Well, you won’t get threats from me. Each to their own but that seems really selfish to me.

The problem with so many of these comments I am seeing is that they are looking to these numbers as though it represents them individually. They do not. They are generalized overviews of a group of people. You will not match each characteristic perfectly.

Why did they use out people? Because those are the people we want to market to when we are determining which products will be advertised to the LGBT community. If they are in the closet, it is generally accepted they have different media habits and purchasing habits and/or power than their out counterparts. It is not beneficial to waste money on experimentation with a consumer who we cannot accurately quantify.

As for the two thirds/one third split of the sample — there are statistically more gay men in the country than lesbians. If you want a truly representative sample of the community this is the way it goes. To analyze lesbian behavior separately than gay male behavior, you would have to have two separate studies. As it is, you can extrapolate that information from the sample sizes here.

The sample size was more than adequate as well. In all likelihood, it was culled from the major metropolitan areas where the LGBT community congregates. The only major problem with a study like that is that it will tend to skew more affluent and educated, and perhaps heavier male. (Just so you know, Scarborough research, a locally driven qualitative syndicated survey of the media habits of consumers uses a sample size of about 1800 for the entire NY metropolitan area, which is about 18 million people. That methodology is accepted as the gold standard by marketers and agencies alike. In no way was this survey a study of over 18 million.)

The bonus of those statistics for those in marketing is that THOSE are the desirable consumers for high end products. In an economy that is having trouble selling luxury goods or defining new markets, a study like this will help companies identify efficient and opportune new consumers.

IT IS NOT A POLITICAL survey and should not be used in any to lay the numbers over the national gay popoulation.

If there were a way to count and/or identify the closeted consumer, I would love to kno what it is. I have been working to figure that one out for ages. Any suggestions?

TL

Why? ‘acause hazin cock is teh good.

‘acause stastically, there are more gays than lesbians.

Also, unfortunately, I’m willing to bet that 70% of the gay community honestly does care more about price/quality over gay advertising/friendliness.

If anything you can conclude that given some yarn there are people who will always be inclined to assert it is really a sock.

And then so you understand now why your assertions regarding the polling sample are quite likely incorrect?

However, it also implies that if you have a product that is decent price/quality that just so happens to be made by a homophobic company that it is still most likely the one that 70% of the gay community will take (30% believes that marketing to/accepting the gays is important) over a product that is expensive and lacks quality but is made by a gay friendly company.

If anything, you can conclude from this study that 70% of the gay population doesn’t give a damn about the gay marketing as long as they are getting the product they want for the price they want.

You might be justified in your assumptions about the polling sample but 1) you don’t know how they identifed the respondants 2) we are not told of the geographic data for the sample 3) no statistical reliability data was provided 4)it is possible to ascertain reliable generalizations about a population where those generalizations truly exist.

And besides, if you are a closet queer, they don’t really care about you in this study anyway as you don’t match the demographic being studied.

Anyway, it’s nice to see some statistics support the theory that the queer community does give a damn who markets directly to us. I’m of a belief that as we appear in more commonplace situations, such as regular print ads, commercials, etc. the more acceptance we will see. That and it really makes certain conservative groups foam at the mouth when another company comes out as gay-money friendly.

And I’m slave to noone! The collar chafes me so.

However, that doesn’t represent the vast majority of the gay population across the country. It simply represents the majority in most places where being gay is considered normal (I did not just say that being gay isn’t normal I said that in the vast majority of the regions in this country being gay is very different for people than it is in LA and NYC).