What the 2019 Audience Research Found
Every other market page cites this one so the arguments there do not have to keep re-explaining where the numbers came from. When a figure elsewhere on the site disagrees with this page, this page wins — it is measured data, not an in-house estimate.
What this is, and what it is not
- Source: Independent Target-Audience Research — MRI Summary (2019). The audience counts come from MRI (Mediamark Research) syndicated consumer data; supporting context came from period trade research (see Sources).
- Conservative where it counts. For the two need-based pools, MRI's counts run below the published literature — gluten-free/food-allergy ~2M against a ~3M literature estimate, gluten-sensitivity ~3.6M against a 9–18M range — so those numbers likely understate the real audience. The pattern does not generalize: MRI's wellness pool (~10.2M) runs above its literature comparison (~6.6M), and the craft-beer comparison pairs different populations (measured "beer experts" vs the Brewers Association's craft-drinker estimate). We keep the measured numbers because they are measured, not because they are the ceiling or the floor.
- Not current. This is 2019 planning data. Treat every number as a worked example of how the market behaves, not a live forecast. Validate against current data before making a public market claim.
- Reported findings, not a dataset. These are the reported findings of a commissioned study built on licensed MRI syndicated data, published as findings with attribution. There is deliberately no CSV or download, and the third-party-derived figures on this page and the pages it feeds are excluded from this site's CC BY reuse grant — cite the pages, not a dataset.
How the Study Was Built
The study was scoped and approved in January 2019 as agency target-audience research on MRI's syndicated consumer database, and the summary deck was delivered March 12, 2019. The method, per the signed commissioning scope retained in the Bard's archive (a separate document from the delivered summary): MRI calculates a weighted index comparing each audience segment's composition against the general population for any measured product, service, or lifestyle variable, reporting the expected number of adults or households, the percentage, and the index for every variable. The original scope named three planned segments — celiac and gluten sensitivity, "better-for-you"/free-form eaters, and craft beer and spirit enthusiasts — which the delivered analysis sharpened into the four measured pools below. Media usage, technology usage, and lifestyle habits were in scope from the start, which is why the behavioral sections of this page exist at all.
The Four Audiences
The research did not flatten "gluten-free" into one customer. It defined four overlapping pools and sized each two ways — the MRI count it could actually measure, and the wider published estimate.
| Audience | Defined as | MRI-measured pool | Wider literature estimate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Food Allergy / Gluten-Free | Buys gluten-free products; restricts diet due to a food allergy | ~2.0M | ~3M |
| Gluten-Sensitive | Buys gluten-free products; reports symptoms consistent with gluten sensitivity | ~3.6M | ~9–18M |
| Wellness | Buys gluten-free products; heedful of wellness; fitness as a dietary goal | ~10.2M | ~6.6M |
| Craft Beer Nerds | Considers themselves a beer expert; friends/family ask their advice; drinks super-premium beer | ~12.6M | ~96M |
The gap between the two columns is the honesty check: the measured pool is smaller than the headline, and the four pools overlap (one person can sit in three of them), so they are not additive. For how to use that without inflating the market, see Market Sizing Without Lying to Yourself. For the strategic read of each audience, see The Four Gluten-Free Beer Audiences.
Who Each Audience Actually Is
This is the demographic fingerprint the strategy pages usually allude to but rarely show. Skews are relative to the general population.
| Audience | Gender | Age skew | Household & income | Region skew |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Food Allergy / Gluten-Free | 74% female / 26% male | Concentrates 25–54 | Professional 34%; married 68%; college 49%; 55% earn $75K+; homes $200K+ | Higher in the West (32%); 80% in high-population counties |
| Gluten-Sensitive | 57% female / 43% male | Skews older (strong 55–65+) | Married 60%, smaller households; more in the $20–50K band; typical education | Higher in the South (44%); 82% in higher-population counties |
| Wellness | 67% female / 33% male | Concentrates 25–54 | Professional 34%; married 68%; college 40%; typical income; homes $200K+ | Lower in the Midwest (14%); 50% in high-population counties |
| Craft Beer Nerds | 28% female / 73% male (as printed in the deck — sums to 101%) | Skews young (huge 25–34) | Professional 39%; married 53% / never-married 36%; college 44%; 49% earn $100K+ | Higher in the Northeast and West; 50% in high-population counties |
The single most useful line in this table is the gender split: the three health-driven audiences skew female, while the craft-beer-authority audience skews 73% male. That tension is exactly why the research recommended the target it did — see the recommendation below and Millennial Women and the Gluten-Free Beer Opportunity.
