3

I am developing an app for a client, where he wishes the app to be able to have users to sign up and try out the app for 14 days, after which they have to make a purchase to continue using the app.

My client does not want to absorb Apple's 30% cut for using Apple's in-app purchase mechanism. Initially I suggested implementing a 3rd party payment gateway, but it seems that Apple does not allow app that unlocks app functionalities via a 3rd party payment gateway.

My question is this: if we submit the app that allows users to sign up and login, but only use the app for 14 days without any form of payment mechanisms in the app to allow the user to continue using the app, will the app be rejected? As I was thinking to just have the payment gateway on a website, and during user sign-up, send the user an email informing them that they can go to the website to make a payment.

I know that Apple rejects trial/demo apps, but this is technically a full fledged app where users that purchased via the website will be able to login and perform full functionality. I will also provide Apple with a test account that is fully functional.

Thanks!

Justin Leo
  • 1,975
  • 3
  • 15
  • 14
  • See http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11301361/ios-app-deployment-without-appstore (there are other questions on SO) and read answer 2, then answer 1. – ott-- Feb 08 '15 at 16:39
  • 1
    I've read the answers, but I'm not sure how is it related to my question? – Justin Leo Feb 08 '15 at 16:55

2 Answers2

6

Short answer: Apple will reject you if you allow signups and block functionality after a trial period without allowing IAP. Period.

I have first hand knowledge of this, shameless plug in 3..2..1.., Simple In/Out offers a 45 day free trial, after which users are blocked from using the app. In the early days, we escaped Apple's ban hammer by being small and using a blessed trial account that never expired. Apple would review using test account, never see rejection or blocked alerts and prompts to sign up on our website. That did change one day after requesting an expedited review. We got a lot more scrutiny and they rejected us for essentially steering users to our website for subscribing.

The IAP for trials and subscriptions other than magazines is pretty terrible. It is essentially designed for magazines, and that's it. So beware going in. What we eventually did was allow users to subscribe in the app using IAP. Our server manages who is subscribed and who isn't. It also manages which subscription they have (IAP or our own). There is a lot of weird receipt checks you need to do to manage the subscription from Apple. The user is also stuck if they want to change to a bigger/lower subscription plan. Which kinda works for us because the only way to do it is email us, in which we can convert from IAP (-30%) to our own (-2.5% for card processing).

The moral of this story is that if you plan on allowing users to create accounts inside your app, then you will most likely be obligated to offer subscriptions via IAP. If you want to avoid IAP, then you will also need to strip any references to your website from your app and description. They will bust you on meta if you try and steer them around the IAP process. Once we added IAP, we were allowed to point everyone to our website for "more information" in which we are able to convert more users to our own subscription rather than IAP. Right now, our number of our own subscribers vs. Apple is about 75:1. So we don't lose much over the signups we get from Apple.

Bill Burgess
  • 14,054
  • 6
  • 49
  • 86
  • Thanks, that is a very detailed first hand experience. I was wondering though, that maybe you got rejected the first time around because you had the prompt directing users to the website? I was thinking of not having ANY links to the website at all, even after the 14 days trial period (yeah I know, bad UX as the user doesn't know what to do after that. But that seems to be the only way) – Justin Leo Feb 08 '15 at 16:53
  • That is one option, but you still assume some risk. On one hand, you may save the 30% option (and the work that goes with it). On the other, you end up offering a pretty poor experience for the users, especially when it expires. You have to hope they are smart enough to find your website on their own. Most users will give up long before they can give you their money. – Bill Burgess Feb 08 '15 at 16:57
  • That's true, but we do plan on informing them through an e-mail that they will receive upon signing up (does that count as a link?) – Justin Leo Feb 08 '15 at 17:03
  • So after 14 days of trial, your app just stops working. And no IAP at all. I would be surprised if big A lets it passed. – user523234 Feb 08 '15 at 17:42
  • 1
    Keep in mind  will test with an email and see that. They have discretion to reject if they feel you are skirting the rules. My advice, plan for the worst. Especially if it is for a client. Will be on you if they get rejected. Or worse, approved at first and rejected later on a subsequent update. – Bill Burgess Feb 08 '15 at 20:08
  • EveryCircuit for iOS blocks users after 24 hour free trial period. Nothing works after that, you cannot even see the projects you have created. – Duck Sep 06 '19 at 16:30
2

I believe this should be perfectly fine as long as the 14 day "trial" is a fully functional version of the app.

Your model seems similar to Spotify. Pay for subscription on their website, but use the service in the app.

These resources may help:

https://news.layervault.com/stories/9695-how-do-apps-like-lyft-uber-airbnb-skirt-apples-30-cut-on-each-transaction

http://www.quora.com/How-does-Apple-define-digital-content-when-taking-its-30-cut

JustAnotherCoder
  • 2,565
  • 17
  • 38
  • Yes it is a fully functional version. I am just afraid of this guideline: "Apps offering subscriptions must do so using IAP, Apple will share the same 70/30 revenue split with developers for these purchases, as set forth in the Developer Program License Agreement." Thanks for the resources! – Justin Leo Feb 08 '15 at 16:41
  • 1
    Why e.g. Uber escapes Apple's 30% cut is simple. They provide physical goods (rides) instead of virtual goods (e.g. a virtual newspaper). In the virtual goods realm, Spotify is an app that already had a subscription model outside Apple. However, as you can see, there are in-app purchases (i.e. Apple takes the 30% cut if the user buys through the app). Since there is also the website and Spotify is BIG, Apple lets Spotify have the other payment method. But one day Apple could just "wake up" and decide all payments should be done through them, as the guideline you mentioned states. – lnjuanj Feb 09 '15 at 08:47
  • Agreed with @lnjuanj on this. Microsoft Office has similar model. – user523234 Feb 09 '15 at 12:13