,
7 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
So actually, that's not true. It is true that advertisers tend to be very, very focused on younger demographics. But this is not because they have more money to spend on stuff.
In fact, they have less money to spend on stuff, as you might expect, given that they don't make very much money.
Advertisers obsess about them first, because their purchases tend to be more discretionary, meaning that there's more room to shift purchases between categories...
Advertisers obsess about them first, because their purchases tend to be more discretionary, meaning that there's more room to shift purchases between categories...
(Middle aged people, by contrast, are going to buy exactly as many diapers as they need to cover the baby's bottom, no more, also no fewer.)
But more importantly, because they are perceived as having more flexible brand preferences.
But more importantly, because they are perceived as having more flexible brand preferences.
There's some debate over whether this is actually true, but that's what advertisers devoutly believe, bless their hearts, and they spend accordingly.
Also, young folks are more elusive--they are not pinned to their sofas by fatigue or babies upstairs. So advertisers stalk them.
Also, young folks are more elusive--they are not pinned to their sofas by fatigue or babies upstairs. So advertisers stalk them.
But if you had a product, and you had to choose whether to sell it to young woke people or cranky "get off my lawn" conservatives (assuming there's equal interest in both demographics), choose the crankycons. They have way more economic power than 24 year olds.
Of course, the 24 year olds represent some option value on the future. But not necessarily as much as you'd think. Youth brands often don't age well.
It's harder than you'd think to age with your customer base. Witness the travails of J. Crew, etc.
