Don't forget that Marco is also handling the entire backend service. That is not insignificant nor trivial.

The "official Instapaper app" designation does come with one significant carrot: users of your app wouldn't have to pay the subscription fee that others have to pay in order to access the Instapaper API.

Is that enough to justify a 50/50 split? I don't know, but it is more than a blessing and promotion.

If developing an Android version is as easy as they put it, this can be a very profitable deal. It's safe to assume you'd make way more money than you would by building this as a contractor.

You get a few thousand paying customers to begin with. Your competing service would take at least a year to catch up, and has no guarantee of success.

Yet he already claims it wouldn't be profitable for him to do it. He's allowing you to build an application which he wouldn't make with to begin with, and them claim 50% of the profit...

He has an additional cost you aren't factoring into the equation: opportunity cost. This is the money he loses by not focusing on iOS. He isn't saying the app isn't worth building, he's saying the app isn't worth him building.

Seriously, these term are generous as far as these kinds of deals go, but I'm not sure you could make money on it. It would really depend on how good other existing clients are.

He's going further than saying it's not worth him building, he's saying it's not worth building at all. If it was worth building, he would hire someone to do it for him. He's saying he could accept it if it falls into his lap, costing him exactly $0.

   If it was worth building, he would hire someone to do it for him

Managing people isn't only expensive, it's something a lot of people don't want to do.

I think none of this is relevant, it's pretty clear Arment personally doesn't believe that anyone can make an 'Android Instapaper' with the same quality, features, and level of support, running on enough compatible devices and sold through enough Android marketplaces, to make it _as profitable_ as just concentrating on iOS and be done with it.

The challenge he puts forward is for someone who disagrees to take up. Personally, looking at the Android ecosystem and the quality of applications in the Android Marketplace, I think he's right. It's perfectly possible to write great Android apps, and many exist, but if you look at who makes them, they are without exception applications made by big corporations who don't make money off the apps themselves, but from associated services, ads, etc.

The cost for him to make an andriod app would be much higher than an experienced andriod dev team since he has almost no experience developing on andriod phones

Um. Seriously?

You've got an established brand, established channels for publicity, all the backend stuff covered, a completed API and all of the specifications worked out for you? And you'd not be happy to collect half the proceeds in perpetuity? I'd be thrilled with a quarter of that action. 50% is generous.

That sounds like an awesome deal to me. This guy has already built the business. It's turn-key. Hell, if I were an Android developer, I would start tonight.

You could just write the app and keep the profits yourself, you'd lose the free publicity but you'd be the best instapaper app for android anyway.

No, you couldn't, as you wouldn't have access to the API.

The article mentions you can pay a fee to get access, is that not so?

This is for users, not developers.

Third party developers can only develop apps using the official API that paid-for users have access to. The official app doesn't require a subscription.

Oh, I see, thanks.

> But a 50/50 rev split for merely receiving Marco's blessing and promotion?

And the dropping of the subscription for users.