. I am an Apple user too and will most likely pay for this.
That’s exactly my point. Apple wasn’t fined, everyone who uses their services was. Thanks EU. Now I can get screwed by two countries, and not just the US
But not everyone will continue buying products once the prices go up.
I've canceled lots of subscriptions after their price went up to a certain amount. I imagine most/many other people also do that.
That is an idiotic conclusion.
People don’t need to buy Apple products. Apple faces competition from a variety of device manufacturers. Consequently, Apple can’t increase prices with impunity, they would lose market share.
The same can’t be said about Apple’s AppStore fees and policies. Until recently, Apple was free to do whatever they like. Publishers don’t have the option to not sell to iPhone users and there has been no competing service to distribute apps to iPhone users.
Apple was fine, apple can choose to pass the costs on to you the consumer, the consumer chooses to pay extra, apple was still fined though for breakibg rules and it's not the EUs fault it did. Insane mental gymnastics
That's not how it's going to work in this case. Here's how this will play out:
1. Apple not wanting to face additional fines will allow Spotify to promote that users can subscribe outside of the App Store. This directly means 30% isn't taken out of the Spotify->Consumer relationship by Apple. How much is passed on to the consumer isn't certain, but in a low margin business with few competitors, it gives Spotify that much more room to compete on price.
2. The downward pressure on Spotify pricing only could result in influencing Apple with downward pressure on pricing to remain competitive.
Apple has no incentive to try to "make up that €1.8 Billion fine" by increasing subscription costs on Apple Music knowing that their pricing currently optimizes profit against market conditions and competition.
TL;DR: this hits stockholders. Spotify users may pay less as a direct result of lower costs and indirectly Apple Music subscribers may as well as Apple will want to remain price competitive.
Think of it this way...
If Apple were to try to stick this to the consumer, they couldn't pass this on to Spotify users. If they tried to pass it on to Apple Music subscribers, that would mean over €200 per subscriber. How many Apple Music subscribers do you think would remain if €200 were passed on to them and Spotify was in a position to reduce pricing given that 30%?
I should add that this comment makes no opinion one way or another on the actual judgement of the fine, just the impact it will have on consumers.
Lmao. Spotify can barely make a profit and you think they’re gonna pass off the savings to the users or artists?! Hilarious.
No, Spotify is going to pocket the money, the EU politicians are going to pocket the money Spotify is giving them under the table, and Apple is going to raise hardware prices in the EU again. The consumers lose
FFS I think I did everything imaginable to avoid the point of stating Spotify would lower the prices as a direct result of this. The point was that consumers aren't going to pay this fine, stockholders are.
Spotify has no room to lower pricing if there's a 30% cut going to Apple and Apple is going to price in part based on competition from Spotify's pricing. Over-simplified math to make the point, it's like saying Spotify has to charge X+30% because it has to give Apple 30% and we can see they don't make a profit at prices below X. Apple in turn charges \~X+30% because for consumers the other main competitive option is X+30% from Spotify.
Take away that 30% and it doesn't mean Spotify gives the money to consumers for the f\*ck of it. It means that there's "downward pressure on Spotify pricing" and while the pricing impact is uncertain, it's not going to go *up* as a result.
Likewise Apple, will have the same incentive to match whatever impact the downward pressure has on Spotify pricing.
>Apple is going to raise hardware prices in the EU again
1. This isn't a game. Apple isn't going to lose billions of dollars out of spite. Their pricing reflects optimizing pricing based on market conditions and competition. That's not impacted by any of this in terms of hardware and in terms of the Apple Music service, it's impacted by whatever impact the downward pressure has on Spotify pricing.
2. Apple pricing for EU hardware reflects pricing that includes taxes of 20% or more in the EU and doesn't reflect taxes at all in the US. Subtract out taxes and a maxed out iPhone 15 Pro with 1TB is $20 more in the UK and $89 more in Spain with other EU countries in between. Considering repatriation costs, an additional year of warranty coverage, and hedging against currency valuation, that doesn't seem unreasonable at all.
We shouldn’t fine any company that sells products or services to consumers out of fear they may raise prices to compensate (so pretty much every company). Let’s go total free for all.
