• Walmart retains its status as the world’s most valuable retail brand with a value of$38.3 billion.
• Online giant Amazon.com has a hugely successful year in 2011 thanks to strong revenue figures as their brand value increases by 61%
• eBay jumps up the league table from 14^th to 11^th place as online brands continue to dominate the retail industry
• Tesco named Britain’s most valuable retail brand despite losing a combined $3 billion of brand value alongside Sainsbury’s and Asda

Will online success spell the end of the High Street?

The Best Retail Brands 2012 shows that although Walmart managed to increase their brand value by 6% and be named the Number 1 Retail Brand 2012, the study by Brand Finance plc shows that rivals Amazon.com achieved an impressive 61% increase in brand value. In the past Walmart has been keen to build its online presence to match its control of physical sales but the Best Retail Brands 2012 shows that Amazon.com could soon be dominating the online market.

Two of the highest climbing brands Amazon.com and eBay are businesses based 100% online which demonstrates the size of the online market as well as the enormous success of Amazon.com’s investment in Kindle, a new market for the corporation but a hugely profitable one.

Amazon.com and eBay’s success is thanks to the £50.34 billion, or 12.0% of UK Retail Trade, spent online in 2011. The equivalent figure in 2008 was a mere 8.6% of retail sales (Source: Kelkoo).

David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance, stated ‘the significance of online retail cannot be underestimated and all major players in the retail industry should turn their attention to the promotion of their online sales in 2012 as the global economic crisis affects spending habits around the world.’ The United Kingdom is the leader in Europe for online retailers and the e-retail market is currently growing at 16% per annum.

Tesco was named the most valuable retail brand in the United Kingdom but, like many other British supermarkets such as Sainsbury’s, suffered a loss in brand value proving that 2011 has been a difficult year for the high street.

For the full list of the Best Retail Brands 2012 visit www.brandirectory.com

• Walmart retains its status as the world’s most valuable retail brand with a value of $38.3 billion.
• Online giant Amazon.com has a hugely successful year in 2011 thanks to strong revenue figures as their brand value increases by 61%
• eBay jumps up the league table from 14^th to 11^th place as online brands continue to dominate the retail industry
• Tesco named Britain’s most valuable retail brand despite losing a combined $3 billion of brand value alongside Sainsbury’s and Asda

Will online success spell the end of the High Street?

The Best Retail Brands 2012 shows that although Walmart managed to increase their brand value by 6% and be named the Number 1 Retail Brand 2012, the study by Brand Finance plc shows that rivals Amazon.com achieved an impressive 61% increase in brand value. In the past Walmart has been keen to build its online presence to match its control of physical sales but the Best Retail Brands 2012 shows that Amazon.com could soon be dominating the online market.

Two of the highest climbing brands Amazon.com and eBay are businesses based 100% online which demonstrates the size of the online market as well as the enormous success of Amazon.com’s investment in Kindle, a new market for the corporation but a hugely profitable one.

Amazon.com and eBay’s success is thanks to the £50.34 billion, or 12.0% of UK Retail Trade, spent online in 2011. The equivalent figure in 2008 was a mere 8.6% of retail sales (Source: Kelkoo).

David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance, stated ‘the significance of online retail cannot be underestimated and all major players in the retail industry should turn their attention to the promotion of their online sales in 2012 as the global economic crisis affects spending habits around the world.’ The United Kingdom is the leader in Europe for online retailers and the e-retail market is currently growing at 16% per annum.

Tesco was named the most valuable retail brand in the United Kingdom but, like many other British supermarkets such as Sainsbury’s, suffered a loss in brand value proving that 2011 has been a difficult year for the high street.

For the full list of the Best Retail Brands 2012 visit www.brandirectory.com

Sale of Pune stake could be IPL's reality check

"Brand Finance, a firm that specialises in brand valuations, issues an annual report on the IPL. In April 2011, it pegged the value of the league at $3.67 billion, down from the $4.13 billion in 2010. Unni Krishnan, the firm's managing director, expects this year's report to show more erosion in the value of the league because of the deteriorating relationships between those involved.

"On a fairly regular basis, the relationships and the 'trust flows' between various stakeholders has been impaired," Krishnan told ESPNcricinfo. "Over a period of time, that dries up cash flows. Sahara further reinforces that those 'trust flows' are diminishing. When that happens, the whole value of the ecosystem and the values of the franchises comes under pressure.""

Article by Tariq Engineer, a senior sub-editor at ESPNcricinfo

For the full article click here

• HSBC, the only British bank among the ten most valuable banking brands, knocks Bank of America off the top spot in the Brand Finance Banking 500.

• Chinese banks performed strongly with China Construction Bank, ICBC, Bank of China and the Agricultural Bank of China maintaining a successful streak for Chinese banking as they secure spots in the Top 20

• There are now more banks from the BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India and China) in the top 20 banking brands than there are from Europe

The Brand Finance Banking 500 report, released today, shows that HSBC has leapfrogged Wells Fargo and Bank of America to become the world’s most valuable banking brand in 2012. This strong performance from the London-based banking giant stood out in its region; European banks performed miserably, making up 16 of the 20 “fallers” on the table.

While Europe continues to be beset by economic uncertainty and the ongoing troubles of the Eurozone; 2011 saw the meteoric rise of the emerging economies reach a crucial tipping point.  Today’s table shows brands from BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) countries now outnumber their European counterparts among top 20 banking brands.

US banks continued to fare well when compared to their European counterparts, with Wells Fargo holding firm in second position and strong performances from both Citi Group and American Express in sixth and seventh place respectively. With five of the top 10 most valuable banking brands headquartered in North America, the US is recovering from the financial crisis much faster than Europe.

Commenting on this year’s report, David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance, said: “The past 12 months have proved to be a very turbulent period for banking brands. We have seen a collective decline in brand value amongst the 500 banks in our report of $94.78bn. Despite this, the total value of the top 500 banking brands was US$746.7 billion. The size of this number – which is equivalent to the GDP of Turkey – underlines the importance of brand value to the global financial sector.”

“2012 is set to be a landmark year politically with the US election in November and polls in Germany and France too. In this context the eyes of the world will be examining the brand value of financial institutions, as an indicator of broader financial health of their respective nations.”

Brian Caplen, Editor of The Banker, says: "While European banks have found the going tough in branding terms, banks from other parts of the world have fared much better. Canadian and Chinese banks, for example, are very prominent in the table of absolute brand value winners showing that it isn't only emerging markets that are benefiting from Europe's difficulties."

The full results appear in the February 2012 issue of The Banker, go to wwww.thebanker.com.

For the complete Brand Finance Banking 500 report and further information, go to www.brandfinance.com

Elise Neils, MD, Brand Finance

The rising cost of stadium naming rights deals is bucking the economic trend, but the brand considerations are being more closely scrutinised. With a greater emphasis being placed on brand valuation methodologies to identify the true benefits of such deals, the considerations also provide useful pointers for other types of sponsorship deal.

