+1. Adding two thoughts. 1. I assume screen time translates to a stronger position in the market. Revenue-wise it might be negative, but I assume they have met

+1. Adding two thoughts. 1. I assume screen time translates to a stronger position in the market. Revenue-wise it might be negative, but I assume they have metrics showing that the less screen time a subscriber incurs, the more likely they are to cancel their subscription. I'd suppose there is a ceiling to this. I personally would imagine it's just as likely for someone to cancel their subscription if they watch 5 hours a week then if they watch 20-- they probably won't, but I'd suppose at some point is just about holding a strong position? Forming habits? Someone who watches 5 hours a week might be watching one or two shows, will run out of things to watch, and might will jump ship if they find that next show somewhere else. Or they might have enough things to do outside of Netflix they'll just do more of that after they are done watching. 2. Which brings me to my second thought. In general, in my opinion it's wrong and creepy that Netflix has this wide view of what it's competing against. Including sleep [1] and now Fortnite is getting kind of borderline "anything that people do with their free time" at this point. Sleep: it's general economic downtime. It's time everyone could spend doing something else, but you don't see KFC competing against it. Imagine-- "People are sleeping too much! That slows digestion, so they get less hungry. We gotta compete against that!" Videogames: Not saying Fortnite is the healthiest of activities, but sheesh, not all screen time is the same. Sometimes I get tired of passive consumption and want to do something that will at least require me to press some buttons and strategize a bit. [1]: https://www.recode.net/2017/4/17/15334122/netflix-sleep-competitor-amazon-hbo https://www.recode.net/2017/4/17/15334122/netflix-sleep-comp...