Grand Traverse County

Grand Traverse County, Michigan — key demographics (latest available)

Population

• Total population: ~97,700 (2023 ACS 1-year)

Age

• Median age: ~43.6
• Under 18: ~21%
• 18–64: ~58%
• 65 and over: ~21%

Sex (gender)

• Female: ~51%
• Male: ~49%

Race and ethnicity (mutually exclusive; sums ~100%)

• Non-Hispanic White: ~90.7%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~3.4%
• Non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native: ~2.1%
• Non-Hispanic Two or more races: ~2.4%
• Non-Hispanic Asian: ~0.8%
• Non-Hispanic Black: ~0.5%
• Non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander and Other: ~0.1%

Households and housing

• Households: ~41,200
• Average household size: ~2.35
• Average family size: ~2.9
• Family households: ~61% of households (married-couple families ~46%)
• With children under 18: ~27% of households
• Living alone: ~32% of households (about 12% age 65+ living alone)
• Tenure: ~73% owner-occupied, ~27% renter-occupied

Insights

• Older-than-state-average age profile with about one in five residents 65+
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White with small but notable Native American and Hispanic communities
• High homeownership and smaller household sizes typical of an aging population

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 American Community Survey (1-year estimates)

• Scope: Grand Traverse County, MI; population ~97,000; land ~464 sq mi; density ~209 people/sq mi.
• Estimated email users (age 13+): 74,800 (91% of residents 13+, ~77% of total population).
• Age mix of email users (counts, share of email users):
  • 13–17: ~4,200 (5.6%)
  • 18–34: ~18,400 (24.6%)
  • 35–64: ~36,500 (48.8%)
  • 65+: ~15,700 (21.0%)
• Gender split among email users: ~51% female, 49% male (mirrors county demographics).
• Digital access and trends:
  • ~87% of households have a broadband subscription.
  • ~93% of households have a computer or smartphone.
  • ~11% are smartphone‑only internet households.
  • Gigabit-capable cable/fiber widely available in and around Traverse City and along the US‑31 corridor; rural townships and peninsulas rely more on fixed wireless/DSL and satellite, reflecting lower density.
• Insights:
  • Strong email penetration driven by high broadband availability and a large 35–64 working-age cohort.
  • The sizable 65+ segment adopts email at slightly lower rates, so multi-channel (email + phone/mail) remains prudent for services and outreach.
  • Urban concentration around Traverse City boosts connectivity and email usage compared with sparsely populated outlying areas.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Grand Traverse County, MI

Key takeaways

• Mobile adoption is near-universal, with heavy seasonal peaks. Reliance on mobile-only internet access is higher than the Michigan average, driven by an older resident base, rural edges beyond Traverse City, and a large share of seasonal/tourist users.
• 5G is broadly available in and around Traverse City and along major corridors; LTE remains the de facto layer in rural and peninsular areas. Median mobile speeds in the urban core are competitive with state medians but fall off more quickly with distance than in Michigan’s largest metros.

User estimates

• Adult mobile users: Approximately 72,000–75,000 adults carry a mobile phone (any type) in the county, based on near-universal mobile ownership among U.S. adults.
• Adult smartphone users: Approximately 65,000–70,000 adults use smartphones. This reflects high statewide smartphone penetration, slightly tempered by Grand Traverse County’s older age structure.
• Households with smartphones: Roughly 37,000–39,000 households include at least one smartphone.
• Mobile-only internet households: Grand Traverse County has a noticeably higher share of households that rely on a cellular data plan as their primary or only internet connection than the statewide average. This is most common in outlying townships and among renters and lower-income households.

Demographic breakdown and how it differs from Michigan

• Age:
  • The county has a larger 65+ share than the Michigan average. Seniors adopt smartphones at lower rates than younger adults, which modestly pulls down overall smartphone penetration but increases the share of basic phone use and households that skip fixed broadband in favor of a mobile data plan.
  • Young adults (18–34) are near-universal smartphone users and are the primary adopters of 5G plans and high-data bundles; their concentration is highest in and around Traverse City.
• Income and housing:
  • Mobile-only access is more prevalent among lower-income renters and seasonal workers than statewide norms, reflecting housing mix and tourism employment.
  • Owner-occupied homes in the urban core tend to bundle fixed broadband with mobile service at higher rates than the county’s rural fringe.
• Race/ethnicity:
  • The county’s predominantly White, non-Hispanic population mirrors rural northern Michigan patterns. Gaps in smartphone uptake by race/ethnicity seen at the state level are smaller here simply because the population is less diverse; disparities correlate more with age and income than with race.
• Seasonal/tourist dynamics:
  • Summer peaks materially increase mobile network load around Traverse City, the Old Mission and Leelanau peninsulas, and recreation corridors. Traffic mix skews to roaming and short-stay users more than the Michigan average, influencing carrier capacity planning and observed speeds.

