Article

Consumer preferences of
Generation Y: Evidence from
live music tourism event
performances in South Africa

Journal of Vacation Marketing

2015, Vol. 21(4) 366382
The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1356766715585903
jvm.sagepub.com

Martinette Kruger and Melville Saayman

North-West University, South Africa

Abstract
Generation Y (born between 1982 and 2002) has caught the attention of researchers due to the sheer
size of this consumer segment and also its significant spending power. The purpose of this exploratory
research was to cluster Generation Y concertgoers to various concerts held in South Africa during
2012 and 2013 based on their age to identify and profile different market segments at the concerts.
Data were collected at eight live music performances, during 2012 and 2013, by performers Linkin
Park, Adam Lambert, Celtic Woman, Lady Gaga, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Bon Jovi, Justin Bieber and
Rodriguez. This resulted in a total factor analysis conducted to identify the main motives of Generation
Yers to attend live music performances. Generation Yers were then divided into three groups based
on their age in order to give a better idea of the differences among these concertgoers. Three Generation Y clusters were identified, namely, Tweens, Twixters and Tweeds. Analyses of variance, twoway frequency tables and w2 tests showed significant differences between the segments in terms of
socio-demographic and behavioural characteristics as well as motives. Based on the results, it is evident
that generation theory needs to be taken into consideration, and it can be a useful tool to segment
markets.
Keywords
Generation theory, Generation Y, live music performances, South Africa

Introduction
Generation Y is a generation still in the process
of defining itself, which causes difficulties in
setting a distinct end date (Glover, 2010). For
the purpose of this research, Generation Y
includes individuals born between 1982 and
2002 (Pendergast, 2010; Schiffman and Kanuk,
2009). Generation Y has caught the attention of
researchers due to the sheer size of this consumer segment and also its significant spending
power (Kueh and Voon, 2007; Moscardo et al.,
2011). More than 70% of Generation Y has
reached adulthood (Paul, 2001), and this cohort
is three times the size of its Generation X predecessor (Stevens et al., 2005). The youth market
has been characterized as one of the most
coveted segments because of the Generation

Ys spending powers, ability to be trendsetters,

receptivity to new products and tremendous
potential for becoming lifestyle customers
(Schiffman and Kanuk, 2009). The challenge
for marketers however is that todays teens
and 20-somethings are very demanding (Brooks,
2005), and they are considered the hardest to
reach through traditional media advertising
(Sullivan and Heitmeyer, 2008) due to their preference for adopting and using digital media that
help facilitate group membership (Bausch and

Corresponding author:
Martinette Kruger, Tourism Research in Economic Environs
and Society (TREES), Potchefstroom Campus, Potchefstroom
2520, South Africa.
Email: martinette.kruger@nwu.ac.za

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

Kruger and Saayman

367

McGiboney, 2009; Horovitz, 2002; Jennings

et al., 2010). The economic importance of Generation Y to marketers and the potential difficulty
in communicating with them call for research
to yield new insights (Leask et al., 2014a; Loda
and Coleman, 2010).
With the potential of Generation Y as a valuable market segment in mind, this research will
specifically focus on the live music preferences
of Generation Y. The marketing potential of live
music performances is tremendous, as they appeal
to a wide variety of market segments (Kruger and
Saayman, 2012a). However, performances by
well-known international artists are few and far
between in South Africa. Attendees see them as
a once-in-a-lifetime experience and as a result
spend substantially on everything from transport
to parking to refreshments to ancillary retail products (especially souvenirs such as T-shirts, posters
and programmes) outside the concert venue
(Hausman, 2000). These live performances are
usually held in the major metropolitan cities such
as Johannesburg and Cape Town, and tickets are
very expensive, limiting attendance to mediumand high-income individuals. Only artists and
bands that include South Africa in their world tour
also currently perform in the country, as it is
extremely difficult to attract artists to travel to this
developing country to perform. The South African
live music performance calendar is therefore
largely determined by the artist(s) and negotiations by music promoters. Research on audiences
in the music context is relatively scarce (Kruger
and Saayman, 2012a; Tonon et al., 2012) and, as
far as the authors could ascertain, the needs and
preferences of Generation Y with regard to live
music performance attendance in South Africa
have to date not been analysed. Information is
therefore needed about individual motives for
attending, so that effective marketing strategies
can be devised (McCarthy et al., 2001). By understanding why consumers act the way they do,
event organizers will be able to shape and influence consumption behaviour through strategic
marketing processes (Swanson et al., 2008). Mayfield and Crompton (1995) point out that the continued viability of a music event depends on the
organizers ability to ensure that what they are
offering is continuously attuned to the benefits
sought by attendees. Furthermore, knowing the
individual motives can help event organizers to
increase attendance at their live performances
(McCarthy and Jinnett, 2001).
The purpose of this exploratory research
was therefore to cluster Generation Y attendees

to various concerts held in South Africa during

2012 and 2013 based on their age to identify and
profile different market segments at the concerts.
The research therefore answers the following
questions:
 Who are the Generation Y live music
concert attendees in terms of their sociodemographic and behavioural characteristics?
 What motivates them to attend live music
performances?
 What distinguishes their music consumption behaviour and preferences?
 Do sub-segments of Generation Y differ
in terms of their live music performance
preferences?
This research could be of great assistance to
event managers who wish to expand their current
marketing campaigns and cater to the needs of
the Generation Y market. As McCrindle (2002:
3) explains, by understanding what todays
youth most value, one can determine how to most
effectively engage them.

Literature review
To fill the knowledge gap about the Generation Y
market at live music performances, four aspects
need to be considered: generational theory;
Generation Y; their music preferences; and live
music performances, the profile of the attendees
and the motives for attending. Here we examine
the literature relevant to these four aspects.

Generational theory
The profile of the tourism industry is characterized by multigenerational visitors and a multigenerational workforce (Pendergast, 2010). A
major shift in the balance of generational dominance is currently occurring, with the baby
boomer generation leaving the leadership roles
in the workforce and Generation Y dramatically
entering both as the workforce and as visitors
(Pendergast, 2010). According to generational
theory, each generation brings with it somewhat
predictable traits, values and beliefs, along with
skills, attributes, capacities, interests, expectations and preferred modus operandi directly attributable to their generational location (Pendergast,
2010). The idea of generation and generation
gap derived from generational theory is not a new
concept (Mannheim, 1952), nor is it uncontested
(Donnison, 2007; Huntley, 2006). Generational

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

368

Journal of Vacation Marketing 21(4)

theory seeks to understand and characterize
cohorts of people according to their membership
of a generation, which is objectively assigned
according to the year of birth (Noble and Schewe,
2003; Pendergast, 2010). Hence, it features patterns and propensities across the generational
group rather than an individual focus.
Generations and generational units are informally defined by demographers, the press and
media, popular culture, market researchers and
by members of the generation themselves (Fields
et al., 2008; Pendergast, 2007). Whilst members
of the generation are alive, it is known as a living
generation and will continue to evolve and redefine itself, usually within the bounds that are
broadly predictable from the traits of the generation (Pendergast, 2010). Even though age has long
been recognized as a major demographic variable,
some authors have argued that it is important to
consider not only chronological age but also life
cycles and generational cohorts (Stevens et al.,
2005). Currently, a distinction is made between
six generations as shown in Table 1.
Due to external influences prevalent in their
formative years, each generation is expected to
display behavioural and consumption patterns
that differentiate it from the previous and the subsequent generation (Noble and Schewe, 2003).
Huang and Petrick (2010) explain that because
each generation has its own characteristics, it
is important to consider how each generation
behaves in terms of information search behaviour, preferred activities and perception of leisure activities.

Who is Generation Y?
The age or life stage of Generation Y makes
them unique to other cohorts. Generation Y was
born during 19822002 and are in the 1131 age
range as of 2013. The characteristics, lifestyles
and attitudes of Generation Y include older teens
and young adults, and this cohort is thus now
reaching adulthood (Moscardo et al., 2011).
They are children of the original baby boomers
and their numbers rival that of the baby boomers
(Williams and Page, 2011). They grow up in
times of immense and fast-paced change, including virtually full employment opportunities for
women, dual-income households as the standard,
wide array of family types seen as normal, significant respect for ethnic and cultural diversity
including a heightened social awareness and
computers in the home and school (Moscardo
et al., 2011; Williams and Page, 2011). Currently,

Table 1. A summary of living birth generations.

