Court Exhibit·8 JUN 2016
Being First Matters Less Than Being Seen First
You can do the work earlier and still lose the story if you never tell it.
Source document — Google Play App Store Strategy — Apple App Store 2.0 Response Email · In re Google Play Store Antitrust Litigation (Epic v. Google) · 3:21-md-02981 (CAND), Doc. 887-49, filed 2023-12-21
Excerpt · In Sameer Samat & Jamie Rosenberg's own words
Apple announced some app store changes today: Ads and new rev share for subscriptions. This was nicely packaged as a App Store 2.0 story, but represents mostly catch up and remedies for several unsustainable terms they've had in rev shares. Play and Ads launched Search Ads in Play last year, and has been offering the same 85/15 subscription rev share to media companies since 2015.
Apple has been under a lot of pressure from media subscription companies (e.g. Spotify, Netflix) and users (and possibly regulators) that 70/30 rev share is too expensive given their significant content costs. We believe this is one of the major motivators for Apple's change here.
Play has allowed subscriptions for all categories for many years and the same 85/15 rev share to media companies since 2015: We have had a behind the scenes effort called the Living Room Accelerator Program (LRAP) since April of 2015 that has been offering 85/15 rev share to media partners. It has been pretty successful in getting partners to adopt our billing and grow their business on Android (Netflix, Showtime, HBONow etc).
Subscription apps are the fastest growing revenue category and largest revenue category in the US outside of games. LRAP contributed significantly to this acceleration.
Apple did do a very nice job packaging what is mostly catch up. It is unfortunate we did not get out in front of this as we could have done the same before them. All this said, this move signals much more serious approach from Apple around their subscription billing platform — we have been investing here but will be looking at intensifying our focus here in the near future.
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. 887-49, filed 2023-12-21
- Date authored
- June 8, 2016
- 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.