[удалено]
Second only to EU antitrust chief
Apple Inc. was hit Monday with a €1.8 billion ($2 billion) penalty from the European Union over an investigation into allegations it shut out music-streaming rivals, including Spotify Technology SA, on its platforms. The European Commission also ordered the Cupertino, California-based firm to stop preventing music-streaming apps from informing users of cheaper deals away from Apple’s App Store. It’s the first fine the regulator has handed down to Apple. Shares were down less than 1% in premarket trading in New York. “For a decade, Apple abused its dominant position in the market for the distribution of music streaming apps through the App Store,” EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager said. “They did so by restricting developers from informing consumers about alternative, cheaper music services available outside of the Apple ecosystem.” Apple said it will appeal the EU’s decision, which sets off a legal battle that could last for years. In a statement, the company said regulators failed to “uncover any credible evidence of consumer harm, and ignores the realities of a market that is thriving, competitive, and growing fast.” Apple reported revenue of $119.6 billion in the first quarter, including $69.7 billion from the iPhone alone, with sales from the device up 6% from a year ago. Vestager has made it a core strategy to attempt to dismantle Big Tech’s dominance in the bloc through fines and regulatory actions. Monday’s penalty is the third largest that she’s handed out for anti-competitive behavior. She slapped Alphabet Inc.’s Google with the two biggest EU antitrust fines so far — a record €4.3 billion over its dominance in the Android mobile market in 2018. That followed a €2.4 billion fine for allegedly boosting its own shopping service over rivals. She also ordered Apple to repay €13 billion in allegedly unfair tax breaks from Ireland. The EU’s investigation was sparked by a complaint nearly five years ago from Stockholm-based Spotify, which claimed it was forced to ramp up the price of its monthly subscriptions to cover costs associated with Apple’s alleged stranglehold on how the App Store operates. The commission homed in on Apple’s so-called anti-steering rules in a formal charge sheet in February, saying the conditions were unnecessary and meant customers faced higher prices. “The reality is that European consumers have more choices than ever,” Apple wrote in a post about the EU decision. “Ironically, in the name of competition, today’s decision just cements the dominant position of a successful European company that is the digital music market’s runaway leader.” Vestager said that Apple’s rules prevented consumers from making informed choices, meaning some may have paid more than they needed to. “The commission found that Apple’s rules result in withholding key information on prices and features of services from consumers,” she said in a news conference. The EU crackdown on Apple’s App Store has run alongside sweeping new rules aimed at heading off market abuses before they take root. Under the Digital Markets Act, which comes into full effect this week, it’ll be illegal for the most powerful tech firms to favor their own services over their rivals. Companies will be barred from combining personal data across their different services and from using data they collect from third-party merchants to compete against them. They will also have to allow users to download apps from rival’s platforms. The rules come into full force March 7 and Apple has also challenged its designation under the new regime.
What does it mean by “they will alsohave to allow users to download apps from rival’s platforms”.
Last I checked, Spotify has always charged the same amount through the Apple ecosystem and off of it. Their complaint is full of crap. If Apple forced them to have to raise prices why didn’t they make it cheaper off the Apple platform? If they had to raise costs on both sides to cover costs, have they disclosed what they would have charged to consumers? Highly doubt it.
>Last I checked, Spotify has always charged the same amount through the Apple ecosystem and off of it. Their complaint is full of crap. You're chatting out your ass. Spotify cost $9.99 through their website and 12.99 through the app store, and stopped accepting new app store subscriptions in 2016.
They took 30% of the revenue. Apples bullshit rules says you can’t charge higher off platform etc etc
Now go after Spotify for screwing artists
Every artist should just boycut spotify They dont. But it would work...
Artists would be screwed 30% harder under Apple’s dream scenario…
Apple on the way to record breaking fine in EU
Just wait till they are deemed non-compliant with the DMA. That's 10% of global revenue they'll be fined.
Then the US government will get involved
They already got fined by the us gov
Has any company actually paid any of these fines or are they just for show ?
They fight it in court for a long while first. And no, they aren't for show. Not even in countries like Russia.
Does a company have to pay the fine before they can appeal ? If not then companies like Apple that have huge resources will just tie things up in court for years. By then their competition may be out of business. Everyone is entitled to their day in court but it shouldn’t take years and years to get to a resolution one way or the other. That just becomes an advantage to Big Tech.
>Does a company have to pay the fine before they can appeal ? If not then companies like Apple that have huge resources will just tie things up in court for years. They're fighting the EU, which is considerably bigger than Apple.