Birth years

Generation income

19011924
19251942
19431960
19611981
19822002

GI
Silent
Baby Boomer
Generation X
Generation Y
(Millennials)
Generation Z

2003

Age range
in 2013
89112
7188
5370
3252
1131
10 or younger

Source: Schiffman and Kanuk (2009) and Pendergast (2010).

Generation Y members are characterized as conventional and committed, with respect for authority and with civic pride (Pendergast, 2010). Key
features of the Generation Y as travellers include
the following: they travel more often, explore
more destinations, spend more on travel, book
more over the Internet, they are hungry for experience, hungry for information, intrepid travellers
and want to get a lot out of their travel (Leask
et al., 2014a; Leask et al., 2014b; Richards, 2007).
Being young they have different priorities to
older generations (McCrindle, 2002). Generation
Yers have a strong focus on leisure and recreation,
and on socializing in general, with shopping and
dining out two of their key preferred activities
(Keating, 2000). Most of them are pragmatic, like
convenience and are value orientated (Morton,
2002). They are brand and fashion conscious and
prefer brands with a core identity based on core
values (Morton, 2002). Word of mouth is the best
marketing method to target this group of people
since they value friends opinions enormously
(Morton, 2002) and like to have friends around
them wherever they go (Rowe, 2008). Research
furthermore suggests that Generation Yers use
radio as their major medium for music and
information but are loyal to only a few stations
(Morton, 2002). They respond to humorous and
emotional advertising the best when it uses real
people in real-life situations (Kumar and Lim,
2008). It has further been suggested that advertising aimed at Generation Y should focus on
lifestyle and fun rather than product features
and specifications (Morton, 2002). They have
different recreational pursuits to other generations, with their top spare time activities being
going to parties, listening to the radio and going
to the movies. Additionally, Generation Y values
diversity and equity and loves music, movies,
television shows, friends and dining out (Brooks,
2005; Noble et al., 2009; Paul, 2001). They generally have no financial commitments, thus over

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

Kruger and Saayman

369

70% of their income is spent on arbitrarily, with

the majority going on entertainment, travel and
food (McCrindle, 2002; Jennings et al., 2010).
Generation Y furthermore places a strong emphasis on integration of technology within all aspects
of their lives and is extremely dependent on the
Internet for information (Park et al., 2010)

Music preferences of Generation Y

There has been a dramatic music retail shift
within the last decade, from the interpersonal,
intra-store purchase of records (or discs) by the
post-war baby boomer generation to individual,
digital file downloading of music files or tracks
by Generation Y consumers (Roberts and Manolis, 2000). The latter is largely due to the fact that
Generation Yers are technologically savvy, which
allow them easy access to download music (Leask
et al., 2014a). The past decade has also witnessed
a shift in the popular music market worldwide,
with live concerts outperforming the more traditional recorded music sector (Larsen and
OReilly, 2005; Montoro-Pons et al., 2012).
According to Larsen and OReilly (2005), live
concert performances by a band/artist/performer
are important places for popular music consumption. Approximately 60% of all the money spent
on music is in the form of live music, and Generation Y (18- to 35-year-olds), the primary consumers of music, spends a higher percentage of
their income on music than any other leisure
activity except dining out (Moskalyak, 2008).
The music for Generation Y consisted of a variety of heavy metal rock, hip hop, R&B and country. It appears as though this group mostly enjoys
more the aspect of the sounds of their music and
the interaction with friends when listening to it,
like dancing (Christian, 2010).
Delsing et al. (2007) followed two groups of
12-to 19-year-old adolescents during a 3-year
period and found preferences for four broad
music styles (pop, urban, rock and highbrow)
to be highly stable across 1-, 2- and 3-year
intervals. Mulder et al. (2010) assessed a wider
age range of respondents (1229) during a 27month period and found that, whilst there was a
relatively high turnover in the preference for
individual artists and bands, preferences for
music genres and broader meta-genres of music
were already quite firm in early adolescence and
became further entrenched during later adolescence and young adulthood. Young people especially tend to appreciate musics entertainment
qualities and also use this medium to help face

the development challenges characteristic for

their phase of life (Schwartz and Fouts, 2003).
Music, its lyrics and artist, provides models for
living, making music culture an important source
for the construction of (adolescent) identity, in
terms of both a personal and a social sense of self
(Tarrant, 2002; Tekman and Horacsu, 2002;
TeNeill Lloyd, 2002).
Music preferences for Generation Y are also
known to be associated with demographic variables such as age, gender, socio-economic status,
ethnic background and political views (North
and Hargreaves, 2007a, 2007b, 2007c). Turning
to popular music, it is well established that variables such as race, class, gender and school
achievement affect music taste, and music preferences can play a crucial role in the presentation of
self, selection of friends and the expression of
group identity (Rentfrow and Gosling, 2006;
Selfhout et al., 2009; Tarrant et al., 2001). People differ in terms of how important music is to
them and in their motives for listening (Bogt
et al., 2011). Adolescence and young adulthood
are generally viewed as formative phases for the
development of music preferences (Bogt et al.,
2011). Research has established that the music
people listen to during late adolescences and
early adulthood not only is best remembered
in later life (Janssen et al., 2007) but also
remains better liked compared to music listened
to at an earlier or later age (Smith, 1994; Holbrook and Schindler, 1989). People carry their
appreciation for different types of music into
adulthood and, as parents, may expose their
children to the cultural formats they themselves
prefer (Bogt et al., 2011).

Live concerts, the attendees and why they

attend these concerts
According to Holbrook (1995: 262), compared
with listening to a recorded performance at home,
the peak musical experience of witnessing a brilliant live performance has a far greater capacity to
move attendees and make the body tingle. The
benefits of attending live music performances
include satisfaction of curiosity, experience of joy
and entertainment, social interaction and the
chance to get physically close to famous and cherished artists (Earl, 2001). Music events have four
distinct features: (1) they have a dominant music
genre such as rock, country, pop and classical,
(2) they are arranged during a specific time period
or date once a year, (3) they take place within a
specific or limited region and (4) they are open

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

370

Journal of Vacation Marketing 21(4)

to the public (Aldskogius, 1993: 56; Stone, 2008).
Live concerts consist of one live performance (with
sometimes an additional live performance by a supporting artist or band) of a specific music genre,
usually take place over a few hours on one day in
a specific venue or city, attract audiences of over
20,000 and are packaged as a coherent whole. Managing and marketing a live concert is complex, as
different events attract different markets that attend
for different reasons (Rachael and Douglas, 2001;
Scott, 1996), and discrete audience segments display distinct preferences (Oakes, 2003: 177).
Although identifying the travel motives of
attendees at events has numerous benefits, few
motivational studies have looked specifically at
live music performance events (Pegg and Patterson, 2010: 87). Previous research has mostly
focused on the travel motives of music festival
attendees (Bowen and Daniels, 2005; Crompton
and McKay, 1997; Faulkner et al., 1999; Formica
and Uysal, 1996; McMorland and Mactaggart,
2007; Nicholson and Pearce, 2000; Pegg and
Patterson, 2010; Thrane, 2002; Tomljenovic
et al., 2001). In a South African context, Kruger
and Saayman (2015) identified five motives of
concert attendees at the U2 360 concert in 2011
(unique experience, socialization and value,
enjoyment and entertainment, artist affiliation and
group togetherness) and showed that male and
female attendees should be treated as two separate
market segments, as they had significantly different socio-demographics, travel behaviour and
motives. In another study, Kruger and Saayman
(2012a) identified the travel motives of attendees
at a live performance of Roxette (artist affiliation
and unique experience, socialization and event
novelty, fun and group affiliation, enjoyment and
entertainment and nostalgia) and identified two
distinct clusters of attendees: avid fans and recreational attendees. The results also showed that
although these fans had homogeneous sociodemographic characteristics, their travel motives
and behavioural characteristics differed. Manners
et al. (2012) determined the influence of different
locations on the profile, motives and behaviour of
attendees at the four Neil Diamond concerts in
2011 and identified four motives (artist affiliation
and unique experience, entertainment, excitement
and group affiliation and socialization). In an
analysis of visitors at concerts by three different
bands (Coldplay, the Script and Kings of Leon),
Kruger and Saayman (2012b) found five motives
(in order of importance: unique experience and
band affiliation, entertainment and group affiliation, event novelty, enjoyment and socialization).