Manchester City Football Club has announced a controversial, record-breaking deal with Etihad Airways, reportedly worth £400 million. Farmers Insurance has offered between $600 million and $700 million for the naming rights to a stadium, yet to be built, that would be the future home of an unspecified National Football League (NFL) team. Mercedes-Benz is putting its name to an 18,000- seat multi-purpose facility in Shanghai. In the Philippines, the Big Dome in Cubao, Quezon City, has been renamed the Smart Araneta Coliseum. Corporate brands are on the stadiums and arenas of around two-thirds of the major league football, baseball, hockey and basketball teams in the United States. Globally, the trend is growing because of the additional revenue stream available to owners of sports stadiums and arenas.

In the past, owners of strong brands could easily justify the high annual costs of such naming rights as a brand-building vehicle. However, as the cost of sponsorship deals has risen, the outlay for naming rights has become increasingly difficult to justify. Such deals are more closely scrutinised and have become more creative, with elaborate rights and benefits packages. Companies are now using traditional brand valuation methodologies to quantify drivers of brand demand. The amount of money paid depends on subjective and objective factors related to a sponsor’s brand value and the related investment in its brand.

Defining the brand?

A brand is a relationship between the identity of a product or service and its consumer. Brand identity is a complex combination of identifiers, which can include legal protection (eg, trademarks, service marks, certification marks, collective marks, patents and copyright), logos, packaging, colour and a story.

The emotional bond between a brand and a consumer can be defined by drivers – elements that motivate the purchase of the brand. Drivers are affected by the attributes of a particular brand or the emotion attached to it, which affect the individual purchase decision and the consumer’s brand loyalty.

Brand strategy begins with a brand being advertised to the public. A consumer identifies the brand with quality or value, and that quality or value is delivered.

The consumer then seeks out the brand and buys more of it or is willing to pay a premium for the product or service associated with it. Brand strength derives from an emotional bond between the consumer and the product or service.

A strong brand has credibility, recognition, visibility, differentiation, longevity and goodwill. It earns them by exposure through advertising and marketing. A strong brand can change the way in which a consumer behaves by becoming a catalyst for a purchase decision to use the brand.

The global naming rights explosion

The outlay of large sums of money each year on marketing and advertising is critical to maintaining a strong brand. Marketing and media analysis company eMarketer estimates that advertisers around the world will spend nearly $500 billion in 2011 on various forms of media. Industry commentators put the annual worldwide spend on sponsorship and naming rights at around $5 billion.

Historically, the naming rights trend was most prominent in the United States, but the market for sponsorship effectively froze between 2008 and 2010. However, economic recovery and the desire for new revenue sources have revived the idea of selling naming rights and corporate sponsorship opportunities, and a predominantly US market has now gone global.

Naming rights are being bought and sold as part of the sports business model on the sale side and as brand strategy for the buyers. A company may choose to invest in its brand through naming rights in order to increase exposure and brand awareness, but the global explosion of naming rights is being driven by the desire of teams and stadium owners to increase revenue streams.

What determines the price of naming rights?

In the United States, naming rights have generally gone to the highest bidder. More recently, sponsors tend to be stable consumer brands in the financial services and insurance industries, such as Citi, Farmers and MetLife. Sports teams and stadium owners are looking not only at the size of the bid, but also at reputation, financial strength, enforceability and security of the contract and safety from controversy. Synergistic relationships are an essential aspect of deals, particularly co-marketing opportunities. Sponsorship agreements are trending towards long-term, multi- faceted, strategic brand-building strategies. The Manchester City/Etihad deal and MetLife’s deal for the home stadium of the New York Giants and the New York Jets deals exemplify the changes in deal structure and how value is justified through traditional brand valuation methodologies.

In a recent study, 120 sponsorship decision makers around the world were asked about the sponsorship decision-making process. Their responses suggest that the top five motivations are to:

• create awareness and visibility;

• increase brand loyalty;

• change or reinforce corporate image;

• showcase community and social responsibility; and

• access a platform for experiential branding.

In evaluating how much it should pay for naming rights, a company must quantify these qualitative marketing reasons. In order to arrive at a figure, it must identify demand drivers and determine the role that the brand contributes to each of them, thus determining how they affect the naming right opportunity. Companies typically apply a complex financial model that assigns scores to each demand driver. 

The scores are subjectively weighted, based on their importance to the naming rights exercise, then factored into a discounted cashflow analysis.

Media exposure

There are a number of demand drivers to consider. The first is media exposure. The number of media impressions that sponsorship receives is one of the driving forces behind the large amounts that companies are prepared to pay. The United States is the largest television market in the world, which is one of the reasons why most large deals are struck there. The named brand is exposed whenever the stadium is televised or mentioned.

Digital impressions (including social networking), news, print media, radio and first-person visual impression by fans at the stadium also generate statistics that can be tracked. Sports Business estimated the value of the top 10 global sports properties in 2010 – in television terms alone – at $18.5 billion.

"The number of media impressions that sponsorship receives is one of the driving forces behind the large amounts that companies are prepared to pay"

Attendance in numbers

There is an obvious positive correlation between stadium attendance and the price paid for naming rights. In monetary terms, naming rights for the NFL are the hottest in the world, with UK football close behind.

Manchester City’s deal with Etihad Airways means that the City of Manchester Stadium will be renamed the Etihad Stadium under a 10-year agreement, subject to the financial rules of football’s European governing body. The terms of the deal have not been formally disclosed, but The Guardian newspaper has reported it to be worth approximately £400 million. Manchester City Chief Executive Officer Garry Cook confirmed the comprehensive partnership agreement, calling it an “exciting opportunity for our two organisations to cooperate more deeply, commercially and on media and community initiatives, in the future”.

One of the drivers of the deal for Etihad was Manchester City’s fan base and attendance numbers. Etihad Chief Executive Officer James Hogan believes that the club’s well-established name and loyal fan base have allowed the company to tap into a new and increasing global audience.

In 2004 Manchester City’s Premier League rivals Arsenal agreed a deal with another airline, Emirates, which was reportedly valued at approximately £90 million. The 15-year deal allocated revenues of about £48 million to shirt sponsorship and £2.8 million a year for naming rights (£42 million in aggregate).

Audience financial demographics

Sports fans are a desirable and extremely sought-after consumer group for many brands. As a subset of this lucrative demographic, the primary user of sports website ESPN.com is a young, educated, affluent, male sports fan who spends money online. Sports fans are prime targets for consumer brands because they have money and are willing to spend it.

The MetLife Stadium deal is an example of a sponsorship partnership that exploits a strong demographic and an important fan base. The New York City area is one of the largest media and fan markets in the world. The city’s two football teams, the Giants and the Jets, share a new $1.6 billion stadium.

The teams aggressively maximised the value of access to this market in a naming rights partnership with MetLife and through agreements with three other strong brands as cornerstone partners. Cornerstone partnerships are a sponsorship concept which seeks to maximise revenue for a stadium owner and provide exclusive and strong brand marketing for the partners. The cost of the cornerstone partner deals is estimated at $8 million each, while the MetLife naming rights partnership is estimated at between $17 million and $18 million a year.

MetLife understands the value of accessing the largest media market in the United States to build its brand. Chief Executive Steven A Kandarian has said that his company wanted to form a partnership with a world-class venue that would expose its brand at a higher level.

Along with the naming exposure, MetLife will also be a cornerstone partner and is the official life insurance company of the Giants and the Jets. The sponsorship arrangement fits perfectly with MetLife's significant sports promotion strategy, which includes its three airships and its premier television network partnerships for coverage of golf and US baseball and football.

