Marketers’ Fixation on the Millennial Generation

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/21/business/media/marketers-fixation-on-the-millennial-generation.html

by applecore • 11 years ago

32 42 11 years ago

nytimes.com

anigbrowl• 11 years ago

24/7 micropandering

An alarmingly accurate characterization.

mwfunk• 11 years ago

I may have missed the point of the article, but it seems like most consumer marketers have always been hyperfocused on (roughly) the 18-30 segment for various reasons. Some of those reasons would be flattering to people in that age range (more likely to be trendsetters, for example) and some would not be (more susceptible to marketing, or more likely to want to follow trends established by perceived trendsetters). But it seems like it's been this way my whole life.

Is the marketing focus on the Millenial Generation simply the fact that the age demographics that marketers have always been fixated on now roughly corresponds with the age range associated with Millenials? It seems that way to me, and if so the article may be conflating stereotypes about capital-G Generations with what consumer marketers have always done, which is to try to squeeze as much money as possible out of twentysomethings before they wise up to it.

sgnelson• 11 years ago

Because that age group in the past 100ish years is the group that generally has the most disposable income, simple as that. However, that's probably not so true of the millennial's due to the poor economy for the past 7 years, high price of college education, and rather poor wages (and thus, less disposable income).

rdl3• 11 years ago

It's more than 18-30 year olds don't have fixed preferences yet. Most 18-30 year olds are discovering "their favorite" beer, brand of car, toothpaste, etc. Most 60 year olds, even though they have more disposable income, have more established brand preference. Hence, it makes more sense to market to the younger people, even if the older people actually spend more. The genius thing is to have a ladder of products and bring people in at the bottom -- say, a cheap Yaris or Echo to start, and then they move "naturally" upmarket as those cars themselves move upmarket (remember when the Corolla was a low end car? Now there are several models below it, if you include Scion, for new buyers). People also tend to move upmarket within the same brand, say up to a Camry, Avalon, Highlander, or even a Lexus.

(Obviously this varies by product/market, but generally for most consumer purchases it is valid.)

serve_yay• 11 years ago

"The Ad Contrarian" blog talks about this a lot. Marketers are apparently obsessed with millennials, but their parents (and older) are the ones with the money who really buy things. For example, the people targeted by car ads constitute 12% of the market, the rest is people older than them. http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-youth-car-delus...

vizeroth3• 11 years ago

This point of view, written by someone over 50, ignores the fact that many baby-boomers still want to see themselves the same way they did in their 20s and 30s, making the advertising nearly as effective on them. At the very least, the data is not showing that they are being driven away by the advertising, and it is not showing that anyone is more effective with baby-boomers by specifically targeting them with campaigns that would not be effective with millennials.

tsotha• 11 years ago

Sure, but the idea is the 18-34 set is developing brand loyalties, so when they actually do have money the marketing will pay off.

Cars are a good example. I'm pushing 50, and when I go to buy another car I'll probably buy a Toyota, because I've had good luck with that brand. The other carmakers can spent a trillion dollars on marketing and it's not going to influence me in the slightest. But people who don't have any experience with cars beyond dad's hand-me-down jalopy are going to be more receptive.

WalterBright• 11 years ago

I, for one, am just fine with marketers ignoring me.

opcvx4• 11 years ago

But are you really ignored?

Quickly take a look around your office/home and take a look at the open tabs in your browser and count the ads and the brands.

the8472• 11 years ago

What ads?

neuro_imager2• 11 years ago

Um, how is this news?

18-35 year olds have more marketeer-accessible expendable income (ie, most don't have mortgages, large family expenditures and haven't racked up medical bills), most are financially naive (made deliberately so by perverse educational systems) and most are socially aspirational. This isn't unique to millennials though.

opcvx4• 11 years ago

Can you elaborate on how does the educational system influences personal finances, and what do you mean by that?

toomuchtodo• 11 years ago

There is almost zero information provided on proper personal financial responsibility/management in formal education in the U.S. You'd get more information from the /r/personalfinance Reddit subreddit FAQ.

moron4hire• 11 years ago

Wait, since when is 1980 in the Millennial generation? 20 years seems really rather broad to be dividing into generations. What does a 35 year old have in common with a 15 year old?

