Skip to main content

The lucrative terrain

The Guardian has an article by Jonathan Freedland on the "multi-million-pound industry intent on turning teenagers and toddlers alike into avaricious consumers."

According to the article, an average British child is familiar with up to 400 brand names by the time he has reached the age of 10! "Researchers report that our children are more likely to recognize Ronald McDonald and the Nike swoosh than Jesus. One study found that 69% of all three-year-olds could identify the McDonald's golden arches - while half of all four-year-olds did not know their own name."
There is, in other words, an enormous children's marketplace, and it is lucrative terrain. The under-16s spend an estimated £30bn a year, including £6bn on clothes and £2bn on toys. Eight in 10 kids have their own TV in their room; half have a DVD player or a video. A million children under nine own a mobile phone. One in five have internet access. With more pocket money than ever before - over £6 a week for the seven to 11 age group and more than £9 for the under-16s - they are a highly-prized target audience. And make no mistake, they are being targeted.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Startups for a stronger Resume?

When the whole web is abuzz with keywords such as Ajax, Web 2.0, Meebo and all, there is some uncertainity about how this new Internet Bubble will shape up.

Mike at Techdirt writes that some of these new startups may be only to actually stand out for the crowd and act as a strong resume.

While the complaint is that so many of these companies are built to flip rather than to be sustainable businesses, some are noticing that this process is really just a better way for some to stand out and get a job. You build a company quickly and cheaply that gets some attention, and a bigger company comes along to scoop up your company, giving you a nice "signing bonus." In effect, the purpose of these companies is to act as a strong resume to stand out from the crowd.
Technorati Tags:

Pottermania

I'll have to admit that the nature of Pottermania is beyond my comprehension capabilities! As more and more fans of all ages and countries immerse themselves in Harry’s adventures, adding fuel to the belief that Pottermania is inescapable, I am purely and simply baffled by its ability to appeal to all ages.

Bored by the inactivity prevailing in this muggle world, I began to read the first one of the series and immediately concluded that reading beyond the tenth leaf was something impossible. Undeterred, I watched the first movie. I Hated it. But with the evil-wizard becoming apple of more and more eyes with every passing moment, around the world, it could only have been something wrong with me and so I watched the second movie. And then it became so easy to establish that I loathed the Potter Kid!

Just a passing thought - "Would it be a bad idea for a Potter special appearance in Oliver Twist? The poor kid could do with some wizardry."

Wimbledon - Swan Lake and Bartoli

OK. In the last few hours, I've been asked this question thrice and hence this post: Who am I rooting for in this Wimbledon? I no longer cheer for "Gentlemen's Tennis" these days. For it is unusually mundane and boring. FedEx and Nadal are way way ahead of anyone else that is clearly reflected in their rankings and hardly makes for any competition. Andy Roddick comes a distant third and this makes watching men's game a little less exciting when compared to the yesteryears of the men's game. The years that passed by had a different air to them, with the likes of Sampras, Agassi, Jim Courier, Goran Ivanisevic taking to the courts, the atmosphere that much more intense, the involvement all that much more. Plus as my friend Santosh says it- where are the serve and volley plays! (For all those jigging about on this stance of mine on FedEX and Tennis, I won't still buy your arguments about Schumi's dominance making F1 mundane though! F1 without Schumi is st…