The following conclusions can be drawn from

this review of the literature: (1) the profile of live
music attendees has to date not taken into
account differences between generations at these
events, and the current profiles can therefore not
be generalized to the Generation Y market; (2)
previous research regarding the motives of live
music attendees has also to date not made a distinction between various generation groups; (3)
the majority of motivational studies focus on
music festivals, and generalizing findings related
to music event (and festival) attendees travel
motives is extremely difficult, as the type and
nature of the event influences not only the profile
of attendees but also their travel motives; (4) the
motives of attendees differ significantly from
one music event to the next and thus they cannot
be regarded as having homogeneous travel
motives; and (5) none of these studies has made
a distinction between the needs of different Generation Yers at this type of event.

Method of research
As this was a quantitative research, a structured
questionnaire was used. Data were collected at
eight live music performances, during 2012 and
2013, by performers Linkin Park, Adam Lambert, Celtic Woman, Lady Gaga, Red Hot Chilli
Peppers, Bon Jovi, Justin Bieber and Rodriguez.
These eight concerts were selected for their
different genres (rock, pop, classical, R&B and folk,
respectively) and their ability to appeal to a wide
range of audiences, including Generation Y. This
section describes the questionnaire, the sampling
method and survey and the statistical analyses.

The questionnaire
The same questionnaire was used at all eight
shows and adapted for each performance, taking
the artist or band into consideration. Although
certain aspects measured especially in the motivational question was artist specific, only the
items that corresponded in all eight questionnaires, could be pooled. The questionnaire had
two sections. Section A captured demographic
details (gender, home language, age, occupation,
home province, country of origin, level of education, marital status and when the decision was
made to attend the event) and spending behaviour
(number of persons paid for, length of stay and
expenditure). Section B captured motivational
factors, measuring 21 items on a 5-point Likerttype scale, where 1 not at all important, 2

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

Kruger and Saayman

371

slightly important, 3 important, 4 very important and 5 extremely important. The items
included in the motives section were based on the
works of Formica and Uysal (1996), Faulkner
et al. (1999), Tomljenovic et al. (2001), Nicholson
and Pearce (2000), Thrane (2002), Bowen and
Daniels (2005) and Pegg and Patterson (2010).
The motivational items measured included themes
such as respondents affiliation with the artist/
band, their need to escape and for socialization
and group affiliation as well as enjoyment. This
section also elicited information specific to
visitors behaviour during the event (preferred
accommodation, initiator of attendance and
when the decision to attend was made) as well
as their music preferences (preferred type of
music, attendance at other music festivals and
sources of information about the concert).

Sampling method and survey

A destination-based survey was undertaken at the
eight concerts held in Johannesburg and Cape
Town: Celtic Woman (October 2012), Adam
Lambert (November 2012), Linkin Park (November 2012), Lady Gaga (December 2012), Red Hot
Chili Peppers (February 2013), Rodriquez (February 2013), Bon Jovi (May 2013) and Justin Bieber
(May 2013). A stratified sampling method was
used and within this a simple random sampling
method. To include all types of ticket holders,
fieldworkers were allocated to the various ticket
price blocks at the venue (the golden circle, which
has seats near the stage and a separate entrance,
the general standing area and seats further from
the stage). No guidelines were given as to age
groups. Fieldworkers were trained simply to get
a representative audience sample in terms of
gender, age, race and ticket holders. Before the
concerts, whilst visitors were waiting outside
the venue, questionnaires were distributed to
those who were willing to participate. Fieldworkers approached the respondents and explained
the purpose of the survey to ensure that visitors
participated willingly. Since a total of approximately 30,000 visitors attended each of the five
concerts, 450 questionnaires were distributed
respectively at the 16 shows (Johannesburg and
Cape Town), that is, a total of 7200 questionnaires, of which a total of completed 6249 questionnaires were administered at the shows
resulting in an 87% return rate. Generation Y concertgoers were extracted from the data, and this
resulted in a total of 3665 questionnaires (more

than half of the total respondents) included in further analyses.

Statistical analyses
The data were captured using Microsoft Excel
and analysed using SPSS (SPSS Inc., 2013, Chicago, Illinois, USA). The data from the eight
concerts were pooled, and the analysis was done
in three stages: a factor analysis, identification of
Generation Y among the attendees and an analysis of significant differences between the Generation Y attendees.
First, a principal axis factor analysis, using
an Oblimin rotation with Kaiser normalization,
was performed on the 21 motivational items to
explain the variancecovariance structure of a set
of variables through a few linear combinations of
these variables. The KaiserMeyerOlkin measure of sampling adequacy was used to determine
whether the covariance matrix was suitable for
factor analysis. Kaisers criteria for the extraction of all factors with eigenvalues larger than
one were used because they were considered to
explain a significant amount of variation in the
data. All items with a factor loading greater than
0.3 were considered as contributing to a factor,
and all items with loadings less than 0.3 as not
correlating significantly with this factor (Steyn,
2000). Items that cross-loaded on two factors,
which both had factor loadings greater than 0.3,
were categorized in the factor where interpretability was best. A reliability coefficient (Cronbachs a) was computed for each factor to
estimate its internal consistency. All factors with
a reliability coefficient above 0.6 were considered
as acceptable in this study. As another measure of
reliability, the average inter-item correlations
were also computed these, according to Clark
and Watson (1995), should lie between 0.15 and
0.55. Second, Generation Yers were divided into
three groups based on their age in order to give
a better idea of the differences among these concertgoers. Third, analyses of variance (ANOVAs),
two-way frequency tables and w2 tests were used
to investigate any significant differences between
the segments in terms of demographic variables
(gender, home language, occupation, level of education, marital status and province of origin) and
behavioural variables (group size, number of tickets purchased, length of stay, type of accommodation, preferred type of music, expenditure, other
music festivals and events attended, initiator of
attendance and when the decision to attend was
made). Effect sizes and values were used to

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

372

Journal of Vacation Marketing 21(4)

Table 2. Factor analysis of Generation Y concertgoers attendance motives.
Motivational factors and items

Factor 1: escape
To experience new things
For a chance to be with people who are enjoying themselves
For nostalgic reasons
To relax and escape from daily tension
Factor 2: artist affiliation and unique experience
I always wanted to see the artist/band perform live
It is a unique, exciting, once-in-a-lifetime experience
To see my favourite artist(s)/band
The artist/band is a well-known international act
This concert is value for money
Factor 3: event novelty
Because I have seen this artist/band before and wanted to do so again
Because of social status in terms of being seen by others
Because of the possibility to meet the artist/band in person
Because the attendance makes one part of the performances
Because these concerts enable one to get physically close to the artists
Factor 4: socialization
It is a sociable event
To spend time with family, friends or someone special
Because I got tickets for free or as a present
Factor 5: entertainment
These concerts are entertainment at its best
To have fun and because I enjoy these types of special events
To enjoy the music
I try to attend as many of these music events as possible
Average inter-item correlation
Reliability coefficient
Mean value
Total variance explained

further identify any significant differences

between the clusters. The purpose of effect size
is to establish whether any differences exist
between the clusters; in this case, in which combination of clusters the mean values of the motives
and the averages of the socio-demographic and
behavioural variables had the smallest or largest
effect. Cohen (1988), Ellis and Steyn (2003) and
Steyn (2009) offer the following guidelines for
interpreting the effect sizes: small effect, d
0.2; medium effect, d 0.5; and large effect, d
0.8. Cohen (1988) gives the following criteria
to interpret values: 0.1 for a small effect, 0.3 for
a medium effect and 0.5 for a large effect.

Results
This section discusses the results of the factor
analysis (travel motives) and presents the results
of the ANOVAs and cross-tabulations with w2
tests to investigate significant differences.

