Book Review|"Little People, Actually Not Small"

"Niche, Actually Not Small" was written by James Harkin; the original title was "Niche", and the Taiwanese Chinese version was published by Morning Finance. This is a version that explores the opposite mode of operation in the world of online marketing as opposed to mainstream and mass market-oriented, that is, to identify groups that are extremely "unique", and even consciously "differentiate" or "differentiate" to the mainstream public. (cleavage) to find a smaller but more precisely targeted audience.

As a book review, this article will not focus on sorting, but will focus on reflection and criticism after reading. This will also be the consistent pattern for myself to write such articles as book reviews in the future.

When talking about marketing today, words such as "big data", "social networking", and "collecting customers" must be used as gestures. Behind these words, basically, "find the "mainstream"" as the background. In daily life, there is no shortage of words that are used in conjunction with "mainstream", such as "mainstream news media", "mainstream publications", "mainstream novels", "mainstream movies" and so on; and in the United Kingdom and the United States, which use the results of democratic elections as the basis for the legitimate operation of the national government In Japan, Taiwan and other countries, there is even more so-called "mainstream public opinion". The subtitle of "Minority , Actually Not Small" is "Why the Market No Longer Favours the Mainstream" . It can be seen that the author James Harkin's argument is indeed based on first recognizing that there are "mainstream" groups in the market, and then discussing the existence of "mainstream" in the market. mainstream" groups.

The subtitle of the Chinese translation, " The Middle Market Falls, the Rise of Niche Consumption ", actually describes the essence of the book's point of view very accurately. Throughout James Harkin's entire article, he is actually emphasizing one thing: no matter the size of the company, it is now looking for "niche" groups outside the mainstream market, with small numbers but obvious characteristics, clear outlines and large differences. These various "niche" and their styles are sometimes completely independent of the mainstream, and sometimes they may be favored by mainstream consumers, and thus gain profits beyond what the original target group can pay. On the one hand, the consumption power of niche groups should not be underestimated (for example: full-time housewives, or people named "football moms" in the book); on the other hand, through the unparalleled speed and coverage of the Internet, once a small The public is amazed by all the good things. No matter the length of time (the trend is always in waves), it can still make the mainstream public pay the bill with enthusiasm.

After reading it, I offer the following three main reflections and comments on the author's views:

1. Is the population of the "middle market" really declining or declining? Or has it never really existed?

Western heavyweight political scientist Benedict Anderson's classic book "Imagined Community" aims to argue that the so-called "nation" is not and has never been a real group, but a group of people based on the pursuit of common political interests, or the exercise of rights (power). ) When safeguarding the movement, it was constructed in order to appeal and increase followers as much as possible and establish its legitimacy and legitimacy. In other words, the post-World War I slogans such as "national self-determination" and "one nation, one nation" are pure falsehoods; no "nation" has ever existed with a pure and unmixed lineage and history in terms of genes, physiology, and even language and thought. day.

Back to the discussion of "Little People, Actually Not Small" . The so-called "middle" market is based on the "central limit theorem" and "normal distribution" of the basic theory of statistics. To put it simply: when we present the results of 10,000 coin tosses, or conduct a "random sample" of opinion polls or intelligence tests on 10,000 people, the final average will approach a "bell curve" (normal distribution). ) graph, showing that the ones with the largest number are concentrated in the middle area. This phenomenon is not only applicable to statistics, but is widely seen in psychology, sociology, and even physics. If we conduct some kind of survey on consumption or shopping habits of the people across the country, we will inevitably find that the vast majority of people fall in the middle of the statistical chart .

However, what needs to be asked here is: in the end, how did this middle section where most people live?

We usually talk about the middle market, mainstream, non-mainstream and other issues, and most of them will bring some polled data as a basis. For example: the main distribution of the movie box office in the past three years, the age group of the audience of romantic movies, etc. Through investigation, we can determine who the mainstream is, who the public is, and what they roughly look like (for example: under 30 years old, unmarried, college educated, and earning about 28k~32k). Then, through other observations (perhaps interviews, maybe another questionnaire) we discovered that there is actually another group of people whose preferences are different from those of the large "mainstream" and need to be defined or named differently.

Furthermore, when it comes to the "change" of this group of the mainstream public, surveys and statistics over a period of time, or even a long period of time, are even more important. If it's just a subjective feeling, there's a good chance there's a huge personal bias.

The author of this book did not provide any survey statistics (even on Google Forms or Facebook), and most of the time, only based on the fact that the streets and big companies turned to pursue subculture groups different from the past, he changed the conclusion that "the middle market has fallen." ". I think this is the problem.

Without an argumentative basis, that is, the empirical (or data) description of the "mainstream public" or "middle market", strictly speaking, we cannot be sure: (1) Whether the middle market occupied by the mainstream public really exists; (2) Even if the mainstream mass and the middle market do exist, according to common sense evidence, is it really fading or falling?

As a result, the theme of the book loses its footing. At best, it can only be an observation of different consumer cultures and special preferences.

The reason why this book thinks that another possible reason for the collapse of the middle market is probably that it finds that many traditional large corporations and even individuals have shifted from the past service and commodity models to special subcultures with a small number of people or groups in recent years. consumer preference. For example, GAP has changed from plain casual styles suitable for all ages to bright and colorful bodysuits (but failed in the end), HBO has set off a ratings frenzy with novel themes such as "Underworld" and "Hot Line", and because of Due to the extremely low cost of website setup, various websites that only serve specific ethnic groups (such as: female prisoner-only website: WomenBehindBars.com, only helping farmers find blind dates: FarmersOnly.com).

