From Amazon to Cond é Nast, reposition application policies

As we all know, Apple's new built-in app buying rules have changed the business strategies of many media companies on the iPhone and iPad. Then let's look at what causes these companies to not share a cup of cake with the Fruit Company.

Amazon, Kobo, and Barnes & Noble removed their iOS App from the App Store on Monday, and of course included any links and pages related to the App. Google Books-recently announced to distributors and retailer partners its new multi-platform (Harry Potter e-book program)-has quietly been removed from the App Store, and neither apple nor google has given any explanation, although the modified applications may be available.

Users who have removed applications can still download and read the purchased content. However, these applications no longer provide direct or indirect purchase portals, which makes some developers and users very upset!

At the same time, the cancellation of service portals will largely impair the interests of some retailers. For users who are used to purchasing content through the Internet, this has little impact. However, this method reduces the functional coverage of the application-based on the content that the user is reading or searching, book sellers are happy to sell their products to customers quickly in a very simple and direct way-some new users or new users may find that there are endless and confusing operations to end browsers. scenario requirements.

Obviously, this is an additional experience of friction. Any extra dispute from book sellers will consolidate Apple's iBooks market position. As David Carnoy of CNET wrote:

When all words and deeds are written, Apple's iBooks will become the only iOS App in the App Store that allows users to directly purchase e-books. But at least Apple still allows electronic reading applications from other companies to exist in App Store. Users have the right to freely select applications.

History: When Apple announced its rule change for the first time in March, it seemed to have to clean up all its independent electronic reading applications. When any content provider provides users with content that can be purchased through its applications, it must ensure that users can purchase the content at the same price through the apple app marketplace.

These regulations will not erode Amazon, Kobo, and Barnes & Noble's own websites. Each time they sell a book, they do not need to share it with Apple. However, many potential users only consume the content through apple applications. For this part of sales, Apple's 30% split will erode most of the bookstore's profits-so that the industry has become a terrible business with a low margin of profits in book retail.

The subscription service is more complicated. If a user uses this service and occasionally sees it through his mobile app, will he still spend money to subscribe to music such as Pandora and Spotify on some company websites?

In January June, Apple modified its rules. Publishers and retailers are now exiting. However, they cannot connect to their own online stores. Otherwise, you should build an independent store in the app to promote sales or subscription. If the store is on the iPad, Apple will be split. That's why Amazon has to change its application today. As we have seen, Apple has begun to implement its new regulations, and e-book retailers have all withdrawn.

This is also true for journals. Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal, one of the winners of paid newspapers, announced that it no longer provides content through iOS-based apps. The Financial Times also announced that they had completely abandoned the existing App Store and displayed gorgeous HTML5 network applications.

The publisher Cond é Nast, whose products include Wired and The New Yorker, still sell their magazines through its free Apple App. However, after its early sales surge, the company also made a free iPad version for paper subscribers, which can be used for advertising and promotion.

On Monday, cond.é Nast also announced that it was reading the cooperation relationship of the application Filpboard. Wired Magazine and New York provide content to Filpboard. Filpboard provides the reading interface. American Express and Lexus put their ads on the special edition of Filpboard. More advertisers will follow up in the future. Condé Nast and Flipboard share profits.

Apple did not get any benefit-except for the possibility that more magazine fans purchase and use ipad.

This is a mixed strategy. On the one hand, there are multiple ways to contact readers and multiple ways to benefit. It also creates huge business opportunities for media companies.

Recently, when talking about technology and media, we often use a metaphor like the ecosystem. We may have used too much. We never thought about it before using it. But here, this metaphor is very appropriate.

Consumers are willing to purchase the large screen and easy-to-use iPad. This is like a brand new food source. Other animals gradually gather here. Dominant species occupy their position, and new competitors also emerge

New sources of food have also helped hatch new prey. Apple's built-in application purchase rules are. In a short period of time, he seemed to want to destroy all other species, but now they are in a balance.

All species are adapting to the new environment. In a short time, we will see that the species are the most suitable for survival, but the long-term effect may not be known in the short term.

With this uncertainty, I personally predict from the left that Apple's new regulations cannot hurt Amazon. In fact. Rather, Apple gave them a gift, including many other companies.

You need to know why, you can read the iOS application change Statement of Amazon today:

We have updated the Kindle apps on iPad, iPhone, and iPod touch. The biggest change is that now you can use the Kindle app to read more than 100 Kindle newspapers and magazines, including the Economist ), you can also share your favorite articles with your friends on Facebook and Twitter. To comply with Apple's recent policy changes, we also deleted the link built into the application, which will open Safari and link to the Kindle Mall ". You can still shop as usual-Just open Safari and go to www.amazon.com/kindlestore. If you want to, you can save it as a bookmarks. Your Kindle e-book will be automatically transferred to your iPad, iPhone, and iPod touch as before.

You may argue that this is completely a lipstick for pig-Amazon shields the following news: Behind the dazzling new features, it removes the link to the Kindle application. But I think the problem is far greater than this.

In addition to regular sales on apple, publishers have better reasons to work with Amazon. The scheduled content does not exist in the Kindle iOS app. I don't think it's Amazon's decision-publishers don't allow Amazon to easily get content on their iPad.

Now, Amazon is more attractive. At the same time, if more users start to use the Kindle application to read The Economist magazine on the iPad, why cannot they enjoy the same media on the Amazon Tablet in the future?

Apple fans like to buy things on the iPad and don't care where they come from and how they do it, as long as it is simple enough to meet the specific needs of Apple fans. What we once personally experienced was to turn a magazine into a category directory and finally transform the Directory into a store. This is the temptation to use Apple for retail-but not just apple.

With the new rules, Apple makes it more difficult for iPad content providers to survive. Apple wants to be the entry to these content transactions-after all, it is hard for publishers to swallow. They are able to control channels through their own websites, but this growth is very slow. More importantly, for users who are eager to purchase and read content in as simple as possible, this is very troublesome!

So who will win? Amazon wins-because it has a large online store that provides all the newspapers, magazines, subscriptions, and books you need. Flipboard wins-because it can display high-quality content from chores and the Internet, while processing all the revenue and advertising businesses in the background without user worries. Google may win-if it can get anyone interested in OnePass, or sell content on its Android platform like Apple.

It provides users and publishers with a unified portal to manage content notes, and provides readers with an excellent reading experience. Although Apple has control over the App Store and hardware, this does not mean that he is the master of the game, and everyone has a chance!