If you do good work and report it, you'll get paid accordingly.
Either its an open program or a closed program.
A closed program that allows submissions from others is an open program.
What reasons what they have to do it this way? My first guess is to tick some checkbox.
If they had explicitly said that it was an open program, they would have had to scale up their efforts to support the entire world of vulnerability researchers, or risk disappointing people for not responding quickly enough.
Put another way - if you are not part of the invited group, and you submit an issue, but do so poorly, or without a clear Proof-of-Concept, and concise description, you can reasonably expect to hear no response from Apple, with no grounds to complain that they ignored you. But, at the same time, if you have a clear exploit, well documented, with impact and proof-of-concept, then their is still an avenue to submit it to Apple, but it's up to Apple to decide how they wish to prioritize.
Thanks, that does make a lot of sense.
My main exposure to bug bounty programs has been through the blog post of submitters, that don't give much insight to the resources/support that e.g. Apple would need to give.
Or it's something in between. Few things in life are or have to be binary -- that's a very CS mindset.
Apple wants to start it as closed, so they have full discretion as to what "others" they will accept (since they've already said they're not just accepting anybody).
This helps them build up their teams and infrastructure for it with the fewer, pre-selected, people, and gives them time to expand (or even evaluate if they need expanding to fully open anyway, perhaps a smaller/controlled list works well enough too).
At the same time, the "we might accept non-invited third parties" gives them the opportunity not to miss out on any important unexpected collaborators / bugs.