This does not mean that the mainstream is fading and the middle market is declining. A person can be a farmer, but she (who says a farmer has to be a man?) may also have been or will be a female prisoner. HBO has achieved success through soap operas that are different from the past, but this does not mean that their writers, producers, and even the audience have the same character as the characters in the show. Most people still work 9 to 5, buy cheap or discounted items from big brands, and just want to see something different at one point in time .

In other words, the mainstream or middle market population may not have fallen, but consumers have been led (or brought into) another preference. Most of the time they still live what the mainstream or middle market offers, but are willing to pay for something a little different.

2. The distinction between niche markets is the independent separation of such groups, or another purely commercial operation

Following the previous statement: Is it possible that the fall of the mainstream or middle market is just a subjective myth of the author, or even most of it is a deliberate business operation by large corporations, clever event planning groups or individuals?

The example cited in the book: In recent years, many large and established film companies have gradually increased their spending on so-called "niche" films in addition to continuously hiring tens of millions of dollars to star in big-budget films. Even many of the works we thought were made by independent directors and studios actually have the shadows of these showbiz giants behind them. From the earlier "Little Miss Sunshine" (Little Miss Sunshine), "Juno" (Juno), to the recent "The Curious Case of Benjamin's Bottom", "Liberty Avenue" "(Milk), "The Reader", etc., are mostly funded, produced and distributed by big Hollywood groups.

The big Hollywood studios have acquired small studios that have won awards or have potential, or partnered with independent filmmakers, allowing them to maintain their style and continue to present them in their productions. From the author's point of view, this is because Hollywood has also discovered that the "niche" market has a high gold content. But that doesn't mean the mass mainstream market is in crisis. The book also admits that the top-grossing and best-grossing films of 2008 are still "The Dark Knight," "Iron Man," "Hancock," and Movies such as "WALL-E". Not to mention the "Marvel Universe" series of Marvel Studios in the past ten years, each of which has made the industry chain a lot of money from top to bottom; there is no danger of depression in the mainstream and popular film and television circles.

People will watch movies outside the mainstream style. It may indeed be due to the personality of the audience, but it is more likely to be an "early taste" or "freshness". Even if it is a movie with sound and light effects that surpasses one of the Marvel Universe series, watching it for a long time will inevitably cause some "aesthetic fatigue". Eating salmon, lobster, abalone, Buddha jumping over the wall every day, and occasionally a little stewed radish soup is more refreshing, but it does not mean that you will change your taste. Going a step further: When the streets are full of bubble tea hand-cranked drink shops, an English rose tea tasting hall suddenly appears, which must be attractive because of its uniqueness. However, we cannot directly infer that those who go to the English Rose Tea Tasting Hall must be the artistic and literary people who like Shakespeare.

The book provides evidence of many media or companies focused on developing a small group of fans and die-hard customers. For example: Politico, which only reports on the secrets of Washington politics, and Climate Wire, which reports exclusively on climate change. They are indeed stable and profitable after locking in and cultivating their own niche market, but this still does not mean that news networks and mainstream media channels with readers all over the country will be replaced .

I believe that what the author wants to emphasize in this book is actually a concept similar to "find the blue ocean market" . The preferences of individuals or groups have many dimensions. Identifying existing needs—even if the number of people is small—and then creating new fields or market options, and then spreading and sharing them through network traffic dividends, can often bring considerable benefits. "Supply" can also "create demand".

3. Without the mainstream public as the foundation, the niche market may be unsustainable

Another basis of the book's argument is that due to the advancement of the Internet and search technology, people increasingly want to "directly find" what they want; the traditional thick stacks of newspaper classified advertisements have long been neglected. Various Facebook groups, and online bookstore sub-categories that are becoming more and more subdivided, have repeatedly shown that the past marketing model or the market has begun to loosen.

The continuous division of small groups from the main group can be said to be a general pattern of human activities. However, the foothold of these small groups is still the main group, just like all kinds of associations and fan pages must still be built on a social media Facebook that takes all over the world. Even though Facebook's various dictatorial and tyrannical acts in recent years have caused complaints from users, and even attracted the attention of the US Congress and investigations by many governments, its scale has not decreased but increased, as have its stock price and profits. Outside of it, many social platforms that want to be different from Facebook continue to emerge, but none of them are able to make it, and few are able to cross the country where they were founded. In the Internet era, although small groups can be discovered or linked to each other, it is also an era when the big ones are afraid of becoming ever-biggest.

We might as well imagine: if we lost Disney, Sony Pictures, Google, and Facebook, would these niche markets be active today?

A large part of the formation of niche markets is based on the fact that large platforms or mainstream media are increasingly open and willing to share resources, which makes the cost of forming groups, societies, and websites (pages) almost negligible. The real source of income for these large platforms and mainstream media actually relies on viewing, advertising and paid usage from the "mainstream public".

Reviews of this book are purely personal. I'm still not bad for "Minority, Actually Not Small" . The author provides an alternative entrepreneurship and management direction, which is indeed worth reading.