Which population cluster do you belong to?

[Paul der Krake]

Someone over at Hacker News posted a PDF on an article's discussion thread on data brokers and the swaths of information they hold on consumers and their households in the US. It's from a research firm that sells analytics and data tools to advertisers.

Here it is:
http://reference.mapinfo.com/software/anysite_segmentation/english/2_0_1/PersonicX_Binder.pdf

It's highly interesting to see how well we are segmented, so I figured I would share it here. Some of the clusters' names are great (Skyboxes & suburbans, or Midtown minnivanners). For a lot of people here, our net worths are probably way above the clusters' averages.

Which advertising box do you think you and your household fit in?

[matchewed]

Closest I can find to my demographic is - Cluster 59 (Group 4X) a Flying Solo - Mobile Mixer (page 46). But like you said the net worth is the key difference. I easily blow away the average for that demographic and score in the .1% for them. Entertaining browse.

[rocksinmyhead]

Very interesting! I would probably be in the "Career Building" category, but my boyfriend is more of a "Mobile Mixer" (what does that even mean??), so we're kind of a weird household I guess. The net worth was actually accurate for me... definitely still <$100K!

ETA: apparently we both "go to bed at 11:30 watching reruns of Scrubs" though... LOL. that is so past my bedtime.

[soccerluvof4]

Closest i see is Skyboxes and Suburbans.

[nereo]

Eeeee!
What I find most interesting is the "estimated net worth" category for almost all of these "clusters" of people 24-35 (my age bracket).  Almost every cluster has >50% of people with <$5k in net worth.
6 to 16 years into adulthood ... that jsut scares me.

[lackofstache]

Apparently we're Taking Hold-Children First by most accounts, though I can't imagine living in the 'burbs.

[homeymomma]

We're also Taking Hold - Children First, but we don't own a home. We probably border with the younger parent groups but our income is higher than those brackets.

I found the little pop culture/media events they chose to list for each group very interesting!

[MooseOutFront]

I guess Fortunes and Families - "Lavish Lifestyles" for us.  Our income, net worth, home value, and careers align reasonably with this category, but we're young and our kids are young relative to their data.  That marketing firm thinks we're "wealthy" with our income, but it sure doesn't feel like it.  Plus we don't live in the burbs because yuk to commuting.

(pg 100 11B-07)

[DoubleDown]

Interesting, thanks for posting.

Skyboxes and Suburbans for us, demographically, although I'd never purchase a Skybox or a Suburban, and we don't align with any of the other consumer descriptions for the category ("Has Jewelry Insurance" - ha, right!!)

[Jamesqf]

I suppost the closest would be the 'Our Turn - Country Single' group, but it's not all that close.  I do have Farm Bureau insurance, but the rest just doesn't match.

Seems like they missed out on a category (or several) for active rural professionals, the sort who hike, ski, mountain bike, &c, and don't spend time watching TV. 

[Davin]

Seems like they missed out on a category (or several) for active rural professionals, the sort who hike, ski, mountain bike, &c, and don't spend time watching TV. 

I agree. I guess it is Transition Time - Outward Bound for me. I don't watch NASCAR and although I do drive an american made pickup truck at work, I'd certainly never consider buying one. Most of the marketing I find directed at me seems to miss the mark pretty wide come to think of it, but there is no other category in there that even comes close.

[jjquantz]

Wow!  My wife and I have always said that we aren't easily classified and this really emphasizes that.  I found two groups that have each have a couple of strong hits, but everything else is totally wrong.

Cluster 43 Group 17M, Modest Means, Work and Causes - this strikes home with the talk about shopping at Walmart, priceChopper and trips to the lumber and building supply store.  We are in the top 2% for net worth in this group.

Cluster 02 Group 15M hits home with the the Arts, golf and opera as leisure activities.  But we don't even break the bottom 1% in this net worth.

I'll have to spend some more time with this and talk to DW about it.  Very interesting insight into how we are viewed by people who try to separate us from our money.

