When Someone Rejects You

While I was thinking about the competition for attention and dollars in today's highly competitive media marketing sales and management, I felt it important to share a little thought about rejection. Something those of us who have been in media sales have had to deal with and will have to for years to come. I had to deal with it from the time when the British Invasion became the music culture and what we wore from bell bottoms, tie dye shirts, blue lens sun glasses to what we look like today. I think I would buy a long sleeve polo that says, " I am old but I got to see all the great bands!"....But media built my house, college for my kids, health care and now my retirement in the midst.

If you have the client's benefit always as your mantra...and truly work hard and give them the best service and support they can't get from the myriad "package sellers" who went to sales workshops which trained them in the 'slam dunk' method of sales...you will, as a result of THEM  get rejection.


Keep this at your desk and refer to it daily:

Peace!

When someone rejects you…..

You don’t need anyone’s affection or approval in order to be good enough. When someone rejects or abandons or judges you, it isn’t actually about you. It’s about them and their own insecurities, limitations, and needs, and you don’t have to internalize that. Your worth isn’t contingent upon other people’s acceptance of you — it’s something inherent. You exist, and therefore, you matter. You’re allowed to voice your thoughts and feelings. You’re allowed to assert your needs and take up space. You’re allowed to hold onto the truth that who you are is exactly enough. And you’re allowed to remove anyone from your life who makes you feel otherwise.   Daniell Koepke

Warmest wishes for the coming season!

Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D. Author of "LeNoble's Media Sales Insights"

Millennials Less Enthused About Pay TV

• by Wayne Friedman, Yesterday, 7:24 PM
• 
  
• 
  

Millennials are still buying into pay TV -- but not surprisingly, their numbers are lower than older TV consumers. Just 63% of millennials -- those 18-29 -- have pay TV subscriptions. Seventy-seven percent of 30- to-49-year-olds have pay TV, and 78% of those 50 and older have a pay TV service, per media research company nScreenMedia.

Going forward, things might be tougher -- especially for those young TV consumers. The research says 98% of those young TV media consumers have no intention of getting pay TV, with just 2% saying they are “considering” subscribing in the next three months. Another 19% say they have “never subscribed.”

When it comes to canceling pay TV services, millennials are pretty much in the average range, with 18% saying they have canceled a pay TV service -- the same percentage as those 30-49 (18%) and a bit more that those 50 and older (14%).

Will millennials continue to take on pay TV? The report says they will, but it will be much more difficult than ever before. The study quotes a recent remark that Jeff Bewkes, chairman/CEO, said recently: “Once they take the mattress and and get it off the floor, that’s when they subscribe to TV.”                         
                
The rise of digital media is one major reason that this job will be more challenging.

Here are a few reasons: 71% say tweeting about an event “makes it more fun” and 70% "enjoy reading tweets while tracking a live event on TV.” The belief is that a passive television experience generates much lower interest among millennials

Over 90% Of Buyers Using Programmatic, Per AOL Survey

by Tyler Loechner, Yesterday, 8/13/2014

Programmatic advertising has woven its way into every channel in marketing, including the most traditional: television.

According to a new study from AOL, 76% of advertisers buy display via programmatic, while 56% buy mobile inventory this way; 48% use programmatic for video ads; 24% for social; 32% for search; and 13% for television. Just 8% say they aren’t using programmatic in any channel.

From the agency perspective, 86% are buying display via programmatic, 60% for mobile and video, 34% for social, 24% for search, 7% for television and just 9% aren’t using it at all.

In other words, over 90% of buyers are now using programmatic in some capacity.

The data comes from new survey results from AOL Platforms. AOL Platforms surveyed senior executives at 25 major U.S. brands, 96 agencies and 56 publishers over a one-month period spanning May and June 2014.

Although it is already prevalent in all digital media channels, agency and brand respondents said advertisers will increase the use of programmatic buying over the next six months. The expected growth is nothing to scoff at: Respondents said advertisers will increase the use of programmatic in display by 58% over the next six months -- by 53% in mobile, 54% in video, 18% in social, 12% in TV and 10% in search.

AOL notes: “87% of brands and agencies plan to increase spend in Display and Video up to 50% in the next year.”

“What started as a way to automate real-time bidding on remnant inventory has evolved into a force for innovation across numerous areas of the advertising landscape, including the trading of premium display and videos buys,” Allie Kline, chief marketing officer of AOL Platforms, told Real-Time Daily. “Programmatic is moving out of the minor leagues.”

