Not All Populations are Created Equal: Understanding
the Differences to Maximize Success
By Randy White
© 2002 White Hutchinson Leisure & Learning Group
The foundation for any project is the feasibility study. Done well, the
project's foundation will be like concrete, strong and stable, able to
support the project and withstand the changing winds of the entertainment
market. However, when the feasibility study takes shortcuts, or is not
thorough, the foundation will be like sticks that snap when market winds
rock the project.
Feasibility studies consist of a series of very specific steps:
- Determination of the geographic market area
- Competitive analysis
- Analysis of market area's population
- Determination of the mix and other project design, programming and
operation characteristics
- Attendance projections
- Per capita spending (spending per visit) projections by type of revenue
- Pro forma financial projections of revenues and expenses
- Design day capacity and size requirements
- Cost estimate
- Return-on-investment projections
- Breakeven and sensitivity analysis
This article will not attempt to discuss all these steps. Rather it will
focus on step #3, analysis of the market area population.
There is common misunderstanding in the location-based entertainment
industry that the number of people living in the market area (and sometimes
the number of tourists) is the key factor in determining attendance and
revenues. Some people in the industry even subscribe to rules of thumb,
such as a population of so many people will support a particular type
of project. Nothing can be further from the truth. Not all populations
are created equal.
The first step in analyzing the market population is by age and household
characteristics-how many households and people are there in the targeted
categories for the project. For example, if the project is a family entertainment
center targeting parents with children from 6 to 14 years old, how many
families with children in that age range are there with how many children?
A population of 150,000 in a retirement area Florida is going to have
a much lower count than a population of 150,000 in a suburban location
in Cleveland. Even in Cleveland, a market population of 150,000 will be
different in one part of the metropolitan area than in another.
However, the analysis doesn't stop there. Income and education have a
dramatic impact on frequency of visits and per capita spending. Using
the same illustration, two different populations of 20,000 families with
16,000 children ages 6 to 14 will not be the same and their potential
spending potentials will be very different.
Let's first take a look at the influence of household income on entertainment
spending. Information from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer
Expenditure Survey (CES), based on data from 10,000 households reveals
a dramatic difference in annual entertainment spending based on income.
The survey includes a category for 'entertainment fees and admissions'
that includes theme parks, FECs, zoos, etc. which we will refer to as
out-of-home entertainment.
The 2000 CES showed that households with annual incomes of $50,000 -
$69,999 spent 76% more on out-of-home entertainment than households with
annual incomes of $30,000 - $39,999. Families with incomes exceeding $70,000
spent almost four times as much as those with $30,000 - $39,999 incomes
and more than twice as much as those with $50,000 - $69,999 incomes.
One additional category of expenditure, food away-from-home (in-restaurant
dining), is also related to expenditures at location-based entertainment
facilities. The graph below shows the results for both.
Income is not the only factor that influences consumer spending for out-of-home
entertainment. Education also has a dramatic impact. The 2000 CES showed
that high school graduates with some college households spent 2.3 times
as much as high school graduates without any college households and that
college graduate households spent 365% as much on out-of-home entertainment
as high school graduates without any college households. The graph below
shows the data, as well as spending for in-restaurant dining.

The effect of household characteristics on out-of-home entertainment
and dining is much more complex than just looking at income and education.
Spending is also influenced by region of the country, occupation, the
age and number of children, the age of the head-of-household, ethnicity
and whether the household rents or owns a home and lives in the country
or an urban area. For example, households headed by managers spend twice
as much on out-of-home entertainment as construction workers, mechanics
and technical sales and clerical workers; homeowners spend twice as much
as renters and households in urban areas spend twice as much as those
living in rural areas.
Accordingly, determining potential revenues for a project requires a
rather complex analysis, much more than just looking at the number of
targeted households and age groups. Any two populations with the same
population, or even with the identical number of target households, will
have very different out-of-home spending potentials. Not all populations
are created equal when it comes to out-of-home entertainment spending.
One of the most effective ways to analyze target populations and their
potential spending is to look at their socio-economics/lifestyles ("SELs").
