Connect with us

Published

on

Tim Cook, chief executive officer of Apple Inc., center, arrives at U.S. district court in Oakland, California, on Friday, May 21, 2021.
Nina Riggio | Bloomberg | Getty Images

In the past few weeks, Apple has made several changes to its App Store rules, allowing a larger number of companies to access a lower commission rate or evade Apple’s mandatory 15% to 30% cut entirely.

But while the concessions can seem like a shift in Apple’s approach to App store policy, when examined in the history of the App Store, they are a clear continuation of strategy going back to 2008.

Apple has historically made small changes to its “guidelines,” a 13,000-word document that says what iPhone apps can and can’t do, while defending its core interests that Apple has the right to determine which software can operate on iPhones, and set its own financial terms for those developers.

Apple has also not yet changed its policy of taking 30% of in-app gaming purchases, which comprise the largest category of App Store revenue. Apple’s App Store grossed $64 billion or more in total sales in 2020, according to analysis based on Apple disclosures.

JPMorgan analyst Samik Chatterjee said in a recent note that he believed the financial impact on the company on one emailing change would be “modest” and other tweaks reducing Apple’s cut for some apps to 15% would be “minimal.”

The regulators and developers who criticize Apple’s App Store have a variety of complaints in the past decade: Its 30% cut is too high, its manual App Review process is arbitrary and powerful, the App Store depresses prices for software and teaches consumers that updates are free.

So Apple has carved out categorical exceptions to the 30% fee, allowed software makers the ability to appeal or challenge its rules, and changed single rules in response to lawsuits or media attention.

Events in the coming months may force Apple to tweak its policies again. A decision in a trial with Epic Games is expected in the coming weeks. The European Union is examining penalties and remedies after finding Apple violated antitrust laws after a Spotify complaint. South Korea recently passed a law that could force it to allow customers to use alternative billing systems.

But looking at App Store history, it’s likely that Apple will continue to push in private negotiations and public lobbying for smaller, non-structural changes to the App Store that address some complaints but does not change its control over iPhone software.

Controversial from the beginning

Apple’s App Store has faced controversy since its launch in 2008. A year after that, the FCC probed the company over its refusal to approve the Google Voice app.

Now there is more regulatory pressure from countries and developers around the world, and it is leading to more rule changes. Apple made some of the recent concessions because of settlements in a developer class action lawsuit in the United States and an agreement with Japan’s Fair Trade Commission, although Apple is applying the changes around the world.

Those tweaks essentially allow companies like Spotify and Tinder’s parent company Match Group to bypass Apple’s sometimes 30% cut of gross sales, addressing a standing complaint that dates back at least five years. Apple also reduced its take to 15% for news apps that participate in Apple News, its own news app.

Apple officials say they are meaningful changes that address key concerns from software makers.

Some of Apple’s opponents, even those that have petitioned for those changes, say that they don’t go far enough, and are part of a pattern of dividing its critics by placating some of them with one-off rule changes.

“Our goal is to restore competition once and for all, not one arbitrary, self-serving step at a time,” Spotify CEO Daniel Ek tweeted this week in response to Apple’s in-app linking rule change.

“Apple’s strategy is Divide and Conquer: carve off special deals for different developer segments,” Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney said last month in a statement to CNBC in response to Apple’s news app concession.

Epic Games is suing Apple seeking to be able to install its own app store on iPhones — which is the big change that Apple wants to fight off.

A history of Apple changing App Store rules

2009: Apple does not approve Google Voice, FCC investigates. A year after the App Store went live, the FCC started probing it over its refusal to approve the Google Voice app, which acted as a second phone number.

Apple responded to the FCC, providing many details about its app review process for the first time, and arguing that it had the right to reject entire categories of apps.

In its letter, Apple also detailed for the first time its Executive Review Board, a body headed by Apple executive Phil Schiller, which makes final decisions on “new and complex issues.”

The Google Voice app was eventually approved in late 2010.

2011: Apple requires in-app payments for digital goods, creates the “reader rule.” In-app purchases with a 30% fee were introduced in early 2009. But in February 2011, Apple significantly tightened its control over the App Store by announcing it planned to force companies to use Apple’s in-app purchase system if they offered digital subscriptions.

At first, Apple offered exceptions for products like Kindle or the New York Times, where users may have purchased e-books or digital subscriptions off-app. But companies still needed to implement in-app purchases with Apple’s cut, at the same price as their off-app subscriptions.

This didn’t work for many publishers, who wanted to retain their direct relationship with customers. By June, Apple had backtracked on some of its more draconian guidelines, allowing companies to pass on the 30% fee to customers or to, if they chose, not offer an Apple in-app purchase at all.

Shortly afterwards, Apple’s marketing chief Phil Schiller started to question Apple’s 30% fee, and suggested lower revenue sharing levels, such as 20%, according to an email released as part of the Epic Games trial.