0.68
0.60
0.43
0.31
0.76
0.70
0.57
0.51
0.38
0.78
0.74
0.59
0.46
0.40
0.66
0.56
0.24

0.47
0.78
3.65
62%

0.40
0.76
4.18

0.50
0.83
2.97

0.34
0.59
3.15

0.85
0.76
0.41
0.34
0.46
0.75
3.94

Results from the factor analysis

The pattern matrix of the principal axis factor
analyses using an Oblimin rotation with Kaiser
normalization identified five motivational factors that were labelled according to similar characteristics (Table 2). These factors accounted for
62% of the total variance. All had relatively high
reliability coefficients, ranging from 0.59 (the
lowest) to 0.83 (the highest) for the motivational
factors. The average inter-item correlation coefficients, with values between 0.34 and 0.50 also
implied internal consistency for all factors.
Moreover, all items loaded on a factor with a
loading greater than 0.3 and the relatively high
factor loadings indicated a reasonably high correlation between the factors and their component items
(Steyn, 2000). The KaiserMeyerOlkin measures
of sampling adequacy of 0.93 also indicated that
the patterns of correlation were relatively compact
and yielded distinct and reliable factors (Field,
2005: 640). Barletts test of sphericity also reached
statistical significance (p < 0.001), supporting the

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

Kruger and Saayman

373

factorability of the correlation matrix (Pallant,

2007: 197). Factor scores were calculated as the
average of all items contributing to a specific factor (mean value) in order to interpret them on the
original 5-point Likert scale. As Table 2 shows,
the following motives for visitors attending the
concerts were identified: escape (factor 1), artist
affiliation and unique experience (factor 2),
event novelty (factor 3), socialization (factor 4)
and entertainment (factor 5). With a mean value
of 4.18, artist affiliation and unique experience
was considered the most important motive for
Generation Yers to attend the concerts, followed
by entertainment (3.94), escape (3.65), socialization (3.15) and event novelty (2.97).

Identification of Generation Y attendees

Generation Y attendees were divided into three subsegments based on their age as shown in Table 3.
The majority (51%) of Generation Y attendees were
in the age group 1925 years, followed by attendees
18 years and younger (26%). Generation Yers in the
age group 26 years and older were the smallest
group representing 23% of the visitors. Based on the
classification given by Schiffman and Kanuk (2009:
439), the three segments were labelled Gen Y tweens
(kids and teens), Gen Y twixters (students) and Gen
Y tweeds (adults).
ANOVAs were then used to determine whether significant differences existed between the
three clusters of Generation Yers at the concerts
based on other socio-demographic and behavioural variables. As shown in Table 4 and based
on the effect sizes, the three clusters differed significantly when it came to group size (p 0.001,
small effect size), number of people paid for (p
0.013), number of tickets purchased (p 0.001),
age first exposed to music genre (p 0.001,
small, medium and large effect size differences),
the spending categories (all small effect sizes)
food (p 0.001), beverages (p 0.001), transport (p 0.001) and parking (p 0.001), total
spending (p 0.001), spending per person
(p 0.001) and the motives escape (p
0.001), event novelty (p 0.001, small effect
size) and entertainment (p 0.011) as well as all
the different media sources (p 0.001). In terms
of behavioural differences, Tweens travelled
with the largest groups (an average of 4.61 persons), followed by Twixters (an average of 4.13
persons), whilst Tweeds travelled in the smallest
groups (an average of 3.82 persons). Corresponding with their larger travelling group, Tweens were
financially responsible for more people during

Table 3. Generation Y concertgoers based on age.

Generation Y
18 years (Generation
Y Tweens)
1925 years (Generation
Y Twixters)
26 years (Generation
Y Tweeds)

Count

Percentage

934

26%

1857

51%

874

23%

the concerts (an average of 1.81 persons) and

purchased the most tickets (an average of 2.60
tickets), whilst Twixters were financially responsible for the fewest people (an average of 1.61
persons) and purchased the fewest tickets (an
average of 2.08 tickets). Generation Y Tweeds
purchased an average of 2.30 tickets. As expected,
the three age groups were exposed to music at different ages with the Tweens exposed at a younger
age (an average of 10.74 years), the Twixters
exposed at an average of 14 years and Tweeds at
the oldest age (an average of 16 years). Also
unsurprisingly, Tweeds attend the most similar
events during the year (an average of 2.46 events)
since they have a higher discretionary income,
whilst the Tweens attend the fewest events (an
average of 2 events).
Regarding spending at the concerts, unsurprisingly, Tweens spend the least on food, beverages,
transport and parking compared with the Twixters
and Tweeds. This could be explained by the fact
that these Generation Yers are still dependent on
their parents for financial support. Generation Y
Tweeds spend the most and consequently have the
highest total spending (an average of, South African Rand, R1529) and highest spending per person (an average of R1000). In terms of the
motives, all three groups seem to be motivated
primarily by artist affiliation and unique experience. Tweens are motivated more by escape
(mean value of 3.76), event novelty (mean value
of 3.13) and especially entertainment (mean value
of 4.02) compared with the other two groups.
However, the biggest differences are between the
Tweens and the Tweeds. All three groups differ
significantly in terms of how the various media
influenced their decision to attend the concerts.
Tweens were influenced to a greater extent by the
mass media (television, newspapers, magazines
and radio), electronic media (Music promoters
website and Computickets website) as well as
word of mouth and social media (Facebook, Twitter and Internet blogs) with Twixters decisions to
attend the concerts also influenced to an extent by
these media. Once again the biggest differences

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

4.13b
1.61b
1.70
2.08b
14.38b
2.38ab
R 764.77
R 82.01
R 117.11a
R 127.81b
R 140.61a
R 55.38
R 27.30a
R 1 200.28a
R 822.88b
3.64b
4.19
3.01a
3.15
3.94ab
2.24b
2.93b
2.30b
2.00b
1.90b
3.00a
2.68a
2.21b
1.97b
2.46ab

4.61a
1.81a
1.35
2.60a
10.74a
2.03a
R831.78
R97.65
R 120.33a
R 65.65a
R 128.88a
R 58.06
R 20.21a
R 1 145.55a
R 669.81a
3.76a
4.21
3.13a
3.19
4.02a
2.62a
3.09a
2.50a
2.48a
2.22a
3.09a
2.81a
2.68a
2.22a
2.59a

2.03c
2.80c
2.11c
1.78c
1.77c
2.77b
2.26b
1.89c
1.77c
2.36b

3.56b
4.15
2.76b
3.13
3.89b

R 831.79
R 103.76
R 171.58b
R 205.18c
R 230.18b
R 70.91
R 41.50b
R 1 529.00b
R 1000.26c

3.82c
1.73a,b
1.81
2.30c
15.94c
2.46b

Generation
Y Tweeds
(26 years)

39.215
10.851
16.214
62.588
26.176
13.316
34.631
64.635
22.033
5.219

7.262
1.490
20.657
0.615
4.552

1.362
0.404
8.507
24.290
8.320
2.380
6.658
8.534
10.772

17.891
4.382
1.946
21.904
220.059
9.298

F ratio

0.001*
0.001*
0.001*
0.001*
0.001*
0.001*
0.001*
0.001*
0.001*
0.005*

0.001*
0.226
0.000*
0.541
0.011*

0.256
0.668
0.001*
0.001*
0.001*
0.093
0.001*
0.001*
0.001*

0.001*
0.013*
0.143
0.001*
0.001*
0.001*

Significance
level

0.05
0.04
0.15
0.12
0.12
0.07
0.07
0.13
0.08

0.29**
0.09

0.11
0.08
0.04

Groups 2 and 3

0.12
0.18
0.07
0.02
0.08
0.06
0.10
0.30**
0.21**
0.03
0.05
0.02
0.09
0.14
0.06
Due to the 4-point Likert scale used, effect sizes
were not calculated for the media sources

0.00
0.01
0.12
0.21**
0.14
0.06
0.10
0.15
0.15

0.88****
0.02

0.73***
0.11
0.05
0.02
0.01
0.21**
0.02
0.02
0.09
0.03
0.17

0.26**
0.03
0.17

Groups 1 and 3

0.16
0.09
0.11

Groups 1 and 2

Effect sizes

ANOVA: analysis of variance.

*p  0.05: statistically significant difference. Effect sizes: **d 0.2: small effect; ***d 0.5: medium effect; ****d 0.8: large effect.
a
Group differs significantly from type (in row) where b is indicated.
c
Group differs significantly from type (in row) where a and b are indicated.
d
Expenditure per person, calculated by summing the respondents spending on the various components and dividing the total by the number of people the respondent was financially responsible for.
e
Respondents were asked to indicate to what extent the media had influenced their decision to attend the concerts on a 4-point Likert scale where 1 not at all; 2 to a lesser extent; 3 to a greater extent and
4 completely.

