“Dying on the Vine”: Why the video sharing service is now history.

November 2, 2016 Phillip Nones Branding, Business, Content Creation and Content Management, Media, Media Consumption, Publishing, Social Commentary, Social Media Instagram, marketing, Media, Snapchat, Social Media, Twitter, Video Sharing Service, Vine

Remember back in 2012 when Twitter introduced its Vine video sharing service?

Back then, observers were positively breathless in their accolades for the service, with some positing that Vine represented some sort of tipping point in the world of instant communications.

A little more than four years later … and as of November 1, Vine has just been shuttered. How is it that such a vaunted social media platform went from de rigeur to rigor mortis in such a short time?

There are several key reasons why.

Time and place: The year 2012 was a perfect time to launch Vine, as it coincided with when many companies and brands were shifting their focus towards video communications. At the time, short-form video was a novelty, making it a kind of dog whistle in the market. But Instagram, newly acquired by Facebook, swooped in and made a big splash, too, while Snapchat attracted younger audiences. What was Vine’s response to these competitor moves? If there was much of any, no one seems to have noticed.

Competing … with yourself: Strange as it may seem, Twitter itself ended up competing with Vine in 2015, launching its own branded video playback capabilities. When something like that happens, what’s the purpose of the older brand that’s doing the same thing? Twitter’s simultaneous foray into live-streaming was a further blow to a brand that simply couldn’t compete with these newer video services introduced by Vine’s very own parent company.

Commercial viability? — What commercial viability? In all its time on the scene, Vine never figured out a way to sell advertising on its network. It had a good germ of an idea in sponsored content, but never seemed to capitalize on the opportunities that presented, either.

Knowing your audience: From the outset, Vine attracted a fairly unique and crowd of users, such as people involved in the hip-hop music scene. It was vastly different from the typical user base in social media – and yet Vine never did all that much to support these users. As a result, there was little brand affinity to keep them close when the next “bright, shiny object” came their way.

In the social media space, the rise and fall of platforms can happen with amazing speed. Unlike some other platforms, Vine was a big hit from the get-go … but perhaps that turned out to be a double-edged sword. Vine never did figure out a way to “mature” with its audiences – which eventually left it behind.

In the end, Vine went out not with a bang, but with a whimper.

TV viewing: More choices than ever … but for viewers it’s a big “so what.”

October 31, 2016 Phillip Nones Media, Media Consumption, Social Commentary Marketing Charts, Media, Media Consumption, Nielsen, Nielsen Total Audience Report, Television, Total Audience Report, TV, TV Viewing Habits

In theory, people love to have choices. But in practice, does having many choices always matter?

In the world of TV viewing, the answer seems to be … not so much.

New findings from Nielsen’s Total Audience Report finds that the average number of channels received by American viewers of TV is just over 200. But on average, people view fewer than 20 different TV channels during the course of a month.

That means that people are typically watching just 10% of the channels available to them.

[For purposes of the Nielsen report, “TV viewing” is defined as watching TV live or via DVR/time-shifted viewing.]

Trends shifting over time.

In a related report published by Marketing Charts, traditional TV viewing has declined in nearly every age group over the past five years.

Here’s how those stats break down:

Ages 12-17: Weekly TV viewing is down ~36% over the past five years
Ages 18-24: Down ~38%
Ages 25-34: Down ~26%
Ages 35-49: Down ~12%
Ages 50-64: Down ~2%
Ages 65+: Up ~5%

Clearly, younger generations are finding outlets for their leisure time other than traditional TV viewing. What’s more, time-shifted viewing remains only a small fraction of all TV viewing — no better than 90/10 split in favor of live TV in any of the six age categories tested.

So we have a combination of tradition asserting itself – people continuing to watch relatively few TV channels – along with some changing behaviors that promise to continue to upend the traditional TV industry.

More findings from the new Nielsen and Marketing Charts reports can be accessed here and here.

Saving for college: Millennial parents seem to have figured it out better.

October 10, 2016October 10, 2016 Phillip Nones Demographics, Economics, Education, Social Commentary College Debt, College Saving, Demographics, Education, GenX, Millennials, Sallie Mae, Saving for College, SLM Corp.

Recently SLM Corp. (aka Sallie Mae) released the results of a survey of parents that asked about how they’re saving for their children’s college education. The survey, which was conducted for Sallie Mae by research firm Ipsos Public Affairs, uncovered some pretty interesting stats.

Here’s something that surprised me: When it comes to saving for kids’ college tuition, it turns out that Millennial parents – those age 35 and younger – have already saved significantly more than their GenX counterparts.