This is when Apple started to put its first restrictions on redirecting users in-app to the publisher’s website, which were reversed in recent weeks.

2016: Apple reduces cut for 2nd year of subscriptions to 15%. By 2015, Spotify had publicly challenged tested Apple’s restrictions on subscriptions, first by emailing customers to tell them it’s less expensive to subscribe directly, instead of through the App Store. This was against Apple’s guidelines, and its one of the rules that was officially clarified as part of Apple’s concessions last month.

Shortly afterwards, Spotify removed Apple in-app purchases entirely and started a process of challenging Apple’s rules with government regulators.

In 2016, Apple announced that it would alter its revenue sharing agreement, specifically for subscription apps. Apple still charged 30% for the first year of a subscription, but subscribers who lasted more than 12 months would cost the app a lower, 15% rate of gross sales. Apple also opened subscription billing to all App Store apps and introduced search ads, which let developers pay for better placement on an App Store search page.

The announcement was also months after Schiller publicly took over oversight of the App Store, replacing services head Eddy Cue, although Schiller had been involved with App Store policy since the beginning.

Although Schiller is no longer a senior vice president at Apple, he remains an Apple employee with the title “fellow,” and continues to lead App Store policy.

2019: Apple backtracks on parental control apps, introduces appeals process. By the time Apple’s annual developer conference kicked off in 2020, the App Store had received considerable antitrust attention, specifically to its ability to reject apps, especially apps that competed with Apple features, such as parental control apps which gave users the ability to set screen time limits for kids.

Apple reversed some of its policies about parental control apps in 2019 after negative media attention, allowing some of them onto the store, and creating software tools that they could use to build their apps.

But the skirmish highlighted that Apple’s App Review process was arbitrary, and sometimes held up app updates over minor details or, worse, because the app didn’t comply with in-app purchase rules.

Developer protests over App Review continued to grow through 2020, and at Apple’s annual developer’s conference, Apple said that it would implement an appeals system for developers to challenge Apple’s rules, although many app makers say it hasn’t solved their complaints with the approval process.

2020: Apple reduces cut to 15% for small companies. Last November, Apple introduced the Small Business Program, a high-profile olive branch to lawmakers and app developers.

It reduced the take from 30% to 15% for any company making less than $1 million per year through the App Store. But because apps are a winner-take-most business, it didn’t hurt Apple’s finances too badly — one estimate at the time suggested the top 1% of app publishers generate 93% of App Store revenue. But it did cut the fees for the majority of individual app developers.

Documents from a settlement in 2021 said that the creation of the Small Business Program was because of a class-action lawsuit.

2021: Apple reduces cut to 15% for news apps that participate in Apple News, allows developers to direct users to alternative payment systems. Antitrust attention on the App Store heated up in 2021. Earlier this year, Apple CEO Tim Cook testified at a trial over App Store practices against Epic Games. Multiple states and the U.S. Congress saw bills introduced which could force Apple to allow alternative app stores.

In August, Apple reduced its subscription cut for any publisher from 30% to 15%, addressing a segment of developers who had fought off App Store changes back in 2011. There was a catch though — those news apps had to participate in Apple’s news aggregator.( News apps are not the main moneymaker on the App Store.)

Apple also settled a class-action lawsuit with smaller U.S. developers, paying $100 million and clarifying guidelines about apps emailing their own customers.

In September, Apple settled with the Japanese FTC and said that “reader” apps could link out to sign up customers for subscriptions on their own websites. All three of these changes addressed concerns that first popped up in 2011 when Apple created the reader rule.

Continue Reading

Technology

Google’s cloud outpaces rivals in third quarter as AI battle heats up

Published

on

By

Google's cloud outpaces rivals in third quarter as AI battle heats up

Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai speaks at the Munich Security Conference at the Hotel Bayerischer Hof in Munich, Germany, on February 16, 2024.

Tobias Hase | Picture Alliance | Getty Images

With Wall Street laser focused on cloud computing this week, Google outpaced its rivals in growth, a key sign for investors that the internet company is gaining traction in artificial intelligence.

Google’s cloud business, which includes infrastructure as well as software subscriptions, grew 35% year over year in the third quarter to $11.35 billion, accelerating from 29% in the prior period.

Amazon Web Services, which remains the market leader, grew 19% to $27.45 billion, meaning it’s more than twice the size of Google Cloud but expanding about half as quickly. Second-place Microsoft said revenue from Azure and other cloud services grew 33% from a year earlier.

Five of the six trillion-dollar tech companies reported results this week, with AI chipmaker Nvidia as the outlier. Amazon, Alphabet and Microsoft always report around the same time, giving investors a snapshot of how the cloud wars are playing out.

