868
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 203 points 1 year ago

I’m not a big fan of the high fees, but I’m even less of a fan of big developers being treated differently than the little guy.

[-] original_reader@lemm.ee 52 points 1 year ago

Some banks do this *** too. The more money you deposit, the less fees you pay. Because 'premium customer' and all this.

[-] squiblet@kbin.social 43 points 1 year ago

Yep Chase for instance: over 75k on deposit, no ATM withdrawal fees anywhere! You know, helping the people who need it the least.

[-] spearz@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

Sorry for the ignorance, but you have to pay to withdraw money from your bank in the US?

[-] squiblet@kbin.social 25 points 1 year ago

From your bank in person, no. From your bank's own ATM, no. From an ATM run by another bank out of network, yes, there are often fees and your bank will waive them under certain circumstances.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] umami_wasbi@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

And charge you a monthly service fee unless you have a job (regular transaction into the account per billing cycle), which isn't a thing in other places.

Ripping off poor and jobless people. Yes.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] riskable@programming.dev 7 points 1 year ago

Some banks? No. All banks.

Even credit unions do this. They may not have as many or as expensive fees as regular commercial banks but they still have fees and certain features aren't free. If you deposit $100,000 (or more) you'll find that a lot of those fees get waived, your interest rates will be better, and they will generally treat you better than the peasants with like $5,000 in their savings.

It's just another advantage that the rich have over every day people. Most of them take these things for granted or don't think they matter in the slightest. It never occurs to them that regular $3 fees or occasional $25 fees can have a huge impact on the poor and the middle class.

Full Disclosure: I work for a bank.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ButtDrugs@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say I think this is done to prevent anticompetitive issues. If Google were to profit off of both its own product (youtube / yt music) and also require its competitors to pay it a % of revenue, it would potentially open them up to more anticompetitive lawsuits.

[-] essteeyou@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

They don't do the same for ebooks with Kindle, which is why Amazon has removed the ability to buy them from the app. I'd be surprised if that was the reason for Spotify.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Zip2@feddit.uk 103 points 1 year ago

And Spotify pass these savings onto the artists, right?

[-] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 38 points 1 year ago

In effect, yes. Given that ~70% of revenue goes to rights holders, making the amount of revenue bigger by not paying 30% of subscriptions to Google, the savings are passed on to rights holders.

[-] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

So, not exactly to the artists. I get the impression you seem to know quite a lot about the deal, can you try to analyze how this 70% gets divided?

[-] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 26 points 1 year ago

https://support.spotify.com/us/artists/article/royalties/

It's net revenue split to rights holders according to the share of streams. If you have 1% of all streams on Spotify in a given time period, you get 0.7% of net revenue for that period.

How the rights holders distribute the money onward to the artists is not exactly transparent though.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)
[-] tinsuke@lemmy.world 95 points 1 year ago

No fees when users choose to pay via Spotify (which had been the case and only option since the beginning, until User Choice Billing was implemented).

If users choose to pay with Google Play Billing, Google keeps 4%.

Even so, what I find hypocritical is that Spotify got this deal and seemingly agreed to keep it under wraps, without advocating for it to be extended to all other music streaming services in the platform.

Because... having a deal with the platform holder that gives it unfair advantage over the competition is exactly what they accuse Apple of doing with iOS.

Sauce: https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/20/23969690/google-spotify-android-billing-commission-secret-deal

[-] abhibeckert@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

4% is basically just the payment processing fee (averaged out, since it's slightly different for every transaction). Spotify has to pay that regardless of how you pay.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Clav64@lemmy.ml 58 points 1 year ago
[-] DrSleepless@lemmy.world 45 points 1 year ago

We're totally screwing the artist, so we'll give you a cut if we don't pay any gees.

[-] thepiguy@lemmy.ml 43 points 1 year ago

Yea no shit, idk if it's just for my region or what, but Spotify does not manage their subscription through the play store. Makes it more annoying to cancel it too, which the execs at Spotify probably see as a plus.

[-] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago

Kind of weird, considering they're a major competitor, but so what? Why is this something they need to "admit"?

[-] Throwaway4669332255@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago

Stuff like this will be used in the anti monopoly cases going on world wide.

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] sebinspace@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Netflix makes heavy use of Amazon Web Services, specifically S3 Buckets. I’m sure there’s a special deal worked out with them as an anchor client.

Malls do the same thing. While they’re not in direct competition in the same sense as Google/Spotify or Amazon/Netflix, some stores don’t even pay rent in a mall because it’s expected that they’ll drive traffic to the rest of the stores. 90% sure Victoria’s Secret, Macy’s, etc are some of these anchor stores that very often pay little or negative rent due to the sheer revenue generated by other avenues.

[-] PixelatedCleric@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 year ago

What alternatives do you guys use besides Bandcamp? I am open to paying a sub as long as the artist is getting a decent cut.

[-] downdaemon@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

Pirate and buy official merch, they make more of that anyway. Also live shows

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago

buy the cd and rip them into your phone

load more comments (18 replies)
[-] andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Idk if Bandcamp is better, but there I buy my beloved albums with a big tip. The only thing I dislike is many artists default to PayPal for their merch. Ah, and they got owned by someone like Tencent or Epic?

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 year ago

Were owned by Epic then sold to Songtradr last month

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Whirling_Cloudburst@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Its not a bug, its a feature. The end game has lots of backdoor deals.

[-] BlackSkinnedJew@lemmynsfw.com 7 points 1 year ago

I'm doing great with xManager so I don't give a flying fuck about this haha

[-] IanSomnia@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago
[-] mcchessers@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

I wondered this myself, so Googled it, and found https://www.xmanagerapp.com/

... And I'm still none the wiser. All I learned that it's for Android and does... something.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 7 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The details surfaced today after Google requested the court to keep the specifics of its deal with Spotify sealed earlier in the month.

This fee could be reduced to 11% due to programs like user choice billing, which allows developers to use their own or third-party payment solutions.

Earlier this month, The Verge reported that the search giant offered Netflix a deal in 2017 to just pay a 10% fee on Play Store for subscriptions.

Last month, the Mountain View-based company reached a settlement with Match Group to let the dating app giant use third-party billing solutions on the Play Store.

Match Group’s rival Bumble was part of the user choice billing program pilot started in November 2022.

Epic, however, rejected Google’s offers to adopt user choice billing and went to trial earlier this month.


The original article contains 382 words, the summary contains 135 words. Saved 65%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2023
868 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

59648 readers
1958 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS