Over Fifty

[ken123]

Advertisers do not like to sponsor TV programs that have too many viewers over the age of fifty, that is one of the reason that MURDER, SHE WROTE was moved from Sunday, and eventually cancelled. The reason I mention the Angela Lansbury program is that her murder mystery show was my wife's favorite TV series. But back to being overy fifty. How do you if feel, if you are over that age, or nearing it that you are considered passe by the ad agencies.

[klondike]

Great topic, Ken!
Interestingly enough, I recently devoured an article that went into great depth concerning how modern American sociologists view the topic of "generations".
One thing that surprised me is that although we all recognise the distinction of "Baby Boomer" (those born between December 31st, 1945 & January 1st, 1970), professional sociologists & demographic experts actually prefer to break American generations down into 6, 8, 10 & 12 year divisions; for instance, being born in the early-mid-50's makes me part of "Generation Jones" which covers Jan. 1st, 1954, to Dec. 31st, 1963, or, roughly speaking, the era beginning with the end of the Korean War, and closing with the JFK assassination.
All three of my kids were born between 1980 & '85, which makes them members of the "MTV Generation" . . . even though that media sensation didn't start 'til the Summer of '81, and continued its pop-culture conquest far into the 90's.
So, trying to get back on track here, how do I feel about sailing past the half-century meridian several years ago, ad-wise?
Frankly, I'm relieved!
Fewer & fewer advertisers seem to be wagging cultural icons from my youth in my face to promote their products, and I find with each passing year I am less & less susceptible to the hooks & lures & buzz-words that used to at least grab my attention (though seldom had me running to some distant strip-mall with wallet drawn!); I also find I am quicker to spot what Vance Packard coined as hidden persuaders . . right down to catchy program music teasers and seasonally dominant color schemes.
(Trust me, there is a Billy Bass, with long-dead batteries, stuffed away in my cellar, but I wasn't the one who bought it!)
So . . li'l older, li'l cagier, li'l more keenly observant, and probably less likely than ever to pony-up for those hot new trends . .
Course, if my fellow Yankees could just get straight about stuffing jalapeno poppers with cream cheese instead of cheddar (!), and a few more local pubs would stock Guinness on tap, then this Old Faht might get a little looser with the ol' bank book!

Klondike

[movieman1957]

I'm less bothered about advertising being targeted toward me than I am programming. I always thought it strange that my generation (I'll be 50 in October - gag) and older are the ones with the money, yet we seem to be the least sought after. We are a big part of the population. This factor may, however, explain the mass of products geared for those who suffer from sexual dysfunctions.

Maybe people in the 18-34 (if that's still a group) are home because of family or lack of income to go out. It was like that for me.

As far as programming is concerned it may be because so much of the programming department must be younger than me. When I watch I tend to enjoy what seems to be a more decidedly mature (in age only) program. Then again, I couldn't stand "Thirtysomething" when I was thirtysomething.

[jdb1]

I have mixed feelings about the way TV is programmed these days.

It seems to me that there is one salient reason advertisers target the young male group - they think they are the stupidest and the most easily influenced.

And that, my fellow over-50s, is why we are ignored.

So maybe I'm a bit flattered, but I'm also generally repelled and filled with frustrated despair by what's on TV.

And that is why I think niche webcasts will be the TV of the future - it is an opportunity to air programming for every taste and interest.

[pktrekgirl]

Well, I'm not over 50...but I'm closer to 50 than to 30...so I suppose my commentary is not *way* out of line or anything.

I agree with Judith. Older people clearly have way more money - I think it was in todays USA Today where I saw the headline that the gap between the net worth of folks in their 50's and 60's and the ones in their 30's is getting wider.

But they are also alot less gullible and less likely to buy anything because of some TV commercial. Older people don't buy what's 'cool'. They go to Consumer Reports or experienced friends and buy what is the best made.

Often diametrically opposed things.

Commercials really try to generate fads of one form or another. And older people are less likely to fall for fads.

My feeling? They are not gonna get my business by pitching a slick advert at me. They are gonna get my business by making a quality product and backing it up with good customer service.

I know...I know....

Color me nutty.

[Mr. Arkadin]

Older people have more money, but younger people have the largest disposable income. I'm 38 not 50, but I totally understand and agree with the point of view expressed here.