Millennial parents reported having saved more than $20,000 toward kids’ college, whereas GenX parents – those between the age of 36 and 51 – have saved only around $18,000.

What’s up with that?

The report lists several possible explanations. First, Millennials are more likely to have started saving earlier for their kids’ college education because of their expectation of having paying a higher share of college costs compared to older generations of people

Likely, their remembering their own (more recent) college experiences.

Here’s another contributing factor: Many GenX parents tended to be hit harder financially than Millennials during the recent recession. They’re the ones who were more likely to have lost a job further into their careers, when it’s can be more difficult to bounce back quite as easily and at the same level of salary.

At the same time, it’s often the GenXers who have higher mortgage and other debts already racked up when compared to Millennials.

Under those circumstances, saving for children’s college is a commitment that’s much easier to place on hold until other, more pressing financial matters are dealt with.

On the other hand, for Millennials the recession caught them at the beginning of their careers when fewer financial commitments (other than student loans) were yet made, and their flexibility more fluid.

It’s easier to roll with the punches when you don’t have a pile of fixed financial obligations already hanging over your head.

Another factor the Sallie Mae/Ipsos report cites is that GenX parents are more likely to have become over-leveraged in their personal finances — a situation exacerbated by income stagnation, declining stock investment values and declining home values (even being underwater on home mortgages in some cases).

It seems that all of these factors have colored GenX attitudes about saving for kids’ college education in ways that go beyond what the raw numbers show. When asked how confident they feel about being able to meet the college financial obligations for their children, 32% of Millennials stated that they felt quite confident.

But among GenXers, it was just 17%.

Overall, this doesn’t paint a very pretty picture for GenX parents. But it seems that the Millennial generation has figured out the “college cost recipe” a little more successfully.

For more “topline” statistical findings from the survey, click or tap here.

The ad blocking phenomenon: It’s all about human nature.

October 2, 2016October 3, 2016 Phillip Nones Advertising, Business, Marketing Communications, Marketing Research, Media, Media Consumption, Social Commentary Ad Blocking, Advertising, Digital Advertising, eMarketer, Gord Hotchkiss, MediaPost, Online Advertising

The rapid rise in consumer adoption of ad blocking software is threatening the traditional advertising model for publishers. For some, it seems like a topsy-turvy world where none of the old assumptions or the old rules apply.

But author and MarComm über-thought leader Gord Hotchkiss reminds us that the consumer behaviors we are witnesses are as old as the hills.

In a recent MediaPost column titled “Why Our Brains Are Blocking Ads,” Hotchkiss points out that the environment for online ads is vastly different from the environment where traditional advertising flourished for decades – primarily in magazines, newspapers and television.

He notes that in the past, the majority of people’s interaction with advertising was done while our brains were in “idling” mode – meaning that they had no specific task at hand. Instead, people were looking for something to capture their attention within a TV program, a newspaper or magazine article.

Hotchkiss contends that in such an environment, the brain is in an “accepting” state and thus is more open to advertising messages:

“We were looking for something interesting, we were primed to be in a positive frame of mind, and our brains could easily handle the contextual switches required to consider an ad and its message.”

Contrast this to the delivery of most digital advertising in today’s world, which is happening when people are in more of a “foraging” mode – involved in a task to find information and answers with our attention focused on that task.

In such an environment, advertising isn’t only a distraction; often, it’s a source of frustration. As Hotchkiss notes:

“The reason we’re blocking [digital] ads is that in the context those ads are being delivered, irrelevant ads are – quite literally – painful. Even relevant ads have a very high threshold to get over.”

Hotchkiss concludes that the rapid rise of ad blocking adoption isn’t about the technology per se. It has to do with the hardwiring of our brains. New technologies haven’t caused fundamental changes in human behavior – they’ve simply enabled new behaviors that weren’t an option before.

As is becoming increasingly obvious, the implications for the advertising business are huge: Ad blocking software is projected to lower digital ad revenues by more than $40 billion in 2016 alone, according to estimates by digital data research firm eMarketer.

Looking back on it, actually it seems like it was all so inevitable.

The “Millennial Effect” – and how it’s affecting the Boomer Generation.

September 28, 2016 Phillip Nones Advertising, Branding, Demographics, Marketing Communications, Marketing Research, Social Commentary Boomer Generation, Eric Trow, Gatesman+Dave, marketing, MediaPost, Millennial Effect, Millennial Generation, Positioning

In the world of marketing communications, it seems that confluence is in the air. This point was underscored recently by Eric Trow, a MediaPost columnist who is also vice present of strategic services at Pittsburgh, PA-based marketing communications firm Gatesman+Dave.