The Full Age Distributions
The study charted every audience's age distribution against the general adult population (values are the share of each pool in the age bracket; Gen Pop shown for comparison). The underlined story per pool: food-allergy/gluten-free concentrates 25–54, gluten-sensitivity skews old, wellness concentrates 25–54, and the craft-beer pool is dramatically young.
| Age bracket | Gen Pop | GF / Food Allergy | Gluten-Sensitive | Wellness | Craft Beer Nerds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21–24 | 12% | 7% | 7% | 11% | 16% |
| 25–34 | 18% | 21% | 12% | 18% | 26% |
| 35–44 | 16% | 21% | 13% | 19% | 19% |
| 45–54 | 17% | 19% | 20% | 20% | 18% |
| 55–64 | 17% | 17% | 25% | 17% | 13% |
| 65+ | 20% | 15% | 23% | 15% | 8% |
How They Behave
Beyond demographics, the research read attitudes and civic behavior:
- The health-driven audiences look like they are in "life-building" mode — more likely to buy or sell a home, buy a new or used car, buy new electronics, become parents, or start a business (the business signal excludes the gluten-sensitive group, per the deck). The Craft Beer Nerds looked more like they were in "career-building" mode.
- Every group indexed high on travel.
- The health audiences are joiners. On every community-involvement measure the chart shows the health groups' bars running longer than the general population's — recycling, voting, signing petitions, fundraising, local affairs, contacting politicians, and attending rallies, in that order of participation. The chart's printed values (~69 recycling, ~63 voting, ~31 petitions, ~22 fundraising, ~18 local affairs, ~16 politicians, ~9 rallies) carry no unit label in the deck; they read as the food-allergy/gluten-free group's participation shares, and we report them as chart values rather than assert the unit. The over-indexing itself is unambiguous from the bars, and it is the concrete basis for the "connect through community, build social capital" guidance on the buyer-behavior pages — see Why Community Builds Trust.
Food and Eating Attitudes, in Full
The study's summary: health-oriented audiences focus on eating healthy, cooking with fresh ingredients, and seeking new ways to live healthier — they like to cook, avoid fast food, seek organic products, rely on labels, evaluate menu nutrition when eating out, and index high on almost every dietary system among those controlling their diet. Craft Beer Nerds, by contrast, look like the general population on food and health — eating for fitness and weight more than health. The measured attitudes behind that summary (the deck's chart values as printed — the deck does not label the unit, and they read as shares agreeing; the food-allergy/gluten-free pool shown against the general population):
| Food attitude | Gen Pop | GF / Food Allergy |
|---|---|---|
| Eat healthy | 33% | 66% |
| Prefer fresh food | 35% | 55% |
| Avoid frozen food | 38% | 49% |
| Healthy breakfast | 27% | 46% |
| Cook frequently | 35% | 42% |
| "Fast food is junk food" | 28% | 37% |
| Eat organic | 13% | 32% |
| Evaluate menu nutrition | 12% | 30% |
The doubling at the top and bottom of that table — eat-healthy 2× the general population, organic and menu-evaluation ~2.5× — is the measured face of the information-seeking gluten-free buyer.
Buying Patterns
The study reduced each audience family to a buying signature: the food-allergy/gluten-free buyer seeks knowledge and buys informed — always checks ingredients and nutritional content, buys natural products, and cares more than average about buying American. The gluten-sensitive/wellness family buys on informed experience. The Craft Beer Nerds buy online and hunt unique finds — fewer buy natural, fewer care about buying American, and they care less about cost savings or selection.