Digital infrastructure highlights

• Coverage:
  • 5G from the three national carriers is widely available in Traverse City, along US‑31 and M‑72, and through most high-traffic corridors. LTE remains the primary layer in forested and peninsular areas and around lakes where siting is constrained.
  • 4G LTE coverage is effectively countywide for outdoor use, with known weaker indoor performance in some low-density zones north and west of the city.
• Performance:
  • Urban core (Traverse City): Median mobile download speeds commonly in the high tens to low hundreds of Mbps on 5G; upload speeds often 10–25 Mbps. Performance is competitive with Michigan’s statewide median.
  • Rural townships/peninsulas: Speeds drop to LTE ranges more frequently (e.g., 5–30 Mbps down, 2–10 Mbps up), with higher variability by carrier and terrain.
• Capacity and resilience:
  • Carriers have added 5G mid-band capacity on existing sites in and around the city and along US‑31/M‑72. Peak-season congestion is still observed at waterfront, event venues, and along beach access points.
  • Public safety and transportation corridors are comparatively well covered; coverage gaps persist on some secondary roads and in wooded shoreline pockets.

How county trends differ from the Michigan state picture

• Slightly lower overall adult smartphone penetration due to an older resident mix, but still very high in absolute terms.
• Higher share of mobile-only households than the state average, reflecting rural/suburban edges and seasonal housing.
• Larger seasonal swings in mobile traffic and greater sensitivity to tourism events than typical Michigan counties.
• Faster drop-off in 5G coverage and speeds outside the urban core compared with Michigan’s largest metros, despite strong performance in the Traverse City area itself.
• Fixed broadband uptake in the city is strong; at the edge of the county, households substitute mobile data where cable/fiber options are sparse or costly.

Interpretation notes

• User counts are estimates derived from applying widely observed mobile and smartphone adoption rates for U.S./Michigan adults to the county’s population profile, and from household-level adoption patterns seen in American Community Survey internet subscription data.
• The infrastructure snapshot reflects the current carrier footprint and observed performance patterns in urban vs rural parts of the county; exact speeds vary by carrier, plan, device, and location.

Grand Traverse County, MI social media snapshot (2024)

Population and digital base

• Population: ~97,000 (2023 ACS estimate). Adults 18+: ~76,000–78,000. Gender: ~51% female, 49% male.
• Smartphone ownership among U.S. adults is ~90% (Pew), which implies a broadly “mobile-first” local audience.

Most‑used platforms (modeled for Grand Traverse County adults, using Pew 2024 U.S. adoption rates adjusted for the county’s slightly older median age)

• YouTube: ~78–82% of adults (≈60k–64k users)
• Facebook: ~66–71% (≈50k–55k)
• Instagram: ~42–48% (≈32k–37k)
• TikTok: ~26–32% (≈20k–25k)
• Pinterest: ~30–36% (≈23k–28k)
• LinkedIn: ~24–30% (≈18k–23k)
• Snapchat: ~18–24% (≈14k–19k)
• X (Twitter): ~18–23% (≈14k–18k)
• Nextdoor: ~16–20% (≈12k–16k)

Age group patterns

• Teens (13–17): Heaviest on YouTube (95%), TikTok (67%), Snapchat (59%), Instagram (62%); Facebook comparatively low (~32%). Source: Pew, U.S. teens 2022.
• 18–29: Very high YouTube and Instagram use; Snapchat and TikTok also high; Facebook moderate.
• 30–49: YouTube and Facebook dominate; Instagram mid-range; TikTok moderate.
• 50–64: Facebook and YouTube lead; Instagram/TikTok lower but growing.
• 65+: Facebook remains the top platform; YouTube strong; other platforms comparatively low.

Gender breakdown (directional, based on Pew 2024 U.S. adult data; similar patterns expected locally)

• Women over-index on: Pinterest (roughly 50% of women vs ~19% of men), Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook, Nextdoor.
• Men over-index on: Reddit (≈29% men vs ~12% women), LinkedIn, X (Twitter), YouTube (slight male tilt).
• Local implication: female-skewed audiences are especially reachable via Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, and neighborhood apps; male-skewed via Reddit, X, LinkedIn, YouTube.

Behavioral trends observed/applicable locally

• Community-first usage: Facebook Groups and Events are central for schools, local government updates, nonprofits, sports leagues, and festivals (e.g., National Cherry Festival). Nextdoor usage clusters around neighborhood issues and public safety.
• Tourism and small business discovery: Instagram and TikTok drive dining, wineries, breweries, and outdoor recreation discovery; short-form video (reels/TikToks) showcasing experiences and seasonal activities performs best.
• Seasonality: Summer tourism brings noticeable spikes in location-tagged content, event searches, and engagement; shoulder seasons favor “locals’ deals” and community events.
• Content formats: Video outperforms static across platforms; user-generated content and authentic behind-the-scenes posts perform well for hospitality, retail, and experiences.
• Timing: Evenings and weekends generally yield higher engagement; weekday lunch and early evening slots work for event promotions and service reminders.
• Cross-platform journeys: Discovery often starts on Instagram/TikTok, but conversions (messaging, RSVPs, reviews) frequently occur on Facebook and Google; professional recruiting and B2B networking favor LinkedIn.

Notes on method and sources

• Local figures are modeled by applying Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. platform adoption rates (and Pew’s 2022 teen data) to Grand Traverse County’s adult population and age profile (U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 ACS). The county’s older-than-U.S.-average median age lifts Facebook/YouTube and slightly suppresses TikTok/Snapchat relative to national averages.

Key sources

• Pew Research Center, Social Media Use (2024); Teens, Social Media and Technology (2022)
• U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS) 2023, Grand Traverse County estimates