Ad technology is not without its faults, however, and brands, agencies and publishers all agree that inventory quality is a serious concern. It has been a known and documented issue for months now, and still progress has been slow, if not absent.

“Inventory quality” is one of the top two challenges that brands, agencies and publishers all face with programmatic -- with agencies and publishers citing is as their biggest hurdle. For brands, the number one issue is transparency, followed by inventory quality and technology complexity. Transparency and technology complexity are the second and third biggest challenges for agencies.

Publishers, on the other hand, don’t cite transparency as an issue -- instead noting that education and measurement are their second and third biggest challenges, respectively.

While the “technology complexity” is a major problem, according to the survey, advertisers aren’t doing themselves many favors. AOL’s survey says that 73% of buyers are working with up to 20 different vendors.

“This shows that while consolidation may be happening at a corporate level, the effects of it have not yet trickled down to the transactional level, requiring numerous partners throughout the process,” AOL theorizes.

The complexity can perhaps be blamed for another complaint buyers and sellers share: Nearly 60% of all respondents say digital media buying and selling is still too time consuming.

Global Ad Spend Will Finally Exceed Pre-Crisis Peak In 2015, GroupM Forecasts

by Steve McClellan, 4 hours ago

• 
  

Global ad spending will reach $534 billion in 2014 -- a 4.5% increase over 2013, according to GroupM’s latest forecast, issued today. The company predicts investments in 2015 will rise an additional 5.0% to $560 billion -- finally exceeding the pre-crisis peak of 2007/2008 in real terms. 

In the U.S., spending is projected to grow 3.4% this year to $162 billion. And next year spending in the U.S. market is forecast to grow another 4.2% to $168.3 billion. 

“The U.S market should experience moderate Ad growth in 2015 consistent with nominal GDP,” said Rino Scanzoni, GroupM’s North America chief investment officer. “We expect 2015 overall Ad volume to exceed the 2006 high water mark of $161.9B by 4% on a nominal basis. TV share should remain consistent. Digital share of Ad revenue is expected to grow by [1%] driven by search and on-line video.”

Globally, ad recovery is localized, with 17 markets accounting for 93% of expected ad growth in 2014. Even at its moderate 3.4% growth rate this year, the U.S. will contribute one-quarter of incremental ad dollars. China ranks second as it climbs a predicted 9.8% to $76 billion. Other countries making sizable contributions to this year’s growth include Nigeria, Kenya and Vietnam. 

“Many companies are still operating with very strong balance sheets,” said Dominic Proctor, president of GroupM Global. “Coupled with a rising general confidence and a specific comfort around digital marketing, though notwithstanding some geopolitical uncertainty, we are seeing an uplift in some of the ‘older economies’ as well as the new.” 

Adam Smith, the firm’s top forecaster and editor of the GroupM forecast report, This Year, Next Year, said: “Despite the slowdown in China's general economy from 2012, its consumer economy continues to expand. This, plus intensive digitization of advertising, keeps China ad investment rising at or near double-digits, with no large print legacy to correct.” 

It is a different story in Western Europe, where 73% of the regional economy is in the Eurozone, which continues to struggle. In real terms, the Eurozone remains 20% below its 2007 advertising peak, and the hardest-hit "periphery" of Greece, Ireland, Spain, Italy and Portugal, 47% below the peak. 

Smith added: “Western Europe is the most-digitized ad region in the world, though this may finally be maturing to judge by digital ad investment growth slowing from double- to high-single digits in 2014 and 2015.” 

Western Europe also has the world's most print-heavy advertising, although recent declines are moderating from double- to mid-single-digits in 2014 and 2015. 

Elsewhere, GroupM notes that some members of its south-east Asia group (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, Singapore and Vietnam) face political and economic challenges, and this year will collectively slip from double- to mid-single digit ad growth.

“This group will still contribute to the global ad recovery, but we are on alert for central banks ‘tightening into the downturn’ if inflation becomes a problem,” said Smith. 

India, Brazil and Russia remain among the faster-growing ad markets, although GroupM warns that its reduced Russia forecast -- from an annual run-rate of 10% to 6% -- assumes no worsening in domestic affairs.   

TV Markets Report Big Differences In Live Vs. Time-Shifted Viewing

MediaDailyNews
by Wayne Friedman, 5 hours ago

• 
  
• 

Local TV markets can vary greatly when it comes to their share of live TV watching versus time-shifted and other video-on-demand viewing.