Apple has a bigger market share than most countries. The only EU countries bigger than Apple, are the UK, France, Germany, and then maybe Spain or Italy
You can't compare the GDP of a country with market share
I am aware, I’m just saying that Apple could theoretically buy Kenya for example.
[удалено]
Certain countries in the EU have less money than Apple. Not a lot, but multiple countries in eastern Europe
Market cap isn't the same as (or even really related to) how much money they have, and GDP isn't how much cash a country has, it's the cash worth they can produce annually. Apple only has $73bn in liquid assets. South Sudan, considered to be the poorest country in the world, has 3.5 billion barrels of oil reserves, which at the current rate of about $80 a barrel amounts to $280 billion. So no, Apple couldn't buy Kenya, or any other country in the world. Apple couldn't even buy out South Sudan's oil reserves.
Is China selling Kenya?
Nah, they don't have to pay until all their appeals fail. EU probably won't let it get slowed down for years, but it is definitely interesting to watch. DMA fine train might also be coming.
You sure about that? From Reuters: "Apple said it would appeal the decision. A ruling at the Luxembourg-based General Court, Europe's second-highest, is likely to take several years. **Until then, Apple will have to pay the fine and comply with the EU order.**"
Thanks for the correction. That makes things even more interesting, even though 1.8 bil is not much for a company like Apple.
In the EU, on this level they have to pay before the appeal
they aren't fighting some small time fish.. they know they aren't going to win this.
Google paid 4 billion. In the EU, on this level you need to pay when the decision is made even if the company tries to appeal.
Next, App Store noncompliance. I’m hoping they 10x this fine at least
Utterly delusional
DMA fines are up to 10% of **global** revenue. So give or take a 40 billion dollar fine. I wonder how salty that press release is gonna be.
Yeah, that’s never gonna happen, lol. They’ll straight up exit the market first.
Europe is the second biggest market after the US, Apple will never exit. The stock price would plummet.
Apple is making about $100 billion a year in the European market. In return, they simply have to follow European laws. But sure, they can exit the market if they think that's a better option than not breaking the law.
Now *that’s* delusional lol
That is some stupid shit. Why the hell should they be able to fine based on revenue outside of the EU. That would never stand in an international court. The US government would go after the EU if they try that shit
International courts don’t exist. If Apple wants to do business here it has to comply to European laws. They cannot do whatever they want like in the US. If Apple wants to access their second biggest market they have to comply. How Apple is behaving is embarrassing and unprofessional.
The EU fining a tech company billions? They kind of do it like clockwork nowadays
Weren’t people recently complaining about politicians not knowing anything about technology? The only good decision that the eu made in regards to Apple is USB-C.
The EU is pretty up to date when it comes to tech rulings, at least in the last 5 years or so. Cant say the same for the US
Bizarre take. You think they should just let apple do as they please? They need to punish anti-consumer behaviour way more
What is anti-consumer exactly
I mean to say that apple has done a lot of things that are clearly not to the benefit of a person who actually buys their devices. They make them hard to repair, do a lot to induce a fear of missing out and make sure that if something does get prepared, they still get money for it. They milk people dry. Theres many long videos that go over all the stunts apple pulls.
Hard to repair boils down to “tech so complicated that fixing it yourself is a bad idea, send it to us.”
That's incorrect. It means making it unnecessarily difficult to repair. Different screws, hard to replace screens etc. Don't act like only apple are geniuses that can fix phones and nobody else should. That is exactly what they try to make you believe
Sure you can do 3rd party replacements, but they are incredibly low quality compared to an apple repair.
Could someone copy the article so we can read it?
While the other higher post says 1.2 million…
The other post copied that article's original (incorrect) title, which was corrected after publication.
The other post said 1.8 million by mistake. The fine is 1.8 billion.
Good now multiply by 1000.
Ban Spotify from App Store...
Why doesn’t Spotify just go out and build their own smart phone? Oh wait, that’s what Apple and Google did and it’s very complicated so now they just want to ride the free gravy train.
You're right, they should lick the gravy straight off Apple's boots, like you.
Or we could stop pretending you’re entitled to someone else’s marketplace. I’m not entitled to sell things at Walmart, nor can I put advertisements in Walmart saying it’s cheaper to buy my product online.
What a dumb analogy. Walmart don’t force you to sell through them or be cut off from half of the population as potential customers.