[Zikoris]

Really interesting! I think we're the closest fit to "Urban Tenants", being coupled up, renters, downtown metro area, no kids, middle income, and decent net worth - except that group is 20-30 years older than us, making most marketing targeted to that demographic pretty irrelevant to us!

On a side note, do most people really have boring lives like that? I didn't read absolutely every description, but the ones I saw seemed to revolve heavily around watching TV. I also saw a lot of dinners coming out of microwaves, or made from some sort of processed  pre-made mix - yuck!

[hybrid]

Wow!  My wife and I have always said that we aren't easily classified and this really emphasizes that.

+1. It's really hard to fit us into a neat little box. On one level we are typical suburbanites by age, location, and demographics, but on another level we don't fall for all the trappings of more "typical" suburbanites. We are difficult to market to.

[Nords]

I don't know which seems more ridiculous-- that advertisers try to use this data to sell their products, or that advertisers actually pay money to get this data in the first place.

Is American capitalism a wonderful system or what?!?

[plantingourpennies]

This would likely peg us as Shooting Stars - Cash And Careers - 07X, albeit about 5 years younger than the group as a whole.  Income ~75-80%ile of that group, with other demographic similarities.  We'd be ~95+%ile for net worth in the group, though that might be because we avoid the gambling trips that seem to be a common activity in that group.  =/

Have you ever looked to see who google thinks you are demographically? 
www.google.com/settings/ads/onweb

Works "best" if you have cookies enabled.  In the past google has thought I was in my 60's and interested in finance and real estate... not bad, except for being about 30+ years too old. 

[Emilyngh]

This would likely peg us as Shooting Stars - Cash And Careers - 07X, albeit about 5 years younger than the group as a whole.  Income ~75-80%ile of that group, with other demographic similarities.  We'd be ~95+%ile for net worth in the group, though that might be because we avoid the gambling trips that seem to be a common activity in that group.  =/

Have you ever looked to see who google thinks you are demographically? 
www.google.com/settings/ads/onweb

Works "best" if you have cookies enabled.  In the past google has thought I was in my 60's and interested in finance and real estate... not bad, except for being about 30+ years too old.

Cool.   Google has my age and gender correct and lists 45 interests, which are mostly true.

[Jamesqf]

Seems like they missed out on a category (or several) for active rural professionals, the sort who hike, ski, mountain bike, &c, and don't spend time watching TV. 

I agree. I guess it is Transition Time - Outward Bound for me. I don't watch NASCAR and although I do drive an american made pickup truck at work, I'd certainly never consider buying one.

Yeah.  While I do own a pickup that I use for hauling or trips that involve going off fairly good dirt, it's an '80s Toyota.  Most of my driving is done in a Honda hybrid.  Likewise, I might own a boat if I lived where there was more water, but it'd have paddles or sails, not a motor.

Then there's the 'owns a desktop computer' thing.  I've got two desktops, two laptops, and a tablet that I use regularly, plus several older ones that I haven't been able to give away.

On a side note, do most people really have boring lives like that? I didn't read absolutely every description, but the ones I saw seemed to revolve heavily around watching TV.

I expect so :-(  Seems like every category that I looked at described what the group watched on TV, not whether.

[sol]

I expect so :-(  Seems like every category that I looked at described what the group watched on TV, not whether.

Well consider the source.  This system is designed to target ads at demographics by identifying their favorite shows.  I'm sure they realize that some varying percentage of each group doesn't watch TV, but a) they don't care about those people and b) their interests are served by concealing from their advertising customers that they're not reaching a target demographic.

[dragoncar]

This would likely peg us as Shooting Stars - Cash And Careers - 07X, albeit about 5 years younger than the group as a whole.  Income ~75-80%ile of that group, with other demographic similarities.  We'd be ~95+%ile for net worth in the group, though that might be because we avoid the gambling trips that seem to be a common activity in that group.  =/

Have you ever looked to see who google thinks you are demographically? 
www.google.com/settings/ads/onweb

Works "best" if you have cookies enabled.  In the past google has thought I was in my 60's and interested in finance and real estate... not bad, except for being about 30+ years too old.

