Not GP, but doesn't this just kinda follow from the definition of inflation? If you keep offering the same value but the currency it is priced in inflates by N%, you "should" be able to raise your prices by N% and not gain/lose any customers since the inflation adjusted price remains the same. This will obviously result in revenue growth of N%.
If you want revenue growth above inflation, you will need to either acquire more users, charge them more for the same product, or both. Building up the value of the product you're offering can help with both. Of course in the case of facebook these points get a bit muddled, since the users get the product for free anyway and they have such a giant customer base that finding new users is becoming an issue.
Why would anyone pay a premium for equity in Netflix if it is not going to provide premium returns? If I wanted average return on investment, then I would just buy a low cost index fund like VOO.
Your original comment presumably talks about Facebook’s market capitalization (Facebook’s value going down), and that being a sign that the market does not “value” a sustainable service. I interpreted a sustainable service as one that does to grow by leaps and bounds and every year, and instead just chugs along offering a steady product at a steady price.
Hence my comment being that the market “values” businesses with sustainable services by offering to pay a premium for a piece of the business commensurate with the rate of inflation. Which is why Facebook’s stock price stalled, since their market cap had priced in much higher growth, and prospective buyers now do not expect that growth, and are willing to pay much less for a piece of Facebook.