This not only categorizes a population by demographic characteristics,
such as income, education, age, occupation and type and location of residence,
but also by their psychographics-their values, tastes and patterns of
consumer behavior. This gives much more targeted information about their
spending. Not only that, but it also gives important information about
their needs, tastes, preferences, values, hopes and fears, which is important
to customizing a project's offerings, design and operations to its targeted
market.
Using SELs has the advantage of allowing a project to target and focus
accurately on a particular target niche of guests. Let's go back to the
example of families with children between 6 and 14. In any market area
there will be a diversity of such families by SELs. There will be some
poor families without high school degrees; there will be some middle-income
families with high school, associate college degrees, or Bachelor's Degrees;
and there will be both upper-middle income and rich families with college
graduates or postgraduate degrees. Some of these families will be service
workers, some will be blue-collar and some will be white-collar and professionals.
It is not possible to design a community-based entertainment venue that
will appeal to all the possible SELs of families with children 6-14 within
a market area, unless of course, the market area is very homogeneous.
That is rarely the case. To be successful, a community-based entertainment
facility needs to target a particular grouping of SELs, not the entire
spectrum. Successful businesses shoot with a rifle at a target market
rather than with a shotgun at the entire population. If you try to be
all things to all people, you only dilute the appeal and end up being
nothing special to everyone. The spending potential might exist in the
market place, but you won't capture the maximum by casting a wide net.
SEL targeting is a proven practice in the retail, restaurant and service
industries. Ruth Chris' restaurants target and appeal to a completely
different group of SELs (broadly white-collar) than Outback (broadly blue-collar).
The Limited women's clothing store targets a completely different SEL
and age group than Talbots. Courtyard by Marriott, Motel 8 and the Hyatt
all target different customers. That's why they are successful. They target
a narrow niche of customers, and then carefully craft their offerings
to have the maximum appeal to them. Often that niche is a very small segment
of the population. Many successful concepts attract as little as five
percent of the overall population as their customer base. This concept
of targeting is know as focused assortment-focusing on both a niche market
and category of product or service and offering that niche market an assortment
within that category that is targeted to their tastes, needs, preferences
and values.
Let me give you a real live example of how this counterintuitive market
approach really works. Our office is located in Westport, an inner-city
area of Kansas City, Missouri. Westport is as close as you can get in
Kansas City to a 'Greenwich Village'. Westport is an older commercial
area with what I call urban diversity-the total spectrum of socio-economic
people, shops and restaurants.
Ten years ago the Westport Café, an independently owned coffeehouse,
opened a block from our office.

Westport Café
Then, four years ago it was announced that Starbucks planned to open
an outlet right next door to them. Fearing that their café wouldn't
survive the competition of a Starbucks, the owners collected a petition
with a thousand signatures from customers and presented it to city leaders
to stop Starbucks. Nevertheless, Starbucks was successful in obtaining
its city approvals and opened.

Starbucks Coffee
Today, four years later, the Broadway Café is still open and operating.
In fact, its sales have increased since the arrival of Starbucks. This
isn't a unique phenomenon. Elsewhere in Kansas City there are other successful
independent coffeehouses operating just a stone's throw from Starbucks.
Nearly all the coffeehouses operating before Starbucks arrived in Kansas
City remain in business today.
This doesn't seem possible. A competitor opens right next door, and a
very aggressive and successful competitor at that, and sales increase?
What is going on to cause this?
Let's go back to SELs and take a look at the customers of each coffeehouse.
You can watch Starbucks' customers come and go, especially at the peak
morning hours. BMW's, Mercedes, and late model SUVs can be seen parking
and their drivers running into Starbucks to pick up their lattes or whatever.
These customers are well dressed with well-tailored clothes, and obviously
most are professionals and white-collar workers. Right next door, customers
come and go from the Westport Café coffeehouse. However, many arrive
by bicycle, in older model cars, many with bumper stickers, or even walk.
For lack of a better descriptor, those customers are bohemian in character.
Now let's take a look at the décor and atmosphere of the two coffeehouses.
Starbucks is very contemporary, with wood finishes and an upscale atmosphere.
The Westport Café is more on the funky side, down to earth and
a little worn around the edges, with furniture that doesn't match and
a homemade character.