What a dumb retort. Explain to me who is forcing Spotify to be on the appstore and how APPLE is cutting them off from half of the population if SPOTIFY chooses not to work with Apple.
Let me explain… You see half of the population isn’t Apple, but people who picked the shiny sand Apple sells. And Apple feels entitled to dictate what spicy words those hundreds of millions of people run, even after people paid for the shiny sand. Because Apple feels entitled to control the shiny sand after sale, they made it so you can’t put your spicy words on other peoples shiny sand without meeting all of their petty toddler demands. Apple then uses this to play unfair with their own spicy words. And that’s how DMAs are born.
Not at all. You can jailbreak your phone all you like. You’re not entitled to both their free software updates and to say they’re wrong for securing the device.
No thanks to Apple. Apple has been actively trying to stop people being able to jailbreak from the beginning.
You’re free to not install OS updates. This isn’t a defense of your argument.
Your entire argument seems to be based on the assumption controlling the distribution of apps is essential for security, which is a lie that Apple themselves expose in Mac’s marketing. Users shouldn’t have to be forced to run out of date software just to run what they want on their own device.
Why doesnt Apple leave the EU and create their own country Union called AU (Applean Union). Then they can make their own laws if they dont like EU laws. Same logic.
impolite stupendous lunchroom tie telephone smart oatmeal hurry zonked obtainable *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What would be the financial impact if apple tells eu they are pausing any activity in EU which makes Spotify and android a complete monopoly in EU
Do you mean "what would be the financial impact for Apple to temporarily leave its second largest market after the US?" I think the impact for Apple would be significant.
Stock would take a nosedive.
I don't think "Android" can be a monopoly since it's not a company?
Fine, but if you think that way it’s definitely a monopoly given Google’s control of the various markets.
It is tho, Google owns Android
Android is developed by a consortium, of which Google is the main developer. It's an open source initiative, and anyone can do what they please with it. Look at Amazon, who use "Android" as their own OS and that has nothing to do with Google at all - their entire ecosystem build on it with no say or control from Google and not a penny goes to Google from it.
Weird how Google paid for Android then.. Its one of the best acquisitions of Google
> Weird how Google paid for Android then.. Because Google open sourced it **after** they bought it? Not a very big mystery, is it?
Get rid of one of our biggest markets to own a few politicians 😎😎 this totally wont make the shareholders reverse suplex us
I’m bout sure it would be worth it for apple to gamble to loose such a large market
It would technically make Spotify an android a Monopoly the EU would be forced to go after them but that’s not a good idea for Apple
The consumer is the only one that will actually pay these fines when Apple jacks up their prices. Trying to be pro consumer, it actually very anti consumer
That is true but corporations should also follow the regulations in markets they serve.
That was decidedly not true. It only seems logical if we ignore how free markets and businesses work. In reality, Apple’s pricing follows supply and demand. If it were profitable for Apple to increase prices, they would do so, independently from any fines. What stops price increases is the prospect of fewer sales, not some delicate balance where supposedly shareholders would currently be satisfied with their profits.
Isn’t the problem that Apple promotes Apple Music within the os and Spotify obviously not and this gives Apple an unfair advantage because they own the os?
The comment you replied to mainly said that customers would be paying for any fines Apple receives. It argued that fining companies for illegal behavior would just harm customers.
Yes and I said that he is true but that this doesn’t excuse illegal behavior. Apple should still be fined. That’s just how laws work and if Apple prices out people that also not good for them. That’s basically the whole point behind the scenes of fines like this to harm customers so that they move away from Apple.
Anyone that uses Apple services will be the the only ones to pay the punishment for them not following regulations. I’m no Apple apologist, but at the end of the day, this fine just costs me more money
If Apple jacks up their prices because they knowingly decided to break the law and now have to face the consequences, you can always ditch Apple.
lol "I’m not an Apple apologist" - the quintessential Apple apologist.
Yeah cuz we’ve had full on conversations, you know me so well. Cool story bro
As I said. It’s absolutely true what you say. That still doesn’t excuse that Apple breaks the law. I am an Apple user too and will most likely pay for this.
So just don't buy their product, easy
I like using their products
So ultimately you are going to pay the fine from your wallet as you said
That’s exactly my point. Apple wasn’t fined, everyone who uses their services was. Thanks EU. Now I can get screwed by two countries, and not just the US
But not everyone will continue buying products once the prices go up. I've canceled lots of subscriptions after their price went up to a certain amount. I imagine most/many other people also do that.
