Netflix Inc (NFLX) 2020 Q3 法說會逐字稿

Good afternoon, and welcome to the Netflix Q3 2020 Earnings Interview.

下午好，歡迎來到 Netflix 2020 年第三季財報採訪。

I'm Spencer Wang, VP of IR and Corporate Development.

我是 Spencer Wang，IR 和企業發展副總裁。

Joining me today are Co-CEO, Reed Hastings; Co-CEO and Chief Content Officer, Ted Sarandos; CFO, Spence Neumann; and COO and Chief Product Officer, Greg Peters.

今天加入我的是聯合執行長 Reed Hastings；聯合執行長兼首席內容長 Ted Sarandos；財務長史賓塞‧諾依曼；首席營運長兼首席產品長 Greg Peters。

Our interviewer this quarter is Kannan Venkateshwar from Barclays.

本季我們的訪談者是來自巴克萊銀行的 Kannan Venkateshwar。

As a reminder, we'll be making forward-looking statements, and actual results may vary.

提醒一下，我們將做出前瞻性陳述，實際結果可能會有所不同。

With that, let me turn it to you, Kannan, for his first question.

那麼，讓我向您提出第一個問題，Kannan。

Thank you, Spencer, and thanks, everybody, for joining us.

謝謝你，史賓塞，也謝謝大家加入我們。

Broadly, Spencer, if you could start -- Spence, if we could start with you, given the subscriber numbers, despite you're cautioning us last quarter about growth, all of us can't get -- can't help ourselves from getting enthusiastic every quarter about your subscriber trends.

從廣義上講，斯賓塞，如果你可以開始- 斯賓塞，如果我們可以從你開始，考慮到訂戶數量，儘管你在上個季度警告我們有關增長的問題，但我們所有人都無法-無法幫助自己每季都對您的訂閱者趨勢充滿熱情。

But maybe it would be useful to just contextualize the growth -- the net add number this quarter.

但也許將成長（本季的淨增加數）放在背景中分析會很有用。

Could you help us understand how the gross adds -- gross additions trended from Q2 to Q3?

您能否幫助我們了解從第二季到第三季的總增加趨勢？

And would you expect gross adds to come down a bit sequentially?

您預計總增加額會持續下降嗎？

And how much of this is an account of chance?

其中有多少是偶然因素？

So if you could just break down the quarterly sub-numbers a little bit and give us some color, that might be useful.

因此，如果您能稍微分解季度子數據並給我們一些顏色，這可能會很有用。

Yes, sure, Kannan, thanks.

是的，當然，卡南，謝謝。

So first, sort of stepping back, if you think about the Q3 subscriber numbers, it was really very much as expected for the quarter.

首先，退一步來說，如果你考慮第三季的訂戶數量，你會發現它確實非常符合本季的預期。

To look at Q3, the biggest impact was really the first half of the year and that giant pull-forward in subscriber additions in the first half of the year with COVID.

從第三季來看，最大的影響其實是上半年，以及上半年因新冠疫情而大幅增加的用戶數。

When we have that much pull-forward, we expected and knew there'd be some level of slowdown, and we tried to project it as best we could.

當我們有如此大的推動力時，我們預計並知道會出現一定程度的放緩，並且我們盡力預測它。

But it's super, super difficult to forecast with perfect precision given all the unknowns and factors.

但考慮到所有的未知因素和因素，要以完美的精確度進行預測是非常非常困難的。

So we actually came pretty close to land within 300,000 members on a member base of roughly 195 million.

因此，在大約 1.95 億會員基礎上，我們實際上非常接近將會員數量限制在 30 萬以內。

That's pretty much forecast noise, and there's a number of ins and outs.

這幾乎是預測噪音，而且有很多細節。

But the general underlying metrics, as you say, are very healthy.

但正如你所說，一般的基本指標非常健康。

So retention remains well at very healthy levels, better than we were a year ago.

因此，保留率仍然保持在非常健康的水平，比一年前更好。

Acquisition remains strong.

收購依然強勁。

So you're just seeing some kind of a natural, kind of because of that pull-forward effect, some slowdown.

所以你只是看到某種自然的、由於前拉效應、一些減速。

But we don't want to lose sight of the fact that to measure our business, it's really not based on any single quarter of growth fluctuation.

但我們不想忽視這樣一個事實：衡量我們的業務實際上並不是基於任何一個季度的成長波動。

It's really about -- it should be measured in multi-quarter and multi-year trends.

這實際上是——應該用多季度和多年趨勢來衡量。

And so if you look at the past 3 quarters, year-to-date through Q3, we've grown by a little over 28 million members, which is more than we grew all of last year.

因此，如果你看看過去 3 個季度，從年初至今到第三季度，我們的會員數量增長了略多於 2800 萬，這比去年全年的增長還要多。

So super healthy growth, and the underlying both top line and bottom line growth and retention trends in our business are healthy.

因此，超級健康的成長，以及我們業務中潛在的頂線和底線成長以及保留趨勢都是健康的。

And Kannan, maybe if I could just add, with respect to more context on the subscriber trends.

Kannan，也許我可以補充更多關於訂戶趨勢的背景資訊。

As Spence said, we just really don't overfocus on any 90-day period.

正如 Spence 所說，我們確實不會過度關注任何 90 天的時間段。

And just to give you an example, if the quarter was 48 hours longer, we would have come in slightly above our guidance forecast.

舉個例子，如果該季度延長 48 小時，我們的業績將略高於我們的指導預測。

So again, as Spence characterized it, I think, really just forecast noise more than anything else.

再說一次，正如斯賓塞所描述的那樣，我認為，實際上只是預測噪音而不是其他任何東西。

Got it.

知道了。

And it looks like organic ARPU in Lat Am was particularly high.

看起來拉丁美洲的有機 ARPU 特別高。

I know you had some price increases earlier in the year as a tax pass-through.

我知道今年早些時候，作為稅收轉嫁，你們的價格有所上漲。

I mean did that have any impact on growth because that was one of the regions which seems to have come in a bit lower?

我的意思是，這對成長有任何影響嗎，因為那是似乎排名較低的地區之一？

And I guess also, if you could contextualize guidance for next year, you did point out that paid net adds will be down next year, first half, at least based on your expectations.

我想，如果你能結合明年的指導，你確實指出，明年上半年的付費淨增加將會下降，至少根據你的預期。

So how are you thinking about the impact of pull-forward while modeling next year's numbers?

那麼，在對明年的數字進行建模時，您如何考慮前推的影響？

If you could just give us some color around that, it might help us understand it a bit better.

如果您能給我們一些相關的說明，可能會幫助我們更好地理解它。

Greg, maybe you want to take the Lat Am price question, and then I'll take the next year and then pass it over to Spence.

格雷格，也許你想回答拉丁美洲的價格問題，然後我會回答明年的問題，然後將其傳遞給斯彭斯。

Yes.

是的。

Sounds good.

聽起來不錯。

And I think, Kannan, it's -- again, it's easy to over-rotate on what we're seeing specifically quarter-to-quarter.

我認為，卡南，再次強調，我們很容易對每個季度所看到的情況進行過度輪換。

And if you look at sort of the 9 months, we see 5 million paid net adds in Lat Am, which is a very healthy growth for us on that period.

如果你看看過去 9 個月的情況，我們會發現拉丁美洲的付費用戶淨增加了 500 萬，這對我們來說是一個非常健康的成長。

So I wouldn't overread anything specifically, and it's more, I think, the pull-forward effect.

所以我不會過度解讀任何具體內容，我認為更多的是前拉效應。

And then over to you, Reed.

然後就輪到你了，里德。

We've been doing high-20s net adds per year for 4 years and this year, on guidance, with 34 million.

4 年來，我們每年的淨增加量一直維持在 20 多歲左右，而今年，根據指導，淨增加量為 3,400 萬。

So we've set all kinds of new records this year.