Anheuser-Busch, Pepsi and Verizon are the other cornerstone partners. Each partner received exterior branding on the stadium, a main entrance to the stadium, a special zone within the stadium and extensive signage on a corner scoreboard. The specifics of each partnership vary; therefore, each brand has different drivers for its deal. However, the common factor is that access to the market and the demographic profile of the fans are expected to prove to be lucrative.

The MetLife Stadium sponsorships give each company access to the largest combined fan base in the United States, the largest US television market and a cross-section of loyal consumers with disposable income.

Location

Politically, sponsors that acquire naming rights provide a unique source of income that may offset the tax costs of establishing a presence in a hometown. In terms of localised marketing, this establishes goodwill and communicates the message that the company is committed to serving the community.

The Farmers Insurance Exchange, the largest auto insurance company in California, and AEG, developers of STAPLES Centre and LA LIVE, recently announced a naming rights agreement for the new football stadium and event centre in downtown Los Angeles. The 30- year deal provides naming rights for a stadium that is also designed to host other sports and entertainment events. The stadium will be called Farmers Field and is touted as a boon to the Los Angeles area.

Timothy J Leiweke, the president and chief executive officer of AEG, sees the agreement with Farmers as the most significant step towards creating the stadium and event centre and bringing an football team back to Los Angeles. Farmers has stressed that the partnership will allow the development of the stadium to be privatised and will benefit the area economically.

Manchester City’s deal was also partly driven by a desire to help the local area. Charles Johnston, the property director of Sport England, has stated: “This announcement is positive for grassroots sport and people in Manchester. The renegotiated stadium agreement will generate further investment in community sport and sports facilities in the local area.” Among other things, Manchester City Council sees the relationship between club and partner as supporting Manchester's international profile and its ability to attract leading brands to invest in job opportunities.

Long-term investment versus short-term advertising

From a marketing perspective, sponsorship is a rapid and effective way for a brand to establish a high level of awareness in new geographic markets and to sustain awareness in future. Sponsorship deals for more than 10 years are common, serving as part of a longterm marketing strategy.

One of the world’s most iconic motoring brands, Mercedes-Benz, is putting its name to an 18,000-seat venue in Shanghai which will host music and cultural events, basketball games, other sports events and lifestyle and family shows. AEG and the National Basketball Association plan to take over the management of Mercedes-Benz Arena and the surrounding development, which includes a six-screen cinema, an ice rink, a bowling alley, a live music club and 20,000 square metres of retail space.

Mercedes-Benz will receive the typical in-arena signs as part of the agreement, as well as a sales centre within the facility and cars on display in the arena’s concourses. Mercedes-Benz hopes to reinforce its long-term contribution and commitment to the thriving culture of Shanghai. This sponsorship deal is part of a strategy to continue to sell cars and build brand equity in a growing and influential Asian economy.

Popularity of sport

In Europe and Asia, the popularity of most sports is relatively static. The main exceptions are basketball and other sports popularised in the United States, and the introduction of variations on traditional sports, such as Twenty20 cricket. However, the United States appears to have a constant appetite for additional spectator sports and since it has the largest media market, there will always be opportunities to introduce a new sport and foster its acceptance.

A sport’s popularity and corresponding media exposure are key factors in the price that a company will pay for naming rights. The growing popularity of Major League Soccer (MLS) in the United States is led by the Seattle Sounders, with an average attendance of over 36,000. This average gate would rank ninth in the US major leagues and is comparable to that of Premier League clubs Aston Villa, Tottenham Hotspur and Everton.

The MLS team Portland Timbers recently signed a multi-year deal for stadium naming rights with Jeld-Wen, an Oregon-based manufacturing company. Industry analysts estimate its value at about $2 million annually.

Many MLS teams have stadium naming rights deals and it would be no surprise to see incrementally larger deals for MLS stadiums in well-attended markets as soccer becomes more popular in the United States.

Contents of agreement

A naming rights deal can be valued higher or lower depending on the entitlements negotiated in the sponsorship agreement and their effect on the sponsor’s brand exposure. The value of a deal may be increased by category exclusivity, co-media branding, business cooperation, on-site brand/product integration, signage, brand recognition on video boards, VIP hospitality and luxury suites, tickets to events, preferred parking inclusions and other entitlements.

The agreement between Etihad and Manchester City points the way to deals that do much more than name a stadium. They encompass other elements of collaborative brand building, such as cross-branding agreements between the venue and sponsor, site development opportunities, combined with media, business, community and sometimes even international cooperation. Etihad Stadium will be the centrepiece of Etihad Campus, a large part of the SportCity site in East Manchester. The deal will include:

• shirt sponsorship;

• match coverage and DVD material on Etihad's in-flight entertainment system and website;

• joint media initiatives in shared target markets; sharing of existing customer databases and loyalty programmes;

• business cooperation at operational level, drawing on hospitality, customer service, ticketing and training capabilities;

• joint community initiatives in the East Manchester area; and

• an Etihad/Manchester City branded aircarft.

Potential negative effects

The potential of a stadium naming rights deal to have a negative effect on the stadium or the sponsor should always be considered. Due diligence on a potential sponsor can include floating a public relations balloon to determine whether public outcry over a new name might outweigh the economic benefits to a stadium owner. A public relations nightmare was averted when, before the MetLife deal, the owners of the Jets/Giants stadium ended discussions with Allianz, a company with ties to Hitler and the Third Reich. According to the New York Times, Allianz’s Nazi-era dealings might have offended people in the New York market, possibly resulting in negative publicity and economic boycotts.

Sponsors can potentially suffer brand impairment from a stadium with a bad reputation. Recently, a mis-hit baseball broke the glass casing in front of a catwalk light at Tropicana Field in St Petersburg, Florida, temporarily halting the game. The next night, a lightning strike nearby caused some of the stadium lights to fail. Some commentators have questioned whether ‘the Trop’ has the feel of a major-league ballpark. However, a Tropicana spokesperson rejected suggestions of brand degradation. The company stated: “We've only experienced goodwill through our sponsorship, which we use to benefit local charities, reward our employees and entertain customers. We have a long-term agreement that we don't see changing anytime soon.”

"A deal can be valued higher or lower depending on the entitlements negotiated in the sponsorship agreement and their effect on the sponsor’s brand exposure"

Other drivers

In the case of a successful team, a company may want to sponsor a home stadium for bragging rights or association with a winning brand. Etihad has stated that its alignment with Manchester City is sensible from a business perspective at a time when the team is enjoying greater success on the national and international stage.

Stadium naming also raises various potentially controversial issues which may have an impact on the success of the sponsorship – in particular, the popularity of the team and individual players and the stadium’s location, capacity and heritage. Chicago’s wellknown Wrigley Field could hardly be renamed Pepsico Field without a major uproar and damage to both brands. A company's decision to sponsor a perennial favourite team may convey its enduring commitment to a genuinely classic sport and venue. Many iconic teams from major sports, including FC Barcelona, the New York Yankees and the Dallas Cowboys, have not entered into sponsorship deals for their stadium’s name.

Comment

These examples of brand value drivers are subjective factors that can influence the price paid for stadium naming rights. The subjective values involved can be made quantifiable by determining their importance to a particular company or to the stadium, depending on which entity is justifying value.

