Marketers love talking about customer lifetime value. But technology is stretching the meaning of “lifetime” in ways few imagined. Thanks to AI and VR, we’re entering an era where digital legacies — avatars, voice clones and holograms of the deceased — will continue shaping buying decisions long after someone has passed away. It’s not about marketing to the dead. It’s about marketing through them.

From grief tech to growth tech

Startups are already creating interactive avatars of parents, spouses and thought leaders so families can continue to “talk” with them after death. This emerging field is often called grief tech — a way to preserve memories and provide comfort.

One entrepreneur pioneering this space is Chris Brickler. He first founded Mynd Immersive, a company using VR to connect seniors with family and community, reducing loneliness in care facilities. His newest venture, Eternalize, goes further: creating interactive “living legacies” of thought leaders and family matriarchs and patriarchs.

Earlier this year, Eternalize debuted in a documentary titled The Heart of Dialogue, which featured AI-driven interactive avatars of best-selling relationship experts Harville Hendrix and Helen LaKelly Hunt. The film, and the companion digital experience, allows viewers to learn from Hendrix and Hunt as if speaking with them directly.

What begins as comfort technology can easily become a channel of influence. If a grandmother’s avatar can still tell her grandchildren bedtime stories, that same avatar can also reinforce habits, tastes and even brand loyalties. If a celebrity’s voice can be licensed for new commercials after death, AI makes it possible for them to keep endorsing products indefinitely.

In other words: Grief tech is evolving into growth tech.

Related: How Can Artificial Intelligence Immortalize Human Beings?

The birth of digital legacies as influencers

We already accept digital characters selling to us — think cartoon mascots, CGI spokespeople or AI-generated influencers on Instagram. The next step is obvious: immortalized influence.

• A sports icon motivates your workout through a VR headset decades after their death

• A music legend promotes a new tour — powered entirely by holograms

• A founder’s avatar appears in company onboarding videos, reinforcing the brand’s values for generations

• Eternalize creates interactive archives of great teachers and thinkers, continuing their impact long after they’re gone

These “voices from the past” can be just as persuasive as any living influencer — sometimes more, because they carry nostalgia, trust and permanence.

Beyond lifetime value

Marketers obsess over LTV, lifetime value. But what happens when “lifetime” no longer ends at death? Digital personas can extend influence indefinitely, creating what you might call eternal value.

Consider this: A family keeps interacting with an AI version of a loved one. A fanbase keeps following a celebrity’s digital twin. A community keeps learning from a thought leader’s avatar. As long as those interactions happen, brands have an opportunity to stay in the conversation.

This isn’t hypothetical. James Earl Jones licensed his voice to be cloned for Darth Vader’s future appearances. Tupac has already “performed” via hologram. Whitney Houston’s hologram show has toured globally. And now, with Eternalize, thought leaders like Hendrix and Hunt are continuing their teaching in interactive form — demonstrating the commercial and cultural viability of digital legacies.

The ethical minefield

Of course, just because it’s possible doesn’t mean it’s simple.

• Consent: Did the person actually want their image or voice used posthumously?

• Authenticity: If an avatar promotes a product that the real person never touched, is that dishonest?

• Exploitation: At what point does honoring a legacy cross into cashing in on grief?

Handled carelessly, digital immortality could spark scandals. But handled with transparency and respect, it could preserve legacies in a way that adds meaning instead of subtracting it.

Lessons for entrepreneurs

1. Watch the early adopters: Entertainment and sports estates are leading the way. They’ll set the tone for what audiences accept.

2. Anticipate regulation: Rights to digital likeness are still being defined. Entrepreneurs who play fair now will have an advantage later.

3. Think legacy, not gimmick: Eternalize shows how legacies can be used for education, heritage and continuity — not just for sales.

4. Prepare for backlash: As with every disruptive idea —social media, influencer marketing, AI art — public opinion will swing. Companies that are thoughtful and cautious will outlast the hype cycle.

Related: AI Can Clone Your Voice, Your Face and Even Your Insights — and Founders Are Already Using This Technology

Why this matters

At first glance, the business of digital immortality sounds like science fiction. But think about how quickly influencer marketing itself went from fringe to billion-dollar industry. Or how the idea of a brand mascot went from talking animals to AI-generated humans. What feels strange today can become normal tomorrow.

Ultimately, this isn’t about technology. It’s about emotion. People don’t want to let go of voices they trust and love. If technology lets those voices continue shaping decisions, brands will inevitably follow.

For entrepreneurs, the crazy idea is also the brilliant one: Don’t think of marketing as limited to the living. Think of it as the stewardship of legacies. In a world where digital selves outlive biological ones, influence doesn’t die.

Your future customers will still be alive. But their most trusted influencers may no longer be.

US companies should be allowed to report earnings every six months instead of quarterly, President Trump said on Monday, in what would be a major shift for corporate America if the Securities and Exchange Commission approved the change.

“This will save money, and allow managers to focus on properly running their companies,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post, reprising an issue Trump pushed unsuccessfully during his first administration. He added that the change would be subject to approval by the SEC.

Currently, the SEC requires corporations to report their financial statements every 90 days. Half-yearly reporting would mark a huge change in disclosure requirements and put the US in line with the UK and several countries in the European Union.

In 2018, top corporate bosses Jamie Dimon and Warren Buffett argued in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that short-termism was harming the US economy.

Some investors have cautioned that waiting longer for financial information would mean less transparency and increase market volatility, making US stocks less attractive, although several on Monday said they supported the idea.

“From the perspective of better capital allocation by public companies, the focus on meeting quarterly earnings projections can lead to decisions based on short-term implications, when we would prefer management keep their eye on the long-term ball,” Burns McKinney, managing director and portfolio manager at NFJ Investment Group, Dallas, said in an email.

Eric Kuby, chief investment officer at North Star Investment Management Corp in Chicago, said he thought that there was “merit” to the idea.

“Having the reporting every quarter does put companies in a position where they are almost always preparing their quarterly reports. And not much usually changes quarter to quarter,” he said.

Trump’s views on the matter are not new. In 2018, he called for the SEC to consider eliminating reporting requirements for public companies during, but some investors pushed back on that proposal, which never gained traction.

The SEC did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for a comment.

Investors argue that one of the reasons US stocks trade at a premium to equities elsewhere is due to greater financial reporting requirements. The benchmark S&P 500 index is trading at 24.3 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months, compared to 15.28 times for Europe’s STOXX 600, according to data compiled by LSEG.

Companies listed in the US did not always report their financial results on a quarterly basis. The regulator mandated the shift from semiannual to quarterly reporting in 1970.