Group size
Number of people paid for
Nights stayed over
Number of tickets purchased
Age first exposed to music genre
Number of similar music events attended during the year
Spending categories
Tickets
Accommodation
Food
Beverages
Transport
Souvenirs
Parking
Total spending
Spending per persond
Motives
Escape
Artist affiliation and unique experience
Event novelty
Socialisation
Entertainment
Influential mediae
Television
Radio
Music promoters website
Magazines
Newspapers
Word of mouth
Facebook
Twitter
Internet blogs
Computickets website

Characteristics

Generation
Y Twixters
(1925 years)

Generation
Y Tweens
(18 years)

Table 4. ANOVA and Tukeys post hoc multiple comparison results for socio-demographic and behavioural factors in three clusters of Generation Y concertgoers.

Kruger and Saayman

375

were between the Tweens and Tweeds who were

influenced to a lesser extent by the various media
sources.

Cross-tabulations and w2 test results

The cross-tabulation and w2 tests revealed a statistically significant difference between the three
segments (refer to Table A1 in Appendix 1).
When interpreting the level of significance and
the values, statistically significant differences
were found between the groups on the basis of
artist/band attended (p 0.001, with a medium
effect size), occupation (p 0.001, with a large
value), province of origin (p 0.001, with a
small value), local resident (p 0.007, with
a large value), marital status (p 0.001, with
a medium value), level of education (p 0.001
with a large value), friends, spouse and family
as initiators of attendance (p 0.001, each with a
small value) and pop, punk rock and rock and
roll as musical genre preferences (p 0.001,
each with small value). These differences are
discussed subsequently.
 Artist/band attended: There are clear differences in the three Generation Y segments
preferences for the respective performing
artists/bands. Unsurprisingly, the majority
of Tweens attended the Justin Bieber
concert (37%), followed by Lady Gaga
(17%), Adam Lambert (16%) and Red Hot
Chilli Peppers (14%). Twixters mostly
attended the Red Hot Chilli Peppers
(24%) and Linkin Park (23%) concert,
whilst Tweeds preferred to attend the Linkin Park (23%), Red Hot Chilli Peppers
(17%) as well as Lady Gaga and Bon Jovi
(14% each).
 Occupation: The majority of Tweens
were students and scholars (88%), whilst
Twixters were either students (53%) or
professionals (22%). Unsurprisingly, significantly more Tweeds were professionals (58%).
 Province of origin: Tweens mainly originate from Gauteng (51%), whilst a large
proportion of Twixters originate from
Gauteng (47%) and Western Cape (39%).
Significantly more Tweeds originate from
the Western Cape (48%).
 Local resident: Corresponding with their
province of origin, all three Generation
Y segments were local residents of the

city where the concerts were held (73%,

67% and 69%, respectively).
Marital status: The majority of Tweens
were single (75%), whilst more than half
of the Twixters were also single (54%).
A large proportion of Twixters were in a
relationship (36%). Tweeds were mainly
single (36%), married (31%) or in a relationship (26%).
Level of education: Tweens were predominantly still in school (67%) or have
matric (25%) as their highest level of education, whilst Twixters and Tweeds mainly
had a diploma or degree (42% and 43%,
respectively). Corresponding with their
level of education, significantly more
Tweeds were professionals (18%).
Initiator of attendance: Significantly more
Tweens and Twixters were initiated by their
friends (55% and 49%, respectively) and
family (37% and 24%, respectively) to
attend the concerts, whilst more Tweeds
were influenced by their spouse (12%).
Preferred type of music: Tweens mainly
prefer pop music (75%), whilst Twixters
and Tweeds prefer punk rock (60% and
63%, respectively) and rock and roll
(74% and 79%, respectively).

Although the values showed no additional

differences in terms of the other variables, all
three Generation Y segments were predominantly
English speaking and purchased their tickets when
the concerts were announced. Significantly more
Tweens and Twixters were influenced by media,
whilst Twixters and Tweeds were also influenced
by their boyfriends/girlfriends. A large proportion
of Tweeds prefer classical and folk/traditional
music whilst significantly more Tweens prefer
rap, R&B and reggae.

Findings and implications

This research revealed four key findings. Firstly,
corresponding with Leask et al. (2014b), the
results emphasize that the Generation Y market
cannot be regarded as homogeneous. Significant
differences were found between Tweens, Twixters and Tweeds, the segments based on their
socio-demographic and behavioural characteristics and motives to attend live music performances. The majority of these differences were
in terms of behavioural characteristics (group
size, number of people paid for, number of tickets purchased, age first exposed to music genre,

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

376

Journal of Vacation Marketing 21(4)

number of similar events attended annually, total
spending and spending per person and motives to
attend). The biggest differences are also between
the Tweens and Tweeds, which are to be expected
when taking their age and life cycle into consideration. Tweens travel in the largest groups; purchase the most tickets (also more expensive
tickets); their decision to attend is greatly influenced by their friends and family; are influenced
to a greater extend by mass, printed, electronic
and social media; prefer mainly pop music; and
have the highest mean values for the motives
escape, event novelty and entertainment compared with the other two groups. The Twixters
resemble more or less similar characteristics of
both the Tweens and Tweeds. Tweeds have the
highest discretionary income and therefore have
the highest average spending. They also prefer
more expensive tickets, are influenced less by
media, are motivated more by artist affiliation
and unique experience and, along with the Twixters, prefer punk rock and rock and roll music.
These differences show that Generation Yers at
live music performances display consumption
patterns distinct from other generational cohorts
that necessitate a proactive, segment-specific
approach by live music promoters in order to
cater to the needs of this market.
Secondly, the characteristics of the three Generation Y attendees correspond with research done
by Morton (2002), Christian (2010) and Delsing
et al. (2007), whilst the results also correspond with
the findings by North and Hargreaves (2007a,
2007b, 2007c), Rentfrow and Gosling (2006),
Selfhout et al. (2009), Tarrant et al. (2001) and
Bogt et al. (2011), who found that music preferences are associated with demographic variables
such as age and socio-economic status and that differences exist in terms of the motives for listening
to music. This implies that event organizers of live
music performances should follow a diversified
marketing strategy based on the unique characteristics of the different Generation Y segments. The
results furthermore corroborate the findings by
Morton (2002) and Rowe (2008), who found that
this generation is greatly influenced by their
friends. However, contradictory to Mortons
(2002) finding that word of mouth is the best marketing method to target Generation Yers, word of
mouth is not the main source of information for the
attendees, and they are rather influenced by a variety of media sources. A diversified communication strategy using a variety of marketing media
should therefore be used to communicate to this
generation. Corresponding with Leask et al.s

(2014a, 2014b) recommendation, social media

networks such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram should be used more effectively by music
promoters to engage this market in online conversations prior, during and after the event. This can
be an effective way to communicate with the
market, reach a larger segment of the Generation
Yers as well as a cost-effective method to promote upcoming artists. However, more research
on the use of social media networks by Generation Yers in South Africa is required to effectively design a social media strategy aimed at
them for live music performances.
Thirdly, the particular combination of motives
found in this research has not been identified in
previous research emphasizing that Generation
Yers are a distinct market segment (Leask et al.,
2014a). These findings also confirm that the type
and nature of the event influence attendees
motives (Kruger and Saayman, 2012a, 2012b;
2014) but also the different generational cohorts
present at the performances resemble distinct
motives. The motives identified in this research
can be regarded as especially important reasons
for the Generation Y market to attend live music
performances. Five motives were identified (in
order of importance): artist affiliation and unique
experience, entertainment, escape, socialization
and event novelty. As discussed in the literature
review, previous research has identified artist
affiliation, unique experience, socialization, event
novelty and entertainment as motives for attending a live music performance (Kruger and Saayman, 2012a, 2012b; 2015; Manners et al., 2012).
Although a common motive found in naturebased research, escape is unique to this research
over and above the combination of motives. These
motives also differ significantly between the three
segments with Tweens having the highest mean
values across all five motives. They are also especially motivated by entertainment, escape and
event novelty. This implies that marketing messages aimed at Tweens should emphasize the
entertainment value and fun nature of attending
live music performances. Corresponding with
Muskat et al.s (2014) recommendation, promoters and organizers should therefore take this into
consideration when marketing and organizing
these events. This segment can be engaged in
online competitions, for example, the best selfie
at the performance, best amateur cover of the artists well-known songs or prizes for the best photo
that captures their experience. Prizes can for
example be in the form of complimentary tickets
to an upcoming concert. This will make attending

