Patreon doesn't currently and doesn't want to us Apple's infrastructure. They're being "forced" to do so, hence this post.

Putting it in quotes is misleading, they are actually being forced:

> Apple has also made clear that if creators on Patreon continue to use unsupported billing models or disable transactions in the iOS app, we will be at risk of having the entire app removed from their App Store.

> Putting it in quotes is misleading, they are actually being forced:

They're not literally forced, they have a choice: A) abide by the rules of the platform or B) leave the platform.

I agree that it's shitty by Apple, but if you start playing the game (being on the AppStore), don't be surprised when you have to continue playing the game by adjusting how you do things.

Let's not forget that if Apple created something called "Apple Creators", they would instantly gain 100% of the market share because there would be no fee (assuming feature parity)

This forcing apps to use your payment platform through extortion is anti-competitive. Full stop.

Don't they already have this for podcast subscriptions? I feel like this is a direct move to get more customers over to Apple Podcasts, which can now be 30% cheaper for customers.

I'm unsure, but I'm pretty sure Spotify had this exact issue recently and decided to make payments via only their website.

But, IIRC, Apple makes it nearly impossible to offer off-app payments without breaking their TOS, including linking to them (don't quote me on that).

That's not really a choice. That's "either do what we say, or your business will be destroyed".

Or drop the app. And explain to everybody why you're doing this

Patreon works fine in a web browser.

And watch loads of creators lose a good portion of their livelihood and leave the platform?

This is part of Apple's argument why they think they are owed 30%. They have built and nurture the most affluent set of mobile users with a CC ready to charge. A company leaving Android is ho hum, but leaving iOS is business ending. How valuable then is it to be on iOS? 30%?

I'm not making a judgement on right or wrong, but I see many people just thinking about infrastructure and not realizing Apple sees iOS user base as one that would not exist without them. And, they want to get paid for access.

Should Microsoft get 30% of everything you do on a computer? That'd be utterly absurd. Apple already got paid for those users when the user bought the device. Why do they get a share of the profits of a completely independent transaction between two other parties? It's ridiculous.

> Should Microsoft get 30% of everything you do on a computer? That'd be utterly absurd.

This is what happens on consoles today. Apple views the iPhone as a closed and complete ecosystem where licensees are allowed to write apps - like a console. The hardware, OS, and App Store are viewed as a single entity and not distinct.

Not saying I agree, but it's important to understand Apple's argument. Given the ruling from the Epic case I think Apple will win the majority of any action taken against the AppStore (not a monopoly, business terms are irrelevant). IMO where Apple is vulnerable is interop like with messaging. I can only guess Apple's lawyers think the same, hence Apple's fairly recent push into RCS.

> This is what happens on consoles today.

Except no, actually, it isn't. Neither Xbox nor PlayStation attempt to collect a 30% royalty from any of the streaming apps nor block them from steering.

Consoles have a significantly more harmonious relationship with the developers, whereas Apple's is drastically more abusive. This is not an insignificant difference, both morally and legally.

One could create a web app based Pateron and use the web based push notifications. https://imgur.com/a/JccxAIs for the process for how to do this on an iPhone.

The challenge (as always) is accessibility and discoverability. The functionality is all there.

> The challenge (as always) is accessibility and discoverability.

And that's the challenge that actually matters, and is more or less insurmountable on iOS.

If they drop the app, then they are free to send users directly to the web site.

There's a decent chance they are about to watch the same thing

We don't have numbers on how much Patreon usage comes through the Apple app.

Patreon does.

I'm inclined to think the "write off the iOS app entirely" option was one of the very very first things they pondered, and the odds are that it's pretty clear that was going to be a very, very expensive option.

they should have just gone the same route as amazon with ebooks and removed the ability to subscribe in the app.

> Apple has also made clear that if creators on Patreon continue to use unsupported billing models or disable transactions in the iOS app, we will be at risk of having the entire app removed from their App Store.

This is confusing to me, does this mean Amazon, Netflix, and Spotify will be in violation as well? None of these companies allow subscription or digital goods transactions in their iOS apps.

I’m not sure why Patreon couldn’t replace the “subscribe” button with a “wishlist” button within the iOS app. They could add a link that opens your wishlist in the browser too. It turns what should be 1 click into 3, but it seems far more sensible than accepting the 30% fee.

Admittedly, I also wondered about this. I'm taking Patreon at their word (for now), but I would welcome Apple making some kind of statement indicating that Patreon is allowed to disable payments in the app.

And if it is true that they're not allowed to disable payments, I would also love to know what's special about Amazon, Netflix, and Spotify (other than their size) that would allow them to "get away" with the same behavior.

If you can't pay money to content makers, what's the point of a patreon app? It's the whole purpose.

Seeing the content you paid for when using a non mobile device?

I’ve happily been using Patreon for years and didn’t even know an app existed. Has the world entirely forgotten about websites?

> Has the world entirely forgotten about websites?

Perhaps, if only the segment of the population forced to use a browser that didn't support PWAs for over a decade. I can see why they would forget about websites over a long enough period of time.

Native apps are better than websites on mobile. I know you know this.

What do you do on Patreon that only a application could do, and not a website?

I subscribe to a bunch of Patreons, and most of them are videos (which I can view on a website) or they're downloadable assets I use my PC for accessing anyways, wouldn't make sense on mobile no matter app or website.

For what? Clicking a “pay this person $5 a month” button? Maybe commenting on a post or watching a video? I don’t see how the platform could affect that in any significant way.

Any sort of audio/video control for sure, which is a substantial portion of patreon content. Also, if you want to support offline content, it's nearly impossible to do it in a browser.

What’s wrong with the native html <video> tag? Or <audio>? I use those for everything and i’ve never been unable to control media.

The app is better for viewing the content you paid for. Patreon is not just for subscribing to creators. They also deliver content. This isn't hard to understand.