Court Exhibit·28 JAN 2019
How to Negotiate When You're the Whale but Not the Favorite
When you're a top customer paying a rack-rate meant for someone else, quantify the mismatch and name the comparable — don't complain, benchmark.
Source document — Epic Games v. Apple — Exhibit G: Apple Internal Email Thread Re Proposed Messaging for Match.com Discussion · Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc. · 4:20-cv-05640 (CAND), Doc. 528-15, filed 2021-04-29 (page 1)
Excerpt · In Peter Stern & Matt Fischer & Philip Schiller & Carson Oliver & Adrian Ong's own words
From Adrian Ong, SVP Operations at Match Group, to Apple's Carson Oliver, January 24, 2019:
"In the last couple of weeks, it has come to my attention that Netflix and Apple had an agreed upon rev share deal at 15% (but obviously they're no longer using in-app billing for new customers – an interesting approach that more of us are pondering for our strongest brands). Can you confirm if this is true?
The main point and why we feel strongly about discussing rev share is that we're driving almost 100% of the revenue growth for you and that we're episodic and therefore never truly benefit from the 15% terms for subscribers > 1 year (vs companies like Netflix that were probably achieving roughly an 18% rev share assuming the 30% based on avg customer retention).
Dating as a category is episodic — the average subscriber stays only 4–5 months. As a top grossing partner, we never are able to take advantage of the 15% rev share since the intent of our apps is to actually have people meet and leave our apps. Other top grossing partners such as our colleagues at Netflix have an average subscriber length of 43 months, which means their average rev share works out to be approximately 18% — much closer to the 15% than the 30% commissions we pay.
Being in the payments space for a very long time, we also know that the 30% rate is arbitrary since i) we know that other categories are not forced to use IAP and ii) the cost of accepting payments is only <2–5%."
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
- Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc.
- Citation
- 4:20-cv-05640 (CAND), Doc. 528-15, filed 2021-04-29
- Date authored
- January 28, 2019
- License
- Public domain
- Original
- View the primary source →
More from Eddy Cue
Eddy Cue ·Apple ·10 JAN 2013
Turn a Competitor's Weakness Into Your Positioning Strategy
When a rival's business model forces them to behave in ways users dislike, that tension is your product opportunity.
Matt Fischer ·Apple Inc. ·21 AUG 2018
When Your Pricing Faces Pushback, Negotiate Before You Lose the Deal
The moment your partners consistently refuse your terms, you have two choices: lose them or adapt — and waiting too long to decide is its own decision.
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.