Status Spending

STATUS ❧ Upper Middle Research

Upper Middle’s Status Symbol survey found that net worth (Cramer Coefficient .43) is more predictive of conspicuous consumption among high-earning professionals than income (0.35), geography (0.27), or profession (.21) because wealth dictates perceived pressure to conform through achievement or indulgence. As successful strivers, we want status symbols that obscure what we lack, whether that’s material comfort commensurate our accomplishments or accomplishments commensurate with our material comfort.^[3]

This is particularly true for those with a net worth between $500K and $1M, who report by far the highest pressure to conform (76%). This inspires that sort of algo-rhythmic homogeneity among Loeffler Randall flats-wearing marketing VPs sitting on CB2 couches in too-small Park Slope apartments scrolling through Insta pics of their friends in Taormina looking like Haim.

The Travel Thing

As high-earning American professionals accumulate wealth, our symbolic consumption layers up. The first layer is practical (primary homes, vehicles). The second is experiential (secondary homes, travel). The third is social or “positional” (clubs, private schools). As such, demand for status symbols has a more or less linear relationship with wealth.

But there’s a weird twist. As the graph above shows, the desire for travel tanks in high net worth brackets. And there’s a simple reason why: Travel cannot be infinitely consumed because it requires time, which is not infinitely available. Wealthy people travel when they can. As such, they are much (+/-4.2x) more likely than other group to say they want time. They also, it seems, cease to see travel as a status symbol when it becomes a lifestyle expectation.

When “summer” become a verb, attitudes shift.

Bobos in Perdition

Though some of us attempt to express status in original ways, status symbols have to be legible to serve their purpose and therefore generally fall into predictable, un-clever buckets.

The irony that emerges is that the creative professional from California, New York and New England most likely to submit clever answers (“A muddy Subaru with Vermont plates”) were, in fact, among the most likely to report wanting luxuries and the salespeople from the Midwest and Southeast most likely to submit folksy non-answers (“Just some peace and quiet”) were, in fact, among the most likely to want symbols conveying prestige. 

Enter the Brandhumpers

Trends in symbolic consumption may be more strongly correlated to net worth, but brand-sensitivity is definitively not. The frequency with which respondents cited brands was more strongly correlated to profession (.47) with doctors, finance bros (it’s not a gendered term), lawyers, MBA-types and marketers – generally more focused on home goods – showing strong brand preferences.

Brand sensitivity across professions was likely mediated somewhat by professional geography. New Yorkers and Californians were the most likely to namedrop brands. 

Though several brands – Rolex, Hermes, Tesla, and Range Rover – were consistently popular across geographies Broadly speaking, brand mentions fell into three geographic categories. 

➺ Coastal (Cultural Cachet): Cartier, Equinox, Zero Bond, Casa Cipriani, Miu Miu, Louis Vuitton (Neverfull), Le Creuset, Ooni, Bottega Veneta, Godard, Rivian, Porsche, Patagonia, Alo.

➺ West and Pacific Northwest (Outdoor Lifestyle): Range Rover, Golf Course Access (varied), guns, Rivian, G-Wagons.

➺ Midwest and South (Basic Signaling): Mercedes, Apple, Canada Goose, Helly Hansen, Lululemon, Uppababy.

Some Interesting Responses….

When asked what status symbols they most desired, Upper Middle’s weirdly honest readers did not disappoint….