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

Kruger and Saayman

377

the performances fun and entertaining and will also

encourage all Generation Yers to participate,
which can lead to greater exposure of the experience at these types of performances. As the Generation Yers progress in age, emphases with regard to
the motives are more on artist affiliation and
unique experience and entertainment and less on
event novelty and escape. These results reveal that
the most influential factors on the decision
to attend a live concert for Twixters and Tweeds
involve the performing band or artist and the experience derived from attending the concert. Therefore, to ensure cost-effective marketing, the
novelty and popularity of the band should be highlighted in marketing campaigns. Since there is a
good chance that these bands may not perform in
South Africa again, the distinct, once-in-alifetime experience should also be emphasized.
This will attract Generation Yers to the performances of a variety of artists and bands and not
necessarily only performances by popular and
mainstream artists who target the younger market.
Music promoters should also try to attract more
popular indie artists and bands that prefer smaller,
more intimate shows. These shows can be held at
smaller open-air venues in a picnic-style set-up that
provide a different live music performance experience also ideal for socialization. This can be a way
to expand these performances to different venues
and areas in the country making them more accessible for Generation Yers and expanding the economic benefits of hosting these events to all
provinces.
Fourthly, corresponding with Kueh and voon
(2007) and Moscardo et al. (2011), Generation
Y is a lucrative and valuable market for live
music performances. These concertgoers represent a large percentage of attendees at these
events (nearly 59% of the total sample surveyed),
travel in large groups, they spend considerably
for only a 1-day event, they do not mind to pay
more money for expensive tickets and they
attend various similar events during the year.
Considering their spending behaviour, from an
economic point of view, this implies that event
organizers should try to attract, retain and expand
audiences in all three segments. Since ticket
prices do not seem to deter this market, music
promoters can use this to their advantage when
designing a ticket pricing strategy for this market. Early exposure also seems to play a key role.
Tweens are exposed to live music performances
at a younger age, attend more frequently and can
greatly influence their parents in terms of spending. Artists such as Justin Bieber, who appeal to

younger Generation Yers, should therefore be

included more frequently in the live music performance calendar. Live music performance
organizers should also attempt to attract artists
who can appeal to all generations. Since Generation Yers attend various similar events, live music
promoters should consider to work together with
music festivals in order to create exposure and
promote upcoming performances.
Fifthly, dividing the generation cohort into
smaller segments taking age and life cycles into
consideration, furthermore proved to be a useful
segmentation tool supporting the notion by Stevens et al. (2005), Noble and Schewe (2003) and
Huang and Petrick (2010) that generations display
different behavioural and consumption patterns
and should hence be considered separately. This
finding once again emphasizes that Generation
Yers cannot be regarded as homogeneous and live
music performance organizers, and marketers
should therefore take cognizance of the needs and
preferences of the different generations attending
these events and market the events accordingly.

Conclusion
This exploratory research investigated a sample
of South Africas Generation Y market at live
concerts and profiled three segments of this market. The contributions of this research are as follows: This was the first time that the profile,
motives and preferences of the Generation Y market have been analysed in a live music performance context. The results offer insights into the
needs of this unexplored market, particularly as
regards their music preferences and behaviour.
The three Generation Y clusters that the study
identified, Tweens, Twixters and Tweeds, differed
significantly in terms of their socio-demographic
and behavioural characteristics and, especially,
in terms of what motivates them to attend a live
music performance. Managers can package a live
concert accordingly in order to develop this
undervalued market. The results support Kruger
and Saaymans argument (2012a, 2012b) that
attendees at live music performances cannot be
regarded as homogeneous in terms of their profiles, needs and preferences. As there has been
only limited research in this area, this study fills
a gap in the literature regarding the profile,
motives and preferences of the Generation Y market at live music performances. Based on the
results, it is evident that generational theory needs
to be taken into consideration, and it can be a useful
tool to segment markets, as it provides valuable

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

378

Journal of Vacation Marketing 21(4)

insights for the live music performance industry
on how to expand on different markets. Based
on this segmentation method, this research
furthermore introduced a typology of Generation
Yers at live music performances, which can be

applied to other similar events. It is recommended

that this method of segmentation also be applied
to other generations, for example, the baby boomers at live music performances in order to better
understand live music performance preferences.

Appendix 1
Table A1. Chi-square test results of Generation Y concertgoers characteristics.

Characteristics
Artist/band attended
Adam Lambert
Bon Jovi
Celtic Woman
Justin Bieber
Lady Gaga
Linkin Park
Red Hot Chilli Peppers
Rodriguez
Language
Afrikaans
English
Other
Occupation
Professional
Self-employed
Technical
Sales
Work at mine
Civil service
Housewife
Pensioner
Student
Unemployed
Other (specify)
Province
Gauteng
Western Cape
Eastern Cape
North West
Mpumalanga
Northern Cape
KwaZulu-Natal
Limpopo
Free State
Outside RSA borders
Local residence
Yes
No
Marital status
Single
In a relationship
Married
Living together
Divorced
Widow/er

18 years
Gen Y
Tweens

1925 years
Gen Y
Twixters

26 years
Gen Y
Tweeds

16%
5%
2%
37%
17%
8%
14%
2%

12%
8%
4%
9%
17%
23%
17%
7%

13%
14%
6%
6%
14%
23%
17%
7%

25%
73%
3%

33%
65%
2%

38%
60%
3%

3%
1%
0%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
88%
2%
4%

22%
6%
3%
6%
0%
0%
1%
0%
53%
3%
5%

58%
11%
7%
9%
1%
1%
1%
0%
5%
1%
7%

51%
39%
1%
2%
1%
0%
3%
1%
1%
1%

47%
39%
3%
2%
2%
0%
4%
1%
2%
1%

38%
48%
4%
1%
2%
0%
5%
1%
1%
1%

73%
27%

67%
33%

69%
31%

75%
22%
2%
1%
1%
1%

54%
36%
6%
3%
0%
0%

36%
26%
31%
6%
1%
0%

w2
Value

df

Significance
level

Value

614.32

14

0.001*

0.409***

0.001*

0.099

1378.251 20

0.001*

0.619****

58.247 18

0.001*

0.127**

0.007*

0.520****

655.763 10

0.001*

0.428***

9.891

(continued)

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

Kruger and Saayman

379

Table A1. (continued)

Characteristics

18 years
Gen Y
Tweens

Level of education
Scholar
67%
Matric
25%
Diploma, degree
3%
Post-graduate
1%
Professional
2%
Other (specify)
2%
When tickets were purchased
Spontaneous decision
14%
A month ago
7%
More than a month ago
16%
When it was announced
61%
Other, specify
3%
Initiator of attendance
Self
Yes 56%;
No 44%
Friends
Yes 55%;
No 45%
Media
Yes 25%;
No 75%
Spouse
Yes 4%;
No 96%
Family
Yes 37%;
No 63%
Work
Yes 4%;
No 96%
Boyfriend/girlfriend
Yes 10%;
No 90%
Preferred type of music
Pop
Yes 75%;
No 25%
Punk rock
Yes 47%;
No 53%
Classical
Yes 23%;
No 77%
Instrumental
Yes 28%;
No 72%
Jazz
Yes 24%;
No 76%
Blues
Yes 24%;
No 76%
Heavy metal
Yes 30%;
No 70%
Rap
Yes 46%;
No 54%
Rock and roll
Yes 65%;
No 35%
R&B
Yes 51%;
No 49%
Reggae
Yes 33%;
No 67%
Country
Yes 31%;
No 69%
Folk/traditional
Yes 18%;
No 82%
Afrikaans
Yes 22%;
No 78%

