4 ms·
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 r
by mwfunk 11y 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 11y agoBecause 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).
- rdl 11y agoIt'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.)
- analog31 11y agoI'm a baby boomer, and a few years ago had to buy a new car. I was shopping for one of those entry level cars, and the marketing was millennial-oriented to the point of being comical. I literally ordered the cheapest model in the line, with zero options. As I signed the check, I asked the salesman: So, the marketing for these cars is all hip hop and millennial, but who is actually buying these things? His answer: "Middle aged cheapskates like you."
- MCRed 11y agoThis is a real problem for Toyota. They created the entire Scion brand to attract young people because the average age of a Toyota owner is getting pretty high. And what's happened? A lot of the Scions are being bought by cheapskate "oldsters" (like me) who know it's made by Toyota and want the low end. (Alas, I didn't buy a Scion this time around but I sure looked at them a lot.)
- Retra 11y agoThe only message I ever really got from Scion marketing is "CHEAP."
- MCRed 11y agoI don't know what are you are, but when I was 18-26 that message was very appealing to me!
- analog31 11y agoAmusingly, a Scion is what I got. The year that I bought it, Toyota was selling the Yaris in Canada but not in the US. From what I could tell, the Corolla, Yaris, and Scion, were all cut from the same cloth. I did look at other makes too, but the Scion was priced to move. A minor selling point was that Scion's options were all dealer-installed, meaning I could have a stripped down model without waiting for one, or having to haggle. I think that I may have bought the cheapest new car on the market at the time. My only gripe is that it's noisy when driving at highway speeds, something that I don't do very often.