More shooting stars here, although that's just from the numbers, not the description.

[Capsu78]

Upscale Aging- Corporate Clout aligns fairly closely...

[sol]

Having read through this document, I think its from 2005.  You can sort of tell by looking at the "grew up with" bullet points and then the "internet uses" section seals it.  Lots of mentions of Dell and Gateway, no mention of Facebook.  Gmail only for the young trendy singles.

This means the numbers are all from before the last years of the real estate bubble, before the market crash and credit default swaps and too big to fail.  I'm betting they're using a very different classification system these days.

[Capsu78]

Good observation Sol,
...and if accurate, it also means that Big Data was still in its "unstructured" infancy... a similar query today would ping across thousands more data points  against a data base gigantically expanded.

[Paul der Krake]

Having read through this document, I think its from 2005.  You can sort of tell by looking at the "grew up with" bullet points and then the "internet uses" section seals it.  Lots of mentions of Dell and Gateway, no mention of Facebook.  Gmail only for the young trendy singles.

This means the numbers are all from before the last years of the real estate bubble, before the market crash and credit default swaps and too big to fail.  I'm betting they're using a very different classification system these days.

You're right, it is a little dated. The metadata embedded in the PDF itself says it was "generated" in 2010, but it could very well have been written beforehand. Nowadays users stories would probably read something like: Aiden wakes up and checks his tinder feed before uploading a picture of his toasts to his instagram account...

[CommonCents]

This would likely peg us as Shooting Stars - Cash And Careers - 07X, albeit about 5 years younger than the group as a whole.  Income ~75-80%ile of that group, with other demographic similarities.  We'd be ~95+%ile for net worth in the group, though that might be because we avoid the gambling trips that seem to be a common activity in that group.  =/

Have you ever looked to see who google thinks you are demographically? 
www.google.com/settings/ads/onweb

Works "best" if you have cookies enabled.  In the past google has thought I was in my 60's and interested in finance and real estate... not bad, except for being about 30+ years too old.

More shooting stars here, although that's just from the numbers, not the description.

By the numbers, Shooting Stars (34/38, married, owner, no kids, just moved to suburbs from city.  Our networth is higher than listed.)  But the description is pretty off!

ETA: Either Shooting Stars or Corporate Clout (except for age factor).

[KBecks2]

We are probably Kids and Clout.

[MrsPete]

I don't think we neatly fit into any of the boxes -- rather, several fit our family -- and that's realistic for this advertising stereotype exercise.  None of us are one thing only. 

I'm tempted to say we're "Fun and Games", but we have children. 
We have a lot in common with "Mid-Americana", but we are college educated and not completely boring. 
We definitely fit into the "Apple Pie Family" group, but we do not spend big on expensive hobbies, nor do we allow our teens to spend lavishly on entertainment. 

With our kids on the way out the door, I see us transitioning into "Aging Upscale" and "Country Ways", though we're not as spendy as either of these groups.  We have the money, and we're willing to spend on what we want, but we're slow and cautious about letting it go. 

[train_writer]

Interesting way of naming marketing clusters!

I am "urban scramble" or "career building", as a 25yo couple.

[NeverWasACornflakeGirl]

Does the document have a definition for the "Income" categories?  I haven't been able to find it.

[NeverWasACornflakeGirl]

Fun link, Paul!  Thanks for posting it.  I guess we fall into FORTUNES & FAMILIES—LAVISH LIFESTYLES
Cluster 07 (Group 11B).  Which really, really makes me laugh.  I would hardly describe our lifestyle as "lavish."

The "Fortunes & Families" Group describes us this way:
"All the trappings of wealth are here, including luxury homes and autos, travel, investment portfolios and costly
leisure activities"

Ummm ... no.... except for the "investment portfolios" part.

But I guess that's why I'm retiring on Monday and your typical "Fortunes and Families" family will be working for another 20 or 25 years!  ;-)

[CommonCents]

Does the document have a definition for the "Income" categories?  I haven't been able to find it.