1925 years
Gen Y
Twixters

26 years
Gen Y
Tweeds

4%
31%
42%
15%
7%
1%

1%
18%
43%
18%
18%
2%

12%
8%
14%
63%
4%

8%
7%
14%
66%
4%

Yes 60%;
No 40%
Yes 49%;
No 51%
Yes 21%;
No 79%
Yes 9%;
No 92%
Yes 24%;
No 76%
Yes 5%;
No 95%
Yes 17%;
No 83%

Yes 62%;
No 38%
Yes 37%;
No 63%
Yes 14%;
No 86%
Yes 12%;
No 88%
Yes 17%;
No 83%
Yes 4%;
No 96%
Yes 13%;
No 87%

Yes 63%;
No 37%
Yes 60%;
No 40%
Yes 27%;
No 73%
Yes 30%;
No 70%
Yes 26%;
No 74%
Yes 27%;
No 73%
Yes 33%;
No 67%
Yes 34%;
No 66%
Yes 74%;
No 26%
Yes 40%;
No 60%
Yes 32%;
No 68%
Yes 30%;
No 70%
Yes 19%;
No 81%
Yes 23%;
No 77%

Yes 69%;
No 31%
Yes 63%;
No 37%
Yes 33%;
No 67%
Yes 29%;
No 71%
Yes 27%;
No 73%
Yes 24%;
No 76%
Yes 35%;
No 65%
Yes 31%;
No 70%
Yes 79%;
No 21%
Yes 39%;
No 61%
Yes 26%;
No 74%
Yes 31%;
No 69%
Yes 24%;
No 76%
Yes 26%;
No 74%

w2
Value

df

2073.349 14

Significance
level

Value

0.001*

0.761****

20.200

0.010*

0.075

5.278

0.071

0.041

54.960

0.001*

0.132**

29.243

0.001*

0.096

31.524

0.001*

0.100**

82.342

0.001*

0.162**

2.246

0.325

0.027

24.509

0.001*

0.088

40.751

0.001*

0.108**

55.797

0.001*

0.127**

20.536

0.001*

0.078

4.179

0.382

0.035

1.633

0.442

0.022

3.427

0.180

0.032

6.881

0.142

0.045

51.535

0.001*

0.123

45.021

0.001*

0.114**

33.523

0.001*

0.099

11.450

0.003*

0.058

1.091

0.896

0.018

11.302

0.023*

0.058

3.675

0.159

0.033

*Significance at the 5% level. value: **small effect 0.1; ***medium effect 0.3; ****large effect 0.5.

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

380

Journal of Vacation Marketing 21(4)

Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the National
Research Foundation (NRF) for financial assistance as well as Big Concerts for allowing the
research to be conducted. We are also grateful
to all the fieldworkers and respondents who were
willing to take part in the survey.
References
Aldskogius H (1993) Festivals and meets: the place of
music in Summer Sweden. Geografiska Annaler
75B(2): 5572.
Bausch S and McGiboney M (2009) Social networks
and blogs now 4th most popular online activity,
ahead of personal email. Nielsen Reports. Available at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/13118194/soc
ial-networks-blogs-now-4th-most-popular-onlineactivity-ahead-of-personal-email-nielsen-reports
(accessed 9 March 2009).
Bogt TFM, Delsing MJMH, van Zalk M, et al. (2011)
Intergenerational continuity of taste: parental and
adolescent music preferences. Social Forces 90(1):
297319.
Bowen HE and Daniels MJ (2005) Does the music
matter? Motivations for attending a music festival.
Event Management 9(3): 155164.
Brooks S (2005) Whats so special about Echo Boomers? Restaurant Business 104(15): 3436.
Christian S (2010) Comparing generations. ESSAI 8(13):
2228.
Clark LA and Watson D (1995) Constructing validity:
basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment 7(3): 309319.
Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the
behavioral sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Crompton JL and McKay SL (1997) Motives for visitors attending festival events. Annals of Tourism
Research 24(2): 425439.
Delsing MJMH, TerBogt T, Engels RCME, et al.
(2007) Adolescents music preferences: factor
structure, stability, and associations with big five
personality characteristics. Journal of Research
on Adolescence 17: 467480.
Donnison S (2007) Unpacking the millennials: a cautionary tale for teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education 32(3): 113.
Earl PE (2001) Simons travel theorem and the demand
for live music. Journal of Economic Psychology
22(1): 335358.
Ellis SM and Steyn HS (2003) Practical significance
(effect sizes) versus or in combination with statistical significance (p values). Management Dynamics
12(1): 5153.

Faulkner B, Fredline E, Larson M, et al. (1999) A marketing analysis of Swedens Storsjoyran music festival. Tourism Analysis 4: 157171.
Field A (2005) Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. 2nd
ed. London, Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Fields B, Wilder S, Brunch J, et al. (2008) Millennial
Leaders: Success stories from Todays Most Brilliant Generation Y leaders. Buffalo Grove: Writers
of the Round Table.
Formica S and Uysal M (1996) A market segmentation
of festival visitors: umbria Jazz Festival in Italy. Festival Management and Event Tourism 3(4): 175182.
Glover P (2010) Generation Ys future tourism
demand: some opportunities and challenges. In
Benckendorff P, Moscardo G and Pendergast D
(eds) Tourism and Generation Y. Cambridge:
CABI, pp. 155164.
Hausman A (2000) A multi-method investigation of
consumer motivations in impulse buying behaviour.
Journal of Consumer Marketing 17(5): 403419.
Holbrook MB (1995) Consumer Research: Introspective Essays on the Study of Consumption. Thousand
Oaks: Sage.
Holbrook MB and Schindler RM (1989) Some exploratory findings on the development of musical tastes.
Journal of Consumer Research 16(June): 119124.
Horovitz B (2002) Gen Y: A tough crowd to sell. USA
Today, 22 Aprilpp. B1B2.
Huang Y and Petrick JF (2010) Generation Ys travel
behaviours: a comparison with Baby Boomers and
generation X. In: Benckendorff P, Moscardo G and
Pendergast D (eds) Tourism and Generation Y.
Cambridge: CABI, pp. 2737.
Huntley R (2006) The World according to Y. Crows
Nest: Allen & Unwin.
Janssen SMJ, Chessa AG and Murre JMJ (2007) Temporal distribution of favourite books, movies, and
records: differential encoding and re-sampling.
Memory 15(7): 755767.
Jennings G, Cater C, Lee YS, et al. (2010) Generation Y:
Perspectives of quality. In: Benckendorff P, Moscardo G and Pendergast D (eds) Tourism and Generation Y. Oxfordshire: CAB International, pp. 5865.
Keating L (2000) The in crowd: retail rushes to keep
pace with Generation Y. Shopping Center World
29(5): 160210.
Kruger M and Saayman M (2012a) Listen to your heart:
motives for attending Roxette live. Journal of Convention and Event Management 13(3): 181202.
Kruger M and Saayman M (2012b) Show me the band
and I will show you the market. Journal of Convention and Event Management 13(4): 250269.
Kruger M and Saayman M (2015) Attendance at the
U2 concert is it a case of this is a mans world?
Event management 19(1): 1532.

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

Kruger and Saayman

381

Kueh K and Voon BH (2007) Culture and service

quality expectations: evidence from generation Y
consumers in Malaysia. Managing Service Quality
17(6): 656680.
Kumar A and Lim H (2008) Age differences in mobile
service perceptions: comparison of Generation Y
and baby boomers. Journal of Services Marketing
22(7): 568577.
Larsen G and OReilly D (2005) Music festivals as
sites of consumption: an exploratory study. Working Paper No 05/05 [online], Bradford University
School of Management, UK.
Leask A, Barron P, Ensor J, et al. (2014a) Generation
Y: The Impact of Generational Changes in Consumer Behaviour on the Marketing of Tourist
Attractions. Available at: http://researchrepository.napier.ac.uk/7442/ (accessed 11 March 2015).
Leask A, Fyall A and Barron P (2014b) Generation Y:
an agenda for future visitor attraction research.
International Journal of Tourism Research 16:
462471.
Loda MD and Coleman BC (2010) Adjusting attitudes
using traditional media: magazines can still move
millennials. In Benckendorff P, Moscardo G and
Pendergast D (eds) Tourism and Generation Y.
Cambridge: CABI, pp. 119130.
Manners B, Kruger M and Saayman M (2012) Managing the beautiful noise: evidence from the Neil Diamond shows. Journal of convention and event
tourism 13(2): 100120.
Mannheim K (1952) The sociological problem of generations. In: Kecskemeti P (ed. And trans.) Essays
on the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 276322.
Mayfield TL and Crompton JL (1995) Development of
an instrument for identifying community reasons
for staging a festival. Journal of Travel Research
33(3): 3744.
McCarthy KE and Jinnett K (2001) A New Framework
for Building Participation in the Arts. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
McCarthy KE, Ondaatje EH and Zakaras L (2001)
Guide to the Literature on Participation in the Arts.
Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.
McCrindle M (2002) Understanding Generation Y.
Available at: http://ec-web.elthamcollege.vic.edu.
au/principal/pdf/Understanding%20Generation%
20Y.pdf (accessed 25 September 2013).
McMorland L and Mactaggart D (2007) Traditional
Scottish music events: native Scots attendance
motivations. Event Management 11(1): 5769.
Montoro-Pons JD, Cuadrado-Garcia M and CasasusEstelles T (2012) Determinants of the frequency
of live popular music attendance. Available at:
http://musicbusinessresearch.files.wordpress.com/

