5 ms·

Estimated annual sales of iPhones in EU are about 12.4M phones in Q4 2023. If you just do quick math, that is 49.6M phones/year. If you pick an ASP of $800 (??)

Estimated annual sales of iPhones in EU are about 12.4M phones in Q4 2023. If you just do quick math, that is 49.6M phones/year. If you pick an ASP of $800 (??) then that would be about $39.7B annual Gross sales. If EU actually tried to get that money, Apple would have to just halt all sales of iPhones in EU. Now, maybe that's what the EU really wants. Are there some bitter former Nokia execs on the EU panel?????

RetroTechie 2y ago
This conflict is with EU regulators. But fines are set as a % of worldwide (not just EU) turnover. It's in the headline...
- kutenai 2y ago
  I did read that, and I think it is OUTRAGEOUS. I'd call it criminal, but these thugs in the EU have no moral character.
  - lock-the-spock 2y ago
    I'm sorry that you have such an emotional reaction about a company being threatened with a fine (not even penalised yet) for harmful behaviour which they could immediately choose to stop if they'd want to. * Two scenarios: Company A violates consumer rights. Government does nothing, consumers continue to get ripped off. Company B violates consumer rights. Government threatens fines. Company either fixes the problem (consumer hsrm reduced) or eats the fine (and the money can be used to pay for useful stuff). Either way, they can no longer gain by tipping off consumers and have every reason to stop if the fine may be repeated for a repeat offender. * Calculating on global profits is standard practice and is done the same theme the US calculates fines (depending on what the fine is about - you might have different reference points for different harm). This is the only solution as otherwise companies will play the usual whack-a-mole where they create an "affiliate Europe" that is legally separate but pays 100% of its net profits as a licensing fee for the brand name to the parent company, thus making 0€ (more difficult to play this game with gross sales, but there are still plenty of ways to fudge those numbers).
_ph_ 2y ago
If Apple halts their iPhone sales in the EU, they endanger their platform globally. Because suddenly a pretty large and important market would go 100% to Android. Also, Macs would become extinct pretty quickly in the EU.
- kutenai 2y ago
  I agree, but I'm just pointing out that this fine is outrageous, and, basically almost equal to total sales in the EU.
  - _ph_ 2y ago
    The fine initially would be up to 10% of the revenue. I don't see how that is outrageous if the violation of the law is there. The actual fine could be lower, but on the other side, the fine needs to be high enough that it can force the fined company to stop breaking the law.
  - pjmlp 2y ago
    That is the point, otherwise companies would just pay them up as the cost of doing business their way, and move on.
  - InsomniacL 2y ago
    The AppStore did $90 billion trade globally. I'd argue 10% isn't big enough if you can break the law and still make a profit.
  - bytesandbots 2y ago
    30% App Store fees is outrageous. Core technology fees is beyond outrageous and illegal.

RetroTechie 2y ago

This conflict is with EU regulators. But fines are set as a % of worldwide (not just EU) turnover. It's in the headline...

kutenai 2y ago
I did read that, and I think it is OUTRAGEOUS. I'd call it criminal, but these thugs in the EU have no moral character.
- lock-the-spock 2y ago
  I'm sorry that you have such an emotional reaction about a company being threatened with a fine (not even penalised yet) for harmful behaviour which they could immediately choose to stop if they'd want to. * Two scenarios: Company A violates consumer rights. Government does nothing, consumers continue to get ripped off. Company B violates consumer rights. Government threatens fines. Company either fixes the problem (consumer hsrm reduced) or eats the fine (and the money can be used to pay for useful stuff). Either way, they can no longer gain by tipping off consumers and have every reason to stop if the fine may be repeated for a repeat offender. * Calculating on global profits is standard practice and is done the same theme the US calculates fines (depending on what the fine is about - you might have different reference points for different harm). This is the only solution as otherwise companies will play the usual whack-a-mole where they create an "affiliate Europe" that is legally separate but pays 100% of its net profits as a licensing fee for the brand name to the parent company, thus making 0€ (more difficult to play this game with gross sales, but there are still plenty of ways to fudge those numbers).

_ph_ 2y ago

If Apple halts their iPhone sales in the EU, they endanger their platform globally. Because suddenly a pretty large and important market would go 100% to Android. Also, Macs would become extinct pretty quickly in the EU.

kutenai 2y ago
I agree, but I'm just pointing out that this fine is outrageous, and, basically almost equal to total sales in the EU.
- _ph_ 2y ago
  The fine initially would be up to 10% of the revenue. I don't see how that is outrageous if the violation of the law is there. The actual fine could be lower, but on the other side, the fine needs to be high enough that it can force the fined company to stop breaking the law.
- pjmlp 2y ago
  That is the point, otherwise companies would just pay them up as the cost of doing business their way, and move on.
- InsomniacL 2y ago
  The AppStore did $90 billion trade globally. I'd argue 10% isn't big enough if you can break the law and still make a profit.
- bytesandbots 2y ago
  30% App Store fees is outrageous. Core technology fees is beyond outrageous and illegal.