My brother and I are the oldest members of our hockey team and it's amazing how many of these 20 something guys still live at home sponging off Mom and Pop. They have no bills to pay so all their cash goes towards themselves. I just found out my niece who is 22 and moved out a year a ago is already 25K in debt!

I think today's awful programming sells a lifestyle that is unaffordable to your average working person. This is nothing new, but the kicker is these are supposed to be reality shows so people assume they can actually live that way. Also, shows like AI are exactly what's wrong with the music industry today. I could go on, but I usually don't talk about this stuff at these kinds of forums.

Personally, I hate most TV programming. If it wasn't for TCM, Discovery, PBS, and Sports channels, I would have thrown my TV out long ago and hooked up my VHS or DVD player to a monitor. Someone at TCM asked why we collect films. My reason is simple--so I don't have to watch the crap that's passing for entertainment now.

[pktrekgirl]

^ Well, they may spend more than we did when we were young...but that is only in real dollars. They actually have a decreased spending power from what we had, I believe. So the overall consumer landscape is not any better than it was 15 years ago. In fact, it is worse.

But IMO that's a moot point anyway, because I don't think the advertisers care how much anyone is spending compared with the same age group 15 years ago. They care about what is happening now, and only now. Because what happened 15 years ago does not impact their bottom line today.

What it really comes down to are two things -

1. Disposable income that the individual age groups have available to spend; and
2. The perceived easy with which the advertising agencies can get each group to part with that disposable income.

I also think a side factor is the sort of item we are talking about. For example, Ford and Kia might be targeting the younger set...but I would suspect that Lexus and Infiniti are probably targeting an older audience...mainly because no matter how much money a kid can save by sponging off of mom and dad, they are STILL not gonna be able to qualify for a car loan for a Lexus on $28,000 a year or whatever.


But generally speaking, you have two things happening at once.

1. Some kids have more disposable income than adults because of the sponging off of parents phenomenon that is so popular today. And in the grand scheme of things, it is REALLY easy to talk a kid into spending every last dime he has.

However -

2. At a certain point (particularly for adult professionals) the 'kids have more disposable income' model doesn't hold true. For example, I myself have more than $28,000 a year in disposable income, after mortgage, utilities, insurance, food, and other essentials.

BUT -

I am also educated enough and seasoned enough to understand that a new car every two years is not gonna improve my quality of life...or 'impress' anyone.

I don't care about going to bars or seeing movies the nanosecond they hit the theater for $12 a crack...and I don't believe any hogwash about how using a particular kind of designer shampoo or toothpaste is gonna change my love life. I don't care about designer clothes, designer sneakers, or other foolishness like that, because I am to the point where I think anyone who pays $600 for a purse is not so much 'elegant and cool' as they are a gullible chump.

In the first years of my career 15 years ago, I made less than 1/3 of what I make now (and with worse benefits). But I remember straining my budget to buy things like $250 Gucci purses and only the best $600 suits from Women's Tailored Clothing in Nordstrom.

NOW I understand that a $250 purse (or with inflation on luxury goods, a $600 purse today) isn't gonna make my world any better. And so even though now I could lose $250 from my checking account and not even MISS it, I couldn't care LESS about Gucci and never spend more than $50 or $60 for a purse.

So what I'm saying is that part of it might be the sponging off of mom and dad phenomenon...but part of it is just life experience teaching the older crowd that most of what they are told by Madison Avenue is little more than flash.

[Vecchiolarry]

Hi Ken et al,

Well, I'm 65 and couldn't care less about advertising and commercials. I turn the mute button on whenever I watch TV and one comes on and throw all my junk mail in a wicker basket by my chair.
I don't watch much TV anymore - it's all drivell and I go through my wicker basket every Sunday morning and weed out and throw out what doesn't concern me.

I usually shop and patronize the same places, so the staff knows me and 90 times out of 100 I am served very quickly and efficiently. WHY? Because I have money, and money talks and I make it talk.
I am not bragging (I don't flaunt my status) but when I want service, it comes running.
Someone once said, "It's good to be king" and I paraphase that with, "It's good to be known!" And, in this city, I am.
And, when I travel, I keep the hotel concierge busy and I use my French title; and that gets attention, believe me...

So, how does it feel to be 65 and a consumer - - - MARVELLOUS!!!!!!!

Larry

PS - to all of you I say, try snapping your fingers and being assertive (not aggressive and rude) and you'll have a great time.....

