"
. With Gen Y and mass brands: Made for each other?
I’m not a huge fan of generation-based generalization, or people who make a living from such generalizations, but I couldn’t help but be intrigued by an assertion by Neil “Millenials” Howe in a recent Q&A with Brandweek. Here’s the bit, with the key parts bolded:
I think that millennials are capable of regenerating the whole notion of the big brand. The idea of the big brand went into decline with the Gen Xers and certainly during the late boomer period. Gen X was a generation that didn’t even want to be thought of as a generation, and it had a lot of little niches. There was never a Top 40 group of songs everyone listened to, and the generation is spread out in terms of wealth. They were cynical toward anything that was big, and this gave rise to niche and viral marketing. The whole concept of the Long Tail is perfectly designed for Gen X.
With millennials you’re returning to the fatter portion of the bell curve. This is a generation that wants to feel that they do have a center of gravity. So you’ll see the emergence of huge brands with this generation. Look at [what happened with] Harry Potter. Think of the idea of the big brand as being a dimension of the return to community.
I’m not sure if I agree, but it’s refreshing to encounter an angle on the mass-vs.-niche discussion that isn’t just about technology. It’s undeniable that technology has fractioned the marketplace, and will presumably continue to do so – but culture is affected by other factors, too. Possibly this is one of them.
What do you think?
.
.
Kim Fellner's book 
.
A
Reader Comments
Rob, two sides of the story here as I see it. Yes, brands are important to Gen Y, but it’s more brand-of-the-month than brand for life. From what I’ve seen, Gen Y’s mindset is trickling up demographically, which is why pop-up retail stores and restaurants that change themes, menus, and even names monthly are starting to thrive. Some backup stuff, below. Of course, there are probably just as many researchers that say exactly the opposite.
Gen Y doesn’t have brand loyalty – they’re quick to move the next big thing.
James R. Palczynski, retail analyst for Ladenburg Thalmann & Co.
“Generation Y” has an inbred mistrust of major brands.
American Sports Data
If you’re a student of marketing, you’ve heard of the brand ladder, from unawareness to awareness, all the way to brand loyal.
What we see with this generation is highly compressed brand ladders because unlike with my generation, when a product could be introduced and had a life cycle of years, they’re now in months.
The Razr phone is hot today, but I give it maybe another six weeks before there’s something hotter. Y Generation really doesn’t have time to be brand loyal because that would indicate that a product is going to live longer than six months.
Bill Engel, co-CEO
Simmons Research, div. of Experian
best,
bonnie
Richmond, VA
USA
i haven’t thought about this enough to really place a stake on the ground, but i think both the original statement and the above comment are correct. what that means to me is that, Gen Y doesn’t have the same innate aversion to anything that smacks of “the man” like Gen X does, they also don’t have any particular loyalty to them.
that said, i think as long as the brand stays fresh and cool, they’ll stick around (for example, Harry Potter).
I’m a “millenial” myself, and mostly I disagree with the views Neil Howe expressed. First, in reference to the highlighted excerpt. Harry Potter as a reference for a resurgence in “big brand” loyalty is a bad example. For instance compare the loyalty of the Star Wars franchise during their times. The earning dollars between the first 3 Star Wars and the Potter movies differ, but take into account inflation, # of theatre releases, and, well, marketing tactics. Howe suggests that “…risk-taking is down, which is consistent with long-range planning…” however makes no mention of the planning process whether it be monetary or whatever so this assertion is broad in and of itself. Also, he mentions “Boomers individuated by creating the personal computer” and that millenials have returned to a community. Yet we lose basic face-to-face interaction skills and judge people on the information provided on these networking sights that tend to relate more like a padded resume or worse, hiding undesirable traits and characteristics easily recognized in person. Howe also mentioned that in 1996, the last election year Xers were considered in the 18-29 bracket, was the lowest all time for that age group. While the number of youth votes have indeed risen (albeit his numbers are slightly off according to CIRCLE), he fails to mention that 1992 had a higher % of 18-29 voters than in 2000 and 2004. As for his expectations for the upcoming elections…well the Obama brand has been highlighted extensivley on this blog. As for his comment about millenials not caring about the government wiretap provision in the Patriot act with millenials proclaiming “I’m special, the government is trying to protect me” is outright moronic. I’ve not met a single millenial who is ok with this intrusive measure. He comments Xers as a gerneration had a lot of little niches and that millenials were reaching the bell curve. However the number of niche markets have skyrocketed as a result of the internet along with the numerous brands that are willing to accomodate them. As a millenial, yes, I do think we are smart, but with the resources we have we should be, especially when answers can be had regarding any subject in an instant. When it comes to job choices, millenials seem to be capricious in that regard, wanting to do one thing one day and another the next. They want to branch out, do it all, and utilize thier minds in many different fields. Finally, as for future millenial weaknesses being that we won’t be able to make individual decisions and rely on answering to a group; customization on products and services has become a symbol of individuality for this generation that its expected and will be pushed even further in the future. Thus creating more options for personal identity.
Paul: Great critique! Especially that Star Wars point. And I agree that the wiretap assertion was sort of … strange.
Bonnie: Interesting batch of comments, though I think some go too far in the other direction. This stuff about “inbred distrust of major brands,” I think that kind of thing is very exaggerated. Do young people shun Nike? Not so far as I can tell. I think your observation that general novelty-seeking is more widespread through the culture, many age groups, sounds more correct to me.
Finn: I like the way you’ve reconciled the views here. And like you, I’m still not at a place where I can put a stake in the ground. (Particularly after reading these comments!) But I think it’s interesting.
I’d have to disagree with Neil. As a millenial myself, big brands don’t do it for me. We’re a generation that needs constant stimulation, which can be seen in the diverse trends and niches today. That also means lots of niche brands. We also like things to be fast and are always searching for the new. Big brands have a big image, and they usually keep that image constant. So we get bored. I know I do. And we’re also more discerning then previous brands. Some people don’t like the way big brands do their business, so they chose to support local or smaller businesses. Or they may question their marketing tactics, like do they really believe in my well-being or are they just trying to make money off of me? And we also have the Internet that allows us to learn about new things happening all over the world. If I didn’t have Internet and didn’t explore on it as much as I do, I would never know about all the little guys out there. This all could be a personal opinion because I try to support local and smaller businesses as much as possible because I feel that true passion goes into their work versus mass produced goods and huge corporations.