Back when Android had very strict permission controls I think this argument was quite valid since there was a market competitor without a locked down store but with a similar level of control. Control of the phone can't only be achieved by curating a store - it can also be achieved by allowing clear user controls and a phone without the locked down store but with the controls doesn't exist... So I can't go anywhere.
"I like that TrueCaller on my iOS device works for most features without getting any permission from me, while on Android it refuses to buzz from the splash screen unless you give it every permission - including full contact access and phone.
I like that on iOS a famous payment app from India (PhonePe) works flawlessly with zero permissions but on Android? It needs both location and contacts to even function - neither of these are mandatory for their functioning but still they do and can get away with that.
You know WhatsApp doesn't let you use "Status" feature unless you provide Storage permission to it on Android (I doubt they need it just to shows those images, videos, and texts)."
I think it's important to note that the mere existence of controls, i.e buttons that do a thing, don't actually end up achieving their goal of improving user privacy unless there's also enforcement of usage patterns. You can't get away with stuff like this on iOS, and it's clear by these accounts that the same companies would do the same on iOS if they could.
Apple doesn't have to change it's policies when (not if) it is forced to allow people to install alternative stores. Those companies will still have to play nice with apples terms if they want to remain on Apple's app store.