所以今年我們創造了各種新紀錄。

So the pull-forward into next year is relatively modest, in sort of that 5 million or 6 million delta as opposed to the second half of this year, again, where the pull-forward effect from the first half is very strong.

因此，明年的拉力相對較小，相當於 500 萬或 600 萬的增量，而今年下半年，上半年的拉力效應非常強勁。

So there's probably a little bit of the effect in Q1 from the pull-forward, maybe a little bit less in Q2, but it will wash out.

因此，第一季的前拉可能會產生一些影響，第二季的影響可能會小一些，但它會被消除。

It's not permanent or long term.

這不是永久的或長期的。

So I think in terms of modeling it, there's the underlying quality of the service.

所以我認為在建模方面，存在著服務的潛在品質。

How many hours do we generate?

我們能生產多少小時？

How much word-of-mouth?

口碑有多少？

And that's improving at some relatively steady rate.

而且這種情況正在以相對穩定的速度改善。

And then our growth sort of seesaws around that number depending on the particular conditions going on in that quarter.

然後我們的成長會圍繞這個數字上下波動，這取決於該季度發生的具體情況。

But year after year, it's fundamentally followed that improvement in the service growth curve.

但年復一年，它從根本上遵循了服務成長曲線的改善。

Spence?

斯彭斯？

I think you both hit on most of it.

我想你們都抓住了大部分內容。

I would just emphasize that in the letter, Kannan, we're really talking mostly about the year-over-year comparison for the first half of '21 versus the first half of '20, and that's because of the dynamic that Reed was mentioning.

我想強調的是，Kannan，在信中，我們實際上主要討論的是 21 年上半年與 20 年上半年的同比比較，這是因為里德提到的動態。

If you look at the first half of this year, again, we grew by 26 million members in the first 2 quarters of 2020.

再看看今年上半年，我們在 2020 年前兩季增加了 2,600 萬會員。

That's more than twice the level of growth we had in 2019.

這是 2019 年成長水準的兩倍多。

So again, we're just -- we're sort of growing through that big acceleration in our member base.

再說一次，我們只是－我們正在透過會員基礎的大幅加速而成長。

So we shouldn't expect year-over-year first half to be comparable.

因此，我們不應期望上半年具有可比性。

Got it.

知道了。

Just try and temper that enthusiasm, Kannan.

試著調節一下這種熱情吧，卡南。

That's fair.

這還算公平。

So I guess one component which can help us understand this a little bit better, maybe the engagement levels.

所以我想有一個因素可以幫助我們更好地理解這一點，也許是參與度。

And obviously, because of the work-from-home environment, there was an engagement lift across the board on streaming services in general.

顯然，由於在家工作的環境，串流媒體服務的參與度總體上有所提升。

But in some ways, you guys are able to benefit from almost a pure experiment in some ways as different countries reopen at different times, and you're able to see what that does to engagement levels.

但在某些方面，隨著不同國家在不同時間重新開放，你們能夠在某種程度上從幾乎純粹的實驗中受益，並且你們能夠看到這對參與程度有何影響。

So as this process plays out around the world, is there any structural lift in engagement you guys have seen in markets that have opened up versus markets that may still not be open?

因此，隨著這個過程在世界各地展開，你們在已經開放的市場與可能尚未開放的市場中看到的參與度是否有任何結構性提升？

And how much of a tailwind could that be structurally longer term?

從結構上看，這能帶來多大的長期推動力？

Or how much of that could become a tough comp next year?

或者其中有多少會成為明年的艱難競爭？

We do look at some of this, but we try not to get overly focused on the COVID effects because they're very onetime in nature.

我們確實關注了其中的一些問題，但我們盡量不要過度關注新冠病毒的影響，因為它們本質上是一次性的。

And by and large now, engagement, churn, all of those metrics are like we would have expected from a year ago.

總的來說，現在的參與度、流失率，所有這些指標都像我們一年前的預期一樣。

So think of that as a minor background effect.

因此，請將其視為次要的背景效應。

And there was the temporary learning when there's no sports.

沒有運動的時候還有臨時學習。

But it's like, well, it's not really that interesting of finding because it's just not relevant to the world.

但這就像，嗯，發現它並不是那麼有趣，因為它與世界無關。

Now we're back in a world with partial sports.

現在我們又回到了一個只有部分運動的世界。

And it's fine, and we're growing.

這很好，我們正在成長。

So again, we compete so broadly.

再說一次，我們的競爭如此廣泛。

We compete for time against TNF, TikTok and YouTube as well as HBO as well as Fortnite.

我們與 TNF、TikTok、YouTube、HBO 以及 Fortnite 爭奪時間。

So really, the limiter for us is what's the quality of our service, how often, how many nights do you say, "Oh my God, I want to go to Netflix and watch the next show."

所以說，對我們來說，真正的限制因素是我們的服務質量，以及您多久、多少個晚上說“天哪，我想去 Netflix 觀看下一個節目”。

And Ted, I guess from -- one of the comments in the release was the goal of shooting 150 productions by year-end.

我猜泰德 (Ted) 在新聞稿中的評論之一是到年底拍攝 150 部作品的目標。

Yes.

是的。

So how does that compare to what your initial plans may have been?

那麼，這與您最初的計劃相比如何？

Because the free cash flow number this quarter is really strong, which tells me that there's probably a lot more content you were initially planning versus what's happening.

因為本季的自由現金流數字非常強勁，這告訴我，與正在發生的事情相比，您最初計劃的內容可能要多得多。

So if you could just give us some color around the cadence.

所以你能否給我們一些關於節奏的色彩。

Yes.

是的。

Like we pointed out, since the COVID shutdowns, we've completed production on over 50 productions, and we expect another 150 before the year is over.

正如我們所指出的，自新冠疫情停工以來，我們已經完成了 50 多部作品的製作，預計在今年年底前將完成 150 部作品。

So all that ramp up puts us back to nearly fully operational in most parts of the world.

因此，所有這些增加使我們在世界大部分地區恢復了幾乎全面運作。

Those productions may go a little slower than we had planned.

這些製作可能比我們計劃的要慢一些。

But materially, we are back in business in production in most places of the world, including in North America that have come on slower.

但從實質上講，我們在世界上大多數地方都恢復了生產業務，包括成長較慢的北美地區。

So we've got -- so I think we'll be -- we're looking at the '21 slate, everything that we forecast for '21, we expect to hit in '21 with a few minor exceptions and some maybe a little more back-weighted than we had planned for earlier -- last year, but we planned it all coming out.

所以我們已經——所以我想我們會——我們正在研究 21 年的名單，我們對 21 年的預測，我們預計會在 21 年實現，除了一些小的例外，有些可能是比我們去年的計劃稍微落後一點，但我們計劃將其全部推出。

And I think the thing that we've really been amazed by has been the adaptivity of our production communities to step up to the plate in these new COVID protocols and get the work done in such an incredible way and then so safely.

我認為，真正讓我們感到驚訝的是我們的生產社區的適應性，他們在這些新的新冠協議中採取了行動，並以如此令人難以置信的方式安全地完成了工作。

We've had a couple of shutdowns, and I really think that we're in a place right now where we should expect that to happen, that we'll have production shutdown.

我們已經停產了幾次，我真的認為我們現在應該預料到這種情況會發生，我們將停產。

And the art of it is how quickly and safely can you reopen.

它的藝術在於你能多快、多安全地重新開放。

And we've been going through that in different parts of the world every day.

我們每天都在世界不同地區經歷這種情況。

But right now, I'd say that we're back to near steady state in physical production.

但現在，我想說我們的實體生產已回到接近穩定的狀態。

Got it.

知道了。

And Greg, from your perspective, when you think about the price increase decision recently, I think there was a price increase in Canada and Australia.

格雷格，從您的角度來看，當您考慮最近的漲價決定時，我認為加拿大和澳洲出現了漲價。

Is this based more on some kind of an algorithm around content release slate and subscriber momentum?