[jdb1]

Larry

PS - to all of you I say, try snapping your fingers and being assertive (not aggressive and rude) and you'll have a great time.....

You are so right, Larry. I am much more assertive in everyday life than I was when I was younger (coming, as I do, from the "Nice girls don't make a fuss" generation). It really does work. Try saying "No, that's not good enough, I want . . . . " and see what reaction you get. First, maybe surprise, but then you generally do get what you want if they want your money. It was such a kick for me when I started saying "No" to salespeople without being indecisive or apologetic. These days I never do what I don't want to do (except maybe for going to work every day and paying taxes), and the heck with those who say I should do otherwise!

[Vecchiolarry]

Hi Judith,

Good for you; I like a gal who knows her own mind and has 'sticktoitiveness'........

And being from Brooklyn, all you need to do is think "Susan Hayward" and sally forth!!

Larry

[markfp]

Having worked in television for over 30 years it's true that in general the advertisers prefer the younger viewers. The main reason is that younger folks tend to spend money today and not worry about tomorrow. It doesn't matter that a guy just out of college has $150,000 in student loans and a job that doesn't pay much. If he wants that $4000 HD-TV, man, don't stand in his way. I work with a lot of young guys who have to have the latest thing and have it now. You know, the ones who change phones three times a year just because the latest one has something new. Every one of them is up to their eyeballs in debt.

There does seem to be a changes happening in the advertising world. As demographics show a larger percentage of viewers are older, more advertisers are aiming towards that group. They're starting to realize that us "boomers" are a good market with money to spend. For the most part, mortgages are paid off, student loans are a thing of the past and now we can really afford those things like HD-TVs. Just look at some of the commercials. I think the "Viva Viagra" spots are very clever and those aren't aimed at 20 year-olds..

[Moraldo Rubini]

Having worked in television for over 30 years it's true that in general the advertisers prefer the younger viewers. The main reason is that younger folks tend to spend money today and not worry about tomorrow. It doesn't matter that a guy just out of college has $150,000 in student loans and a job that doesn't pay much. If he wants that $4000 HD-TV, man, don't stand in his way. I work with a lot of young guys who have to have the latest thing and have it now. You know, the ones who change phones three times a year just because the latest one has something new. Every one of them is up to their eyeballs in debt.

There does seem to be a changes happening in the advertising world. As demographics show a larger percentage of viewers are older, more advertisers are aiming towards that group. They're starting to realize that us "boomers" are a good market with money to spend. For the most part, mortgages are paid off, student loans are a thing of the past and now we can really afford those things like HD-TVs. Just look at some of the commercials. I think the "Viva Viagra" spots are very clever and those aren't aimed at 20 year-olds..

I just read an article about the latest studies showing that the 20-somethings aren't the spenders now. It seems we're working with outdated material and common wisdom that claimed older people don't spend like the younger folk. But that was based on a generation who'd lived through the depression -- they didn't spend. But their kids -- the baby boomers -- rebelled from this mindset and do spend. In the meantime -- in general -- the baby boomer kids are rebelling the other way and are more reluctant to spend. Advertisers are just beginning to catch up with this, realizing that there's a huge little-tapped population out there...

[MikeBSG]

There have been nights when the "Viva Viagra" commercials have been the best thing on TV.

Maybe they should release a record of it.

[mrsl]

Being 62 puts me completely, totally, and absolutely in the throw away generation regarding advertising. NOTHING is geared to white women over 60 except Depends and life insurance.

I hate to break it to Sears, Walmart, and Target, but I eat food, I wear clothes and make up, I listen to music, I drive cars, and I clean my home amoung many other things, and GEE WHIZ - I shop for it all by myself!!!

The ratio of more senior retired women over senior retired men is still higher, however advertisers don't consider this.

Everything is aimed at 50 and under. What about a make up for the women whose complexion has lightened over the years, or clothing that doesn't make you feel like you're competing with your grandkids?

Ads that show things that people DON'T know about may be advantageous to sellers, instead of making outrageous priced clothing so attractive to little pre-schoolers who simply drive their parents nuts with whining and crying, especially in the store where they also upset other shoppers. I watched a whole tableau about a child turning into a Mansonesque character because her mother couldn't afford a Disney Princesses back pack.

I wouldn't mind an ad that told me where to find the items I mentioned earlier, but I am dead to advertisers. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Anne