zlacker

>>mef+(OP)
2/3 of its revenues were from the U.S. That's... sad.

>>throw7+M5b
> 2/3 of its revenues were from the U.S. That's... sad.

Probably common for a lot of luxury products; US is like 1/4 of world GDP, and a lot higher than that in personal income beyond basic needs.

>>dragon+G6b
But still around 4 to 5% of the global population. Every stat in the global context of usage/consumerism gets weird when you consider this, and even weirder when you account for debt-to-income ratio.

>>jimmyg+k8b
> But still around 4 to 5% of the global population.

Yeah, but so? "Subsisitence farmers in sub-Saharan Africa spend substantially less per capita on online adult entertainment than Americans" is...not a surprising bit of information.

> Every stat in the global context of usage/consumerism gets weird when you consider this

Seems to me that the weird thing is the implicit premise that consumer and especially luxury spending should be expected to track population and not wealth.

> and even weirder when you account for debt-to-income ratio.

Are you assuming that the ability to borrow should be negatively correlated with luxury spending?