|
| ▲ | johnnyanmac 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| You call it a tax, most others would call it the cost of doing business. But yes, that's built into the product's price. Devs are paying for a license to work with IOS and need to own hardware only Apple sells to work on IOS. So I think those costs are covered. We'll see what the "reasonable" price is. If nothing else, we know 27% was too much even for appeals. |
| |
| ▲ | knollimar 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Payment processing is worth 3. I assume the other stuff is somewhere within an order of magnitude of that, so maybe like 9-12% total is fair? |
|
|
| ▲ | stale2002 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > They deserve some fee Not if the only way to get to the store was through that road. In that case, there are public access laws and it is literally illegal for people who "own" a road to charge people money, if there is an easement. Thats probably a simplification, but they are called "easement by necessity." rights. So even in your example of the roadway, thats also wrong. They get zero dollars. |
| |
| ▲ | knollimar 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Isn't that only to get somewhere else? My point is in the real world sharing an area with it would mean the other store also contributes tax wise. It's not equivalent to bring up real life if the real life paying part isn't also adhered to; the lack of symmetry is notable. I don't think they deserve to set their price, though (30% is way too high). |
|
