While some have expressed anger at Apple for rejecting Readability's new app from the iOS App Store, John Gruber hits the nail on the head.
[H]ow can anyone be surprised by this rejection? Readability’s business model is to charge a subscription fee, keep 30 percent, and pass 70 percent along to the writers/publishers of the articles being read by Readability users. Sound familiar?
Maybe I’m missing something, but these guys claiming to be surprised and disappointed by Apple’s insistence on a 30 percent cut of subscriptions when their own business model is to take a 30 percent cut of subscriptions strikes me as rich. And how can they claim that Readability isn’t “serving up content”? That’s exactly what Readability does. What they’re pissed about is that Apple has the stronger hand. Readability needs Apple to publish an app in the App Store. Apple doesn’t need Readability.
This goes back to what I wrote in my last post. Apple's growth for more than ten years has been to gain leverage over its negotiating partners. Readability, while a small-scale operation, is one of those partners. Of course, this opens Apple to charges of "greed" and "meanness," but while a few people may be unhappy that Readability isn't available for iOS, I suspect most outside the tech blog bubble won't care.