The Brand Loyalty Myth for Older Consumers
The Brand Loyalty Myth for Older Consumers
Even as paid media recognizes the profit in featuring and serving older consumers, advertisers are still sitting on the sidelines. Brand loyalty is just one of their misconceptions.
Welcome to Longevity Gains, the newsletter for marketers and entrepreneurs who want to succeed in the longevity economy, the largest and fastest-growing market in the world. It’s the $22 trillion opportunity you can’t afford to ignore.
Hello there!
As we approach the longevity economy tipping point of no return, we have more concrete indications that it’s already here. Beyond Baby Boomers keeping the US out of recession for the last couple of years, we see media companies creating a new category of product for older people.
While streaming services like Netflix have embraced shows featuring older people like “Frankie and Grace” and “The Kominski Method,” we’re now seeing film producers tapping into this lucrative demographic to create a new genre.
This year has seen the release of “Summer Camp” and “The Fabulous Four,” films in the same vein as last year’s “80 for Brady” along with “Book Club” (2018) and “Poms” (2019). What they all have in common is powerhouse casts of amazing female actors who happen to be in their 70s and 80s.
These films feature Jane Fonda, Mary Steenburgen, Candice Bergen, Lily Tomlin, Sally Field, Rita Moreno, Kathy Bates, Diane Keaton and others who appeal not only to older people, but specifically to older women, who have outsized influence in the longevity economy. It’s a welcome development given the traditional idea that a woman’s career in Hollywood was over at 40 unless her name is Meryl Streep.
Of course, we’ve had sporadic instances of films featuring older people, notably the “old dudes acting up” genre that includes “Grumpy Old Men,” “The Bucket List” and “Going in Style.” And while DeNiro in “The Intern” was a bright spot for crossover appeal, producers are finding a viable new product that gets older women into movie theaters:
“What makes something like this appeal to us as financiers and distributors, is that this is a movie we think a certain generation is going to want to go to to experience communally,” said Kent Sanderson, President of independent film company Bleecker Street.
The interesting thing about this insight, along with the project featuring older people made by streamers like Netflix, is that media producers see older consumers as viable prospects outside of advertising-supported channels. In other words, they know older people will pay for this content, while advertisers seem to be avoiding specifically getting in front of older audiences.
If that strikes you as irrational, you may be right. The only justification that makes logical sense is the idea that older audiences are already brand loyal and resistant to change, and therefore don’t need to be targeted with advertising that speaks to them while portraying older people in a positive light.
Problem is, that’s just not true. As John Dick, CEO of CivicScience, explains in his talk called Brand Loyalty (or Lack of) in 50+ Consumers, while older consumers may experience switching costs like everyone else, they will in fact change brands when properly incentivised and are more experimental with new products and services than previously thought.
Plus, older consumers love to tell others about new products and brands. As upstarts such as Caddis Eyewear demonstrate, one reason older consumers will switch is when a brand makes them feel seen and valued.
The other fallacy in the context of television advertising is a lack of understanding about who is watching. While the 18 to 49 demographic has long been coveted by advertisers, the average age of a television viewer is well into the 50s and 60s. Part of that reflects the dwindling number of people who haven’t cut the cord and still have cable TV.
This is already causing media executives to downplay age for the first time in over 60 years:
They are focusing more on the mass-market reach of TV, and playing down the importance of age for advertisers. What really matters, they say, is whether your ad is reaching people who are likely to buy your product, whether they are 37 or 67.
That would logically lead to more inclusive advertising (since it’s also a myth that seeing older people in ads will alienate younger people) and/or programming aimed at older audiences. While we’ve seen some programs that reflect an older audience, such as “The Golden Bachelor” and the return of 61-year-old Jon Stewart to “The Daily Show,” the real action still seems to be happening outside of advertising-supported media.
Which brings us back to the movies. People are voting with their dollars on these comedies, but they’re not for every elder. In fact, if you read the comments on the New York Times article below, you’d think they were universally reviled.
