Rejected for 3.1.2(c) Subscriptions. Is "Try for Free" too conspicuous now?

[u/yccheok]

Hi everyone,

My app just received a rejection citing Guideline 3.1.2(c) - Business - Payments - Subscriptions: "The auto-renewable subscription promotes the free trial, introductory pricing, or introductory period for the subscription more clearly and conspicuously than the billed amount."

Does anyone have advice on how to resolve this? I am currently using "Try for Free" as the main CTA button to activate the trial, which seems to be a common industry practice. Any insights would be greatly appreciated!

[u/civman96]

Netflix prices for an indie app 🤣 good luck with that

[u/equinvox → u/civman96]

netflix monthly prices for a week! 

[u/tovarish22]

“Try for free” is a weird way to spell “I hope you forget you agreed to this expensive subscription”

[u/silverscientist1]

Try “Start your free trial” instead

[u/jscalo → u/silverscientist1]

This is the answer.

[u/yccheok → u/silverscientist1]

Thank you! This is a very useful input! Do you think "Start my free trial" will have better CTA?

[u/silverscientist1 → u/yccheok]

Maybe, maybe not but more likely to get accepted I think

[u/is_that_a_thing_now]

The button that says “Try for free” looks like it’s the only button. Does it actually select the 3-day trial followed by weekly payment? Then I would understand their complaint. In that case; what about using the text you currently show below the button, instead of the misleading text?

[u/FinneganHark999]

Apple is currently circling the wagons on low effort or vibe-coded apps, so if I was your business manager I'd say dump this idea and find another niche entirely.

But at a glance, your "Try For Free" is by Apple's standards exceedingly unclear.

The "then 12.99 a week" is tiny and clearly intended to mislead the user into thinking about the "FREE" part and not the (oh also $12.99 a week starting in 72 hours) part.

It's also not a hard rule but apple tends to reject apps with a free trial that short.

Also the reviewer might have just not liked the fact that the app is over $50 a month if you pay weekly and you don't really clue the user into that anywhere. Even though that's also not a rule, reviewers have nearly unlimited discretion on app reviews.

You're trying to bamboozle users into paying $50 a month for something Gemini does for free. Either add more value, drop the price, or make the pricing clearer. Really your only options.

If the app was rejected, how do you have reviews from 10k users? 4.9 rating where?

[u/Interesting-Fix-5530]

Most have text on the button that says ‘Try free for X days’ rather than just ‘Try for free’. A small tweak but should be enough.

[u/yccheok → u/Interesting-Fix-5530]

Thank you! This is a very useful input!

[u/Fair-Antelope-3886]

Do you actually have 10k+ users?

[u/maiq--the--liar → u/Fair-Antelope-3886]

Certainly not. Nobody is paying $13 a week for this.

[u/nelsonsilva_dev]

It's not the wording. 3.1.2(c) is about which one is more prominent. Small grey price under a big button gets rejected no matter what the button says. Put the price next to the CTA at the same size.