Selling to the Affluent

I read, with some interest, Matt Oechsli's book on Selling to the Affluent, which is based on a few studies he has done of customers who have an annual income of $100K or higher - primarily, a study done for the financial services industry (financial advisors and wealth management firms), but it seems to have broader implications for the consumer market.

Most of it simply echoes what has been said for years about high-ticket purchases: when making major purchases, customers are resistant to sales tactics that might be used for consumer goods - they seek suggestions from people they know, do a lot of research before contacting vendors, and place a high level of concern not only on the value of the product, but the reputation of the provider and the quality of after-sale service and support they can expect to receive.

What's largely unique to the "affluent" customer is their degree of independence in making decisions: other people and media sources can make them aware of the existence of a product, and can provide information for them to consider (if they believe the source to be reliable), but ultimately their make a purchasing decisions based on their own judgment. As such, the bandwagon approach to marketing, as well as any of th tactics that leverage social influence to override a person's resistance, are not only ineffective, but counterproductive.

But again, this gets back to Marketing 101 principles of "soft" selling versus "hard" selling - although, as I recall, this was considered in light of the product itself, regardless of the qualities of the consumer. If the product has benefits and the buyer can be convinced, by means of logic, that the benefits are worth the cost, than a soft selling approach is required. If the product has no such benefits, then it's time to get "creative" with marketing tactics, convince the person they should buy the product for reasons other than the benefits it delivers. This always seemed greasy to me, but there are a lot of products for which logic fails and, admittedly, there seems to be no other way to move them.

Switching to the perspective of the customer seems a bit more rational - as what one customer would purchase after "soft" persuasion may be a "hard" sell to another, or a given consumer might be more tractable by one method than another.

I dispute the suggestion that this mind-set applies only to people of a certain income level. The methodology of the author's study focused exclusively on this group of customers - so it's fair to say that these behaviors are a quality of the affluent classification, but not necessarily unique to or characteristic of them. I'd be more comfortable accepting the assertion that these qualities are characteristics of the affluent consumer had the author done a broader study and found the qualities absent, or significantly less pronounced, at lower income levels.

As such, I have the sense that the same behaviors likely apply to any mindful consumer, regardless of their level of income. But perhaps there's some corruption of cause and effect: a person who is mindful of their expenses is likely to be savvy enough to amass wealth and become affluent, and given that 99.4% of affluent persons made their own fortunes rather than inheriting them, it's likely that people at lower levels of income who are mindful about expenses will eventually become affluent.

This may be of interest to businesses that seek to serve customers who have become affluent, but who are completely indifferent to them until they have achieved a certain level of income. If it were possible to flag a customer at age 25 or 30 who is already showing the tendencies of an affluent customer and make contact with them prior to their becoming affluent, it could be give them considerable advantage against firms who don't show up until a person has a certain level of income (at which point, their competitors are all knocking on the same doors).