Considering that Apple charges too much, foreign manufacturers began to form a team to resist


Welcome to the wechat subscription number of chuangshiji
Wen / Cha Ping Jun
Source: bad comments (ID: chaping321)
You guys must have heard of one thing recently, that is, the game companies epic, apple and Google, which are developing rapidly in recent years, have started to work.
The reason is that epic wants its own game fortress night to bypass Apple’s high channel fees, because the 30% share of Apple’s stores is too high.
As a result, as the party in charge of the channel, how can Apple think you are dishonest in my territory? So the app store was taken off the shelves.
After that, both sides came and went and had a good time.
Here, epic sued apple, saying that elder brother was not kind and divided too much. This is not blood sucking, but pumping my blood with a pump.
Apple said that epic’s lawsuit is a marketing gimmick. I’m not willing to pay any attention to you. By the way, I’m going to stop using your developer’s account and virtual engine. I’m sorry, that’s what channel vendors do.
Although the court finally ruled that Apple could not stop the virtual engine of epic for the time being, because epic violated the agreement first, it was OK for apple to take off the blockhouse night.
The verdict protects the illusory engine, but not the night of the fortress
From the result, although Apple lost part of the loss of Fortress night, its ecology is still strong, and it has set a good example.
Epic lost a lot, because not only apple, but Google’s Google play store also took “Fortress night” off the shelves, which was equivalent to the loss of all mobile travel channels, which was cut off.
For epic, that’s not the end of the story.
After a short quiet period, epic suddenly launched a big move. Epic Games joined spotify, tinder’s parent company match group and other companies to join an “anti apple” alliance. The official name of the organization is “application fair alliance”.
The alliance wants to take advantage of this to apple and other app store operators (don’t look at you, Google!) Pressure should be exerted on these channel operators to change their commission and withdrawal.
Many bad friends may not know what the relationship between developers, publishers and channel providers is.
In fact, it is very simple. For example, the developer is the author, the publisher is the publishing house, and the channel provider is the bookstore.
In fact, most of the traditional industries can use the relationship between the three to straighten out the interest relationship between them.
Since the interests have been generated, the issue of distribution will naturally be involved. According to the previous “hidden rules”, the division between the three is 433 or 334.
For example, in the game industry, developers invest in R & D and production of games, and publishers are responsible for suppressing CDs, packaging, and finally selling them by game stores.
Everyone’s contribution, of course, is to make money together.
On the digital distribution platform, channel providers like apple and Google store also use this proportion. They take 30% of their own shares and let developers and publishers share the remaining 70%.
However, in the Internet era, the cost of channel operators and distributors is relatively much lower. Distributors no longer need to consider the market demand to make CDs, and the channel providers save the burden of storefront and inventory risk, with almost no cost.
But for developers, the cost of making and developing an application has not changed much.
In this case, the original “hidden rules” are no longer applicable, so there are developers “rising up” and besieging the “guangdingding” scene.
Especially in China, because they can’t use the Google App store, they want to grasp the channel in their own hands.
These channels can be divided into three types. The first type is controlled by an organization called “hard core alliance”. The main members of the hard core alliance are domestic first-line smart phone manufacturers, such as Huawei, oppo, vivo, Lenovo, Meizu, etc.
These mobile phones often have their own application market, such as Xiaomi game, Yijia mall, Huawei game center, etc.
The second is software channels such as app app, 360 mobile assistant and Peapod. The third category is some promotion channels, such as today’s headlines and micro blog, which are advertising platforms on applications.
The share ratio of these distributors is not ambiguous at all. Their “unspoken rule” is 50% because Apple and Android in foreign countries are almost in a “monopoly” position, while in China, channel providers have to compete with each other to buy traffic, so the price is higher.
But the problem is, because the number of channels is too many, the quality of channels is also mixed.
For example, in some channels, it will have a dedicated server and operation team to help promote the operation of a game, which is a good thing for both sides, which is a high-quality channel.
And some channels are more difficult to say, just to provide a download service, users download the game regardless, developers in this garbage channel will not make much money.
Developers are naturally not willing to give half of their income to those who lie down and do nothing.
For example, recently, two very popular domestic games “original God” (developed by MIHA game) and “awakening of nations” (developed by Lilith) have avoided being put on the shelves of mainstream android app stores (such as app store, Yijia store, Huawei store, etc.).
The purpose of this move is very obvious, they just don’t want to give such a large sum of money to channel business.
Tencent is more direct. It has informed all channel providers that they can either change the proportion of shares to three or seven times, or their own games will not be put on the shelves in their channels.
Why do they dare to be so hard?
Because no matter MIHA youlilis or Tencent, their products are head games, which are the main source of income that can not be ignored for these channel operators.

Without such a few channels, the popularity of these games is enough to let players take the initiative to go to the official website or other places to download.
For channel operators, these head games may represent most of their income sources.
Coincidentally, the members of foreign “application fair alliance” are mostly big companies developed and issued by themselves.
Why do so many developers at home and abroad choose to start the channel business at this time?
On the one hand, these mobile game developers after so many years of development, has grown to the point of “own traffic”, to a large extent, do not need to see the face of the channel business.
On the other hand, channel operators do have the suspicion of “lying down to make money”. They can take 30% – 50% of the income from developers by controlling the flow entrance and providing no services for the products of developers.
For the former “authors”, it is naturally impossible for them to go to places like skyscrapers and busy markets with a few books in their hands, so they can’t sell a few books at all, and it’s time-consuming and laborious. Therefore, they need the role of “bookstore”.
In the Internet age, developers can get traffic and reach consumers in many other ways besides channel providers.
In this way, for the channel providers who can only provide their own traffic but have to take a large amount of income, developers are naturally not happy.
The emergence of the Internet, for many industries have caused a huge impact and change, such as developers and channel business competition is almost inevitable phenomenon.
For example, epic did a lot of things this time. Although Apple stubbornly took it back, it temporarily exempted the 30% system bonus from Facebook, airbnb and the fitness course ordering platform classpass, for “being affected by the epidemic”.
I think Apple itself has also felt about the issue of system extraction. As long as someone takes the lead, a large number of people will follow suit. After all, the money of each enterprise does not fall from the sky. On the contrary, it is the one who is most likely to pick up the cheap one.
Of course, apple can’t be soft on epic, so it mentioned the epidemic as a reason. Of course, this is just groundless speculation. I’m not sure about this statement~
After all, apple is still a publisher with complete resources. It not only has an app store, but also has tens of thousands of Apple product users, major ecology and the long-term relationship with developers are its channel resources.
Under this premise, many people feel unfair and shaken to some extent by taking 30% of the apple. The status of those Android game channels that draw 50% is more subtle…
Therefore, poor judge thinks that what we should be curious about is not why the developers choose to make trouble at this time, but why the developers didn’t make the trouble earlier.
After all, since the advent of the Internet era, the contradiction between channel providers and developers and distributors has existed for too long.
Pictures and data sources:
First finance and economics, change from 5% to 3 7? Industry refers to Tencent grabbing channel cake
Sina Finance and Economics? “Original God” and “awakening of nations” are absent from mainstream Android stores in China
Sina Technology, spotify and epic join the “application fair alliance” to challenge the operation mode of app store