An Extended Youth
Posted by casey on 10-29-2008
The youth market has always been defined as tweens, teens, and sometimes college students, but Viacom’s recent “Golden Age of Youth” study reveals that marketers should begin including the 25-34 age group as part of their youth target. Call it the Peter Pan syndrome if you will, but the survey found that contemporary twentysomethings prolong their youth and delay “the onset of adult responsibilities and stay emotionally and physically younger for longer.”
Because the traditional duties that come with adulthood, like mortgages, children, marriage, and developing a strong sense of self-identity now happen later in life, 52% of 25-34 year-olds said they still have “a lot of growing up to do.”
According to an article from MarketingVox:
“Even in these financially challenging times, people are trying to stay younger for longer,” said Kevin Razvi, EVP and managing director of VBSI. “25-to-34 year-olds are continuing to consume music, gaming and the internet and are enjoying the pursuits of their younger years while benefiting from a greater level of personal and financial freedom.”
The study identified three key stages of youth that all have similar lifestyle choices and spending interests: “discovery” is defined as 16-19 years old, “experimentation” is 20-24 years old, and “golden” is 25-34 years old. A lot of ground was covered, but here are some interesting – and in some cases, amusing – highlights:
- 20 is the ideal age to lose your virginity
- 26 is the ideal age for love
- 27 is the ideal age to be a parent
- 71% of 25-34 year olds agree they feel comfortable with who they are
- 25-34 year olds who are married are significantly more likely to be happy (66%) vs. singles (30%)
- In general, 78% are optimistic about their future
Why do you think the “youth market” has expanded? Boomeranging millennials moving back home? Youth culture as pop culture? What’s behind this alleged case of arrested development?
Categorized under: Youth Marketing
October 31st, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Although the study found that we have a lot of disposable income, is that just because we don’t have enough income for larger, long term investments?
A big part of it is the dramatic rise in property values – it is near impossible for most 25-34 year olds to buy a house and raise a family to any kind of middle class standard.
I do not think that this generation’s perpetual adolescence is entirely down to choice.