“While Alphabet has often been criticized as a Johnny-one-note for its dependence on digital advertising, the rapid growth of Google Cloud has begun to diversify the company’s revenue,” analysts at Argus Research, who recommend buying the stock, wrote in a report on Oct. 31.

For a long time, cloud was a money sink for Google, but that’s no longer the case.

Google reported a 17% cloud operating margin in the third quarter, after first turning a profit last year. It was “a real beat to expectations there,” Melissa Otto, head of technology, media and telecommunications sector research at Visible Alpha, said on CNBC this week. She said she isn’t sure if the company can sustain that level of profitability.

Otto: The scale of Alphabet's cloud business, and spend on AI infrastructure, will be critical

The opposite story has been true at Amazon, which has long counted on AWS for the bulk of total profit.

AWS’ operating margin for the the third quarter was 38%, which analysts at Bernstein described as a “whopping” number. Executives have been careful with hiring and have discontinued less popular AWS services. Also, at the beginning of 2024, Amazon extended the useful life of its servers from five years to six, a change that boosted the operating margin by 200 basis points, or 2 percentage points.

Microsoft this week started giving investors more accurate readings of its Azure public cloud. When the company reported Azure revenue growth in the past, the number would include sales of mobility and security services and Power BI data analytics software. Microsoft, which is the lead investor in ChatGPT creator OpenAI, is getting a hefty boost from AI services.

“Demand continues to be higher than our available capacity,” Amy Hood, Microsoft’s finance chief, said on the company’s earnings call.

While Azure growth in the current quarter will moderate a bit, Hood said it should pick up in the first half of 2025 “as our capital investments create an increase in available AI capacity to serve more of the growing demand.”

Amazon is seeing a similar dynamic.

“I think pretty much everyone today has less capacity than they have demand for, and it’s really primarily chips that are the area where companies could use more supply,” Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said on his company’s earnings call.

To help ease the burden, Amazon relies to a degree on its own processors, in addition to Nvidia’s graphics processing units (GPUs). Jassy said clients are showing interest in Trainium 2, the company’s second-generation chip for training models.

“We’ve gone back to our manufacturing partners multiple times to produce much more than we’d originally planned,” he said.

Google is now on the sixth generation of its own custom tensor processing units for AI. CEO Sundar Pichai told analysts that he’d been spending time with the TPU team.

“I couldn’t be more excited at the forward-looking roadmap, but all of it allows us to both plan ahead in the future and really drive an optimized architecture for it,” he said.

Microsoft introduced its own AI chip in the cloud, Maia, a year ago. The company has started to use Maia chips to power its own services, but it hasn’t yet made it available for customers to rent out, a spokesperson said.

Analysts at DA Davidson said in a note this week that they don’t see this as a battle Microsoft can win going up against Amazon and Google. They have a neutral rating on Microsoft.

Oracle, which generally ranks fourth among U.S. cloud infrastructure companies, is expected to report quarterly results in December. In its last report, Oracle said cloud infrastructure revenue jumped 45% to $2.2 billion, up from 42% growth in the prior quarter.

Oracle recently partnered with its three bigger cloud rivals to make its databases available on their services, a move that Chairman Larry Ellison said on the last earnings calls, “will turbocharge the growth of our database business for years to come.”

WATCH: Otto: The scale of Alphabet’s cloud business, and spend on AI infrastructure, will be critical

Otto: The scale of Alphabet's cloud business, and spend on AI infrastructure, will be critical

Continue Reading

Technology

Nvidia to join Dow Jones Industrial Average, replacing rival chipmaker Intel

Published

on

By

Nvidia to join Dow Jones Industrial Average, replacing rival chipmaker Intel

CEO of Nvidia, Jensen Huang, speaks during the launch of the supercomputer Gefion, where the new AI supercomputer has been established in collaboration with EIFO and NVIDIA at Vilhelm Lauritzen Terminal in Kastrup, Denmark October 23, 2024.

Ritzau Scanpix | Mads Claus Rasmussen | Via Reuters

Nvidia is replacing rival chipmaker Intel in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, a shakeup to the blue-chip index that reflects the boom in artificial intelligence and a major shift in the semiconductor industry.

Intel shares were down 1% in extended trading on Friday. Nvidia shares rose 1%.

The switch will take place on Nov. 8. Also, Sherwin Williams will replace Dow Inc. in the index, S&P Dow Jones said in a statement.

Nvidia shares have climbed over 170% so far in 2024 after jumping roughly 240% last year, as investors have rushed to get a piece of the AI chipmaker. Nvidia’s market cap has swelled to $3.3 trillion, second only to Apple among publicly traded companies.

Companies including Microsoft, Meta, Google and Amazon are purchasing Nvidia’s graphics processing units (GPUs), such as the H100, in massive quantities to build clusters of computers for their AI work. Nvidia’s revenue has more than doubled in each of the past five quarters, and has at least tripled in three of them. The company has sginaled that demand for its next-generation AI GPU called Blackwell is “insane.”