That makes me a Millennial and my wife from 1979 a Gen Xer. Oh, she's not going to like that one bit :P

And what ever happened to Gen X? They just seem to get universally lumped into the Baby Boomers now, if they get mentioned at all.

return0• 11 years ago

I too protest about our marginalization. We are Gen X.5

001sky• 11 years ago

FYI original definition of millenial is +18 years old in yr 2000 (so BOD 1982)

Futurebot• 11 years ago

It's even broader than that. Different sources and countries use different ranges, so where you fall depends on which you consult (some use 1976 as a starting year, others use 1978, and still others use 1980 or 1981.) Some also carve out additional generations (MTV generation / Doom Generation / XY Cusp Generation along with Echo Boomers / Generation McGuire) for people born in the edge years. Here's more:

http://www.esds1.pt/site/images/stories/isacosta/secondary_p...

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/brainiac/2008/04/fin...

The old Wikipedia article on XY Cusp before it got edited: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JCDenton2052/mh5

Excerpt: "The XY Cusp includes those people born in the mid-to-late 1970s and early 1980s. The word XY is used because their generational identity is mixed, uncertain, or deviant from X or Y or both, but do not constitute a separate generational group in themselves. Some place the years between: 1976-1983 [3] [4][5] [6] People born within this group are in parallel situations with people born in between previous generations: Generation Jones between Boomer and X - late 50s, early 60s, (teens of the 70s); between Silents and Boomers - late 30s, early 40s (teens of the 50s); and the Beat generation between G.I. and Silents - late 10s, early 20s (teens of the 30s). They are referred to as Cusper Groups, Transitional Times, or Buffer Zones. John Losey states "If you couldn't neatly place yourself in any of the [generations], then you're probably a Cusper. 1943-1947, 1962-1967 and 1976-1983 are each considered transition times. Many people born during these cusp periods identify with the generations on either side."

There's definitely no single standard in sociology on this.

bigger_cheese• 11 years ago

It all seems a bit wishy-washy to me. I was born in 1985 I turned 30 this year. I have enough trouble identifying with my sister (who is six years younger than me) let alone someone I have 15 years on.

reagency3• 11 years ago

Baby boomers are on 55+ now.

Gen X is middle age now, and they eventually got low paying jobs working for the baby boomers.

Gen Y happened, but we were boring, so we got retroactively split up and rolled into Gen X and Millenials.

Zaephyr• 11 years ago

So... Ad researchers have rebranded Gen Y?? That's kind of funny.

(Also shows how much attention I was paying. I thought there were Boomers, X's, Y's, and Millenials)

vizeroth3• 11 years ago

Through most of my life I've been distinctly aware that I was lumped into Gen X (born 1978) with some of my aunts and uncles, while my sister (1980) and, more recently, my wife (1981) were usually lumped into some other generation (the name of which has shifted every few years).

I think what's really going on is that most of the advertisers ignored Gen X as a waste of marketing resources when Baby Boomers were always the pot of gold. Most of them are now looking back and realizing that they missed an opportunity at that crucial age range, and they're trying to make up for it by continuing to ignore Gen X and going straight for the Millennials. Of course, that's not to say that Gen X was completely ignored or that marketing doesn't work on them. There are clearly any number of instances in which they were targeted with some effect. However, I think that, in general, we live in a world which is still largely skewed in favor of the Baby Boomers, despite the fact that most of them are shifting into fixed incomes and/or continuing to work full-time well into retirement age simply because they do not feel they can retire (sometimes because they're still supporting their Gen X or Millennial children).

bitwize• 11 years ago

Don't worry.

It won't be long before the marketers focus on us -- the marketers for arthritis, incontinence, gout, and erectile dysfunction medication that is.

technofiend• 11 years ago

Though millennials are hailed as the first generation of “digital natives,” the over-40 (and 50 and 60) sets have become pretty adept when it comes to smartphones and other devices.

I always find this condescending if not outright insulting. Did the flipping internet, smartphones and all the rest of it just spring fully formed into existence with the birth of the first millennial?

We didn't become adept, we invented it! /rant off

Marketers’ Fixation on the Millennial Generation

Related Stories