Editor's note : Kent I. Phillips is presi­dent of Data Hank USA. a Fort Wayne. Ind., research firm providing market share studies for soft drink bottlers.

As this is my first contributed ar­ticle to this publication. I was hoping for a less controversial subject to write about. It seems I have a reputation for being something of a rebel as far as research approaches are con­cerned. Therefore, to be on the safe side here, I am not going to directly identify companies that market products nation­ally by their name, only by their product category. My commentary will be di­rected at national companies, not local or regional ones.

In the arena of ethnic marketing, most national companies operate with the following myths:

Myth #1 : The ethnic market is an en­tity. Several national beverage compa­nies claim that their brand leads the His panic market. These statements are made based on national data collected through scanner outlets in "Hispanic" areas. This is nonsensical. First of all, there is no Hispanic market, anymore than there is an African-American market. Or, I guess it would be safe to say that if these two things are true, then there are also Ger­man, French and Italian markets as well.

Let's look at this alleged Hispanic market first. Are we to believe that Span­ish-speaking people in Miami with a Cuban heritage share the same brand preferences as Spanish-speaking people in the Southwestern areas, many of whom trace their culture to Mexico, or the sev­eral million Spanish-speaking New York­ers with Puerto Rican backgrounds? I don't think so. The same holds true for African-American consumers in New York City versus Los Angeles.

Each of these groups has developed purchasing habits based on local market­ing efforts and conditions. There is no similarity in Spanish-speaking consumption patterns, no more than there is in English-speaking Americans in Atlanta versus Minneapolis. Each region, city, and sometimes neighborhood has devel­oped different brand preferences accord­ing to who has marketed to this group historically.

Myth #2: Since the ethnic population is growing we need to design a national ethnic marketing plan. You're welcome to develop as many national plans as you like, but they won't work. Research in advance of marketing today seems ob­sessed with obtaining information down to the local level. Several national scan­ner-based research companies are now touting individual store level scanner data to provide us information on consumer products. All retailers are deeply con­cerned about having products and store layouts that address the needs of the local shopper, not the chainwide average. So, why do national companies seek national research and marketing for ethnic groups? I don't know.

I do not feel that the ethnic issue exists, due to the fact that there is no difference between a marketing strategy for an eth­nic neighborhood than there would be for a farming area. The point here is that national plans won't work unless they are executed uniquely at the local level. Plans must be translated to a single market. Therefore, the ethnicity of the market is irrelevant.

Myth #3: Research data coming from ethnic markets is adequate. Most na­tional consumer product companies ac­cept scanner data from major supermar­ket chains and a sprinkling of conve­nience stores and believe that this data represents the ethnic market. This is false. The problem here is that in many cases one of the exciting and unique aspects of ethnic neighborhoods is a very strong independent retailing segment. In many cases, this retailing segment may have the exact opposite emphasis of the chain stores. As an example, the chain stores in one area were promoting beer and soft drinks in 24-pack cans and selling these products at a loss to build store traffic. The independent retailers in the area, some of whom only operate one or two stores, promoted six-packs and two-liters at a hot price to counter the chain stores' aggressive posture. The independent busi­ness segment lost fewer cents per unit, even though the stores lost money on each sale. The scanner companies would only track the sales in the chain stores, therefore, showing that perhaps 24-packs would be the lead item. Yet, the indepen­dent segment, far out-numbering the chain stores, was selling huge volumes of a directly opposite package. If a marketer is utilizing scanner to evaluate this mar­ketplace, he or she is seriously mistaken.

By the same token, many of these chain stores do not reflect consumer pur­chase habits on non-featured products due to lack of distribution, shelf space or uncompetitive pricing. The net result is an inadequate and sometimes very mis­leading picture.

Myth #4: The ethnic market is a price-driven market. False. Some of the highest consumption levels on small package sizes and non-multi-packs is in the ethnic market. I believe that part of this miscon­ception comes from the fact that many ethnic groups tend to purchase a larger percentage of some commodities, such as flour, beans and rice. But this certainly does not mean they are not concerned about quality and/or loyal to national brands. Many national marketers seem to think this is a discount-oriented segment. Those who would chase this market with price only will not succeed.

Virtually all demographics point to a growing ethnic population in the United States. This is one of the wonderful things about this country that adds to the excite­ment in living here and the challenges in marketing products to a changing soci­ety. Companies that collect the proper information and can develop a strategic plan to market locally, ethnic or not, will be the ones that thrive in the new millen­nium.