In this article we examine what we refer to as the three eras of GLBT marketing, to provide a historical context for building successful GLBT marketing strategies.

The first era: 1970-1990 -- Under the Radar

Historically retailers and professional services were welcomed into and in fact were celebrated and honored by gay communities throughout North America for one (or both) of two reasons:

1. Because national brands made their marketing message “gay-friendly” or advertised in gay-focused media, they seemed to “promise” GLBT people that they were welcome and were going to be treated equally, overcoming a history of overt and covert discrimination.
2. As with any community there is a chauvinistic preference to do “business with our own” and therefore gay-owned and operated businesses that advertised to the community made it clear that they were intrinsically part of the community.

The second era: 1990-2005 -- Consumer Appreciation Becomes Consumer Expectation

Behind the very obvious success of the beer and liquor brands, a wide variety of other brands saw the potential of the gay and lesbian segment. To the degree that they dared in a discriminatory and politically volatile environment, brands started targeting gay consumers. Over time, increasing tolerance and understanding of AIDS allowed many brands to reach out. Supporting AIDS causes was an effective way of raising their hands in front of the community. The political risk was low. (“We don’t actually support homosexuals, but as a God-fearing company, we see it as our duty to help stop this epidemic.”) And the cost of this support, while not as low as it had been, bordered on exploitive, compared to general market promotional costs.

Initially it was enough to donate and communicate messages of support in advertising, but as more and more brands recognized the opportunity and the gay space became cluttered, the rules of engagement changed. Standing out became necessary and consequently the marketing campaigns became increasingly more creative and interesting.

And effective. Companies found that appealing to the GLBT community made economic sense. It was good business. Gradually advertising dollars moved from an AIDS focus to general awareness strategies.

Research showed repeatedly that that the segment would respond to marketing that was directed toward gay and lesbian consumers because they felt desired, understood, safer and more comfortable doing business with brands that recognized them for who they were. These brands were also implicitly promising not to discriminate. It was a clear quid pro quo: support for the community translated to the bottom line.

A side benefit of this process was the propagation of the myth that the GLBT community was large and more affluent than other market segments. While the research was always a bit vague and certainly suspect to anyone who understood research, two important aspects consistently showed up as conclusions:

1. There were many gay and lesbian people.
2. Their discretionary income was above average because they did not have kids to support.

However, what started out as a relatively smooth ride became something of a hard ride toward the end of the twentieth century and the early 2000s. Two major forces were in play:

1. Advertising to GLBT consumers– so called “targeting”– started to evidence diminishing returns because many brands were stepping into the space. The clutter was growing.
2. GLBT consumers started feeling less marginalized and therefore less prone to evaluate brand preference solely on the “gay-friendliness factor.

Third Era: 2006 -- Marketing Science and Strategic Sophistication

As s it became increasingly evident that just showing up was no longer satisfactory, brand marketers started to ask the really hard question: Is our investment in the GLBT segment really paying off?, The third era, which is just beginning, demands marketing treatment equivalent to any other market segment, i. e., the same business case, the same strategic approach and the same level of professional, profit-focused expertise.
 

What remains to be seen is how far brands are willing to go to develop strategies that are intelligent, consumer-centric and include experientially based go-to-market strategies, or whether GLBT marketing will be allowed to wither away, driven into disrepute by the continuation of out-moded strategies, such as:

“Look, we’re a mainstream brand, and we believe in diversity, so this multicultural campaign will work for gay consumers too.”

Or

“Consumers know our brand. We can get away with changing a copy line to a double entendre. That will work for gay consumers. Never mind about the lesbians.”

Or

“While we finally know that sexist advertising does not spur brand development in the general market, GLBT is all about sex, so we’ll wrap our message up in some inappropriate sexually provocative imagery.”

Or

“We really want to do business with you but we’re not prepared to invest in the same proportion as we do in the “real” market, so we’ll just use the same tired stock photos of gay men and third rate gay copy and you’ll love it because the men are cute.”
 

When we ask gay and lesbian consumers what they think about these strategies, they tell us, in no uncertain terms, that they are offended.
 

The third era of GLBT marketing is defined by 6 precepts that govern the decision as to whether a GLBT niche plan makes business sense, and subsequently, the degree to which it succeeds:

1. Gays, lesbians and transgender people are not homogenous – they fall into demographic, psychographic and social subgroups, as do all other consumers. The simplistic common difference (being gay) is no longer a glue that binds.
2. In the segment, 40% to 45% are lesbians, and generalities regarding their desirability as a market force are inoperative. Lesbians span the socio- economic spectrum in the same way as gay men; hold increasingly senior positions in small and large companies; are entrepreneurs and retirees, as much as any other group. It no longer makes sense to disregard 40% of the $690 billion LGBT marketplace.
3. The ghetto walls have crumbled, and gay people can be found living and working all over the city. For a number of social and political reasons, the need to live together in a geographic community has receded. What were formerly gay villages are increasingly being gentrified and occupied by “open minded” straight people.
4. But, while the imperative for a geographic community has declined, the need for community has increased. “Gay-borhoods” are being replaced by on-line communities, which are as easily and more efficiently reached through interactive media than the old “gay-borhood” was reachable through traditional media.
5. In line with the changing socio-political climate, gays and lesbians are feeling more relaxed about being themselves, and are open to new products and services that help them express their self-actualized individuality.
6. The emergence of marriage and “marriage-like” partnerships has opened up a market for gay-tailored financial, legal and insurance products and services.

In truth, GLBT marketing has not become easier. On the contrary, it has become more challenging. But, when strategically planned, it is less risky and with vastly more profit potential. Truth-telling by members of the GLBT community, news reporting, research and time have opened up the complex—and once mysterious and threatening—lives of modern GLBT consumers. Corporations that have demonstrated they value diversity and brands that have engaged in consumer dialogue that builds equity will succeed with both the gay and lesbian consumer segment and the increasingly diverse general marketplace.