這是否更多地基於某種圍繞內容發布清單和訂閱者動力的演算法？

Or is this based more on the strategic goal of where you want to be with respect to ARPUs over a given time frame?

或者這更多地基於您希望在給定時間範圍內實現 ARPU 的策略目標？

So how should we think about the cadence of price increases going forward given that productions are restarting now?

那麼，鑑於現在正在重啟生產，我們該如何看待未來價格上漲的節奏呢？

Yes.

是的。

No magic algorithm, but the core model we have is, and what we think really our responsibility and our job is, is to take the money that our members give us every month and invest that as judiciously, as smartly as we can and creating new amazing stories.

沒有神奇的演算法，但我們擁有的核心模型是，我們認為我們真正的責任和工作是，利用我們的會員每月給我們的錢，並盡可能明智地進行投資，並創造新的精彩的故事。

We've got titles that are coming out across an increasing range of genres, amazing movies like Old Guard and Extraction and more animation like Over the Moon and Willoughbys and Klaus, and so just basically delivering more value is for our members, better product experiences.

我們推出了越來越多類型的影片、《老守衛》和《驚天營救》等令人驚嘆的電影，以及《月球之上》和《威洛比與克勞斯》等更多動畫，因此基本上上為我們的會員提供更多價值、更好的產品體驗。

And if we do that well and we seek to basically every day be better about pretty much every component of how we're investing in that and make that efficiency and that effectiveness better, we will deliver more value to our members, and we'll occasionally go back and ask those members to pay a little bit more to keep that virtuous cycle of investment and value creation going.

如果我們做得好，並且我們基本上每天都力求在投資方式的幾乎每個組成部分上都做得更好，並提高效率和效果，我們將為我們的會員帶來更多價值，我們將偶爾回去請這些成員多付一點錢，以保持投資和價值創造的良性循環。

And as we said before, we look at every country independently.

正如我們之前所說，我們獨立地看待每個國家。

So instead of an algorithm, we're just basically assessing, okay, how many new popular titles have we delivered, what are local language originals in that particular country looking like, what's the slate that's coming looking like, what are the fundamental metrics, right, engagement and churn, what do those look like.

因此，我們不是使用演算法，而是基本上評估，好吧，我們提供了多少新的流行遊戲，該特定國家/地區的本地語言原創內容是什麼樣子，即將發布的內容是什麼樣子，基本指標是什麼，是的，參與度和流失率，這些是什麼樣的。

And then we just -- we do an assessment.

然後我們就進行評估。

And we say do we believe that we're really delivering more value to our members and, if so, do we think it's the right time to go back and ask them to pay a bit more so we can again keep that cycle going.

我們說我們是否相信我們真的為我們的會員提供了更多價值，如果是這樣，我們是否認為現在是回去要求他們支付更多費用的合適時機，以便我們可以再次保持這個循環。

And I think the one other important thing to note here, something, a north star that we hold close to our heart in this whole process, is we think that we are just an incredible entertainment value, and we very much want to remain an incredible value as we continue to improve the service and grow.

我認為這裡要注意的另一件重要的事情是，我們在整個過程中緊緊抓住的北極星，是我們認為我們只是一個令人難以置信的娛樂價值，我們非常希望保持一個令人難以置信的價值。隨著我們不斷改進服務和成長，我們將獲得價值。

And now that you're in a more normal pricing environment and some of the metrics that you mentioned just now in terms of engagement levels and so on and so on, I mean, when you analyze different markets, is there room for the recent price increases in a couple of markets to expand as we go forward over the next few quarters?

現在你處在一個更正常的定價環境中，還有你剛才提到的一些指標，比如參與度等等，我的意思是，當你分析不同的市場時，最近的價格還有空間嗎？隨著我們在未來幾季的發展，一些市場的成長是否會擴大？

Yes.

是的。

I think I won't comment or speculate on any specific changes, but that basic model that we just described, if we continue to do a great job at investing and we feel like there's ample opportunity to deliver more value, and you heard from Ted the sort of the number of original productions that we're doing and increasing even under these conditions that number, and if we do that, then we feel like there is that opportunity to occasionally go back and then ask members where we've delivered that extra value in those countries to pay a little bit more.

我想我不會評論或推測任何具體的變化，但我們剛才描述的基本模型，如果我們繼續在投資方面做得很好，並且我們覺得有足夠的機會來提供更多價值，你從泰德那裡聽到了即使在這種情況下，我們正在製作並增加的原創作品數量，如果我們這樣做，那麼我們覺得有機會偶爾回去，然後詢問會員我們在哪裡交付了這些作品在那些國家的額外價值要多付一點錢。

Got it.

知道了。

And in the U.S., I mean, you've also done away with the free tier recently.

我的意思是，在美國，你們最近也取消了免費套餐。

And I think U.S. is one of the last markets where you've done this.

我認為美國是最後這樣做的市場之一。

Is this because most of the new additions in the U.S. are now people who already have been subscribers in the past?

這是因為現在美國新增的大多數用戶都是過去已經訂閱過的用戶嗎？

I mean could you help us understand the decision to walk away from the free tier in the U.S.?

我的意思是，您能否幫助我們理解放棄美國免費套餐的決定？

Yes.

是的。

Like most things that we do, we're constantly assessing and testing and trying to understand what's working, what's working best, how do we improve.

就像我們所做的大多數事情一樣，我們不斷地評估和測試並試圖了解什麼是有效的、什麼是最有效的以及我們如何改進。

And we do that with our marketing and promotion tactics as well, one of the most effective ways to introduce Netflix to people in different countries around the world.

我們也透過行銷和促銷策略來做到這一點，這是向世界各地不同國家的人們介紹 Netflix 最有效的方法之一。

And based on that testing and that actual performance, we've shifted those tactics, as you noted, in many, many countries, including the United States.

正如您所指出的，根據該測試和實際表現，我們已經在包括美國在內的許多國家/地區改變了這些策略。

But we also seek to innovate and come up with what are new ways that we can use to introduce Netflix to new members.

但我們也尋求創新，想出可以用來向新會員介紹 Netflix 的新方法。

And so an idea that we're excited about, and we'll see how it goes, but we think that giving everyone in a country access to Netflix for free for a weekend could be a great way to expose a bunch of new people to the amazing stories that we have, the service, how the service works, really create an event and hopefully get a bunch of those folks to sign up.

因此，我們對這個想法感到興奮，我們會看看它會如何發展，但我們認為，讓一個國家/地區的每個人在周末免費訪問 Netflix 可能是讓一群新人接觸到 Netflix 的好方法。我們擁有的令人驚嘆的故事、服務、服務的運作方式，真正創造了一個活動，並希望吸引很多人來報名。

So we're going to try that in India, and we'll see how that goes.

所以我們將在印度進行嘗試，看看效果如何。

And that's just an example of the kind of innovation that we seek to do in this space.

這只是我們在這個領域尋求創新的一個例子。

That's interesting.

那很有意思。

So I guess that dovetails into a question I have for Ted, which is more around some of the shows that have been licensed or reverse-licensed, if I can use that term, to cable networks as well as services like Pluto.

所以我想這與我向 Ted 提出的一個問題相吻合，這個問題更多的是圍繞一些已經獲得許可或反向許可的節目（如果我可以使用這個詞的話）到有線電視網絡以及 Pluto 等服務。

And obviously, some of these are not your productions, they're owned by somebody else.

顯然，其中一些不是您的作品，它們屬於其他人所有。

But is this a bigger opportunity in general with your originals?

但這對於你的原創作品來說是一個更大的機會嗎？

And the opportunity to stream Netflix for free either as an event or even as a starting tier, as a mainstream product with your licensed content or your legacy content, which may not be as productive anymore with your existing base, is that something that you're willing to explore in a bigger way?