Trow’s main point is this: Despite the big differences that marketers have traditionally noted between members of the Boomer Generation and their younger Millennial counterparts, today the two groups are becoming more similar than they are different.

In particular, Boomers are beginning to act more like Millennials.

Trow identifies a set of fundamental trending characteristics that underscore his belief:

Boomers increasingly want instant gratification – and related to that, they want convenience as well.
Boomers are embracing technology more every day, including being nearly as dependent on mobile devices as their younger counterparts.
Boomers connect online – with adults over the age of 65 now driving social media growth more than any other generation at the moment.
Boomers want control – and to that end, they do their research as well.
Boomers want to live healthier – with levels of interest in natural, healthy and environmentally responsible products rivaling those of younger age groups.
Boomers are more questioning of traditional authority – and not just because of the 2016 U.S. presidential election race, either.

Putting it all together, Trow concludes that he and many other Boomers could, in practice, be classified more accurately as “middle-aged Millennials.”

Speaking as someone who falls inside the Boomer generation age range, I concede many of Trow’s points.

But how about you? Do they ring true to you as well?

The Top Ten U.S. Cities for Stretching a Dollar

September 21, 2016September 21, 2016 Phillip Nones Demographics, Economics, Employment, Human Resources, Social Commentary

… They’re pretty nice in other ways, too.

A few months ago, my eldest daughter received her graduate degree in higher education academic counseling, and immediately thereafter started a new career position at a university located in a medium-sized city in the state of Wisconsin.

Of course, the main attraction was the job position itself and the potential it offers for professional growth.

But another important factor was the cost-of-living dynamics in an urban area where real estate and other costs are clearly more “friendly” to a career person just starting out.

Along those lines, the recent publication of CareerCast.com‘s newest “Ten Best Cities for Return on Salary” is revealing.

What it shows is that for young professionals just beginning in their careers – and likely saddled with student loans that are a significant chunk of change – the top cities for “stretching a dollar” aren’t particularly known for being the hippest places around.

By the same token, they aren’t the dregs, either.

Here’s CareerCast’s “Top 10” listing in order of the most budget-friendly cities:

#1 most budget-friendly: Wausau, WI
#2: Tucson, AZ
#3: Pittsburgh, PA
#4: Midland, TX
#5: Lincoln, NE
#6: Houston, TX
#7: Fort Worth, TX
#8: Durham, NC
#9: Columbus, OH
#10: Austin, TX

Scanning the roster, you might see a few surprises.

One shows up as #10 on the list; certainly no one is going to accuse Austin of being anything less than trendy. Houston and Fort Worth (#6 and #7 on the list) are major metropolises.

Affordable, livable housing in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

And more people are falling in love with the charms of Pittsburgh, PA (#3 on the list) – especially when compared to its old, worn-out and unsafe urban counterpart on the other side of the state.

The Midwestern cities on the list might not be the end-all in trendiness, but one can’t complain about quality-of-life factors like friendly neighborhoods and lower crime rates in places like Lincoln, Columbus and Wausau.

And if nothing else, Midland is the city that played host to President George W. Bush in his formative years …

Overall, I think it can be said that these ten cities aren’t a bad set of choices for young working professionals. The fact that they also happen to be the best ones for stretching a dollar is just icing on the cake.

Quick-change artistry: Masculinity goes from “alpha-male” to “alta-male” inside of a generation.

September 14, 2016November 13, 2021 Phillip Nones Demographics, Marketing, Marketing Communications, Marketing Research, Social Commentary Alejandro Nones, Alpha Male, Alta Male, Coach Magazine, Demographics, Dennis Publishing, Join the Dots, Marketing Research, Social Behavior, Sociology

Alpha-male: Venezuelan actor Alejandro Nones — Alpha-male: Venezuelan/Mexican actor Alejandro Nones

Many people contend that changes in society are driven by many influences – not least movies and music. Certainly, the popular arts reflect the current culture, but they also drive its evolution.

This view was underscored recently in the results of field research conducted by a British- and Singapore-based survey firm Join the Dots for Dennis Publishing, which has just launched Coach, a magazine in the U.K.

The magazine’s audience consists of men who are committed to lifestyles that make themselves “healthier, fitter and happier.”

The research aimed to figure out what are today’s characteristics of being “male.” An in-depth qualitative focus group session with men aged 22 to 60 helped establish the set of questions that was then administered in a quantitative survey of ~1,000 respondents (including women as well as men) between the ages of 25 and 54 years old. The survey sample represented a diverse mix of family status, sexual preferences, incomes, professions and interests.