Pittsburgh viewers have the biggest percentage of prime-time live viewing -- at 70%. Philadelphia is next at 68%, followed by Minneapolis at 62% and New York and Baltimore, each with 61%, according to Nielsen.

Looking at the lowest percentage of live viewing, Dallas is No. 1 (44%), followed by Houston (47%), and Los Angeles (49%). All those markets register less than half their TV viewing in live TV programming.

In addition, Dallas is the only market in the top 25 that has a higher percentage of time-shifted viewing (47%) to that of its live viewing (44%). Plus, 9% of its viewing comes from video on demand. Houston and Los Angeles also have hefty amount of time-shifted viewing in prime time -- 44% for Houston and 45% for Los Angeles.

When it comes to the top 25 markets in prime time, 56% view TV shows live, 34% time-shift within seven days and 10% go to video-on-demand.  Nielsen time shifted/live prime-time data from its June 2014 NPower report. In terms of overall results, total day live viewing, Pittsburgh is also at the top of the list, along with Detroit, both at five hours and 19 minutes. Tampa is at 5:16 and Philadelphia 5:16.

At the other end of the spectrum are San Francisco, three hours and 27 minutes, followed by Denver, 3:37; Seattle, 3:39; and Los Angeles, 3:49.

St. Louis (49 minutes), Detroit and Orlando (each with 46 minutes) and Cleveland (45 minutes) register the highest time-shifted viewing overall.

This research is from a Nielsen report of 25- to-54-year-olds in May 2014.

Making Sense of Programmatic Buying

Commentary

• by Ken Beaulieu, 2014, 
Ken Beaulieu is senior director of marketing and communications for the Association of National Advertisers.
• 
  
• Bob Arnold, digital media and strategy lead, North America, at Google, believes programmatic buying will one day revolutionize the industry because it will bring about more effective and relevant advertising to target consumers. Until then, he says, much work is needed to educate brand marketers about what programmatic buying really means and how best to capitalize on the trend.

Arnold, a featured speaker at the ANA Media Leadership Conference, March 30-April 1, in Boca Raton Fla., shares his perspective on programmatic buying, including the biggest misconception about the space, the main benefits to marketers, and what the future holds.

How do you define programmatic media buying? Do you feel there’s an adequate understanding of the term throughout the advertising industry?

Programmatic buying is utilizing technology to plan and buy media in order to reach the right person with the right message when they’re most receptive. It eliminates a lot of the guesswork of media buying. From an industry-understanding standpoint, brand marketers are just now starting to hear of the term. The ecosystem is very complicated; a lot of terms are being used interchangeably.

For example, many people call real-time bidding programmatic media buying, but real-time bidding is a subset of programmatic as a whole. So it’s going to take more education and a simplification of the ecosystem. Also, as more people utilize programmatic, we will need to show results. Then people will have a greater impetus to learn what programmatic is and how to use it. We’ve already seen great results for direct response marketers, and now we’re starting to see results for brand marketers as well.

What are the main benefits of programmatic buying to brand marketers?

Programmatic allows you to have your cake and eat it too — in other words, it drives stronger marketing via efficiency and effectiveness. Process automation drives efficiency, which reduces a lot of the heavy lifting during the planning and buying process. When you use technology, you become more precise in your media placement to drive effectiveness. It's a better user experience because users will only see relevant ads.

With more brands buying programmatic media by themselves, how can they set themselves up for success?

First, centralize analytics to have consistent measures from campaign to campaign. This allows you to spend more time on furthering your media innovation plans and less on trying to create new measurement plans. Which leads to the second point: centralize insights to scale the learning across the company. Marketers can then share answers to questions like: “What types of creative techniques work best?” and “What programmatic buying techniques work best?” The centralization of analytics and insights enables you to take programmatic to the next level.

What is the biggest misconception about programmatic buying?

Many people believe programmatic is simply a race to the bottom — in other words, an attempt simply to drive CPMs as low as possible. The reality is that programmatic is starting to shine a light on quality publishers. As that happens, more publishers will benefit from programmatic because marketers will pay for quality. And as media investment funnels toward higher quality publishers, that will drive up prices in an open-market system. Quality publishers will win at the end of the day. And as programmatic becomes easier for marketers, they will be drawn to quality inventory, thus creating a virtuous cycle.

What does the future of programmatic buying look like to you?

