Baby Boomers in their 40s and 50s not only are at the peak of their earning potential but also are making the majority of buying decisions for themselves, small children and their elderly parents, according to a recent branding survey conducted by TV Land and consumer researcher OTX.
The findings were detailed during a press conference Monday at the National Press Club by TV Land president Larry W. Jones. He was joined by Kim Alexis (pictured), host of TV Land's original reality series She's Got The Look and Beverly Johnson, a judge on the same series.
Not only are 40- and 50 year-olds spending more on themselves per month than Millennials and Gen Xers but, more interestingly, they are spending twice as much as their younger cohorts on others in their lives. With so many people to shop for, Boomers are “making several multi-generational purchase decisions at once and—contrary to common assumptions—they are far less brand loyal than Millennials and Gen Xers,” according to the survey.
TV Land's "Generation BUY: A Close Look at the Boomer Consumer" study, fielded by OTX, includes input from almost 4,000 adults ages 18-65 nationwide. Commissioned by TV Land, the study provides information on the purchase decisions and brand loyalty of Adults 40-59.
“While we have always known that it's a mistake to underestimate the power of people in their 40s and 50s, ‘Generation BUY’ once again shows us that Boomers are a major source of consumerism in this country,” Jones said. “Knowing that this generation has so many dependants, the means to buy the products that appeal to them and the willingness to try new brands is powerful information to share with our marketing and advertising partners.”
This doesn't surprise me one bit. I've thought for years that the advertisers were crazy to be so fixated on the younger set. Very few people I know are doing better financially than their Boomer age parents.
Although I don't know how they figure anyone in their 40s is a considered a boomer, aren't they the post-war babies?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Ammit,
Boomers were born between 1946 and 1964, so the youngest of the generation is only 44ish.
quote:
Originally posted by Ammit: This doesn't surprise me one bit. I've thought for years that the advertisers were crazy to be so fixated on the younger set. Very few people I know are doing better financially than their Boomer age parents.
Although I don't know how they figure anyone in their 40s is a considered a boomer, aren't they the post-war babies?
Originally posted by Ammit: This doesn't surprise me one bit. I've thought for years that the advertisers were crazy to be so fixated on the younger set. Very few people I know are doing better financially than their Boomer age parents.
Advertisers do not claim that old people don't have money. Advertisers contend that old people aren't influenced to spend that money based upon seeing an advertisment. When advertisers want to influence old people they do things like pay off magazines to write positive reviews of their cars/drugs/whatever.
Originally posted by Obveeus: Advertisers do not claim that old people don't have money. Advertisers contend that old people aren't influenced to spend that money based upon seeing an advertisment. When advertisers want to influence old people they do things like pay off magazines to write positive reviews of their cars/drugs/whatever.
From the last paragraph of the story.
"TV Land's "Generation BUY" study also found that 40 and 50-somethings are more open to new brands and less brand loyal than people under 40 making 40-59s "Free Agent Shoppers." Twenty-six percent of Boomers said they are not at all brand loyal versus 21% of Gen X and Millennials. In fact, Gen Y are the most likely to say that once they have made a commitment to a brand, they will stick with it, no matter what. The willingness of 40 and 50 year-olds to buy new brands carries over across virtually every product category including electronics, personal care products, restaurants, automobiles and more."
According to a lot of posters here, plus writen articles, the reason advertisers are BIG on the 18-49 Demo was that they were supposed to be more OPEN to new brands and products, while the older viewers were closed minded and Brand Loyal.
This study completely debunks those theories, which were decades old and do not apply anymore.
Read what you just commented on. The people were asked whether they were 'brand loyal' and old people denied being that way. That isn't a study of people's actual buying habits, that is an opinion poll. Frequently, people do not actually behave in the same ways they claim to behave.
Why is it so hard to accept the fact that the "Demo Myth" is untrue?
You really believe that people do not know what they are doing/buying? "I'm not brand loyal, but when I go to the store, things just fly in to my cart. I can't figure it out."
Face it, Brand Loyalty is a fading concept that dies with the Depression Era generation.
quote:
Originally posted by Obveeus: Read what you just commented on. The people were asked whether they were 'brand loyal' and old people denied being that way. That isn't a study of people's actual buying habits, that is an opinion poll. Frequently, people do not actually behave in the same ways they claim to behave.
Originally posted by TV-aholic: Why is it so hard to accept the fact that the "Demo Myth" is untrue?
Why is it hard to accept the fact that it is true?
Your attitude on the subject reflects exactly why old people would claim that they aren't brand loyal. Old people already are aware that being 'brand loyal' is a stamp of uselessness to advertisers, so they want to claim they aren't brand loyal just so they can claim they aren't old and useless to advertisers.
quote:
You really believe that people do not know what they are doing/buying? "I'm not brand loyal, but when I go to the store, things just fly in to my cart. I can't figure it out."