Not specifically, but if you look at the breakdowns on the detail page, you'll get an idea.  There are 10 brackets there and they then group them into six general categories such as wealthy, affluent, upper middle, etc.  Each detail page varies on what are "hard" factors, and what may vary for that cluster.  Some "hard" factors for a group may be married, house ownership, wealth, kids, etc., but another group may have different "hard" factors.

[rubybeth]

Very interesting. We don't quite fit into the Cash & Careers - Shooting Stars category, but likely will once my DH finishes his graduate degree, gets a different job, and we eventually buy a house. I guess right now we'd better fit into the the Taking Hold - Married Sophisticates category except we're early 30s.

[EK]

Hmmm I'm not quite sure exactly what category we fit into... Married sophisticates maybe (but the lists for reading and shopping doesn't match us there), career building kinda-sorta (but not with those shopping, reading or activities).  Our net worth is below average for these categories because we are younger than the people in these categories by like 10 years.

We definitely used to be Urban Scramble (again with very different reading habits) until we moved out of NYC and got our shit together.

Our shopping, media, reading, and activities most resemble the Established Elite (a category for people in their 50s and 60s... We are in our 20s), which really tickles my funny bone.

[dragoncar]

This would likely peg us as Shooting Stars - Cash And Careers - 07X, albeit about 5 years younger than the group as a whole.  Income ~75-80%ile of that group, with other demographic similarities.  We'd be ~95+%ile for net worth in the group, though that might be because we avoid the gambling trips that seem to be a common activity in that group.  =/

Have you ever looked to see who google thinks you are demographically? 
www.google.com/settings/ads/onweb

Works "best" if you have cookies enabled.  In the past google has thought I was in my 60's and interested in finance and real estate... not bad, except for being about 30+ years too old.

More shooting stars here, although that's just from the numbers, not the description.

By the numbers, Shooting Stars (34/38, married, owner, no kids, just moved to suburbs from city.  Our networth is higher than listed.)  But the description is pretty off!

ETA: Either Shooting Stars or Corporate Clout (except for age factor).

I could also be Married Sophisticates -- the only issue is my income is at the top, but their distribution is already bimodal:

<$15,000 0.0
$15,000-$19,999 0.0
$20,000-$29,999 0.0
$30,000-$39,999 0.0
$40,000-$49,999 0.1
$50,000-$74,999 52.4
$75,000-$99,999 40.5
$100,000-$124,999 0.0
$125,000-$149,999 0.0
$150,000+ 7.0

The description is closer, though.

[grantmeaname]

Having read through this document, I think its from 2005.  You can sort of tell by looking at the "grew up with" bullet points and then the "internet uses" section seals it.  Lots of mentions of Dell and Gateway, no mention of Facebook.  Gmail only for the young trendy singles.

This means the numbers are all from before the last years of the real estate bubble, before the market crash and credit default swaps and too big to fail.  I'm betting they're using a very different classification system these days.

You're right, it is a little dated. The metadata embedded in the PDF itself says it was "generated" in 2010, but it could very well have been written beforehand. Nowadays users stories would probably read something like: Aiden wakes up and checks his tinder feed before uploading a picture of his toasts to his instagram account...

The page on college students mentions Al Gore's Nobel prize and Obama's election, so the data has got to be from at least 2008.

[Random]

It depends on what you emphasize in the categorization.   Overall, flush families:apple pie fits the best.  The description makes me want to rebel, though. 

 It is amazing how much influence kids and home ownership impact activities and lifestyle. 

Also as others have noted, the net worth categories are interesting to look at.  I am in the highest category in the summary table though hard to argue that I am anything besides solidly upper middle class

[sol]

the data has got to be from at least 2008.

That surprises me, since facebook was a culutural phenomenon in 2008 and had almost 200 million users by the end of the year.  You'd think that might show up in the "how people use the internet" section of a document designed to help advertisers find receptive audiences.  Maybe nobody could read the writing on the wall on that one?

[grantmeaname]

Maybe they did a half-ass revision of an older document?

[Vilgan]

Married Sophisticate and Savvy Single seemed like the closest 2 groups. Interesting read for sure :)