Pope has split the ask in two, "to ensure that the rules that Apple applies are fair, and to compensate the losses that British companies have suffered" [5]. Only the second half is something a tribunal pays out, and the size of it is already reported two ways: filed as £2bn, valued by Reuters at $2.7bn [1][2], which implies a rate of about 1.35 dollars to the pound [1]. Neither number is a finding. The claim has to be certified before it proceeds, and the method for calculating developer losses is still to be argued [18].
For scale, the same tribunal found last October that Apple had abused its dominant position between 2015 and 2020 by overcharging App Store commissions, in a case worth around £1.5bn [11]. The new claim is about a third larger than that [3], and roughly 7.7 times the £260m Google paid to settle its UK Play Store class action rather than take a judgment [12][2].
The gate the developers object to [4] is drawn at a company boundary, and the useful evidence for the claimants is that the boundary has moved once already. In Germany, Apple rewrote its tracking-consent rules to end a Bundeskartellamt self-preferencing probe, which is the closest any authority has come to changing the design of the prompt [16]. None of the European findings binds a London tribunal, though they do let the claimants point at four competition authorities that examined the same conduct and did not simply accept the privacy justification [17]. Apple's own advertising business grew across the same period [9]. The commission argument runs on its own track, with the US Supreme Court agreeing to hear Apple's appeal against a contempt finding in the Epic case [14].
For anyone running a UK app business, the grid has two axes: whether a measurement path you rely on depends on an identifier the platform controls, and whether the platform sells a first-party product that does the same job. Two yeses put you in the quadrant this case is about, and under the tribunal's opt-out regime a certified class covers you unless you actively leave [10]. The figure that will decide your share of anything is not your prompt opt-in rate. It is paid payback period and attributable revenue per channel on either side of 2021, when the prompt cut the flow of identifiers mobile advertising had been built on [7]. Firms that kept those series have evidence of their own. Firms that swapped attribution vendors and never wrote down what the old one told them will be represented by somebody else's average.