Depending on the party determining the value of the sponsorship deal, the drivers will be weighted for importance and factored into the cash flows over the term of the projected agreement. These cash flows are then discounted back to a current date, using an appropriate discount rate to calculate the overall deal value in today’s money. This model can be used as a brand-tracking device to measure return on investment for the sponsorship with a programme of consistent and reliable market research that measures the drivers.

How much brand value increases will determine how much a sponsor is willing to put on the table for the naming rights. Sponsorship can be highly effective target marketing – increasing visibility and recognition of the brand, establishing an emotional connection and loyalty with consumers – and its return can be measured through traditional brand valuation methods.

"Amidst all the uncertainty and volatile macro environment, here's some good news. India has emerged as the world's second fastest growing brand with only China to beat. CNBC-TV18's Pavni Mittal brings the results of Brand Finance's latest global report.

Among all the political chaos ..." read more

Click here to view the full Brand Finance Nation Brands 100.

Brand UK remains an island of stability as our continental counterparts collapse

Despite the London riots and talk of a double dip recession, the United Kingdom remains a steady brand and keeps its position as the 5^th most valuable Nation Brand thanks to the success of the Royal Wedding and the upcoming Olympics in 2012.

Most of the Top 10 Losers are victims of the Eurozone Crisis                  

Greece, Ireland, Spain, Austria, Italy and Portugal all feature in the Top 10 Losers and have all fallen down the table. Greece and Ireland have been hardest hit with each nation shedding 40% of their brand value. The EU’s total brand value fell by 4% as confidence in the bailout system and continental governments remains at an all time low.

Despite being Number 1 Brand USA suffers from a difficult year

The worlds most valuable nation, the USA, had a very bad year in 2011. The US lost over half a trillion dollars in value and downgraded from a brand value of AA to AA- and now had a lower brand rating than neighbouring Canada.

Developing countries gain the upper hand as the West struggles

2011 has seen nation brands such as Croatia, Turkey and Estonia feature in the Top 10 Winners for the first time. Whilst the majority of the continent struggles with the global financial crisis, previously developing nations have now emerged as stable and business friendly countries compared to their European counterparts.

A devastating year tarnishes Japan’s brand value

Following the tragic earthquake and nuclear disaster in Japan, the country’s brand value dropped by $679 billion. Slow growth, recession and a shrinking work force has severely hampered the nation which saw the largest drop in its brand value. 

The Brand Finance Nation Brand 100

As the world struggles with economic turmoil, the Brand Finance Nation Brands 100 reveals the startling affect the current climate has had on the brand value of 100 countries. However whilst some countries have slid down the league table, 2011 has been a year for developing countries to emerge victorious against a backdrop of an uncertain economy.

Nation brand values are produced through a detailed analysis of economic data, perceptual market research data and infrastructure measures producing a combined score out of 100. The report combines a wide range of economic, demographic and political factors and is based on in-depth research by Brand Finance’s global network of offices.

Top 10 Nation Brands 2011

1. USA
2. Germany
3. China
4. Japan
5. United Kingdom
6. France
7. Italy
8. Canada
9. India
10. Brazil

For further information contact:

James Baker

PR and Media Relations Executive

t: +44 (0) 20 7389 0400

j.baker@brandfinance.com

In a survey expected to be released next week by London-based consulting firm Brand Finance, Canada gets high marks for the value and equity of its “brand.” And during tough economic times, stability has been a cornerstone of our success.

“When everyone else fell apart with the financial crisis, it didn’t happen at home,” said John Ashbourne, an analyst at the firm who hails from Toronto.

“It comes across as being a very dependable and very respectable sort of place where you’d want to do business, where you’d want to invest in.”

Canada came eighth out of 100 nations, analyzed in the report compiled from a variety of sources including World Bank data and qualitative analysis from the firm, on the international business reputation of major countries.

The United States was ranked first, Germany second, and China third.

While the U.S. had the highest brand value of 11.3 trillion dollars, compared to Canada’s 1.3 trillion.....

To read the full article click here

This article first appeared in The Toronto Star.

We'll be saving the world - will you join us?

The International Licensing Executives Society warmly invites you to attend the 2012 International Delegates Meeting and Annual Conference in Auckland, New Zealand from Friday 30 March to Wednesday 4 April 2012.

The Conference will be a superb opportunity to network with other industry professionals and immerse yourself in the vibrant sights and sounds of New Zealand's largest city.

Neste contexto, as suas fontes geradoras de receitas  têm vido a multiplicar-se, podendo ser agrupadas da seguinte forma:

- Receitas de bilheteira ou matchday, como sejam os valores cobrados pelos ingressos, camarotes e caterings no dia do jogo;

- Receitas comerciais, como sejam as vendas de merchandising, patrocínios e licenciamento;

- Receitas televisivas ou de broadcasting;

- Receitas pela venda de jogadores.

Com excepção das receitas pela venda de jogadores, todas as restantes dependem quase em exclusivo da força da marca do clube.

Num contexto de crise económica, e especialmente financeira, a luta pelas fontes de financiamento, numa indústria caracterizada por fortes necessidades ciclicas de investimento, implica necessáriamente uma correcta demonstração da força e do valor da marca bem como a sua estratégia.

Saber que parte das receitas é explicada pela força da marca num clube de futebol, em relação aos clubes adversários e às outras formas de entretenimento concorrentes, é provavelmente o argumento mais forte para tentar encontrar o intervalo de negociação pretendido e atingir as fontes de financiamento necessárias.

Após um fim de semana onde foram lançados sucessivos alertas, por parte dos principais clubes, para as dificuldades que advêm do periodo económico que vivemos, é de extrema importância que se implementem ferramentas que permitam gerir a marca, a sua força e o seu valor, como o principal activo estratégico de um clube.   

To view the article online at Imagens de Marca please click here

To read the article please click here

Click here for the full article.

Brand Finance Austalia Managing Director Tim Heberden explained that Qantas will have to tread carefully. 

To read the full story in The New York Times please click here

Tim Heberden, Managing Director of Brand Finance Australia. 

Background

With a value of $1.1 billion, the Qantas brand was in 13^th position on Brand Finance’s table of Australia’s most valuable brands at the beginning of 2011. Even then, it was noted as the biggest loser of brand value since our 2008 study.

Strong brands shift the demand curve by increasing sales volumes and generating a price premium. In addition to influencing consumers, strong brands have a favourable impact on other stakeholders such as staff, investors and joint venture partners.

Declining Goodwill and Brand Value

Brand Finance has estimated that the value of the Qantas brand has declined by $100 million since January. The 9 per cent decline places it precariously close to the $1 billion mark.

The goodwill towards a brand can be considered as a ‘stock’ which rises and falls according to public perceptions. The current industrial dispute will have eroded the stock of goodwill towards Qantas, and this will continue to damage performance long after peace has been declared between management and unions.

Reputational Risk

Considerable attention has focussed on whether management or unions are to blame for the disruptions in Qantas’ service over recent months. From a passenger perspective this is of little relevance.  Loss of trust in the brand results in lost revenue - no matter who is to blame. 