The survey questions focused on the habits and aspirations of men … and the results showed how far we’ve come from the heydays of the “alpha-male” barely 25 years ago.

The researchers contrasted good and not-go-good alpha-male stereotypes (self-absorbed … unwilling or unable to talk about insecurities or vulnerabilities) with a new persona they dubbed the “alta-male.”

The alta-male is a man who values work/life balance and finds personal fulfillment as much in self-improvement as in material wealth.

Additionally, the alta-male tends to reject male role models from earlier generations, instead opting to establish their own identity based on a myriad of diverse influences.

Of course, it’s one thing to aspire to these goals and quite another to actually attain them. The study found that two-thirds of the respondents are finding it difficult to achieve the satisfactory work/life balance they desire.

On the other hand, alta-males tend to be more adaptable, and they’re willing to embrace uncertainty more than the alpha-males of yore.

Even more strongly, alta-males are seekers of experiences, which they value over “mere money” – despite recognizing that it takes money to partake in many such life experiences.

Perhaps most surprising, the study found little difference in perspectives between older and younger male respondents.

It turns out that older men are just as likely to have an “alta-male” attitude towards life. So clearly, the culture has been rubbing off on them, too.

From my own personal standpoint (as someone whose been around the track quite a few times over the decades), I sense a similar shift in my own personal perspectives as well.

What about the rest of you?

Condé Nast Traveler and its readers weigh in on America’s friendliest and unfriendliest cities.

August 28, 2016 Phillip Nones Marketing Research, Social Commentary America, America's Friendliest Cities, America's Unfriendliest Cities, American Cities, Asheville, Atlantic City, Austin, Baltimore, Burlington, Charleston, Conde Nast Traveler, Detroit, Dover, Hartford, Jackson Hole, Los Angeles, Nashville, New Haven, New Orleans, Newark, Oakland, Park City, Regional Americana, Santa Fe, Savannah, Wilmington

The usual suspects … and a few surprises as well?

People say there’s wisdom in crowds.

If that’s the case, then the ~128,000 people who participated in the Condé Nast Traveler Readers’ Choice Awards survey in 2015 must count for something when it comes to which cities are America’s friendliest.

… And the survey results show that if you want to find America’s friendliest folks, head south and west.

That is correct: Of the ten cities rated the most friendly, just one is located in the Northeast … and absolutely none are in the Midwest.

For the record, here are the ten friendliest American cities based on the Condé Nast survey:

#1 Charleston, SC — America’s friendliest city

#2 Park City, UT

#3 Savannah, GA

#4 Nashville, TN

#5 Austin, TX

#6 Santa Fe, NM

#7 Asheville, NC

#8 Jackson (Jackson Hole), WY

#9 New Orleans, LA

#10 Burlington, VT

Of course, there are also the ten unfriendliest cities as determined from the same survey — no doubt the subject of just as much curiosity.

Those seem to be just as clustered — but elsewhere — primarily in the Northeast, but also a few in California. And Detroit, too:

#1 Newark, NJ — America’s unfriendliest city

#2 Oakland, CA

#3 Atlantic City, NJ

#4 Detroit, MI

#5 Hartford, CT

#6 New Haven, CT

#7 Dover, DE

#8 Wilmington, DE

#9 Los Angeles, CA

#10 Baltimore, MD

I have no earthly idea if these rankings are accurate or not; it’s actually well-nigh impossible to have a definitive listing based on a ranking criterion that’s so subjective.

But having lived in both Nashville and Baltimore — and having visited 13 of the other 18 cities — I do get a sense of where the Condé Nast survey respondents are coming from.

How about you? Do you think that any of these cities are unfairly ranked? And what other cities do you think should have made it on either list? Like New York City or Philadelphia, for instance?

Incidentally, the 2016 Readers’ Choice Survey results are currently being tabulated and are due to be published in October. It will be interesting to see if there are any big changes in the listings …

Are self-driving cars finally set to become the breakout stars of the highway?

August 19, 2016August 22, 2016 Phillip Nones Business, Economics, Manufacturing, Social Commentary Barclays, Business, Ford Motor, Johana Bhuiyan, Mark Fields, Recode, Recode Brian Johnson, Self-Driving Autos, Self-Driving Cars, Self-Driving Fleets, Uber, Vox Media

Uber's first self-driving fleet of cars arrives in Pittsburgh in August, 2016. — Uber’s first self-driving fleet of cars arrives in Pittsburgh in August, 2016.

It looks as if self-driving cars are poised to make the leap from “stuff of science fiction” to “regular sight on the roads” within the coming half-decade.