免費串流Netflix 的機會，無論是作為一項活動，還是作為起始層，作為包含您的授權內容或遺留內容的主流產品，這些內容在您現有的基礎上可能不再那麼高效，這就是您想要的東西。你願意以更大的方式探索嗎？

Yes.

是的。

I think we're always looking at new different ways for people to get a sample of the content that everyone's talking about, including trying the service out here and there in different ways.

我認為我們一直在尋找新的不同方式，讓人們獲得每個人都在談論的內容樣本，包括以不同的方式嘗試服務。

I think licensing our content to other people are -- mostly, I think it's helpful for us to keep our original content on Netflix so people understand the value proposition of Netflix.

我認為將我們的內容授權給其他人主要是，我認為這對我們在 Netflix 上保留原創內容很有幫助，這樣人們就能了解 Netflix 的價值主張。

And we have seen our ability to grow a show that was on another network or a smaller outlet pretty meaningfully, but we've not necessarily seen it the other way around when we've experimented in the past with things like actually with Narcos, when we licensed it to Univision in the past, trying to get people to try to sample the show.

我們已經看到了我們在另一個網絡或較小的頻道上製作一部非常有意義的節目的能力，但當我們過去嘗試過像《毒梟》這樣的事情時，我們不一定會看到相反的情況，當我們過去將其授權給Univision，試圖讓人們嘗試觀看該節目。

We don't own that show, Gaumont does, and the deal that they did was something that -- it'll be interesting to see how -- if it lifts the awareness and interest in Narcos, but it's on a relatively small platform relative to Netflix.

我們不擁有那個節目，高蒙擁有，他們所做的交易是這樣的——看看如何提升人們對《毒梟》的認識和興趣，這將是很有趣的，但它是在一個相對較小的平台上進行的到 Netflix。

Got it.

知道了。

And Reed, from your perspective, there have been -- and I guess, Ted, this is for you as well, but there have been a bunch of management changes recently or over the course of last year, starting with Spence, of course.

里德，從你的角度來看，我想，特德，這也適合你，但最近或去年發生了一系列管理層變動，當然從斯彭斯開始。

But there've been changes in marketing -- in the marketing leadership and recently on the content side.

但行銷方面已經發生了變化——行銷領導力以及最近在內容方面。

And voluntary churn, like you pointed out in your book, I think, voluntary churn at Netflix is really low compared to other organizations.

至於自願流失，就像您在書中指出的那樣，我認為，與其他組織相比，Netflix 的自願流失確實很低。

So it feels a lot more deliberate in some of these choices that you're making.

因此，你在做出的某些選擇中感覺更加深思熟慮。

So could you help us think through what drove these changes?

那麼您能幫助我們思考是什麼推動了這些改變嗎？

And are these changes more or less done?

這些改變或多或少已經完成了嗎？

And organizationally, where are you right now?

從組織上來說，你現在在哪裡？

Well, I can talk to you on one of the major changes that we're really excited about, which is I was -- restructured the content team to be more like our film team and more like our animation team and have one global organization.

好吧，我可以和你們談談我們真正感到興奮的一項重大變化，那就是我——重組了內容團隊，使其更像我們的電影團隊，更像我們的動畫團隊，並擁有一個全球性組織。

And to run that, I tapped Bela Bajaria who's been with Netflix for a long time, has come in to start our unscripted group, brought in that team from scratch, and they developed this incredible unscripted slate that we have today, moved over to our local language original team, hugely successful.

為了運行這個項目，我聘請了貝拉·巴賈裡亞(Bela Bajaria)，她在Netflix 工作了很長時間，她來組建我們的無腳本小組，從頭開始組建該團隊，他們開發了我們今天擁有的令人難以置信的無腳本石板，並轉移到我們的本土語言原創團隊，取得巨大成功。

These are 2 areas of the business that are going to grow 3 or 4x over the next 3 to 5 years.

這兩個業務領域將在未來 3 到 5 年內成長 3 到 4 倍。

So I thought that she was really well suited to take on that organization.

所以我認為她非常適合擔任這個組織。

And she -- and in that English language scripted series business, she joined us from Paramount -- from Universal Television where she was the President and had brought us such shows as Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt and Master of None.

而她——在英語劇本系列業務中，她是從派拉蒙公司加入我們的——她是環球電視台的總裁，為我們帶來了《堅不可摧的金米·施密特》和《無為大師》等節目。

And she also orchestrated the -- to bring You on as a Netflix Original and delivered that first great season of Witcher.

她還精心策劃了《You》作為 Netflix 原創作品，並交付了《巫師》的第一季。

So I think Bela is going to be phenomenal running that group.

所以我認為貝拉在管理這個團隊時將會表現出色。

And then there's some changes after that, that whenever you put new change at the top, there's some downstream effects as well.

之後還有一些變化，每當你將新的變化放在頂部時，也會產生一些下游影響。

I think, Kannan, to your broader question, yes, we're always trying to broaden our talent as we take on bigger challenges.

我認為，卡南，對於你更廣泛的問題，是的，我們在應對更大的挑戰時一直在努力擴大我們的才能。

So Greg took on head of product about 3 or 4 years ago; Spence, CFO, about 1.5 years ago; Spencer, IR, about 8 years ago.

因此，大約三、四年前，格雷格就擔任了產品負責人； Spence，財務官，約 1.5 年前；史賓塞，IR，大約 8 年前。

And they all have grown into those roles.

他們都已經成長為這些角色。

But it's a normal model.

但這是一個正常的模型。

No one gets to keep the job for free.

沒有人可以免費保住這份工作。

You got to earn it every year, which is intensely challenging, and we all love that part of it.

你每年都必須贏得它，這是極具挑戰性的，我們都喜歡其中的一部分。

Got it.

知道了。

And Spence, my next question may make you squirm a little bit.

斯彭斯，我的下一個問題可能會讓你有點局促不安。

But Reed, last month, in an interview, I think you said something that, at least I hadn't realized, was essentially a Keeper Test move which was the change in CFO last year.

但是里德，上個月在一次採訪中，我認為你說了一些話，至少我沒有意識到，本質上是一個守門員測試舉措，即去年首席財務官的變動。

And you mentioned it was deliberate and you needed an entertainment company CFO, and therefore, it was time for a change.

你提到這是故意的，你需要一位娛樂公司財務官，因此，是時候做出改變了。

So to make a change at that level, to deliberately seek a CFO more attuned to what an entertainment company looks like, it seems like a face shift in how you think about the company, about what Netflix today is versus maybe a decade ago.

因此，要在這個層面上做出改變，刻意尋找一位更適合娛樂公司形象的財務官，你對公司、對今天的 Netflix 的看法與十年前相比，似乎會發生根本性的轉變。

Is that the right way to think about -- or interpret that comment?

這是思考或解釋該評論的正確方式嗎？

Yes, I think so broadly.

是的，我的想法很廣泛。

I mean we've been moving towards being an entertainment company for many years.

我的意思是，我們多年來一直致力於成為一家娛樂公司。

And our former CFO, David Wells, an extraordinary human being and a great CFO, and we offered him a chance to move to L.A. and to really lean into that, and he demurred.

我們的前財務長大衛威爾斯（David Wells）是一位非凡的人，也是一位偉大的首席財務官，我們為他提供了搬到洛杉磯並真正投入其中的機會，但他表示反對。

And he had done so well as a generalist and tech CFO.

作為一名多面手和技術首席財務官，他做得非常出色。

He wanted to stay with that.

他想堅持下去。

And then we felt super fortunate to recruit Spence Neumann who's been like the dream CFO for Netflix.

然後我們非常幸運地聘請了 Spence Neumann，他是 Netflix 夢想中的財務長。

So it might -- could not be better and so super fortunate.

所以這可能是——再好不過了，而且超級幸運。

That's great.

那太棒了。

And one of the things, I guess, which has surprised me over the course of the last year is the way most of you have spoken about the impact of content on growth, right?