Sensitivity to reputational damage increases following a serious event which has reduced people’s trust in a brand.  In these conditions, the value impact of future negative events is magnified as they reinforce prevailing negative views. Tim Heberden, managing director of Brand Finance Australia, said that “Qantas has faced a number of negative headlines in the last few years and should evaluate the cumulative effect of reputational risk when considering future actions and statements.”

One of the key requirements of ISO 10668 is that brand valuers must be independent. However brand valuation units of large marketing services companies continue to value the very brands that their parent companies create and build. 

To address this issue the Brand Finance Institute launched the ‘Campaign for Independent Brand Valuation’ at our Eighth Annual Forum on the 26th October 2011; a call to action for all independent brand valuers to lobby for a higher standard of independence and transparency. 

The Brand Finance Institute has created a manifesto for independent brand valuation to drive the debate forward. The campaign aims to ensure that all future brand valuations are conducted independently.

David Haigh, CEO, Brand Finance and Chairman, Brand Finance Institute comments: “For conflict of interest reasons auditors are now barred from providing consultancy and valuation services to their audit clients. In our view large marketing services firms should also be banned from valuing the brands which they earn the bulk of their revenues creating and building.”  

Click here for the full recording. 

To view the Brand Finance® Top 30 European Football Brand report please click here

Elise specialises in the valuation and monetization of tangible and intangible assets, including businesses, brands, securities, trademarks, patents and patent applications, naming rights, copyrights and other intellectual property for companies, non profits, government entities, and attorneys. 

Elise has supervised and participated in hundreds of complex international valuation assignments involving brand creation, merger and acquisition transactions, strategic planning, GAAP and IFRS compliance, SEC reporting, tax reporting, litigation and estate planning. 

Previous experience includes valuing intellectual property within a wide range of industries, with a particular focus on the Sports and Entertainment and has valued many world famous brands including Malibu®, Realtor®, Budweiser®, Woolmark® and Maker’s Mark®.

Brand Finance Managing Director David Hensley told Channel 4 News this latest campaign does not seem to be saying anything fresh.

Click here for the full article

The combined value of the top 100 Turkish brands has increased 10% from last year to a total of $33 billion. However total brand value of the top 100 Turkish companies still remains lower than technology brand IBM, which ranks as the fourth most valuable brand in the world at $36 billion.

Türk Telekom has been valued as Turkey’s most valuable brand worth $2.39 billion, growing an impressive $697million since 2010. Telecoms Service brands dominate the top of the table with Turkcell taking third place with a value of $1.89bn.

The Turkish banking industry also performed well with four bank brands ranked in the top 10 Turkish brands. Isbank is ranked the second most valuable brand in Turkey with a value of $2.28bn. Other banks in the top 10 Turkish brands include Akbank, Garanti and Yapi Kredi. Turkish banks’ combined brand value rose by 40% since 2010.

Other notable performers include Turkish Airlines ranked the 6^th with a value of $1.69bn. Other brands in the top 10 include beverage brand Anadolu Efes, home furnishing company Arçelik and food retailer BİM.

To view the full results, please visit Brandirectory

To attend the BrandFinance® Turkey Forum 2011, please click here

With stock markets continuing to slump, new data shows there is a significant decline in ‘Brand USA’s’ value. Nation brand values are produced through a detailed analysis of economic data, perceptual market research data and infrastructure measures producing a combined score out of 100. For ‘Brand USA’ decreases are apparent across all inputs. Infrastructure scores dropped from 77 to 76 points, economic measures fell from 74 to 64 points and the brand equity measure slipped from 71 to 61.

As the world’s biggest economy, ‘Brand USA’ is still significantly more valuable than the next nearest nation. However the drop in brand strength has been caused by inflation, cost of capital, reduced capital, higher unemployment and declining image abroad. If ‘Brand USA’ had been given the AA- rating in the Brand Finance Nations Brand Index (published in May 2011), it would fall below Canada, Australia and South Korea in brand strength.

David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance plc, comments:
“‘Brand USA’ is under enormous pressure as a decade of crises in business and foreign policy have been joined by serious economic problems. Low consumer spending, a static property market and the sovereign debt credit downgrade have all taken their toll on the value of ‘Brand USA’. At the same time other developed and emerging nation brands are performing better and growing in value. The economic crisis and double dip recession will accelerate these differences, with further shifts likely in the near future.”

Ollie Schmitz, Director of Nation Brand Valuation, Brand Finance plc adds:
“Prior to the recession, ‘Brand USA’ communicated strong and desirable values in everything from popular culture and entertainment to food and retailing brands. However, as a result of the current economic situation the brand strength has now dropped to its lowest score since tracking began in 2000. Once the global benchmark, emerging markets across the globe will now look to other nations to take the lead signalling exceptionally testing times for the ‘Brand USA’ in the future.”

The full Brand Finance plc Nation League Table 2011 and methodology is available upon request from Brand Finance plc.

Economic crisis causes $6.3 trillion of intangible assets value to be lost since January 2011, according to Brand Finance plc.

• The Brand Finance plc. Global Intangible Financial Tracker League Table (GIFT) is a 10 year study of the intangible asset values of all public stock exchanges worldwide
• GIFT is released in January each year but due to the exceptional economic conditions it has been updated as of 24th August 2011
• Further panic in world stock markets has resulted in a 25% ($6.3 tn) reduction in intangible asset values.
• Despite the fall recorded in GIFT, an update of the Brand Finance Global 100 brands shows that there has only been a 2.4% drop in their combined value

Financial service brands hit hardest

Tougher legislation, sluggish activity in the corporate market and ongoing fears regarding exposure to sovereign debt has meant banking and insurance brands have suffered. Bank brands in the top 100 have lost $25.9bn from their total brand value (7%) since January 2011.

HSBC has become the world’s most valuable bank brand keeping a steady position at 10. Bank of America experienced a brand value fall of $5.3bn taking it down to position 14. Likewise Wells Fargo saw a 12% reduction in brand value and Santander also slipped back in the league table with a reduction of $3.3bn.

Insurance brands saw a drop of 6% with AXA fairing worst, with a loss of $1.6bn brand value taking them out of the top 50 global brands.

Sparking technology industry

The economic crisis has not led to a blanket reduction in brand value. Technology and electronics brands are prospering with Google, Apple and Microsoft taking the top 3 positions in the league table. Apple has increased its value by 33%, making it a more valuable brand than Microsoft for the first time.

Established economies

The total brand value for the 46 US headquartered brands declined 2% from January. US brands dependent on their home market suffered bigger losses than global brands including McDonald’s, Nike and Coca-Cola who all improve their position in the league table.

Japanese brands dropped 3% as a result of the tsunami disrupting business. Europe has also felt the pressure with Spanish brands down 13% and France 5%, both are exposed to issues within the financial services sector.

Developing countries

In contrast, emerging economies including China, India and South Korea all show strong performances. In China the total brand value increased with two new brands entering the top 100; PetroChina and China Life Insurance Company. Argricultural Bank of China increased brand value by $1.5bn, rising from 99 to 71 in the league table.

Samsung is another notable performer, increasing the value of its brand to $26.6bn (up 24%). The South Korean company has not experienced the supply chain disruptions by their Japanese competitors and is developing a stronger hold on both the TV and smart phone markets. Similarly in India TATA moved up the league table with a new brand value of $14.8 bn at position 41 (previously 50). 

