Court Exhibit·7 FEB 2018
When Your Biggest Partners Refuse Your Terms, Listen
A 10% discount can't buy compliance when the real objection is losing control of the customer.
Source document — GPB Grandfathering Discussions Update · In re Google Play Store Antitrust Litigation (Epic v. Google) · 3:21-md-02981 (CAND), Doc. 886-96, filed 2023-12-21 (page 1)
Excerpt · In Kirsten Rasanen's own words
Neither partner seemed super concerned about integrating with Subscription Center, though both asked if this would be 'retroactive' or only for subs acquired through their flow after Play Billing integration. Neither partner was particularly moved by the continued offer of 10% rev share where ever they are all in on GPB. Both still think the economics are not there.
Spotify still thinks they'll have to charge more for users acquired using GPB. Spotify is going to come back to us sometime during the week of 2/12 with a counter-proposal which they tell us we're 'probably not going to like.' Interestingly, Sue said they are hopeful we can arrive at a mutually agreed middle ground that could be applied to 'other stores.'
Netflix maintains that they should be treated differently from other developers because 'not everyone gets a front row seat at the stadium.' Netflix asked if they could use Google Pay instead of GPB because it 'looks just like GPB.' Netflix is still continuing to test consumption-only vs. Play Billing. Their appetite for this grandfathering proposal will be impacted by the delta in results they see between both options.
Neither partner responded well to the idea of timeboxing the grandfathering period. Spotify simply doesn't believe 'handing over control to a platform will ever be good for our business.'
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. 886-96, filed 2023-12-21
- Date authored
- February 7, 2018
- 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.