iZac

iZac

Based on the results of the 2006 census, the ABS has revamped the previous way we classified generations. The new chart looks like this…

0-19 __iGeneration
20-39 _Generation X and Generation Y
40-59 _Baby Boomers
60-79 _Lucky
80+ __.Oldest

The newer generation characterisation relies not so heavily on random age demographics, but rather characteristics of each segment. iGeneration, most specifically, focuses on interweb usage and have been named aptly so because they have no memory without it.

Two things to note…

+ The next generation now has an official name, at least here in Australia.
+ I can no longer call myself a Gen Y, instead I am an iGen. Scary.

No Comments
  • Adam
    Posted at 01:31h, 01 February Reply

    Man, those lines are arbitrary – show me someone who can honestly point out the characteristic differences between a 19yo iGen and a 20yo Gen Y! Gotta be some blurring at the edges, so you may still yet be a Gen Y.

    PS: Do you miss being a Y already? If you stay an iGen, we are now officially your cooler older cousins.

  • Bianca
    Posted at 07:32h, 01 February Reply

    I feel for the 80+ year olds. Under 60 and you get a cool name, over 80 and you just get reminded how old you are.

    @ Adam – you’re right on them being blurred. The grouping of gens X and Y is interesting. Someone just finished uni with a work hard, party hard attitude has been grouped with married 2 kids and a mortgage.

  • Tannie
    Posted at 08:28h, 01 February Reply

    So what is the cutoff for this. Is this as at the end of 2006 or has it been scaled to 2009?

  • threebillion
    Posted at 11:41h, 01 February Reply

    I am so over ‘Generations’ it’s unbelievable. It’s a cheap headline grabbing method which undermines every bit of thinking on real population and society trends.

    If someone ever tries to put you in a Generation, punch them in the mouth for being so rude.

  • Zac Martin
    Posted at 11:47h, 01 February Reply

    @ Adam

    Blurred lines get people in a lot of trouble!

    @ Tannie

    I imagine it’s been scaled for 2009.

    @ threebillion

    Completely agree, but we have to start somewhere right?

  • Ben
    Posted at 11:52h, 01 February Reply

    if you use these definitions to help with marketing and comms you should go work in another profession … irrelevant.

  • Adam
    Posted at 18:08h, 01 February Reply

    Blurred lines can get people in trouble, definitely, but so can generalisations. I often wonder at the usefulness of these definitions, as Ben brought up.
    We’re comfortable using generalisations in our work, and it avoids us having to dig deeper or rethink our approach. It’s like the B-word: are we taking the easy way out by using them?

  • Stan Lee
    Posted at 20:07h, 01 February Reply

    The Prisoner. Greatest commentary on the depersonalisation of society ever made. Further info here: http://tinyurl.com/gqax3

    No. 6: Who are you?
    No. 2: The new Number 2.
    No. 6: Who is Number 1?
    No. 2: You are Number 6.
    No. 6: I am not a number, I am a free man.

  • Daniel Oyston
    Posted at 08:39h, 02 February Reply

    @zacmartin maybe you should now be known as iZac?

    Wow, I didn’t realise that putting age groups into generations would cerate so much hatred! Is it really a big deal? The ABS obviously does it because they use the stats and can see value in having them divided into generation.

    But it isn’t like they are saying that you have to use the generations in our marketing efforts. Simple: just don’t.

  • Daniel Oyston
    Posted at 12:50h, 02 February Reply

    Did I completeley miss your heading or did you change it?

  • Zac Martin
    Posted at 17:54h, 02 February Reply

    @ Daniel Oyston

    That was the title all along. ;]

  • Nudge Marketing
    Posted at 18:15h, 02 February Reply

    60-79 Lucky? WFT?

    I don’t think you can be iGeneration without Steve Jobs approval.

Post A Comment