> Putting aside what's the fair amount for such a commission, how exactly are VISA or Mstercard more entitled to charge it compared to Apple?
I don't see how their comparable at all. Apple doesn't replace the role of Visa. Some payment processing company is required to process online payments - there's lots of code and infrastructure to maintain to make payments work.
Apple does not facilitate the transaction, and the transaction would get done fine without them. Hence they don't have the same level of "entitlement" as Visa.
Can you take a step back and look at the bigger picture? Commissions in this world aren't exclusively charged for facilitating a money transaction and nothing more. VISA also has no hand in how a bottle of water is produced, they don't store it in their warehouse, they don't analyze the quality, and they don't ship it to me. But VISA still takes it's share simply because the payment (not product) crosses their network. It's a service, it costs. And I have no say either as a regular customer or a merchant because between VISA and MC there are no real options. Some countries may have a domestic solution but realistically you can't consider changing countries an option. And you may also need to go outside of that network one day.
Apple facilitates a transaction only it's not financial. They facilitate the "transaction" of apps and services between users and developers via the Apple platform. They make it possible by building a terminal (the iPhone), a community of users, an infrastructure to host all the apps and intermediate the services. This costs money no matter who does it.
If you want to argue that the percentage is too large, that the conditions are unreasonable, that some parts should be free, that Apple is abusing their position, etc. you may have a point. But if you're arguing that Apple shouldn't be allowed to charge for the services because they don't do exactly what VISA is doing, or that VISA shouldn't be treated in exactly the same way, you don't have a leg to stand on.
Please take a moment to really think about this and not just vent frustration because that's not constructive. How exactly is VISA different from Apple from the perspective relevant here? And don't say "because Apple doesn't process the financial transaction" again.
I don't see how their comparable at all. Apple doesn't replace the role of Visa. Some payment processing company is required to process online payments - there's lots of code and infrastructure to maintain to make payments work.
Apple does not facilitate the transaction, and the transaction would get done fine without them. Hence they don't have the same level of "entitlement" as Visa.