Marketing's Oldest Old Wives' Tale

There a few themes that keep popping up in this blog. They are:

1. Misconceptions about "branding" and how brands are built
2. The folly of listening to "marketing experts"
3. The over-promise of online advertising
4. The over-promise of social media
5. The "death of advertising," "death of TV," and "death of marketing" nonsense
6. The chronic, silly belief in "the thing that will change everything"
7. The foolishness of marketers' obsession with young people

Over the past few weeks I've written a number of posts about #7. But I haven't really dealt with the main thesis that drives marketers to focus on young people when every trend in demographics and economics points to people over 50 as the drivers of consumer spending.

In case you haven't been paying attention, here are the key facts:

• Over 70% of the wealth in the U.S. is controlled by people over 50.
• Half of all consumer spending is done by people over 50.
• People over 50 have an average net worth 3 times that of younger generations
• They account for 55% of consumer packaged goods sales and dominate 94% of CPG categories
• Baby boomers spend an average of $650/month on technology, more than either Gen X or Gen Y
• Younger boomers outspend younger adults in every major category
• Baby boomers are the Internet’s largest constituency
• Between now and 2030, the population over 50 will grow at about three times the rate of people 18-49  
• They buy over 60% of all new cars
• They are the target for 5% of all advertising.

So the question is, if people over 50 are so economically dominant, how can it be that, as Forbes says, they are "the most neglected wealthy people in the history of marketing."

There are a number of reasons. In a recent post entitled The Invincible Blindness Of  Advertisers, I mentioned a few of the fictitious beliefs that drive this, including:

• People over 50 are already too brand loyal to convert
• People over 50 are too price-conscious
• People over 50 don't spend much
• There is a "lifetime value" in targeting young people

It's all nonsense. But perhaps the largest delusion about people over 50 is that they want to be like young people.

Do they want to feel young? Yes. Do they want to be like young people? No. This is a distinction that seems to be completely lost on marketers.

The baby boom is Barack Obama and Tom Hanks. It is Bruce Springsteen and Condoleezza Rice and Yo-Yo Ma and Steve Jobs. It’s Stephen Spielberg and Magic Johnson and Jonathan Franzen and Oprah Winfrey and Jerry Seinfeld.

The idea that these people and their contemporaries want to be like a 25-year old barista or a doofus college frat boy is absurd. The belief that they aspire to be like the knuckleheads who inhabit Bud Light, or Taco Bell, or KFC ads is beyond ridiculous.

The marketing industry does not understand this. They think of baby boomers as grandma and grandpa. They are not. They invented the personal computer. They grew up listening to the Rolling Stones and smoking weed. They didn’t invent sex, but they invented the sexual revolution.

And yet, the idea that people over 50 want to be like young people is the hopelessly out-of-date fiction that the advertising and marketing industry clings to while they waste hundreds of millions of dollars pandering to people who don't and won't buy their products.

Apple, Jobs, and Creativity

A week after Steve Jobs stepped down as CEO of Apple, but before his sad death, I wrote the following about the media reaction to his leaving...

"The consensus seemed to be that Jobs built a strong culture, hired smart people, and taught a way of thinking that will serve Apple well in the future. The story line went like this-- while Jobs will be missed, he is no longer essential to the future of the company and it will go on brilliantly without him.

 

I don't buy this for a second. Genius is non-transferable."

Eighteen months later, the strength of Apple as a consumer products juggernaut is being called into question. Although their sales are still astronomical, their growth has slowed and their stock price has dropped substantially -- about 1/3 in the last 4 months. They are no longer the world's most valuable company.

In the months since Jobs' death, Apple has done very little to reassure us that it is still the same company that startled us with beautiful, imaginative products. This came to mind the other day when I saw a tweet from the great Dave Trott quoting Bill Bernbach:

"It may well be that creativity is the last unfair advantage we're legally allowed to take over our competitors."

Apple has clearly not shown the same type of creativity in the past 18 months that it did in previous years.

As I said at the time...

"...one of the first indications of whether Apple is capable of continuing its explosion of creative energy without Jobs at the helm may be found in its advertising."

Advertising did turn out to be the first indicator. Luckluster ad efforts for "Siri" and a campaign featuring a "Genius" did not live up to the high standards of intelligent, thoughtful advertising Apple had established.

But more important, there have been no significant product breakthroughs. We had gotten used to Apple amazing us with new products and features every six months. But in the past 18 months all we've seen from them is incrementalism -- smaller iPads, larger iPhones. Just the kind of stuff we're used to seeing from the followers in the industry, not the leader.

Meanwhile Samsung has grabbed the cool factor from them with products, features and advertising that are very attractive to young people (yes, there are categories in which it pays to target young people.)

I am not ready to be worried about Apple. I expect they will be back before long with a breakthrough idea or two.

But as Bernbach said, the future is about one thing -- Apple has to demonstrate that they can be as creative without Steve Jobs as they were with him.

So far, they haven't.

Marketing The Marketing: The Social Media Backfire

The Super Bowl is a made-for-tv event.

Last year, over 110 million people watched it on television. The only reason it is such a big deal in other media is that it is so big on television.

In their infinite greed, marketers are trying to wring every last penny out of their almost-$4-million investment in a Super Bowl spot.

To do so, they have employed a questionable tactic -- marketing the marketing. They release their spots on line early, and they promote their spots with teasers.

For the most part, this tactic has been a mess.

First, they have taken a substantial bite out of the surprise and novelty that Super Bowl advertising used to generate.

Next, their "teasers" are usually wasteful nonsense that could be better spent promoting the product rather than the marketing.

Third, they open themselves up for criticism and ridicule before the spot even has a chance to air. So far this year, at least 3 major advertisers have been pummeled on social media about spots that haven't even run yet.

To understand some of the foolishness behind this questionable tactic, listen to this doubletalk from a big shot at Taco Bell about their hideous spot...

"By releasing "Viva Young" online before the Super Bowl, we're rewarding our biggest fans and bringing them inside the brand," added (Taco Bell's) chief marketing and innovation officer... "We want to share the spot with our Team Members, franchisees and online fans first so they're in the know before Super Bowl Sunday, so we can engage with them in social and digital spaces."

Instead of worrying about "engaging in social and digital spaces" with your imaginary "biggest fans" how about making an intelligent spot for the other 110 million of us?