Paying Netflix $0.53/H, etc.

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Comparing entertainment services by dollars spent per hour of use highlights how cheap most digital media is relative to other leisure activities, but also how usage patterns and household sharing can make averages misleading. Commenters contrast streaming platforms, games, books, and even dining out on a cost‑per‑hour basis, while noting that quality of time and personal habits often matter more than raw price. The thread broadens into how best to fund creators—subscription bundles, Patreon-style support, or micropayments—and the practical, technical, and psychological hurdles each model faces.

Methodology and Data Quality

  • Many commenters like the $/hour framing but see the specific numbers as rough at best.
  • Netflix hours, Spotify hours, and game pricing are called out as especially shaky; the original post also warns the data “are probably incorrect.”
  • Several people stress that median vs mean matters, and that heavy users likely skew averages.
  • One person builds an interactive spreadsheet so readers can plug in their own usage.

Netflix and Streaming Usage

  • Debate over Netflix usage: some think 43 hours/month (≈1.1 h/day) is high; others say that’s easily matched or exceeded, especially for whole households or people who leave TV on as background.
  • Older and retired viewers and account sharing are cited as reasons high averages are plausible.
  • A 2020 stat of 3.2 hours/day per US subscriber is mentioned, but others note that was peak lockdown and the market has since fragmented.
  • US Netflix pricing is clarified (up to $23/month for 4K). Some unsubscribed after price hikes.

Comparisons: Spotify, Books, Games, YouTube

  • Several doubt Spotify’s “5 hours/month” figure; individuals report 50–90 hours/month.
  • Kindle Unlimited is great value for heavy, fast readers, but many find its catalog misaligned with what they want. Libraries plus Libby/OverDrive are commonly used alternatives, though selection varies.
  • Games: one camp argues many AAA titles yield poor $/h (10–20h completed for $60); another cites long 20–60h+ “main story” games and says ~$2/h is common and acceptable.
  • Some argue $/h is too reductionist; a short, impactful game or a cinema visit can be good value despite high $/h.
  • YouTube Premium is widely seen as paying mainly to remove ads, with very low effective $/h.

Supporting Creators, Bundling, and Micropayments

  • Several struggle with supporting many individual creators at $5–10/month each; bundling (YouTube Premium, Nebula, Patreon-style aggregation) feels more economical and fair.
  • There’s interest in a Patreon-like “pool” subscription automatically split across creators based on engagement.
  • Micropayment schemes (Brave/BAT, Flattr, Web Monetization) are debated:
    • Pros: fine-grained, usage-based support.
    • Cons: creator consent, complexity, fees, tax headaches, and low earnings for most.

Broader Value‑per‑Hour Reflections

  • Some extend the $/h lens to food, fashion, smartphones, piracy setups, and phone amortization, but note that “quality of hour” and memorability can outweigh raw cost.