With the addition of Nvidia, four of the six trillion-dollar tech companies are now in the index. The two not in the Dow are Alphabet and Meta.

While Nvidia has been soaring, Intel has been slumping. Long the dominant maker of PC chips, Intel has lost market share to Advanced Micro Devices and has made very little headway in AI. Intel shares have fallen by more than half this year as the company struggles with manufacturing challenges and new competition for its central processors.

Intel said in a filing this week that the board’s audit and finance committee approved cost and capital reduction activities, including lowering head count by 16,500 employees and reducing its real estate footprint. The job cuts were originally announced in August.

The Dow contains 30 components and is weighted by the share price of the individual stocks instead of total market value. Nvidia put itself in better position to join the index in May, when the company announced a 10-for-1 stock split. While doing nothing to its market cap, the move slashed the price of each share by 90%, allowing the company to become a part of the Dow without having too heavy a weighting.

The switch is the first change to the index since February, when Amazon replaced Walgreens Boots Alliance. Over the years, the Dow has been playing catchup in gaining exposure to the largest technology companies. The stocks in the index are chosen by a committee from S&P Dow Jones Indices.

WATCH: Nvidia leaps and bounds ahead of AMD

Nvidia is leaps and bounds ahead of AMD on the AI story, says Susquehanna's Christopher Rolland

Continue Reading

Technology

Super Micro’s 44% plunge this week wipes out stock’s gains for the year

Published

on

By

Super Micro's 44% plunge this week wipes out stock's gains for the year

Charles Liang, chief executive officer of Super Micro Computer Inc., during the Computex conference in Taipei, Taiwan, on Wednesday, June 5, 2024. The trade show runs through June 7. 

Annabelle Chih | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Super Micro investors continued to rush the exits on Friday, pushing the stock down another 9% and bringing this week’s selloff to 44%, after the data center company lost its second auditor in less than two years.

The company’s shares fell as low as $26.23, wiping out all of the gains for 2024. Shares had peaked at $118.81 in March, at which point they were up more than fourfold for the year. Earlier that month, S&P Dow Jones added the stock to the S&P 500, and Wall Street was rallying around the company’s growth, driven by sales of servers packed with Nvidia’s artificial intelligence processors.

Super Micro’s spectacular collapse since March has wiped out roughly $55 billion in market cap and left the company at risk of being delisted from the Nasdaq. On Wednesday, as the stock was in the midst of its second-worst day ever, Super Micro said it will provide a “business update” regarding its latest quarter on Tuesday, which is Election Day in the U.S.

The company’s recent challenges date back to August, when Super Micro said it would not file its annual report on time with the SEC. Noted short seller Hindenburg Research then disclosed a short position in the company and wrote in a report that it identified “fresh evidence of accounting manipulation.” The Wall Street Journal later reported that the Department of Justice was in the early stages of a probe into the company.

Super Micro disclosed on Wednesday that Ernst & Young had resigned as its accounting firm just 17 months after taking over from Deloitte & Touche. The auditor said it was “unwilling to be associated with the financial statements prepared by management.”

A Super Micro spokesperson told CNBC that the company “disagrees with E&Y’s decision to resign, and we are working diligently to select new auditors.” Super Micro does not expect matters raised by Ernst & Young to “result in any restatements of its quarterly financial results for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024, or for prior fiscal years,” the representative said.

Analysts at Argus Research on Thursday downgraded the stock in the intermediate term to a hold, citing the Hindenburg note, reports of the Justice Department investigation and the departure of Super Micro’s accounting firm, which the analysts called a “serious matter.” Argus’ fears go beyond accounting irregularities, with the firm suggesting that the company may be doing business with problematic entities.

“The DoJ’s concerns, in our view, may be mainly about related-party transactions and about SMCI products ending up in the hands of sanctioned Russian companies,” the analysts wrote.

In September, the month after announcing its filing delay, Super Micro said it had received a notification from the Nasdaq indicating that its late status meant the company wasn’t in compliance with the exchange’s listing rules. Super Micro said the Nasdaq’s rules allowed the company 60 days to file its report or submit a plan to regain compliance. Based on that timeframe, the deadline would be mid-November.

Though Super Micro hasn’t filed financials with the SEC since May, the company said in an August earnings presentation that revenue more than doubled for a third straight quarter. Analysts expect that, for the fiscal first quarter ended September, revenue jumped more than 200% to $6.45 billion, according to LSEG. That’s up from $2.1 billion a year earlier and $1.9 billion in the same fiscal quarter of 2023.

WATCH: I don’t know if Super Micro is guilty or innocent, says Jim Cramer

I don't know if Super Micro is guilty or innocent, says Jim Cramer

Continue Reading

Trending