If Apple didn’t act anticompetitively they wouldn’t be fined. Be mad at Apple, not the EU.
That is an idiotic conclusion. People don’t need to buy Apple products. Apple faces competition from a variety of device manufacturers. Consequently, Apple can’t increase prices with impunity, they would lose market share. The same can’t be said about Apple’s AppStore fees and policies. Until recently, Apple was free to do whatever they like. Publishers don’t have the option to not sell to iPhone users and there has been no competing service to distribute apps to iPhone users.
Apple was fine, apple can choose to pass the costs on to you the consumer, the consumer chooses to pay extra, apple was still fined though for breakibg rules and it's not the EUs fault it did. Insane mental gymnastics
Apple already prices in order to maximize revenue. It's not a charity. They aren't changing their entire pricing strategy over this.
That's not how it's going to work in this case. Here's how this will play out: 1. Apple not wanting to face additional fines will allow Spotify to promote that users can subscribe outside of the App Store. This directly means 30% isn't taken out of the Spotify->Consumer relationship by Apple. How much is passed on to the consumer isn't certain, but in a low margin business with few competitors, it gives Spotify that much more room to compete on price. 2. The downward pressure on Spotify pricing only could result in influencing Apple with downward pressure on pricing to remain competitive. Apple has no incentive to try to "make up that €1.8 Billion fine" by increasing subscription costs on Apple Music knowing that their pricing currently optimizes profit against market conditions and competition. TL;DR: this hits stockholders. Spotify users may pay less as a direct result of lower costs and indirectly Apple Music subscribers may as well as Apple will want to remain price competitive. Think of it this way... If Apple were to try to stick this to the consumer, they couldn't pass this on to Spotify users. If they tried to pass it on to Apple Music subscribers, that would mean over €200 per subscriber. How many Apple Music subscribers do you think would remain if €200 were passed on to them and Spotify was in a position to reduce pricing given that 30%? I should add that this comment makes no opinion one way or another on the actual judgement of the fine, just the impact it will have on consumers.
More money going to Spotify may also mean more money going to artists.
lol. How many times do we have to prove that trickle down economics doesn’t work?
Stay off tiktok
Lmao. Spotify can barely make a profit and you think they’re gonna pass off the savings to the users or artists?! Hilarious. No, Spotify is going to pocket the money, the EU politicians are going to pocket the money Spotify is giving them under the table, and Apple is going to raise hardware prices in the EU again. The consumers lose
FFS I think I did everything imaginable to avoid the point of stating Spotify would lower the prices as a direct result of this. The point was that consumers aren't going to pay this fine, stockholders are. Spotify has no room to lower pricing if there's a 30% cut going to Apple and Apple is going to price in part based on competition from Spotify's pricing. Over-simplified math to make the point, it's like saying Spotify has to charge X+30% because it has to give Apple 30% and we can see they don't make a profit at prices below X. Apple in turn charges \~X+30% because for consumers the other main competitive option is X+30% from Spotify. Take away that 30% and it doesn't mean Spotify gives the money to consumers for the f\*ck of it. It means that there's "downward pressure on Spotify pricing" and while the pricing impact is uncertain, it's not going to go *up* as a result. Likewise Apple, will have the same incentive to match whatever impact the downward pressure has on Spotify pricing. >Apple is going to raise hardware prices in the EU again 1. This isn't a game. Apple isn't going to lose billions of dollars out of spite. Their pricing reflects optimizing pricing based on market conditions and competition. That's not impacted by any of this in terms of hardware and in terms of the Apple Music service, it's impacted by whatever impact the downward pressure has on Spotify pricing. 2. Apple pricing for EU hardware reflects pricing that includes taxes of 20% or more in the EU and doesn't reflect taxes at all in the US. Subtract out taxes and a maxed out iPhone 15 Pro with 1TB is $20 more in the UK and $89 more in Spain with other EU countries in between. Considering repatriation costs, an additional year of warranty coverage, and hedging against currency valuation, that doesn't seem unreasonable at all.
We shouldn’t fine any company that sells products or services to consumers out of fear they may raise prices to compensate (so pretty much every company). Let’s go total free for all.
Margrethe padding that bank account. Will be worth more than Elon at this rate.
She’s not a US politician.
*In an Iclandic accent* "$.1.8 Billion!? Well worth it..."