The part where Gen-X is younger, maybe?

jdiff 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It's perplexing, to put it generously, but it doesn't throw the semantics of the entire sentence into question.

For all we know the document is from two decades ago.

	▲	jdiff 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Two decades ago makes the GenZ reference confusing, as the very oldest of them by the most generous definition would be only 9 years old. With a span across 50 years, that range from Gen X to Gen Z is just awkward to place as "young buyers of Monster" at any point in time.