David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance plc, comments:

“As stock markets around the world falter, we are seeing a drop in the amount of intangible value global businesses hold and the value of the individual brands. The dramatic shifts that can be seen since the BrandFinance^® Global 500 launched earlier this year illustrate how vital it is for businesses to track the value of their brands. Even the world’s biggest businesses are not immune to change.” 

Additional insights

• Coca-Cola has reversed the decline noted in BrandFinance^® Global 500 and is now the 11^th most valuable brand. This shift creates a greater lead over its longstanding rival, Pepsi ($19.1bn / 25^th).
• The automotive sector has also performed well in the last six months, with crisis-plagued Toyota re-entering the top 10 with a value of $28.8 bn.  
• In Europe, Germany maintained a steady position, underpinned by a stable economy and strong auto industry including brands BMW, Mercedes Benz and Volkswagen. The UK saw two additional brands enter the top 100; BP and BT.  

Segment Growth

There was evidence of uniform growth across all segments and categories.
•    Banks have a healthy 34% brand value growth
•    Telecom sector grew with an average Brand Value growth of 25%
•    The two private health care giants Parkway and Raffles Medical Group performed particularly strongly with a massive brand value growth of 136% and 123% respectively.
•    In the media category, while the SPH saw an increase of 54%, there were three new entrants, the Straits Times at number 43, Lianhe Zaobao at position 78 and Her World at position 83.
•    Real estate saw enormous growth of 400% and 300% for certain brands and 13 of the 15 brands in this category grew well. Interestingly two brands in real estate suffered negative growth with CapitaLand down 13 % and Hoo Bee losing 38% of its brand value.
•    The Transport category also performed well with SMRT increasing Brand Value by 189% and Comfort up 49% leading to strong double digit growth.  
•    Retail did well with an average Brand Value growth of over 60% except for YHI which had zero growth.
•    All the hotels and motels brands continued to grow with three City Development brands (Millennium, Copthorne and Kingsgate Hotel) entering the top 100 for the first time.

Top Risers have representation from a variety of segments

Coming out of the crisis, all segments grew well. There was no dominant category amongst the top 10 risers. Five of the top 10 risers are also amongst the top 10 brands. All the top risers are within the top 22 ranked brands.

Significant brand value loss amongst losers

The losers and dropouts had a value erosion of only 1.3 bn US$.  There is no specific segment or industry or sector where brand value was seen to be eroded. The value erosion was present across industry and segments such as transportation, manufacturers, food, retail, real estate, commercial services. This indicates reduction in brand value was due to brand management practices as appose to market conditions effecting particular sectors.
 

Quotable Quotes:

Samir Dixit, Managing Director of Brand Finance Singapore says.
‘It is very heartening to see that this year; the brand value growth has come from across industries and segments with no domination of any one category. This is particularly healthy from an economic development and market growth perspective. This all round growth and reduced contribution from the top 10 indicates strong brand management practices and the acceptance for brand management as a disciplined approach by all corporates, big and small’.
 
 
About Brand Finance

Brand Finance is an independent brand strategy and valuation consultancy focused on advising strongly branded organisations on how to maximise value through effective management of their brands and intangible assets. Since it was founded in 1996, Brand Finance has performed thousands of branded business, brand and intangible asset valuations worth trillions of dollars.

Its clients include international brand owners, tax authorities, IP lawyers and investment banks. Its work is frequently peer-reviewed by the big four audit practices and its reports have been accepted by various regulatory bodies, including the UK Takeover Panel.

Brand Finance is headquartered in London and has a network of international offices in Amsterdam, Athens, Bangalore, Barcelona, Cape Town, Colombo, Dubai, Geneva, Helsinki, Hong Kong, Istanbul, Lisbon, Madrid, Moscow, New York, Paris, Sao Paulo, Sydney, Singapore, Toronto and Zagreb.



Contact Details:

South East Asia:
Samir Dixit, Managing Director, Brand Finance Singapore
Email: s.dixit@brandfinance.com
T: +65 90698651 (Singapore)

London:
Katy Bergson, Media Relations Manager
Email: k.bergson@brandfinance.com
T: +44 207 389 9400

Another year, and another British government initiated an inquiry into intellectual property, or so it seems. The latest, a Review of IP and Growth led by Professor Ian Hargreaves , was released on 18 May by Dr Vince Cable, the secretary of state for business innovation and skills and secretary of the board of trade at the Alliiance Against Intellectual Property Theft conference at the British Film Institute.

Please click the link below to read the job description and then send your resume to a.chandra@brandfinance.com

Brand Finance plc, the world’s leading brand valuation and strategy consulting services firm, has announced the promotion of its India office MD Unni Krishnan as Global Strategy Director to lead brand strategy projects across its network of 17 offices including the head offices in UK & USA.

David Haigh, Global CEO said: “Under the leadership of Unni, our Indian operations have delivered exemplary value to clients. Going forward, it is important to have his unique capabilities to integrate the disciplines of marketing, finance and business strategy to be deployed across the group’s global activities. Hence, we decided to move Unni into Brand Finance Plc’s board so that his expertise can be accessed in the UK, US and elsewhere in the Brand Finance network. The Indian team will play an integral role in our strategy and has become one of the biggest offices in terms of project work, and as a hub for innovation.”

Frank Partnoy, the George E. Barrett Professor of Law and Finance at the University of San Diego and one of the world’s leading experts on the complexities of modern finance said, "Unni and Brand Finance have developed a brilliant model to help companies harness their long-run potential. Unni is passionate about creating long-term value, and his long-term wealth creation thesis has real intellectual heft. His ideas are consistent with cutting-edge academic research. As companies throughout the world come to understand the importance and superiority of a multi-year strategic focus, Unni is playing an important role in the global move away from quarterly earnings myopia."

Reacting to Unni’s new role, Adi Godrej, Chairman of the Godrej Group said “I have found Unni Krishnan to be an extraordinarily gifted professional in the field of brand valuation. Unni, under the Brand Finance umbrella, supervised two projects for the Godrej Group. Valuing the various brands in the Godrej Consumer Products portfolio and evaluating the Godrej Properties brand when the company had an IPO. Both were done very professionally and gave us many value creation insights other than the valuation.” R Gopalakrishnan, Director of Tata Sons commented “Unni Krishnan has been persistent and consistent in his vision to develop a practical branding tool which Indian companies can avail of. He has potential and the zeal to help internationalize his tool and experiences.

Scott Bedbury, CEO of Brandstream and former CMO of Starbucks and Nike said, “Unni has helped some of India’s top CEOs develop a new lens through which they can make key business decisions and more fully measure their impact on long –term value. Interestingly, few US leaders have made this leap yet, preferring instead to focus almost exclusively on short term financial goals with very little correlation on business sustainability. In the pursuit of quick wins at all costs, other brands end up losing the long term battle for enduring profitability.“

Unni Krishnan who set up Brand Finance in India in 2003 has been the architect of the firm’s impressive track record by delivering more than 150 projects across 23 business sectors with leading groups like Tata, Godrej, L&T, UB, Amalgamations and Raymond.

BrandFinance together with SPC magazine released the Top 50 Cosmetics Brands league table for 2011.

P&G’s Olay comes out as the most valuable global beauty brand in Brand Finance’s first list of the Top 50 Cosmetics Brands. Some of the others might come as more of a surprise in this valuable industry study.

