The DINKWAD's Guide To Luxury

The nuclear family needs to pack up its white picket fence and make way for a new (-ly popularised) aspirational archetype. The DINK (Dual Income, No Kids) has been heralded as the new American Dream, however, the real hero has been oft overlooked. I give you the DINKWAD: Dual Income, No Kids, With A Dog. Superior because, if you haven't noticed, premium pet care is a billion-dollar industry and pandemic puppies was a thing.

DINKWADs are the avocado-toast, refuse-to-give-up-a-flat-white-in-favour-of-a-house-deposit type. The little luxuries generation, the 'treat yourself' archetype.

Part of a ludicrous legion of demographic acronyms primarily preserved for the moneyed middling generations at any one time; specifically HENRYs (High Earner, Not Rich Yet) and Yuppies (young urban professional – if you're convinced the definition is 'young upwardly mobile professional', you'd be talking about 'yumpie', which, to everyone's relief, was ousted when yuppie won the popular discourse).

Less applicable to moneyed, middle-class millennials are WOOFs (Well-Off Older Folk), GLAMs (Greying, Leisured, Affluent, Married) and PODWOGs (Parents Of DINKS WithOut Grandchildren). Then you have the slightly less aspirational SITCOM (Single Income, Two Children, Oppressive Mortgage) or SINBAD (Single Income, No Boyfriend And Desperate), which I can only assume comes as SINGAD also. And SINPAD (for the more universal 'partner').

Of all these useless designations, DINKWAD is up there with luxury's best bets. These are the New Luxurians – a combination of digital nomads, travel mavericks, wellbodies, wealth creators, lifestyle hackers. They embody the 'carpe diem' culture that has defined strains of contemporary consumerism since pre-pandemic. It's like 'YOLO' with more gravitas.

No children and two steady streams of income means the "why not?" decisions come easier. The traditionalists among us may cast it as a selfish choice, a ploy for social traction even (the DINK hashtag has over 250 million views on TikTok alone), but trending or not, it's a accurate reflection of many people's realities.

In the US, fertility rates have been declining for over a decade while there's a growing portion of the adult population who aren't planning to have kids at all. Most DINKWADs highlighting their status publicly are childless by choice, noting the cost of raising a child in the 2020s sits around $300,000. Even the most well groomed of pups probably won't hit those figures.

To that end, the first half of DINK might as well stand for disposable income – the preserve of luxury. These are people forgoing traditional trajectories in favour of purchases that will actually bring them joy, rather than the mild satisfaction that may come from meeting societal expectations. For luxury brands, if you insist on sticking to demographics (we do, however, suggest a broadening of horizons), let it be this one.

Some tips on how to engage them:

• Disposable income doesn't necessarily mean splurges are a given, luxury brands still need to work for it.
• This is a cohort commitment to romanticisng their own lives, whether through extraordinary travel or little treats to break up the mundane. Whatever the scale of the purchase, it must bring joy – either through meaning or through a service that makes life a little bit easier.
• Perhaps the most cited reward of the DINKWAD lifestyle (beyond financial benefits) is the opportunity to be spontaneous. Something we crave just as much as ritual and routine. Brands who can find a way to creatively fill that need will be ahead in the game of winning culture.
• Note: the DINKWAD lifestyle comes with stigma by association. It can be seen as smug or flaunting, which, ironically, are two qualities often attributed to luxury circles. Avoid conveying these. At the same time, luxury is lightening up, and while these financial acronyms are ultimately ridiculous, they open doors and encourage new ways of thinking about people and markets. Something needed in every industry, and something luxury is certainly not exempt from.
• Final note: there's absolutely no harm in developing dog-friendly products here.