What we have is two completely different coffeehouses, which are successfully
targeting two completely different groups of SELs. In fact, the customers
of one would probably not want to even be seen in the other. Each coffeehouse
is focused on a completely different niche of customers. That is why Starbucks'
opening didn't take any sales away from the Westport Café. There
was a latent demand for coffee from a white-collar market that the Westport
Café wasn't satisfying, as their atmosphere and presentation didn't
match that market. It wasn't until Starbucks opened that that latent demand
was satisfied.
Just to expand on this concept a little further, although both coffeehouses
are less than a one-block walk from our office, I personally walk two
blocks to Einstein Bros. to buy my morning coffee. Why? Because Einstein
Bros. is a better match to my tastes, both for coffee and atmosphere,
than either Starbucks or the Westport Café. And in the same area,
there is a Panera Bread Bakery-Café, where you can see other customers
coming and going in the morning for their coffee.
This illustrates the successful concept of targeting a niche market based
upon socio-economic/lifestyles. Not only are all populations not equal,
but also within any population there are subpopulations that are very
different, and often incompatible. As the expression says, "Birds
of a feather flock together." You have to design the nest to attract
the particular variety of birds you want to attract.
What this time-proven marketing principal means to community-based entertainment
facilities is that they cannot successfully attract an entire market area
population. Rather, each must select a targeted niche market within that
population and design the all aspects of the business to appeal to them.
This is where most entertainment facilities miss the mark, and often
pay dearly. The conventional wisdom seems to be that everyone will come
for entertainment. That is true, just like all coffee drinkers will buy
coffee. But they will only buy it if the coffeehouse matches their tastes,
both for the coffee as well as the décor, atmosphere and service.
Not all coffee drinkers in any market will frequent the same coffeehouse.
In fact, if the existing coffeehouses don't match their tastes, they won't
buy from any coffeehouse. In our Westport case history, the current Starbucks'
customers weren't buying coffee at the Westport Café before Starbucks
opened. They probably weren't stopping anywhere for coffee.
What this means is that out-of-home entertainment spending is not a zero-sum
game, i.e., there is not a fixed amount of money being spent on it and
the strategy is to get the largest piece of the pie. In most markets,
there is latent spending potential that is not being captured, as there
are no entertainment facilities that match the tastes of many customers.
In Westport, the overall market coffee sales increased when Starbucks
opened-the pie got larger when the latent spending potential was captured.
Our company's research over the past thirteen years shows that many entertainment
markets are like Westport before Starbucks opened. There may be existing
entertainment facilities, but they are only capturing some of the out-of-home
entertainment potential. And just like Starbucks attracted a white-collar
market when its preexisting competitor was not, our observation is that
most community-based entertainment centers are not attracting the white-collar
family market, leaving a large untapped potential in those markets.
That potential grows every year, as our society becomes more and more
educated and the percentage of knowledge workers grows. Contemporary consumers
are seeking more sophisticated concepts, with better ambiance and design,
and often ones that educate them or enrich their lives. According to the
Economic Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, between 1998 and
2000, revenues increased by 15% for museums, historical sites and similar
cultural institutions and by 16% for fitness and recreational sports centers.
During the same period, sales in bowling centers increased by only 6%
and family fun centers and arcade sales decreased by 4%. Our company's
observation is that the dramatic difference between these growth rates
is attributable to the failure of most community-based entertainment facilities
to match contemporary tastes for the more upscale groups of SELs who control
the greatest share of out-of-home entertainment spending.
Two successful entertainment chains have successfully identified this
market opportunity with the young adult market. Both Dave & Busters
and Jillian's have developed successful facilities, many with sales exceeding
$10 million, in markets that had many other facilities targeting young
adults, but that didn't match the SELs of more upscale young adults.
This is why it is so important when doing a market feasibility study
to not only identify the SELs, but to determine which compatibility grouping
of SELs should be targeted. And once that is determined, it is important
to identify the design and operational characteristics required for the
entertainment center to capture the maximum amount of their spending potential.
Then the center must be developed and operated to match the targeted markets'
tastes, needs, values, and preferences.
Not all market areas are created equal. And not all populations within
any one market area are equal. Understanding these differences and targeting
a niche market population with a focused assortment is a critical factor
for success with community-based entertainment facilities.
|