我想，去年讓我感到驚訝的一件事是你們大多數人談論內容對成長的影響的方式，對嗎？

And I think this started around Q2 of last year when there was a big miss, and one of the reasons attributed was the content slate at that point.

我認為這一切始於去年第二季度，當時出現了重大失誤，原因之一是當時的內容板。

And now we increasingly talk about comps versus last year when you have a big show like Stranger Things.

現在我們越來越多地談論與去年相比的對比，當時有像《怪奇物語》這樣的大型節目。

I would have expected the opposite, to be honest.

老實說，我本來期望的是相反的情況。

I mean when you have 200 million subs and when the content slate is so big, content -- singular pieces of content should, in theory, become smaller parts of overall consumption, but seems like it's starting to have a bigger impact.

我的意思是，當你有 2 億訂閱者並且內容板如此之大時，理論上，單一內容應該成為整體消費的較小部分，但似乎它開始產生更大的影響。

Could you help us think through the content skew in consumption?

您能幫助我們思考一下消費中的內容偏差嗎？

Is that skew more or less over time?

隨著時間的推移，這種偏差是或多或少？

And why is that seemingly having a bigger effect?

為什麼這看起來有更大的影響？

Or is that just me reading too much into some of these comments?

或者只是我對其中一些評論讀得太多了？

It's just a little bit of math, Kannan.

這只是一點數學知識，Kannan。

And so let's say there's a 5% variation because of content on the margin.

假設由於邊緣內容而存在 5% 的差異。

And 5% used to be a small part of the growth, so then you really didn't notice it that much.

5%曾經只是成長的一小部分，所以當時你真的沒有註意到那麼多。

And now 5% might be half of the annual subscriber growth, so you noticed it much more.

現在 5% 可能是年度訂閱者成長的一半，所以你會更加註意到它。

I don't think it's particularly changed.

我不認為它有什麼特別的改變。

We are a little more sensitive to it.

我們對此比較敏感。

Again, on the growth, remember that if you have a theatrical business, you have up-year, down-year, the variation is in revenue.

再一次，關於成長，請記住，如果你有一家戲劇業務，你就會有同比增長、同比下降，變化在於收入。

In our case, the revenue is going up and up and up, but there's a little bit of wobble in that direction.

在我們的例子中，收入不斷上升，但在這個方向上有一點搖擺。

So I think that's what's -- I mean I don't think it's particularly more sensitive.

所以我認為這就是——我的意思是我不認為它特別敏感。

Like you say, we've got lots of hits, and we have The Crown coming up and kind of big returning series, we have Witcher coming up.

就像你說的，我們有很多熱門作品，我們還有《王冠》和大型回歸系列，我們還有《巫師》。

So there's a lot of big things coming.

所以有很多大事即將發生。

Got it.

知道了。

And so it's fair to say, I guess, that when you have a show like The Crown or The Witcher or Stranger Things coming on, every year that goes by, the impact of these shows to overall growth on a normalized basis, keeps coming down.

因此，我想，公平地說，當你有像《王冠》、《巫師》或《怪奇物語》這樣的節目上映時，每年，這些節目對整體增長的影響在正常化的基礎上不斷下降。

But on an absolute basis, it still has an impact.

但從絕對意義上來說，還是有影響力的。

So is that basically the way to read some of these comments?

那麼這基本上就是閱讀這些評論的方式嗎？

Correct.

正確的。

And because the growth rate has been steady, let's call that 30 million a year, round numbers, the percentage on the base is a bigger fraction of that, so you feel it more.

因為成長速度一直很穩定，我們可以稱之為每年 3000 萬，四捨五入的數字，基數的百分比是其中更大的一部分，所以你更能感覺到。

So from a practical standpoint as investors, it's a bigger deal.

因此，從投資者的實際角度來看，這是一件更重要的事情。

But remember, it's variations in the growth.

但請記住，這是成長的變化。

And the stunning thing is just big picture, outside of COVID, how steady the growth has been year after year after year, back to these underlying growth models like diffusion of word-of-mouth, Netflix is a better way to go, and then you capture a little more of that when you have a big show and then you have a shadow under that.

令人驚嘆的是大局，除了新冠疫情之外，年復一年的增長是多麼穩定，回到這些潛在的增長模式，比如口碑傳播，Netflix 是一個更好的選擇，然後當你有一場大型演出時，你會捕捉到更多的東西，然後你就會在它下面留下陰影。

So think of it as like a big general diffused model, and then you're just seeing a little surface variations that are happening.

因此，可以將其視為一個大型的通用擴散模型，然後您只會看到正在發生的一些表面變化。

Got it.

知道了。

And then in terms of the total number of titles, if I have this right, I think the total number of shows that you have on Netflix today is actually significantly lower than what you had when Netflix started streaming more than a decade ago.

然後就節目總數而言，如果我沒說錯的話，我認為現在 Netflix 上的節目總數實際上明顯低於 Netflix 十多年前開始串流媒體播放時的數量。

First of all, I don't know if that's true.

首先，我不知道這是不是真的。

I mean if that is true, then is that deliberate?

我的意思是，如果這是真的，那麼這是故意的嗎？

And how do you determine optimum volume?

如何確定最佳音量？

I guess that's the broader question?

我想這是一個更廣泛的問題？

How much is too much?

多少是太多了？

It is true that it's less because in the earlier days of Netflix, remember, we were trying to figure out what we could stream.

確實，它的數量較少，因為在 Netflix 的早期，請記住，我們試圖弄清楚我們可以串流什麼。

And we were licensing in bulk and volume, just a lot of content just to see what worked well versus today where we're much more deliberate about the programming.

我們大量授權了許多內容，只是為了看看哪些內容效果好，而今天我們對程式設計更加深思熟慮。

And we really don't focus that much on the title count.

我們確實不太關注標題數量。

Remember, in the early days of streaming, everyone was -- that was -- the marketing war was how many titles you had.

請記住，在串流媒體的早期，每個人——也就是說——行銷戰的重點是你擁有多少個影片。

But it turns out that doesn't -- it isn't that meaningful if people don't watch them.

但事實證明並非如此——如果人們不看它們，就沒那麼有意義了。

So what we've really done is concentrated on the titles that have a lot of impact and can aggregate big audiences and move the business forward and add a lot of value for our members.

因此，我們真正所做的就是專注於具有很大影響力、能夠聚集大量受眾、推動業務並為我們的會員增加大量價值的遊戲。

So we really don't focus on the title count.

所以我們其實並不關注標題數量。

But you are correct, it's significantly lower than it was when we first started streaming, I'd say, 10 years ago where we used to license an entire library of 800 films from somebody and nobody watched any of them.

但你是對的，它比 10 年前我們剛開始串流媒體時要低得多，當時我們從某人那裡獲得了包含 800 部電影的整個庫的許可，但沒有人觀看其中任何一部。

So it's really not a chase for how many titles, but are these the titles you can't live without.

所以，真正追求的不是有多少頭銜，而是這些頭銜是不是你離不開的。

Got it.

知道了。

And I guess, Ted, in one of your recent interviews, you indicated that the goal was to scale up to 6 animated feature films a year.

我想，特德，在您最近的一次採訪中，您表示目標是每年增加到 6 部動畫長片。

And if I'm not wrong, I think you guys are already doing more movies than the top 5 Hollywood studios put together.

如果我沒猜錯的話，我想你們製作的電影已經比好萊塢 5 強製片廠加起來還要多了。

So when you think about that kind of scale to build content, is quality a trade-off?

那麼，當您考慮建立內容的規模時，品質是一種權衡嗎？

I mean how do you maintain that balance between building scale on originals versus quality?

我的意思是，你如何在原創規模和品質之間保持平衡？

I'll tell you the thing that we've been working on and trying and doing, if you think about how many more original series we produce today than we used to and how many more we're producing relative to everybody else in the industry and around the world and yet, last year, we had 160 Emmy nominations for our television slate, which is the most honored single season of television in the history of the Emmys.