Mobile and Internet, in Full
All audiences indexed notably high on: the internet as the best source of information, connection, and shopping; enjoying new technology (strongest among Craft Beer Nerds); fully integrating mobile into life, particularly texting; and using social media to connect and learn about news and products. The differences: Craft Beer Nerds are the most tech-and-entertainment oriented, prefer a single device, and use the phone as a replacement for other technology; the food-allergy/gluten-free audience more often uses social media and the internet to find information and learn.
The measured mobile attitudes (the deck's chart values as printed — the unit is not labeled, the segments cluster near each value, and on the deck's parallel charts the printed number attaches to the food-allergy/gluten-free bar):
| Mobile attitude | Chart value |
|---|---|
| One device is most convenient | ~58% |
| Texting is part of daily life | ~52% |
| Understand phone features | ~39% |
| Rely on phone GPS | ~40% |
| Use mobile for offers | ~29% |
| Interested in mobile video | ~25% |
| Use mobile to check prices | ~26% |
| Use mobile to compare products | ~22% |
| "Apps make life convenient" | ~19% |
The study's own conclusion, quoted in substance: health-oriented audiences and craft beer nerds are mobile first — key audiences have integrated mobile into their lives, and it is the best platform through which to interact with them. That 2019 conclusion is the origin of Mobile-First, Research-First, Label-First.
The Millennial-Women Facts
The implication slides carried four measured statements about women 21–34: they over-index on craft beer and are its fastest-growing cohort; they account for ~15% of total craft beer consumption; they are the most frequently diagnosed cohort for celiac disease; and they are more likely to be wellness-oriented. Those four lines are the entire evidential basis for the Millennial Women page — read that page's caveats alongside them.
The Recommended Target
The study did not recommend chasing all four audiences at once. Its initial recommendation was a set of nested circles:
- Core: millennial women diagnosed with celiac disease or gluten sensitivity (medically or self-identified).
- Surrounding: their spouse, partner, and family — because the purchase moves through the household.
- Outer: the broader wellness audience.
The connection strategy attached to it was community, social capital, and mobile for the core, and health communities, a younger orientation, and mobile for the wellness ring. The study's own caveat on the recommendation: it would be refined as media analysis was applied — it was an initial focus, not a final answer. This is the source of the "millennial women" and "spouse/family multiplier" pages — and the caution on both is the same: the value was the overlap of signals, not the demographic label. See Millennial Women and The Spouse, Family, and Friend-Group Multiplier.
Where the Audiences Concentrate
The research mapped all four audiences by U.S. census division (not by state), with a behavioral-index layer on top. The full regional layer — the US map, every division's pools, and the complete nine-behavior index table — lives on Where the Audience Lives; the strategic summary is on Market Opportunity and the regional strategy in Regional Opportunity.
The behavioral indices (100 = national average) are what turned raw population into a focus list:
| Behavior | Where it over-indexes most |
|---|---|
| Gluten-free / food-allergy | Mountain (198), West North Central (135), Pacific (111) |
| Gluten-sensitivity | South Atlantic (144), East South Central (117), Pacific (108) |
| Wellness | South Atlantic (126), Mountain (125), Pacific (106) |
| Craft-beer enthusiasm | New England (155), Mid-Atlantic (126), Pacific (117) |
| Super-premium beer drinking | New England (163), Mid-Atlantic (122), Pacific (115) |
| Hard-cider drinking | New England (128), Pacific (119), Mid-Atlantic (118), Mountain (114) |
Layering size with these indices, the study flagged five focus divisions: New England, Mid-Atlantic, West North Central, Mountain, and Pacific. Note that the single largest audience pool — the South Atlantic — is not on that list, because it indexes lower on premium-beer and cider behavior. Size and fit are different questions.
