3 ms·

This is actually a big deal for Facebook. 20 years ago, no one would have really cared WHAT teenagers considered "hip". The reason was, teenagers had next to ze

This is actually a big deal for Facebook. 20 years ago, no one would have really cared WHAT teenagers considered "hip". The reason was, teenagers had next to zero buying power. Teenagers were trying to act like "grownups". Now, take a look at any of your teenager friends/family. They're standing there in a mirror with a brand new iPhone and a Macbook Pro in the background. Now look at a picture with their moms and/or dads. Notice that much of the time, the adults are trying to dress like the kids. The kids now represent an enormous potential as the adults are just dying to hold on to their youth. For now it's wise for any company that wants to turn a huge impulse profit to pay attention to what the fickle teen generation is currently considering cool. Vine is a perfect example.

philwelch 13y ago
20 years ago was 1993. Marketing obsession with teenagers predates 1993 by decades, and with good reason--brand impressions created by age 16 can last for life. In earlier, healthier economic times, teenagers actually had buying power too because they could work minimum wage jobs without having to pay bills.
- hsitz 13y ago
  I was going to say something similar. The poster sounds like a young one, assuming things were different before he was born. Not so. For example, back in the 60's muscle cars were hugely important for auto makers and they were largely an object of teen lust. High schoolers and their cars used to be really important; young people's love affair with cars has waned in last couple decades. And teenagers have determined large amounts of adult (i.e, their parents) spending for long time, which has made them target of advertisers for just as long.
  - gruseom 13y ago
    Marketing to teenagers definitely goes back decades, but not forever. I believe it is very much a post-WWII phenomenon.
- MarkTee 13y ago
  What bills do teenagers have to pay now that they didn't in 1993? The only thing that I can think of would be a phone bill.
  - philwelch 13y ago
    It's not that they have more bills, it's that they're less likely to have jobs.

philwelch 13y ago

20 years ago was 1993. Marketing obsession with teenagers predates 1993 by decades, and with good reason--brand impressions created by age 16 can last for life. In earlier, healthier economic times, teenagers actually had buying power too because they could work minimum wage jobs without having to pay bills.

hsitz 13y ago
I was going to say something similar. The poster sounds like a young one, assuming things were different before he was born. Not so. For example, back in the 60's muscle cars were hugely important for auto makers and they were largely an object of teen lust. High schoolers and their cars used to be really important; young people's love affair with cars has waned in last couple decades. And teenagers have determined large amounts of adult (i.e, their parents) spending for long time, which has made them target of advertisers for just as long.
- gruseom 13y ago
  Marketing to teenagers definitely goes back decades, but not forever. I believe it is very much a post-WWII phenomenon.
MarkTee 13y ago
What bills do teenagers have to pay now that they didn't in 1993? The only thing that I can think of would be a phone bill.
- philwelch 13y ago
  It's not that they have more bills, it's that they're less likely to have jobs.