我會告訴你我們一直在努力、嘗試和做的事情，如果你想想我們今天比以前多製作了多少原創劇集，以及相對於業內其他人來說我們製作了多少原創劇集然而，去年，我們的電視節目獲得了160 項艾美獎提名，這是艾美獎歷史上最受尊敬的單季電視節目。

That kind of quality attracts more quality.

這種品質會吸引更多的品質。

We're doing that today in how we're building up our animation slate.

今天我們在建立動畫板時就是這麼做的。

Last year, we released 2 feature films that were nominated for the Academy Award for best animated feature.

去年，我們發行了兩部長片，獲得奧斯卡最佳動畫長片提名。

Both were pretty popular.

兩者都很受歡迎。

Klaus was extremely popular, also won the BAFTA award for best animated feature and 6 Annie Awards, which is a celebration by -- from animators of the best work of the year.

克勞斯非常受歡迎，也獲得了英國電影學院獎最佳動畫長片獎和 6 項安妮獎，這是由動畫師們慶祝的年度最佳作品。

And that kind of quality keeps attracting more quality.

而這種品質不斷吸引更多的品質。

So we're deep into our '21, '22, '23 animation slate, working with some of the greatest animators in the world, like Chris Nee and Jorge Gutierrez and Nora Twomey, Chris Williams, Alex Woo, all making the projects that they've been dying to make and making them at Netflix.

因此，我們深入研究 '21、'22、'23 動畫項目，與世界上一些最偉大的動畫師合作，例如 Chris Nee、Jorge Gutierrez、Nora Twomey、Chris Williams、Alex Woo，他們都製作了以下項目：他們一直渴望製作並在Netflix 上製作它們。

So we're really excited about it.

所以我們對此感到非常興奮。

We think that there's no quality trade-off for quantity.

我們認為，數量與質量之間沒有權衡。

And we think that there's a big appetite for film and a big appetite for animated features at Netflix.

我們認為 Netflix 對電影和動畫長片都有很大的興趣。

Got it.

知道了。

And Greg, if I could switch to a slightly different topic.

格雷格，如果我可以換一個稍微不同的主題。

Recently, there have been headlines around the Google Play Store changes in payment terms, especially for in-app purchases.

最近，有關 Google Play 商店支付條款變更（尤其是應用程式內購買）的新聞頭條不斷出現。

And obviously, this has been a broader discussion with the dispute between HBO, Peacock, Roku and so on.

顯然，這已經是與 HBO、Peacock、Roku 等之間的爭端進行更廣泛的討論。

And we touched on it last quarter a little bit.

上個季度我們稍微談到了這一點。

But if you could help us think about not just the near-term impact of the Google move but also bigger and longer-term issues, I mean how do you plan to deal with aggregators?

但如果你能幫助我們不僅思考谷歌此舉的近期影響，而且思考更大和更長期的問題，我的意思是你打算如何應對聚合商？

Is there -- is this becoming a bigger deal than it used to be in the past?

這是否變得比過去更重要？

And so how would you expect to cope with some of these issues going forward on the pricing front?

那麼您預計如何解決定價方面的一些問題呢？

Sure.

當然。

On the Google Play Store specifically, I think you -- I won't comment on the details of any given partnership, but you can look at our position on iOS where, for quite some time, we've been signing up new members on those devices through the mobile browser using our own payment method.

具體來說，在Google Play 商店上，我想您——我不會對任何特定合作夥伴關係的細節發表評論，但您可以看看我們在iOS 上的立場，相當長一段時間以來，我們一直在在iOS 上註冊新會員。這些裝置透過行動瀏覽器使用我們自己的付款方式。

We're not dependent on the App Store for discovery.

我們不依賴 App Store 進行發現。

We're not dependent on the App Store for payment.

我們不依賴 App Store 進行付款。

And we've seen steady, solid growth through that channel.

我們透過該管道看到了穩定、穩健的成長。

So it's been quite effective regardless.

所以無論如何，它都非常有效。

I think that's relevant to note when you think about sort of that dynamic.

我認為當你思考這種動態時，這一點值得注意。

And then to your point, look, I mean, the world is shifting to streaming into Internet TV, and a bunch of new players are coming in.

然後就你的觀點而言，我的意思是，世界正在轉向串流電視，並且一群新玩家正在加入。

And so I think the dynamics between those relationships, aggregators and device manufacturers and new streaming services, are being worked out.

因此，我認為這些關係、聚合商和設備製造商以及新的串流服務之間的動態正在解決。

But we have been in this business for quite some time, and we've invested in relationships with device manufacturers and platform owners for over a decade.

但我們從事這項業務已經有一段時間了，十多年來我們一直致力於與設備製造商和平台所有者建立關係。

And we've really, really focused on making this a positive experience for them, adding more value to their devices because we're there, making it great for us because we get to use those devices to access new consumers around the world and making it great for the people to purchase those devices because they have these incredible experiences with Netflix and the amazing stories that we tell on those devices.

我們真的非常非常專注於為他們提供積極的體驗，為他們的設備增加更多價值，因為我們在那裡，這對我們來說很棒，因為我們可以使用這些設備來接觸世界各地的新消費者，並讓人們購買這些設備是件好事，因為他們可以透過 Netflix 獲得令人難以置信的體驗以及我們在這些設備上講述的精彩故事。

And I just don't -- I don't see any significant change in that sort of positive model.

我只是不認為這種積極模式有任何重大變化。

We're going to keep investing, and we have whole teams who basically just do nothing but make it great for our device manufacturers to take our technology on and deliver then great experiences to the consumers who buy those devices.

我們將繼續投資，我們的整個團隊基本上什麼都不做，只是讓我們的設備製造商能夠很好地採用我們的技術，並為購買這些設備的消費者提供出色的體驗。

Got it.

知道了。

And Greg, I think last quarter, one of the things you had mentioned was the promotional impact of Netflix itself, like, instead of spending on marketing, you could use Netflix itself and the scale of Netflix as a promotional tool going forward.

格雷格，我想上個季度，你提到的一件事是 Netflix 本身的促銷影響，例如，你可以使用 Netflix 本身和 Netflix 的規模作為未來的促銷工具，而不是在行銷上花錢。

And I think the folklore, and I don't know where this data came from but it's quoted all over the place, is that 75% of your viewing comes from the first page in terms of your recommendations.

我認為民間傳說，我不知道這些數據來自哪裡，但它被到處引用，那就是，就您的推薦而言，您的瀏覽量中有 75% 來自第一頁。

I don't know if that's still -- if that number is true at all.

我不知道這個數字是否仍然真實。

But it would be great to get some context around how much of content consumption is actually driven by the recommendations that you put up on the screen versus other sources potentially.

但如果能了解一些背景信息，了解有多少內容消費實際上是由您在螢幕上提出的推薦與其他潛在來源驅動的。

Yes.

是的。

A very significant majority is driven by the recommendations that we present.

絕大多數是由我們提出的建議所推動的。

And so I think, to your point, the model that we're working with is that millions of people, millions of our members, show up every day to our applications, our interfaces, looking for something great to watch.

因此，我認為，就您的觀點而言，我們正在使用的模型是數百萬人，我們的數百萬會員，每天都會出現在我們的應用程式、我們的介面上，尋找精彩的內容。

And so we really have a tremendous opportunity to fulfill that interest and fulfill that demand.

因此，我們確實有巨大的機會來滿足這種興趣和需求。

If we do a good job at -- through the recommendations, the titles that we select, how we present those titles in a compelling way, of giving each of those members something satisfying in that moment, then they're happy, they're fulfilled.