The Sizing Funnel
This is the honest-sizing method actually executed — a progressive filter from the whole adult population down to a reachable target. The two columns are the study's two scenarios, which differ only by which fifth region is included (Mountain vs. South Atlantic).
| Filter step | Scenario A (incl. Mountain) | Scenario B (incl. South Atlantic) |
|---|---|---|
| Total 21+ population | 233,483,000 | 233,483,000 |
| In key census regions | 111,482,000 | 158,346,000 |
| …and millennial | 42,629,000 | 51,978,000 |
| …and in a target segment (GF/FA, GS, Wellness) | 2,094,000 | 2,310,000 |
| …add spouse/partner (60%) | 3,350,400 | 3,788,400 |
| …who drink craft or hard cider (38%) | 1,273,152 | 1,439,592 |
The segment breakdown at the fourth step: Scenario A — GF/FA 421K, GS 416K, Wellness 1,911K; Scenario B — GF/FA 433K, GS 633K, Wellness 2,038K. The filtered target rounds to ~1.3M (A) and ~1.4M (B). For why this stepwise method beats a stacked top-line number, see Market Sizing Without Lying to Yourself.
The Revenue Math
From the filtered target, at a median 3 glasses in the last 7 days, an average price of $10.99 per six-pack, and modeled market-share scenarios:
| Filtered target | Potential 6-packs (last 30 days) | Share | Monthly 6-packs | Annual revenue |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scenario A — ~1.3M | ~2.6M | 3% | 75K | ~$10.0M |
| 5% | 127K | ~$16.8M | ||
| 10% | 255K | ~$33.6M | ||
| 20% | 509K | ~$67.2M | ||
| Scenario B — ~1.4M | ~2.9M | 3% | 86K | ~$11.4M |
| 5% | 144K | ~$19.0M | ||
| 10% | 288K | ~$38.0M | ||
| 20% | 576K | ~$76.0M |
The 20% row is a stress test, not a projection. The point is not the dollar figures — it is how fast the output moves when the share assumption moves. For the full model and its limits, see Revenue Scenarios for a Truly Gluten-Free Beer.
What the Research Recommended Next
The study closed with a build sequence, not a media buy — the honest order for a small brand:
- A brief — a compelling strategy and actionable market/competition insights to lead brand development.
- Brand identity — logo, tagline, and packaging relevant to the community.
- A campaign message — one big creative idea anchored in the strategy and spoken directly to the community.
- A channel plan — a laser-focused, tactical plan to reach the community efficiently.
That "outsmart, don't outspend" logic is carried in Outsmart vs. Outspend.
How to Read These Numbers
- Illustrative, not current. 2019 planning data. Every figure needs current validation before it becomes a public claim.
- Conservative where it counts. The two need-based pools measure below the published literature, so the core audience is likely larger; the wellness pool measures above its literature comparison. Read each pool against its own estimate, not the set against a slogan.
- Not additive. The four audiences overlap; do not stack them.
- Fit ≠ size. The biggest population is rarely the best-fit market — that is the whole reason for the filters.
Sources
- Independent Target-Audience Research — MRI Summary (2019), based on MRI / Mediamark syndicated consumer data. Primary source.
- Audience-size literature cited in the deck: American Journal of Gastroenterology (celiac prevalence); Catassi et al., Nutrients 2013, Cascella et al., Schizophrenia Bulletin 2011, and Lundin & Alaedini, Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2012 (non-celiac gluten sensitivity); Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 2016 (gluten avoidance); Brewers Association, 2017 (craft-beer population).
- Supporting period trade research reviewed alongside the deck: "Consumer Perceptions of 'Clean' Are Changing" (Food Business News, March 2019); "Healthy Eating and Organic on the Rise" (March 2019); "Millennial Beverages."
Related Reading
- Where the Audience Lives — the full regional data and map
- Market Opportunity
- The Four Gluten-Free Beer Audiences
- Millennial Women and the Gluten-Free Beer Opportunity
- The Spouse, Family, and Friend-Group Multiplier
- Regional Opportunity
- Market Sizing Without Lying to Yourself
- Revenue Scenarios for a Truly Gluten-Free Beer
- Sources & References