2012/04/volume-2-no-1-april-2013_montoro_end.
pdf (accessed 23 May 2014).
Morton LP (2002) Targeting Generation Y. Public
Relations Quarterly 47(2): 4648.
Moscardo G, Murphy L and Benckendorff P (2011)
Generation Y and travel futures. In: Yeoman I,
Smith K, Hsu C and Watson S (eds) Tourism and
Demography. Oxford: Goodfellow Publishers, pp.
87100.
Moskalyak A (2008) ITFacts. Available at: /http://
blogs.zdnet.com/ITFacts/?cat10S (accessed 23
May 2014).
Mulder J, ter Bogt TFM, Raaijmakers QAW, et al.
(2010) From death metal to R&B? Consistency
of music preferences among Dutch adolescents and
young adults. Psychology of Music 38(1): 6483.
Muskat M, Muskat B, Zehrer A, et al. (2014) Generation Y: evaluating services experiences through
mobile ethnography. Tourism Review 68(3):
5571.
Nicholson R and Pearce DG (2000) Who goes to
events: a comparative analysis of the profile characteristics of visitors to four South Island events
in New Zealand. Journal of Vacation Marketing
6(3): 263253.
Noble SM and Schewe CD (2003) Cohort segmentation: an exploration of its validity. Journal of Business Research 56(12): 979987.
Noble SM, Haytko DL and Phillips J (2009) What
drives college-age Generation Y consumers? Journal of Business Research 62(6): 617628.
North AC and Hargreaves DJ (2007a) Lifestyle correlates of musical preference: 1. Relationships, living
arrangements, beliefs, and crime. Psychology of
Music 35(1): 5887.
North AC and Hargreaves DJ (2007b) Lifestyle correlates of musical preference: 2. Media, leisure
time and music. Psychology of Music 35(2):
179200.
North AC and Hargreaves DJ (2007c) Lifestyle
correlates of musical preference: 3. Travel, money,
education, employment and health. Psychology of
Music 35(3): 473497.
Oakes S (2003) Demographics and sponsorship considerations for jazz and classical music festivals.
The Service Industries Journal 23(3): 165178.
Pallant J (2007) SPSS Survival Manual: a Step-by-step
Guide to Data Analysis using SPSS Version 15. 3rd
ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, p. 335.
Paul P (2001) Getting inside Generation Y. American
Demographics 23(9): 4249.
Park M, Jang H, Lee S, et al. (2010) Tourism and the N
generation in a dynamically changing society: the
case of South Korea. In: Benckendorff P, Moscordo G and pendergast D (eds) Tourism and

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015

382

Journal of Vacation Marketing 21(4)

Generation Y. Cambridge: CAB International, pp.
8597.
Pegg S and Patterson I (2010) Rethinking music festival as a staged event: gaining insights from understanding visitor motivations and experiences they
seek. Journal of Convention and Event Tourism
11(2): 8599.
Pendergast D (2007) The MilGen and society. In: Bahr N
and Pendergast D (eds) The Millennial Adolescent.
Camberwell, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research, pp. 2340. Available at http://shop.
acer.edu.au/acer-shop/product/086316933 (accessed
14 February 2014).
Pendergast D (2010) Getting to know the Y generation.
In: Benckendorff P, Moscardo G and Pendergast D
(eds) Tourism and Generation Y. Cambridge: CABI,
pp. 115.
Rachael EN and Douglas GP (2001) Why do people
attend events: a comparative analysis of visitor
motivations at four South Island events. Journal
of Travel Research 39(4): 449460.
Rentfrow PJ and Gosling SD (2006) Message in a
Ballad The role of music preferences in interpersonal perception. Psychological Science
17(3): 236242.
Richards G (2007) New Horisons II: The young independent traveller. World Youth Student & Educational Travel Confederation, Madrid.
Roberts JA and Manolis C (2000) Baby boomers
and busters: an exploratory investigation of attitudes towards marketing, advertising and consumerism. Journal of Consumer Marketing 17:
481499.
Rowe M (2008) Generation revelation. Restaurant
hospitality, January: 2630.
Schiffman LG and Kanuk LL (2009) Consumer Behaviour. 9th ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey:
Pearson Education International.
Schwartz KD and Fouts GT (2003) Music preferences,
personality style and development of issues of adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 32(3):
205213.
Scott D (1996) A comparison of visitors motivations
to attend three urban festivals. Festival Management and Event Tourism 3: 121128.
Selfhout MHW, Branje SJT, ter Bogt TFM, et al.
(2009) The role of music preferences in early adolescents friendship formation and stability. Journal of Adolescence 32(1): 95107.
Smith T (1994) Generational differences in musical
preferences. Popular Music and Society 18(1):
4359.

Stevens J, Lathrop A and Bradish C (2005) Tracking

generation Y: a contemporary sport consumer profile. Journal of Sport Management 19: 254277.
Steyn HS (2000) Practical significance of the difference in means. South African Journal of Industrial
Psychology 26(3): 13.
Steyn HS Jr (2009) Manual: Effect size indices and
practical significance. Available at: http://www.
nwu.ac.za/p-statcs/index.html
Stone C (2008) The British pop music festival phenomenon. In: Ali-Knight J, Robertson M, Fyall A and
Ladkin A (eds) International Perspectives of Festivals and Events: Paradigms of Analysis. Oxford:
Butterworth-Heinemann, pp. 205224.
Sullivan P and Heitmeyer J (2008) Looking at Gen Y
shopping preferences and intentions: exploring the
role of experience and apparel involvement. International Journal of Consumer Studies 32: 285295.
Swanson SR, Davis JC and Zhao Y (2008) Art for arts
sake? An examination of motives for arts performance attendance. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Quaterly 37(2): 300323.
Tarrant M (2002) Adolescent peer groups and social
identity. Social Development 11(1): 110123.
Tarrant M, North AC and Hargreaves DJ (2001) Social
categorisation, self-esteem, and the estimated
musical preferences of male adolescents. Journal
of Social Psychology 141(5): 565581.
TeNeill LB (2002) A conceptual framework for
examining adolescent identity, media influence
and social development. Review of General Psychology 6(1): 7391.
Tekman HG and Hortacsu N (2002) Music and social
identity: stylistic identification as a response to
musical style. International Journal of Psychology
37: 277285.
Thrane C (2002) Jazz festival visitors and their expenditures: linking spending patterns to musical interest. Journal of Travel Research 40(3): 281286.
Tomljenovic R, Larson M and Faulkner B (2001) Predictors of satisfaction with festival attendance: A
case of Storsjoyran rock music festival. Turizam
49(2): 123133.
Tonon J, Claussen J and Peukert C (2012) On the road
again: the effect of live performances on artist popularity. Available at: http://www.mric.uni-muenchen.
de/research/res_seminars_mric/seminar_mm1213/
effect-of-live-performance.pdf (accessed 21 July
2013).
Williams KC and Page RA (2011) Marketing to the generations. Available at: http://www.aabri.com/manu
scripts/10575.pdf (accessed 20 September 2013).

Downloaded from jvm.sagepub.com at University of Bucharest on December 1, 2015