如果我們做得很好——透過推薦、我們選擇的標題、我們如何以令人信服的方式展示這些標題，為每個會員在那一刻提供滿意的東西，那麼他們會很高興，他們會很高興。實現了。

And that means the next night, when they're thinking about like what do they want to watch or how do they want to be entertained, and you think about the wealth of options that are available to them that sort of Reed went through, that if we've done a good job the previous night, they're going to turn to us again, and we have an opportunity to sort of fulfill again and to sort of keep that positive feedback process.

這意味著第二天晚上，當他們思考他們想看什麼或他們想如何娛樂時，你會想到他們可以選擇的豐富選項，就像里德經歷的那樣，如果我們前一天晚上做得很好，他們會再次轉向我們，我們有機會再次實現並保持積極的回饋過程。

And so we're really deeply invested in that.

所以我們對此投入了很大的精力。

We have hundreds of people who wake up every day and sort of devote their entire professional existence to making every aspect of that work better and better and better.

我們有成百上千的人每天醒來，投入他們的整個職業生涯，讓工作的各個方面變得越來越好。

We know we're going to be doing that for decades to come, which is super exciting.

我們知道我們將在未來幾十年內這樣做，這是非常令人興奮的。

Yes.

是的。

And I guess this also means that as you evolve this process, some of the KPIs internally that you measure performance on also changes over time.

我想這也意味著，隨著流程的發展，衡量績效的一些內部 KPI 也會隨著時間的推移而改變。

And I think, Reed, in your book, you've mentioned an interaction with your Chief Marketing Officer at the point, I think this was in 2016, where she pushed back against customer sign-ups being used for measuring performance of the marketing team instead of retention.

我想，里德，在你的書中，你提到了與你的首席行銷長的一次互動，我想這是在 2016 年，當時她反對將客戶註冊用於衡量行銷團隊的績效而不是保留。

And I think ultimately, you guys went with retention.

我認為最終，你們還是選擇了保留。

But over time, a number of these KPIs seem to have shifted internally.

但隨著時間的推移，其中許多 KPI 似乎已經發生了內部變化。

So could you help us understand how you measure performance?

那麼您能幫助我們了解您如何衡量績效嗎？

To the extent you're comfortable doing this, how do you measure performance for the content team?

如果您願意這樣做，您如何衡量內容團隊的績效？

Has this focus shifted from origination to retention?

這個焦點是否從起源轉向了保留？

Is that a bigger part of how you think about the business broadly or even features such as engagement, for example?

這是您對業務的更廣泛的看法，甚至是諸如參與度之類的特徵嗎？

For at least the last 5 years, we've realized there are no gimmicks.

至少在過去五年裡，我們已經意識到沒有什麼噱頭。

There are no techniques.

沒有技巧。

It's fundamentally about member satisfaction.

從根本上來說，這與會員滿意度有關。

And if we please you on a Wednesday night, you're more likely to come back on a Thursday night.

如果我們在周三晚上讓您滿意，您就更有可能在星期四晚上回來。

So again, you can juice a given title if you wanted to, but you're going to pay for it downstream because not everybody got the best title for them.

再說一次，如果你願意，你可以榨取給定的標題，但你要為下游付出代價，因為並不是每個人都獲得了最好的標題。

Or you can juice sign-ups or you can juice any particular metric, but it's all just very distorting.

或者你可以提高註冊量，或者你可以提高任何特定指標，但這一切都非常扭曲。

And the fundamental for us is member joy, which we look at how much of your viewing time do you choose to spend with Netflix, how many repeat days, what's retention, all of those aspects.

對我們來說，最根本的是會員滿意度，我們會考慮您選擇在 Netflix 上花費多少觀看時間、重複天數、留存率以及所有這些方面。

And so we're really focused on the fundamentals of that pleasing and what does seem to please our members, and that's how we grow.

因此，我們真正關注的是令人愉悅的基本要素，以及真正讓我們的會員感到高興的東西，這就是我們成長的方式。

Now we augment that with a lot of conversation because we want our titles to be the most talked about titles in every nation because when you watch Enola Holmes and then, like, you see this -- all these activations that we're doing in London with Enola Holmes statues, it locks in and it's like something fun to really talk about, and it's a great topspin on a fundamentally great piece of content.

現在，我們透過大量對話來增強這一點，因為我們希望我們的遊戲成為每個國家談論最多的遊戲，因為當你觀看《Enola Holmes》時，你會看到這一點——我們在倫敦所做的所有這些活動都有了埃諾拉·福爾摩斯的雕像，它就鎖定了，這就像真正談論的一些有趣的事情，而且它是一個從根本上來說很棒的內容的一個很棒的上旋。

But that interplay that we use across product, content, it's how we do budgeting decisions, how much do we want to spend in each area, it's driven fundamentally by our guess on member satisfaction in each country and how that works.

但是我們在產品、內容之間所使用的相互作用，就是我們如何做出預算決策，我們想在每個領域花費多少，它從根本上是由我們對每個國家的會員滿意度及其運作方式的猜測驅動的。

And Ted, you've thought a lot about this, so let me turn it over to you.

特德，你對此想了很多，所以讓我把它交給你。

Yes, I would agree with you.

是的，我同意你的觀點。

I mean I think one of the things, going back to what Greg said, it's not unusual for a Hollywood studio to spend 50%, 70%, sometimes 100% of the production budget of a film and marketing to get people out to the box office and opening weekend.

我的意思是，我認為其中一件事，回到格雷格所說的，好萊塢工作室花費 50%、70%，有時甚至 100% 的電影製作預算和營銷來讓人們走出困境並不罕見。辦公室和週末開放。

We do a fraction of that for our -- in terms of paid advertising for our films.

我們為我們的電影做了付費廣告的一小部分。

And yet we're getting 70 million, 80 million, 100 million folks turning out to watch those movies in its first 28 days, which is like a $1 billion box office in terms of cultural impact.

然而，在上映的 28 天內，就有 7,000 萬、8,000 萬、1 億人觀看這些電影，就文化影響力而言，這相當於 10 億美元的票房。

So when I look at that, and I think that's the enormous promise of the scale and the recommendation engine, the value of the recommendation on Netflix, to make sure you have a great experience and come back looking for the next one.

因此，當我看到這一點時，我認為這就是規模和推薦引擎的巨大前景，Netflix 推薦的價值，可以確保您獲得良好的體驗並回來尋找下一個。

And primarily, what we're trying to do in our marketing is get people to talk about those things that they're watching and got to get it into the conversation, get it into the zeitgeist that the watching -- the heavy lifting of the watching is being handled by the recommendation and the presentations on Netflix on that first page you talked about earlier.

首先，我們在行銷中要做的就是讓人們談論他們正在觀看的那些事情，並將其納入對話中，將其納入觀看的時代精神中——觀看是透過您之前提到的首頁上Netflix 上的推薦和演示來處理的。

So -- but what we can do is do really creative marketing, really clever events to activate the fan base and to excite the fan base so that when they're talking about a movie, they're talking about a Netflix movie.

所以，我們能做的是進行真正有創意的行銷，舉辦真正聰明的活動來激活粉絲群並激發粉絲群，這樣當他們談論一部電影時，他們談論的是一部 Netflix 電影。

And when they're talking about a TV show, they're talking about a Netflix TV show.

當他們談論電視節目時，他們談論的是 Netflix 電視節目。

And that's the thing that we're building toward every day.

這就是我們每天都在努力實現的目標。

Got it.

知道了。

And I guess in terms of the content itself, Ted, I mean there's probably a lot of opportunity right now.

我想就內容本身而言，特德，我的意思是現在可能有很多機會。

Given the shutdown in theatrical and the slow reopenings there, there's a lot of content in the pipeline, and the window between movie releases next year is significantly smaller than what it was last year already.

考慮到院線的關閉和重新開放的緩慢，還有很多內容正在醞釀中，明年電影發行之間的時間間隔比去年要小得多。

So if this gets pushed out another quarter, potentially a lot of movies will probably come to you or Amazon or somebody else.

