Court Exhibit·17 OCT 2017
Preview Bad News Before You Ship It
When you're about to close a door on a big partner, walking through it in person costs you nothing and buys you information you can't get any other way.
Source document — In re Google Play Store Antitrust Litigation (Epic v. Google) — Exhibit 1417 · In re Google Play Store Antitrust Litigation (Epic v. Google) · 3:21-md-02981 (CAND), Doc. 886-93, filed 2023-12-21 (page 1)
Excerpt · In Kirsten Rasanen & Sameer Samat & Wilson White & Paul Feng's own words
Met with Spotify team at their offices this afternoon. The discussion went as expected. They were surprised and concerned but appreciated the in-person meeting, advance warning and the open dialogue.
They didn't seem to think we would go this direction, "We thought Google would remain an open platform and do what's right for users and developers."
Key Takeaways:
Transaction Fee — The 10% rev share offer was met with some head nods but no firm commitment that this is sufficient. "Well 10% is a lot better than 15%." They seemed surprised that we went down to 10%. I anticipate they will ask for a deeper discount.
Pricing Parity / User Communication — They haven't done the math to know if 10% rev share means they'd need to raise prices in the app or not. If they do, they would want to be able to tell users that they can purchase for less elsewhere (something our new policy will expressly prohibit). This piece is very important and is a crux of the Apple debate: They believe users should be fully informed about their choices; disadvantaging app users by not being able to tell them that pricing is lower elsewhere isn't fair to users.
Policy Principle: It is a principle for them to protect user choice and to have as much control over their relationship with the user as possible.
The daily letter · Free
This edition is for members — but the daily letter is free.
One real corporate email, and the lesson it teaches, in your inbox every weekday morning. Free. Unsubscribe in one click.
How this surfaced
- Source type
- Court Exhibit
- Case / record
- In re Google Play Store Antitrust Litigation (Epic v. Google)
- Citation
- 3:21-md-02981 (CAND), Doc. 886-93, filed 2023-12-21
- Date authored
- October 17, 2017
- License
- Public domain
- Original
- View the primary source →
Shanna Velez & Mike Marchak & Purnima Kochikar & Alyssa Ablao & Josh Kim & Randy Gelber ·Google ·15 DEC 2021
Discounts Are Cheaper Than Exceptions to Your Pricing Rule
When you can't grant a carveout, invent a program — same economics, but the rule stays intact.
Don ·Google ·14 MAR 2023
Bundle Deals Across Divisions to Save a Weak Position
When one business unit can't justify the check alone, stack the strategic value across the whole company — or lose the partner entirely.
Karen Aviram Beatty & Lawrence Koh ·Google ·11 DEC 2019
Bundling Deals Can Backfire When Your Counterparty Wants Simplicity
When you stack asks to justify a payment, the other side sees complexity — and offers you a simpler exit.