Marketers want to deliver the right message to the right person when they’re most receptive, and programmatic enables that. So I think programmatic will simply become the way media planning and buying is done. In fact, we’re actually starting to see TV and out-of-home advertising utilize programmatic media planning and buying. That said, there is an opportunity to develop better solutions for brand marketers. We know, for example, that there’s no correlation between click-through rates and brand awareness, purchase intent, or sales. If we are able to create a measurement for brands that is as meaningful and actionable as the click has become for performance advertisers, we think it will really help unlock brand spend. And we’ll see an even stronger push for everything to become programmatic.

Don't Forget Millennials As Their Market Share of Auto Industry Grows

By Brittany Barnic Monday, Aug. 11, 2014

Previously believed to be generally uninterested in the auto industry, Millennials have begun to surpass their predecessor (Gen X) in car purchases, as an analysis done by J.D. Power and Associates has proved. Millennials now account for 26% of new car purchases while Gen X accounts for 24%. Baby Boomers still account for the largest segment of new car purchases, holding a majority of 34%, however marketers are increasingly paying less and less attention to the demographic. Gen Y, the Millennials, are the fastest growing segment due to their age, more so, their youth. Taking the “youth” factor into account, one must realize that Gen Y is “growing” across various spectrums. Millennials are obtaining positions that allow a growth in income, starting families that are indeed “growing” and furthermore, growing desire to upgrade their toys. With new incomes, new families and new desires comes a desire to upgrade their former “jalopy” to something more aesthetically pleasant, safer, and for many; more eco-friendly. The most popular style car for Gen Y is the small, compact vehicle similar to the Kias, Toyotas, and Hondas which make up close to 50% of all purchases. Gen X prefers mid-sized sedans, however a transition to larger vehicles is expected to come with time as Gen Y continues to age. Since this younger generation is becoming the key consumer, it is important for marketers to keep up with the trends, preferences, and purchase behaviors that they tend to exhibit and enjoy. Gen Y has been raised with the internet readily available, and they have become the pioneers of social media. Being the “social” people that they are, it is quite ironic to note that they actually prefer to not interact with people, that is, in person, at least. Keeping this in mind, it is necessary for auto brands to have as much information and interactive tools available to their audience(s) via their websites and social media pages as possible. If today’s Gen Y consumer can conduct research independently, locate what they are searching for, weigh their options, determine their credit score, read what reviews from what other consumers have to say about a specific product, and become familiar with warranties and packages etc. before they even have to step foot into a car dealership, they will ultimately feel more comfortable and confident in their decisions, especially when in relation to what could very well be their first major purchase. A final note: Online personalities are just as important to Gen Y as face-to-face personalities. With the nature of the automobile industry being so heavily weighted in the actual, physical, in person experience, it might be a good idea to consider having live sales associates available to chat via the brand’s website in an effort to directly answer any questions that the consumer may have, in real time, and of course via Gen Y’s favorite mode of communication: the digital kind!

Radio Biz Endures Weak Second Quarter

• by Erik Sass, August 6, 2014, 5:02 PM
• 
  
• 
  

With more broadcast radio groups announcing their financial results, it’s becoming clear that the radio business had a slow second quarter, with broadcast radio revenues flat or down in most cases. The latest and less than spectacular figures come from Cumulus Media, Entercom, and Radio One.

When newly acquired stations are included in the comparison, Cumulus Media said total nonpolitical broadcast radio advertising revenues slipped 1.3% from $305.2 million in the second quarter of 2013 to $301.2 million in the second quarter of 2014.

However, this decline was more than offset by gains in political advertising, up 219% from $1.2 million to $3.8 million, and digital advertising, up 98% from $6.5 million to $12.9 million. As a result, Cumulus’ total revenues edged up 2% from $321.9 million to $328.2 million, again when newly acquired properties are included.

Cumulus broadcast radio revenues were boosted by last year’s acquisition of WestwoodOne, a radio network that provides syndicated news, sports, talk and music programming, as well as advertising and events services, and a station swap with Townsquare Media, also completed in 2013.

Cumulus Media CEO Lew Dickey attributed the weak second-quarter results for broadcast radio to a slump in advertising demand in a number of categories in May and June, including retail healthcare, entertainment and real estate.

Also this week, Entercom announced that total revenues were basically flat at $100.2 million in the second quarter of 2014, down about 1% from $101.2 million in the second quarter of 2013, with president and CEO David Field blaming “sluggish business conditions” that “persisted throughout the quarter,” although June results showed a modest improvement. The company’s best performing categories were insurance, telecom, TV and cable, grocery and professional services.