因此，如果這個項目再推遲一個季度，可能會有很多電影出現在你、亞馬遜或其他地方。

So how are you thinking about that pipeline of content as you go into next year?

那麼，當您進入明年時，您如何考慮內容管道？

Is that a big opportunity in terms of content acquisition?

就內容獲取而言，這是一個巨大的機會嗎？

It's pretty short-term opportunistic.

這是相當短期的機會主義。

That said, there will be some things.

也就是說，會有一些事情。

Reed mentioned Enola Holmes is one that we bought -- that would have gone theatrical.

里德提到《伊諾拉‧福爾摩斯》是我們買的──那本來可以上演戲劇。

It turned out to be a nice hit for us.

事實證明，這對我們來說是一個很好的打擊。

And then we just released The Trial of the Chicago 7 that we picked up from Paramount under similar conditions, which is great.

然後我們剛剛發行了《芝加哥七人組的審判》，這是我們在類似條件下從派拉蒙那裡收到的，這很棒。

You have to remember, we have a very healthy pipeline of films coming out already in the rest of this year and next, in '22.

你必須記住，我們已經在今年剩餘時間和明年 22 年推出了一系列非常健康的電影。

And -- but we're looking at all of them, and we'll be at the table.

而且——但我們正在研究所有這些，並且我們將坐在談判桌上。

But I would look at it as a fairly short-term opportunity while the studios refigure how they're going to release films.

但我認為這是一個相當短期的機會，而工作室正在重新調整他們將如何發行電影。

In different parts of the world, this past week, in Japan, theaters reopened to 100% -- with 100% capacity.

在世界不同地區，上週，在日本，劇院重新開放至 100%——容量為 100%。

So I think they're looking at the impact of that around the world and how long they're going to have to make new plans and what are they going to do with their '21 and '22 films if they are sitting on their '20 films.

所以我認為他們正在考慮這對世界各地的影響，以及他們需要多長時間制定新計劃，以及如果他們坐等“21”和“22”電影，他們將如何處理他們的“21”和“22”電影20部電影。

So I do think there'll be some short-term opportunities.

所以我確實認為會有一些短期機會。

We'll pick up some, not all, but we'll certainly be in the mix.

我們會挑選一些，而不是全部，但我們肯定會參與其中。

Got it.

知道了。

And in terms of some of these newer opportunities, is this also potentially a way for new business models to open up?

就其中一些新機會而言，這是否也是開闢新商業模式的潛在途徑？

I mean there's also been a lot of experimentation by the likes of Disney on the PVOD side as well as releasing some of their movies directly to consumers on streaming.

我的意思是，迪士尼等公司在 PVOD 方面也進行了大量的實驗，並透過串流媒體直接向消費者發布一些電影。

But -- and like music, we've seen a lot more of this as well.

但是——就像音樂一樣，我們也看到了更多這樣的事。

So do some of these opportunities during COVID also open up potentially new avenues for monetization from your perspective as well?

那麼，從您的角度來看，新冠疫情期間的一些機會是否也開闢了潛在的新的獲利途徑？

Look, I think what's been happening with -- consumers' desire to see films at home has been growing, and we've been satisfying it.

聽著，我認為正在發生的事情——消費者在家看電影的願望一直在增長，而我們一直在滿足它。

And I think there was kind of a natural migration that was already happening, that this may have accelerated in some dimensions.

我認為一種自然的遷移已經發生，這可能在某些方面加速了。

But I think at some point, theaters are going to reopen and people are going to go back out to the theaters.

但我認為在某個時候，劇院將會重新開放，人們也會回到劇院。

I hope so.

但願如此。

Like I said, I'm a fan of doing it myself.

就像我說的，我喜歡自己做。

And I do think people kind of crave the social interaction to go out and see a film with an audience sometimes.

我確實認為人們有時會渴望出去和觀眾一起看電影的社交互動。

I don't doubt that that's going to come back in some capacity.

我毫不懷疑這會以某種方式回歸。

So I wouldn't look at this being that radical a change.

所以我不認為這是一個徹底的改變。

I just think it would be -- it's probably an accelerated change that was -- may have already been in the works.

我只是認為這可能是一個加速的變化，可能已經在進行中。

Got it.

知道了。

We have time for one more question, Kannan.

我們還有時間再問一個問題，Kannan。

Got it.

知道了。

So Spence, I guess, the mandatory free cash flow question that we have to get to, now that you have potentially $2 billion in free cash flow over the course of this year, and obviously, I mean there's a lot of lumpiness in this just given the cadence of content production, but broadly, when you think about maybe a 3-year, 4-year kind of horizon, you are getting to a point where cash flow use is going to be more than just about content.

所以，我想，斯賓塞，我們必須解決的強制性自由現金流問題，既然今年你可能有 20 億美元的自由現金流，顯然，我的意思是，在這方面存在很多不穩定性。考慮到內容製作的節奏，但從廣義上講，當你考慮3 年、4 年的視野時，你會發現現金流的使用將不僅僅是內容。

How are you thinking about your capital structure?

您如何看待您的資本結構？

As you get closer to this breakeven point, what's the use of cash once you turn free cash flow positive?

當你接近這個損益平衡點時，一旦你的自由現金流變成正值，現金有什麼用呢？

Yes.

是的。

Sure.

當然。

Thanks, Kannan.

謝謝，康南。

The free cash flow story is an exciting one for us right now.

自由現金流的故事現在對我們來說是一個令人興奮的故事。

As you can see, the free cash flow profile is improving.

正如您所看到的，自由現金流狀況正在改善。

Obviously, this year was a bit short term with not just improving profitability but also the reduction in content spend.

顯然，今年有點短期，不僅獲利能力提高，內容支出也減少。

But as we look forward to 2021 already, we guided to free cash flow -- negative free cash flow, negative $1 billion to breakeven, so vastly improved from our peak negative free cash flow in 2019.

但當我們展望 2021 年時，我們指導自由現金流——負自由現金流，負 10 億美元達到盈虧平衡，比 2019 年負自由現金流高峰有了很大改善。

We're not yet sustainably free cash flow positive or ready to call that, but we're rapidly closing in.

我們尚未實現可持續的自由現金流為正或準備好稱之為正值，但我們正在迅速接近。

And I'd say given the more than $8 billion of cash on the balance sheet, we are at a point where at least we can probably pretty safely say that we can self-finance our growth without needing to access the capital markets.

我想說，考慮到資產負債表上超過 80 億美元的現金，我們至少可以相當有把握地說，我們可以在不需要進入資本市場的情況下為我們的成長自籌資金。

But we're still, obviously, based on our guidance, probably a couple of years away at least from sustainably being free cash flow positive.

但顯然，根據我們的指導，我們可能至少還需要幾年時間才能持續實現自由現金流為正值。

So it's probably a little too early to call our long-term capital allocation approach other than to say that you can trust that we're going to be -- we're going to remain disciplined, and we're going to take an approach that we believe will maximize the long-term value for our shareholders.

因此，現在說我們的長期資本配置方法可能還為時過早，而不是說你可以相信我們將保持紀律，我們將採取一種方法我們相信這將為股東實現長期價值最大化。

So more to come on that front.

因此，這方面還有更多內容。

Got it.

知道了。

Thank you so much.

太感謝了。

Thanks all for the time today.

感謝大家今天抽出時間。

And hopefully, we'll chat again next quarter.

希望我們下個季度能再次聊天。

The big pictures that you referred to there, next time we get together, we should be over 200 million members, completing a year of 34 million, all-time record free cash flow positive, got an amazing content technology and marketing engine humming, so really looking forward to next year.

你提到的大局，下次我們聚在一起時，我們應該有超過 2 億會員，完成 3400 萬的一年，自由現金流創歷史新高，擁有令人驚嘆的內容技術和營銷引擎，所以真的很期待明年。

Thank you so much, Reed.

非常感謝你，里德。