Yeah, but you're taking "benefit from" and equating that to targeting. That's a bit of a liberal interpretation, in my opinion.
They go on to say later in the same 10K: "We believe our employees represent the best version of our target consumers, which allows us to connect with and understand our target market in an authentic and credible way."
I don't see them employing children. They employee 20 to 40 year old people with action sports/lifestyle brand/gaming backgrounds.
Oh, well, you're mixing threads. I assume you are referring to my description of the crusifiction of Christ. If you can't handle the truth maybe it's time to examine your life. Esau sold his birthright for a pot of beans; ahhh, I'm almost sure the metaphor is missed on you.
The marley example you point out uses similar marketing techniques as skullcandy. That's downright funny.
'Anything, that can be remotely considered a tirade I was egged into.'
And that is downright pathetic. It's not my fault....I was forced into having my jetblue moment. What kind of weak minded individual can egged into something from a stock chat room?
I appreciate Leemors as well; a most worthy opponent; he can spell, writes clearly, logically....... but Butz, "factually incorrect", please, I think not.
To answer Leemors allegation that I went on a religious tirade: I don't see it that way. Saying that I wouldn't go to a porn site is hardly a tirade. Anything, that can be remotely considered a tirade I was egged into.
<<<I am still wondering why you think Skullcandy's market is kids.>>>>
Because they say so. This is from their latest 10K:
"....Our brand also benefits from the increasing popularity of action sports, particularly within the youth culture. Our consumer influencers are teens and young adults that associate themselves with skateboarding, snowboarding, surfing and other action sports....."
OP: 'House of Marley was a big hit at South by Southwest'
I'd say OP was caught red handed on this one. Factually incorrect and models employed by house of marley to boot. One couldn't have asked for a better example of OP's 'do as I say, not as I do' style. Thanks Leemors.
Yes, I understand, but marketing and beautiful women have gone hand in hand forever. If you want to rally against anyone who has ever done that, you're not going to be left with many corporations.
I am still wondering why you think Skullcandy's market is kids. Headphones are for kids like video games are for kids. Yes, there is certainly a portion of the market that is teens and pre-teens for both headphones and video games. However, the largest market segment is certainly 20-something males for both categories. As they get older, they're not going away. I work with plenty of 30-something gamers. These folks are never going to stop gaming. It's not something they grow out of, it's something they do and will always do. Headphones are accessories for gaming, music, smart phones, and tablets. All of which continue to grow in popularity and the market segments continue to expand across age demographics with them. This is why Skullcandy isn't going anywhere. It's also why they're not marketing to kids, they're marketing to their entire clientele base... which is expanding in age and demographic by the day. My Dad is 60 and uses the Skullcandy Holua buds I gave him for Christmas every day as his hands-free device for his phone while he commutes. He loved the buds AND the Kate Upton ad, coincidentally.
Repeating over and over that Skullcandy is marketing sex to children isn't going to make it true.
I don't like posts that are bullish, I like posts that are factual. If you want to be a detractor, fine. All I ask is that your info be factual. Consistently you provide inaccurate info. Today you brought up House of Marley being at SXSW and Skullcandy not being there. Which was promptly proven wrong. Skullcandy WAS there, doing what they do best: marketing to who's who of popular and up and coming artists. Then instead of dropping it once you were wrong, you went on a religious/moral tirade that had nothing to do with it. A logical person doesn't make that inexplicable leap.
That second link looks suspicious (untrustworthy source) but I'll take your word for it, that it is associated with Marley and not tasteful.
The bottom line is it is wrong to promote products this way, especially to kids.