Which in turn brings us back to rule number one here at Longevity Gains. Older people are people, with a wide variety of preferences, interests, values, and taste. Lots of people like Adam Sandler movies, others think they're trash. Such is the marketplace.
In other words, there is no “50+ market” that you can uniformly target. Our Empowerment Marketing Toolkit can help you discover your ideal older prospect.
Once you nail down who you’re serving, don’t be afraid to go after established brands in competitive spaces. Anyone who treats older consumers with the respect they crave and deserve is likely to be richly rewarded.
The Retirement Reality
After years of hearing about the “retirement crisis,” it seems we’ve settled into a new retirement reality — namely that people will be working longer and that will be the new normal. This is something younger Boomers and many Gen Xers have already deduced.
Many Americans haven't been able to save for retirement at all. When the U.S. Census Bureau released its regular survey of consumer finances in 2022, nearly half of Americans aged 55 to 65 reported not having a single dollar saved in personal retirement accounts. A more recent report says about 3 in 10 workers age 59 or older have no money put away for retirement.
One of the main tenets of the longevity economy is longer work lives, which leads to years of extended consumer spending. So yes, we’re expecting that people will need to work longer.
Just in case that wasn’t obvious given the widespread lack of sufficient retirement savings plus longer, healthier lives, we’ve got Larry Fink, CEO of investment firm BlackRock, to tell us. Thanks Larry.
He does make a salient point, though:
"No one should have to work longer than they want to. But I do think it's a bit crazy that our anchor idea for the right retirement age — 65 years old — originates from the time of the Ottoman Empire," Fink wrote in his 2024 letter, which largely focuses on the retirement crisis facing the U.S. and other nations as their populations age.
While it may be obvious, people tend to get cranky when you force them to work longer, which is what raising the eligibility age for Social Security would do to many. The recent fierce protests in France were in response to a proposal to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64, which the government did anyway out of necessity.
Meanwhile, The Netherlands decided over 10 years ago to gradually raise the retirement age based on adjustment as the country’s life expectancy changes. The country with the oldest population in the world, Japan, has actively embraced older workers through various programs, and treats these workers as valued contributors, in line with their cultural respect for elders.
So, it’s not a crazy idea despite the inevitable controversy. But given that Social Security doesn’t provide all that much actual security with the high cost of living in the United States, there are a multitude of opportunities to help older people remain financially viable for longer.
A solution to the retirement crisis? Americans should work for more years, BlackRock CEO says (CBS News)
Time to rethink retirement (Larry Fink’s 2024 Annual Chairman’s Letter to Investors) (BlackRock)
Looking California, Feeling Minnesota
Finally, Kamala Harris revealed her VP candidate yesterday, selecting Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as running mate. While the reaction on social media was jubilant among Democrats, there were immediate comments on the contrast in apparent ages between the two, even though Waltz is only 6 months older than Harris.
Yes, Walz is a bit overweight, but it’s mainly his lack of hair that makes him appear older. When someone brought the issue up on the socials, former high school teacher Walz replied that it was because he “supervised the lunchroom for 20 years. You do not leave that job with a full head of hair. Trust me.”
A healthy sense of humor, for sure. But it’s mainly our genetics that influence our appearance over the entire course of our lives, and specifically as we age.
Longevity isn’t about looks, even though we often resort to saying that healthy older people “don’t look their age.” That’s not really the point. And while healthspan varies drastically in the United States based on geography and the local culture that goes with it, people in Minnesota live longer than average lives, just like in Kamala’s California.
This political cycle has put age from and center as the foremost issue, and it’s clearly exposed the casual and accepted ageism that runs through U.S. society. As we proceed through this huge demographic shift, marketers and entrepreneurs must be a part of a concerted effort to dispel the stereotypes and misconceptions that divide people based on age if we have any hope of enjoying a more harmonious society.
That’s all for now, talk soon.
Keep going-