To view full results, please visit Brandirectory

Heineken takes second place in the rankings with a brand value increase of 30% to $11,108. The result is a reflection of it’s continued investment in brand building initiatives on a global scale. The brand strength has remained extremely strong in 2011 with an AAA- rating.

In fourth place was ING, which has bucked the trend for financial services brands and achieved impressive brand value growth of 23% to US$8.7 billion. Rival Dutch insurance brands have not fared so well with both Delta-Lloyd and Aegon losing brand value in 2011. As well as suffering from a depressed US credit market, Aegon had €150 million exposure to troubled telecoms giant WorldCom, which filed for bankruptcy protection during the period.

Randstad now ranks 6th in the list. After its integration of Vedior the brand value has significantly grown, and also the brand rating has increased.

Interestingly, five Unilever brands, and the Unilever corporate brand are in the top 20. The combined value of these brands would have resulted in rank 2 on this year's list.

TNT, no. 9 in the list has a raised brand rating, which is mainly caused by its decision to split the business early 2011, thus increasing clarity in its portfolio.

2011 is the first year that Brand Finance extended their global listing extensively into the Netherlands, now representing the 50 most valuable brands. Because of their large brand value, 11 of the 50 brands are also represented in the Brand Finance Global500 league table.

To view the full results, please visit Brandirectory

David Haigh talks on ABN Digital about South African brands, the impact of World Cup on them and the nation branding in the world's "hottest" continent.

 
BrandFinance's valuation of IPL is a widely used reference point in various reports and articles across the world. The qualitative analysis and views provided in the report was widely commented on by business and media fratenity.

Google grows as Coke goes flat and BP leaks brand value, according to the 2011 BrandFinance^® Global 500 

Although the top tier of the BrandFinance® Global 500 contains many household names brands that have existed for decades – IBM, Bank of America, HSBC – the world’s increasing dependence on the internet is reflected by Google’s position at no. 1. Five of the top ten largest growers are technology-related companies, reinforcing the commercial importance of embracing technological innovation to give a seamless, value-enhancing brand experience for customers and consumers.

 ‘Don’t be evil’ - Google’s dominance of the search engine sector means it tops the 2011 table. The company has repeatedly undertaken ventures that are comparatively un-commercial but have a positive impact on its brand rating (AAA+) which is the highest in the table. These actions include developing services help rescue efforts following the natural disasters in New Zealand and Japan and its growing not-for-profit arm.

To see the full results, please visit Brandirectory

Power to you – Vodafone becomes the most valuable UK brand; Google overtakes Microsoft and Coke goes flat, according to the 2011 BrandFinance^® Global 500 

Following HSBC’s drop from 8th to 11th, Vodafone becomes the only UK brand to be included in the top ten.  Originally conceived as the world’s first global mobile brand, the company has managed to increase its brand value by nearly 6% from 2010.

Vodafone’s investments in Africa and Australia have continued to boost its global brand presence, with its joint venture in Australia now fully transitioned to the Vodafone brand. Despite being the world’s most valuable mobile telecoms brand, there is still further potential upside, principally across its partner market network - now present in over 40 markets – which could return more value from the brand to both Vodafone and its partners..

To see the full results. please visit Brandirectory

New Delhi, The Financial Express

In a first for any Indian brand, the salt-to-software conglomerate Tata has entered the top 50 club of global brands, as per the latest ‘Global 500’ list by Brand Finance, print-media exclusive to FE in India. Tata was listed at 65thspot last year. The group’s brand value is pegged at $15.08 billion, as compared to $11.21 billion in 2010, and has seen an appreciation of 100% from its brand value of $7.38 billion in 2007. The Tata brand name has lived and prospered in India for decades now. And with its global forays through deals, mergers and acquisitions, the Tatas have been grabbing their share of international headlines. Breaking into the top 50 in the Brand Finance Global 500 rankings is yet another shot in the arm for the Tatas.

Read the full article here

To see the full results, please visit Brandirectory

TotalTelecom+ presents the Top Telecoms according to Brand Finance.

To view the full results, please visit Brandirectory

At a private event recently, Mr. O P Bhatt, Chairman State Bank Group, was felicitated by Mr. Unni Krishnan, MD Brand Finance India, in recognition of SBI being ranked 34th in the BrandFinance Banking 500. After a transformational project titled "Parivartan", meaning change in Hindi, SBI has renewed itself. In a few years, SBI has been able to break into the top 50, of the BrandFinance Banking 500.

"SBI has continued to strengthen its position and is on its way to transform into a brand-led business with a focus on innovation.  The chairman’s vision to become the best customer oriented bank in the country is on track." Mr. Krishnan comments on the reasons for SBI's rise.

The BrandFinance Banking 500 is an annual review of the top banking brands in the world, the report now in its 5th edition is conducted by Brand Finance, the worlds leading brand valuation and strategy consultancy.

Vodafone, AT&T and Verizon continue to dominate the BrandFinance® Telecom 2011, the study of the world's most valuable telecom brands. Vodafone again tops the list, while AT&T and Verizon have retained their positions in 2nd and 3rd.

In fact, relative stability is a hallmark of this year's study, with a few notable exceptions. The rise of China is reflected China Mobile's progress up the ranks, moving from 5th in 2010 to 4th this year. Meanwhile Nokia's well-publicised difficulties are reflected in a dramatic cut to its brand value, falling by over 50% from $19,558m in 2010 to $9,658m this year. 

You can view the full results in Brandirectory

In response to the Harrods expansion plans, David Haigh CEO of Brand Finance talks on Sky News for the Harrods Brand and its expansion possibilities

The Bank of America has been named as the most valuable banking brand in the world in 2011, according to the fifth edition of the BrandFinance Global Banking 500

By Donia O'Loughlin

Read the full article here

Now that brands can carry a hard cash value under ISO 10668, they can be used more widely than ever, for anything from collateral for loans to bargaining in takeovers.

Why measure brand value? 

Read the full article here

Bank of America Corp., the biggest U.S. bank by assets, replaced HSBC Holdings Plc as the world’s most valuable banking brand, according to a survey by London- based Brand Finance Plc

By Simon Clark

Read the full article here

A survey by London-based Brand Finance Plc of banks, based on the notional amount that a company would have to pay for the brand, has ranked the Bank of America as the most valuable banking brand with an estimated price of $30.6 billion

By IBTimes Staff Reporter

Read the full article here

BrandFinance® Banking 500 2011

A sleeping giant awakes; America’s banks dominate the 2011 BrandFinance® Banking 500 as financial institutions begin rebuilding damaged reputations

Bank of America ($30.6bn) and Wells Fargo ($28.9bn) are the two most valuable banking brands in the world

Four of the top ten are domiciled in the USA; American total banking brand value increased by almost 30% from 2010

European bank brands also recovering but face problems relating to sovereign debt exposure within the Eurozone

Proactive marketing strategies and an improving domestic consumer banking market have seen the US regain its place as the world’s financial capital, according to the fifth edition of the BrandFinance® Global Banking 500 – an annual review of the top banking brands in the world published in The Banker. 