In the past few weeks, CEO Mark Fields and other senior leadership people at Ford Motor Company have stated as much. They’re giving their predictions on what’s going to happen with self-driving cars, along with explaining what their own company has been doing to move the ball forward.

Here are some key takeaways from the Ford pronouncements:

Rather than being a novelty, self-driving cars will start being a regular sight on the highways by 2021.
Most of the first self-driving automobiles will be conventional cars or hybrids, rather than full electric vehicles.
The first self-driving cars on the road will be heavily geared towards ride-sharing fleets and package-delivery services, rather than vehicles sold to the general consumer market.
Self-driving technology will be too expensive for individual ownership – at least until 2025 or beyond.

Several additional predictions from other industry observers are also worth noting:

Johana Bhuiyan of Vox Media’s Recode predicts that the price of ride-hailing services like Lyft or Uber will decline because of lower human resources requirements (drivers), thanks to self-driving vehicles.
Brian Johnson, an analyst at Barclays, believes that once self-driving vehicles are in widespread use, auto sales will decline precipitously (as in nearly 40%), as more people come to rely on ride-hailing services that are priced significantly more affordably than taxi or ride-hailing services have been up to now.

If these predictions are accurate, it means that the biggest advancement in consumer transportation since the inception of the automobile itself is right on our doorstep.

The financial goals — and worries — of affluent consumers: It turns out they’re more similar than different from the broader population.

August 7, 2016August 7, 2016 Phillip Nones Economics, Security, Social Commentary Affluent Consumers, Affluent Market, Economy, Financial Anxieties, Financial Goals, Financial Independence, Financial Planning, Shullman

But gender differences do exist …

In this year’s U.S. presidential election campaign, there’s been a good deal of attention paid to so-called “working class” voters. No doubt, this is a segment of the electorate that’s especially unhappy with the current state of affairs in the country.

But what about other population groups?

As it turns out, affluent Americans are worried about many of the same things as well. A recent survey of affluent Americans conducted by the Shullman Research firm reveals that their worries are fundamentally similar to other Americans.

Here’s what survey respondents revealed as their to worries:

Your own health: ~36% of respondents cited as a top worry
Your family’s health: ~31% cited
Having enough money saved to retire comfortably: ~30%
The economy going into recession: ~28%
Terrorism: ~27%
Inflation: ~23%
The price of gasoline: ~22%
Being out of work and finding a good job: ~20%
Political issues / warfare around the world: ~15%
Taking care of elderly parents: ~15%

[One mild surprise for me was seeing how many respondents cited “the price of gasoline” as a source of worry, considering not only the recent easing of those prices as well as the affluence level of the survey sample.]

Generally speaking, the research found few gender differences in these responses, but with a few exceptions.

Men were more likely to cite “inflation” as a concern (28% for men vs. 18% for women), whereas women were more likely to consider “the economy going into recession” as a concern (30% for women vs. 26% for men).

Where there’s more divergence between genders is in how people’s identify their top financial goals. Here’s how the various goals tested by the Shullman research ranked overall:

Having enough money for daily living expenses: ~57% citied as a top financial goal
Having enough money for unexpected emergency expenses: ~56%
Having enough income for retirement: ~46%
Reducing my debt: ~41%
Improving my standard of living: ~40%
Remaining financially independent: ~39%
Becoming financially independent: ~33%
Keeping up with inflation: ~30%
Providing protection for family members if I die: ~29%
Purchasing a home: ~19%
Providing for my children’s college expenses: ~19%
Providing an estate for my spouse and/or children: ~16%

Obviously, some of the goals that rank further down the list are more applicable to certain people at certain stages in their lives — whether they’re just getting started in their career, raising young children and so forth.

But I was struck at how many of these supposed “affluent” respondents cited “having enough money for daily living expenses” as a top financial goal. Wouldn’t more people have already achieved that milestone?

Another interesting finding: With many of the goals, women place more importance on them than do men:

63% of women versus just 50% of men consider “having enough money for daily living expenses” to be a top financial goal.
63% of women versus just 47% of men consider “having enough money for unexpected emergency expenses” a top financial goal.
48% of women versus just 33% of men consider “reducing debt” a top financial goal.
45% of women versus just 34% of men consider “improving their standard of living” a top financial goal.
36% of women versus 30% of men consider “becoming financially independent” a top financial goal.

One explanation for the differences observed between men and women may be the “baseline” from which each group is weighing their financial goals. But since the survey was limited to affluent consumers, one might have expected that the usual demographic characteristics wouldn’t apply. Perhaps the differences are rooted in other, more fundamental characteristics.