I believe that people frequently lie when they think it will serve their purposes...just like the talk around here from time to time about putting the nielsen box (or filling out the log book) on a show even if you aren't watching it, just so it will be higher rated.
The Myth is untrue because we now have NEW & RECENT evidence that says different.
You are just grasping at straws now by stating that people are lying about this. Why would they lie? There is no stigma attached. Most individuals that ARE brand loyal, are proud of it and state that they are.
Pricing & Performance drive buying habbits, not the brand name of an item.
quote:
Originally posted by Obveeus:
quote:
Originally posted by TV-aholic: Why is it so hard to accept the fact that the "Demo Myth" is untrue?
Why is it hard to accept the fact that it is true?
Your attitude on the subject reflects exactly why old people would claim that they aren't brand loyal. Old people already are aware that being 'brand loyal' is a stamp of uselessness to advertisers, so they want to claim they aren't brand loyal just so they can claim they aren't old and useless to advertisers.
quote:
You really believe that people do not know what they are doing/buying? "I'm not brand loyal, but when I go to the store, things just fly in to my cart. I can't figure it out."
I believe that people frequently lie when they think it will serve their purposes...just like the talk around here from time to time about putting the nielsen box (or filling out the log book) on a show even if you aren't watching it, just so it will be higher rated.
Originally posted by TV-aholic: The Myth is untrue because we now have NEW & RECENT evidence that says different.
What evidence? The 'evidence' you cite is not a study of anyone's actual buying habits, it was a survey of how people claim they act. How can you not see the difference between those two things?
quote:
You are just grasping at straws now by stating that people are lying about this. Why would they lie? There is no stigma attached.
You want an actual study...look at the adoption rate for DVR and online TV viewing. that is an example of actual change in buying patterns rather than 'brand loyalty'. Now, look at those old as dirt CBS viewers sitting in front of their same old dead body crime procedurals even in reruns. That is an actual 'buying pattern'.
quote:
Most individuals that ARE brand loyal, are proud of it and state that they are.
Advertisers see little value in brand loyal people and old folks know that. Admitting to being strongly brand loyal to an advertiser is admitting being worthless to that advertiser and we have seen time and time again how the old folks desperately try to deny that worthlessness.
quote:
Pricing & Performance drive buying habbits, not the brand name of an item.
Notice that 'pricing and performance' are not advertising?
Originally posted by TV-aholic: Why is it so hard to accept the fact that the "Demo Myth" is untrue?
You really believe that people do not know what they are doing/buying? "I'm not brand loyal, but when I go to the store, things just fly in to my cart. I can't figure it out."
Face it, Brand Loyalty is a fading concept that dies with the Depression Era generation.
quote:
Originally posted by Obveeus: Read what you just commented on. The people were asked whether they were 'brand loyal' and old people denied being that way. That isn't a study of people's actual buying habits, that is an opinion poll. Frequently, people do not actually behave in the same ways they claim to behave.
I agree. The system worked when it was developed, but it is outdated now. Pretty soon a new model will be invented that is more effective.
Posts: 1750 | Location: New Jersey | Registered: 24 March 2007
You don't like what the article found out, so you make up ANYTHING to discount it.
Fine, hide your head in the sand. It may go away.
BTW, It is almost never disclosed as to who or what these types of studies/survey's are for, to the people paticipating in the study/survey.
quote:
Originally posted by Obveeus:
quote:
Originally posted by TV-aholic: The Myth is untrue because we now have NEW & RECENT evidence that says different.
What evidence? The 'evidence' you cite is not a study of anyone's actual buying habits, it was a survey of how people claim they act. How can you not see the difference between those two things?
quote:
You are just grasping at straws now by stating that people are lying about this. Why would they lie? There is no stigma attached.
You want an actual study...look at the adoption rate for DVR and online TV viewing. that is an example of actual change in buying patterns rather than 'brand loyalty'. Now, look at those old as dirt CBS viewers sitting in front of their same old dead body crime procedurals even in reruns. That is an actual 'buying pattern'.
quote:
Most individuals that ARE brand loyal, are proud of it and state that they are.
Advertisers see little value in brand loyal people and old folks know that. Admitting to being strongly brand loyal to an advertiser is admitting being worthless to that advertiser and we have seen time and time again how the old folks desperately try to deny that worthlessness.
quote:
Pricing & Performance drive buying habbits, not the brand name of an item.
Notice that 'pricing and performance' are not advertising?
Originally posted by TV-aholic: BTW, It is almost never disclosed as to who or what these types of studies/survey's are for, to the people paticipating in the study/survey.
A 'study' is still very different than a 'survey'. A 'study' attempts to collect actual data regarding an issue while a 'survey' attempts to collect opinions. How can you not see the difference in value between the two when trying to show 'proof' of something?