Radio One, which targets mostly African-American and Hispanic audiences, said broadcast radio revenues decreased 4.1% from $58.8 million to $55.8 million. Radio advertising revenues fell 3.8%, offsetting a small increase in the company’s cable TV revenues, from $37.7 million to $38 million. Between the fall in radio revenues and the changed timing of the annual “Tom Joyner’s Fantastic Voyage” cruise hosted by Reach Media, the company’s total revenues fell 9.4% from $119.6 million to $108.4 million.

Previously, Beasley Broadcast Group said total revenues fell 3.6% from $26.9 million in the second quarter of 2013 to $25.9 million in the second quarter of 2014, the company announced Friday. Emmis said total radio revenues were flat at $45 million in March, April, and May (the broadcaster’s first fiscal quarter). And Clear Channel Media and Entertainment, formerly Clear Channel Radio, revealed that total revenues edged up less than 1% from $805.6 million to $806.3 million.

While the majority of the radio business comes mostly from ad agency buys, Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D. of Executive Decision Systems Inc. of Littleton, CO says more emphasis should be placed on growing local-direct revenues as when programmatic buying hits mainstream..agencies will no long need the station agency rep to compete in CPP as the metrics are returning to CPM wherein agency buyers can look at multiple screens to complete a specific targeted buy. Reps who heretofore have considered the agency their primary income source will have to enter the game of new local-direct business development or look for another occupation.   

U.S. Ad Rev Forecast To Rise 2.5% In 2014

• by Wayne Friedman, August 8, 2014, 11:45 AM
• 
  
• 
  

National TV advertising among the major media companies may not be doing as poorly as first indicated, according to one financial analyst.

Although a number of major TV-centric companies reported lower or weak advertising sales, Brian Wieser, senior research analyst of Pivotal Research Group, says by way of comparison to the overall advertising market, national TV had a decent performance.

Wieser writes: “On our current read, U.S. media owners advertising underlying annual growth (excluding incremental Olympic and political advertising) was around 1% in second-quarter 2014 versus slightly more than 2% in first quarter of 2014.

Pivotal estimates a 2.5% U.S. domestic advertising growth this year.

But TV looks like it outperformed the market overall to date.

“We would note that if national TV grew at 2% as we think it did, it means that the medium continued to gain share of ad spending, rather than lose share as many believe.” Wieser says first-quarter ad revenue was up 3% for national TV.

Breaking this down, when looking at domestic revenues from cable network groups -- AMC Networks, Comcast, Discovery Communications, Walt Disney, 21st Century Fox, Scripps Network Interactive, Time Warner and Viacom -- on average grew by 4.4% in the second quarter; and 4.7% during the first quarter. Broadcast networks had a harder time of it with ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC declining around 4% in the second quarter, by his estimates.

Overall, the national TV advertising data needs to be viewed long-term. Wieser says: “While this is indeed a slowdown, when put in context of a full year, where growth rates can easily deviate by several percentage points between the quarters, we don’t see this as particularly meaningful in context of our expectations for the medium.”

Measuring Mobile Engagement To Create Performance Metrics For Terrestrial Radio

by Sara Sisenwein , Wednesday, Aug. 6, 2014

When it comes to marketing campaigns, success or failure can be measured in a variety of ways. Performance metrics are vital to advertisers who need solid figures to prove the efficacy of their campaign — to demonstrate how their marketing spend is clearly translated into sales leads.   New technologies can now pair the large and diverse reach of terrestrial broadcast radio with mobile engagement to create interactive radio campaigns. Now when a consumer is listening to the radio over-the-air and hears a call to action (CTA) for an advertiser’s offer, they can use their mobile device to engage with the digital content related to that CTA in real-time. This not only quantifies the reach of a particular local radio campaign, but also generates results that traditional radio-only campaigns have never been able to produce.   Unprecedented engagement rates Integrating mobile strategies into radio advertising campaigns delivers engagement rates that far exceed those from digital-only channels.   For example, a local auto dealership specializing in used cars created a series of interactive radio advertisements. Some of the ads were straightforward promotions, while others gave consumers an incentive to interact with the content. By offering listeners the opportunity to win a small amount of money, the campaign generated a unique open rate of 28%. One would be hard pressed to compare that to any digital-only campaign.   Similarly, a popular radio station organized a campaign to benefit local area charities. Listeners were able to vote for their favorite charities through the mobile component of the ad. For each vote received, $1 was donated to the corresponding charity. The campaign reached the 2,500-vote limit in a matter of only four days (three days before projected), with a unique open rate of 44% compared to the 17% industry average for non-profits.   The impact of these types of campaigns is considerable. The value of tying a compelling 30-second audio spot delivered by a credible spokesperson to a captivated audience that allows them to engage via their mobile device results in extremely high open rates.   Flexible messaging Depending on an advertiser's industry, keeping the campaign up to date with industry trends and developments can be challenging. Altering a traditional, stand-alone radio spot to reflect a new promotion or event can be costly and time-consuming. However, when an interactive mobile component is involved, companies can quickly optimize their campaigns as needed.   For instance, the mortgage industry is one that is constantly in flux. A local mortgage company used traditional radio advertisements for years and was interested in seeing how mobile could impact their campaign. By adding a mobile component to their radio ads, the organization was able to update their messaging to reflect changes in the market, and as a result, saw dramatic increase in the effectiveness of their ads.   Their interactive radio campaign not only generated the results the company was looking for, but also validated their belief that broadcast radio is an increasingly viable advertising medium.   The bottom line While engagement and messaging are very important, once again, it all comes down to the bottom line. Can radio stations demonstrate a clear return on investment to advertisers? The answer is yes. In such a competitive climate, where a myriad of digital media are fighting over marketing budgets, not only do radio stations need to keep up with the competition, they also need to differentiate themselves from digital or mobile-only campaigns through interactive radio. While it is mobile technology that can show the data, it's the combination with a high-reach vehicle like radio that really generates tangible results.

Gen X Is The Generation That Affluent Marketers Can't Afford To Ignore

By Bob Shullman Wednesday, Aug. 6, 2014

As part of our recent focus on wealth, our previous column, “Millennials Are the Future, But Boomers Are Today,” addressed where household income and wealth currently reside among upscale consumers. For the first time, we also included mass-market consumers in order to provide affluent marketers with a benchmark of the rest of America, which is often a target market. While Millennials continue to be a hot marketing topic, our latest column indicated that total spending power in aggregate is still with the Boomers when share of total net worth and share of total household income are considered by generation. This led a number of readers to question whether or not the Boomers have the highest spending power on averageof all the generations we track. In that regard, we're nowaddressing this specific question by focusing on the Gen Xers among upscale consumers and, again, among mass-market consumers to provide context. Gen Xers are the generation affluent marketers cannot afford to ignore based on their numbers, their average household income, and their average net worth. Following are estimated indices for American adults by their generation for their average household incomes and average personal net worths. The Bureau of the Census is the source for average household incomes, and our ongoing survey for average personal net worths. The estimated number of adults in each generation, based on Census statistics, follows the generation's name. Average Household Average Personal Generation (size) Income Index Net Worth Index All Adults (236.9 million)  100          100 Millennials (67.9 million)      94             75 Gen-X (60.4 million)           118           113 Baby Boomers (74.9 million) 99           108 Seniors (33.7 million)           62           112 Notably, the 60 million Gen Xers, who now range in age from 34 to 48, are the second-largest generation, constituting 25% of all U.S. adults 18 or older, and are ranked #1 by far for their average household incomes (which many marketers use as one of their targeting metrics) and for their net worths by a very small margin compared with the Seniors. A further look at the Gen X generation reveals the following that marketers cannot afford to ignore, including: About 6 million of the Gen Xers are truly affluent (they either live in households with household incomes of $250,000+ or their personal net worth is $1 million or more); The Gen Xers' share of total estimated net worth dollars (29%) ranks #2 of all the generations (Boomers are in first place for this metric); The Gen Xers' share of total personal income dollars (31%) again ranks # 2 of all the generations (Boomers again are in first place in this metric). For marketers focused on affluent Gen Xers (those with household incomes of $250,000+ or personal net worth of $1 million or more): The majority of affluent Gen Xers (51%) are financially focused on providing for their children's college expenses (it's their #1 financial goal); Finally, regarding their spending plans for the near future, affluent Gen Xers (65%) have traveling for pleasure in their plans, and over half (51%) plan to buy one or more luxuries. Given that the average Gen Xer has the highest household income and net worth of all the generations it would be wise for those who market to them to keep abreast of developments in this extremely valuable target market. Even as marketers cultivate and engage Millennials, they shouldn't ignore the Gen Xers — especially the upscale and affluent ones.