Despite concerns of further mortgage-related write-downs, Bank of America is currently the most valuable banking brand in the world. In 2010, the company actively sought to repair its reputation – supporting new consumer protection legislation, modifying 285,000 loans, 76,000 in the fourth quarter alone, and engaging in more philanthropic activities - which was underpinned by strong results, the integration of Merrill Lynch and overall improvements in the consumer banking market.

The BrandFinance^® Banking 500 contains ninety American bank and twenty UK banks. Many of these larger institutions have directly addressed their recent perceived failings, from Goldman Sachs’ 39 recommendations and proposed restructuring, to Bob Diamond’s cordial but bullish defence of Barclays to the UK’s Treasury Select Committee.

Whilst investors remain twitchy about the full extent of further write-offs and the introduction of more stringent legislation, many brands have seen their rebuilding strategies in tackling perceptual issues be rewarded with both increases in brand value and stable or enhanced Brand Ratings.

Brazil and China

Bradesco (brand value - $18.7 bn) is one of the big winners in 2011, moving up three places, reflecting its domestic dominance and the increasingly positive international view of Brazil’s economy.   Itaú, another Brazilian bank, recorded the largest overall brand value increase ($9.7bn). ICBC Bank enters the top ten, a first for Chinese banks, and is the only Chinese bank with a retail presence in the US. 

Despite their colossal market capitalisations and enormous retail networks, Chinese banks still have both substantial perceptual and regulatory hurdles to overcome before they achieve significant international retail expansion.

David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance Plc said:

‘‘The top tier of the BrandFinance^® Banking 500 demonstrates that a cohesive, intelligent brand strategy can help to salvage even the most damaged reputations. Banking brands have never previously been subjected to such high levels of consumer, client and political scrutiny. However, it is possible that some banks will struggle in the short to medium-term as their business strategy fails to deliver on their revised brand and communications mandate.’’

Anne Finucane, Global Strategy & Marketing Officer Bank of America added: “Our vision is to be recognized as the finest financial services firm in the world.  In today’s new reality, that has little to do with simply quarterly earnings or a marketing budget – it’s about being resilient and focused on the issues that matter most to consumers and communities, and that truly drive the domestic and global economies forward.  At the end of the day, our brand is clearly a very powerful asset to leverage against all our businesses and it is setting opportunity in motion for everyone we serve.”

Brian Caplen, Editor of The Banker concluded:

‘‘In the fifth year of publishing the BrandFinance Banking 500, it is interesting to see a couple of the forecasted trends come to fruition: the rise of the brands from the BRIC countries and consolidation amongst Western banks. The focus for 2011 will be the stability of the US brands’ recovery, and the possibility of the BRIC brands successfully expanding internationally.’’

To view BrandFinance® Top 500 Most Valuable Banking Brands, please visit www.brandirectory.com

Two years ago, when the financial crisis on Wall Street reached its peak, economists in India were surprisingly buoyant about its ripple effects in their region. Many contended that emerging high-growth economies such as India's had "decoupled" from developed markets.

To read the full article, please press here

Recent Brand Finance® annual Forum attracted high profile speakers and delegates from a variety of fields. The headline theme was ‘How to measure the contribution of marketing activity to business performance’. The presentations revealed that plenty of progress has been made, but plenty of questions remain.

David Titlman, International Editor of Warc reports

$3.9 million according to the stock market.

On the weekend of November 6 Inglis’s probable deal with the South Sydney Rabbitohs, and the crumbling of his informal agreement with the Brisbane Broncos.

On November 11th, the Brisbane Broncos share price fell from 30 cents to 26 cents, reducing the CLub's marketing capitalisation by $3.9 million - significantly more than Inglis's reportedly $1.2 million two year deal.

To learn more click our press release below.

The annual BrandFinance® Global 500 is the most comprehensive global table of brand values and ratings. Each year, the results are published in the February edition of The Marketing Week magazine, the leading UK marketing affairs publication.

For the forthcoming edition, we are looking to engage with brand owners in order to obtain additional data to ensure that their brands are fairly valued within the study.  Wherever the necessary information is unavailable, we will seek to rely upon desk research from public sources.

Upon completion, please email this document to: Global500@brandfinance.com

The annual BrandFinance® Banking 500 is the most comprehensive table of published banking brands’ values and ratings. Each year, the results are published in the February edition of The Banker, the leading, international financial affairs publication.

For the forthcoming edition, we are looking to engage with brand owners in order to obtain additional data to ensure that their brands are fairly valued within the study.  Wherever the necessary information is unavailable, we will seek to rely upon desk research from public sources.

Upon completion, please email this document: to: Banking500@brandfinance.com

Brand and deliver, a report from the Economist Intelligence Unit, examines the current state of branding in emerging Asia. It looks at how companies are tackling the next—critical—stage of their evolution by harnessing the power of brands. And it assesses the lessons that can be learnt from pioneering firms in Japan and South Korea that have already succeeded in building global brands.

Rankings from Brand Finance indicate brand strength of the world’s leading mobile operators ahead of Mobile World Congress.

Like those of all other intangibles, brand values are climbing once again. This comes at a significant time as it coincides with a major breakthrough in the brand management process

The recession has been the making or breaking of many brands, and those that have used the time to reappraise their role in the changing market are now scaling up the 2010 Brand Finance Global 500 list to become the world’s power brands.

Failure of India's big three IT firms - TCS, Wipro & Infosys - to build a brand like a Google or a Microsoft may cost them dear

By Sarah Jacob & Pankaj Mishra

In India, the Tatas always enjoyed the consumer’s trust and the challenge was to build businesses. Outside India, it has bought the businesses and the challenge is to build trust, the Tata trust

By Kala Vijayraghavan

Several Indian business houses have woken up to the huge value of family brands built over generations of trust and goodwill. They are now working hard to develop brands as sustainable asset for generations to come

By Bhanu Pande

By Lijee Philip & Kala Vijayraghavan

Tata Motors' experience in the acquisition of JaguarLandRover offers many lessons on how the hidden, intangible value of a brand can be unlocked into tangible financial benefits  

India's 50 most valuable corporate brands increased their combined brand value by $9 billion in 2010 with the biggest, Tata Motors, alone accounting for almost two-thirds of it. Other business groups are now looking for ways to take good care of their brands.

By The Economic Times Mumbai

"ISO 10668 gives brand valuation analysis the institutional credibility which it previously lacked. It professionalises brand management."

David Haigh, CEO, Brand Finance plc

In 2007 the International Organization for Standardization ('ISO'), set up a task force to draft an International Standard on monetary brand valuation. After 3 years the ISO 10668 – Monetary Brand Valuation – will be released in Autumn 2010. This sets out the principles which should be adopted when valuing any brand.

The new ISO 10668 applies to brand valuations commissioned for all purposes, including:
• Accounting and financial reporting
• Insolvency and liquidation
• Tax planning and compliance
• Litigation support and dispute resolution
• Corporate finance and fundraising
• Licensing and joint venture negotiation
• Internal management information and reporting
• Strategic planning and brand management

The last of these applications include:
• Brand and marketing budget determination
• Brand portfolio review
• Brand architecture analysis
• Brand extension planning

Under ISO 10668 the brand valuer must declare the purpose of the valuation as this affects the premise or basis of value, the valuation assumptions used and the ultimate valuation opinion, all of which need to be transparent to a user of the final brand valuation report.

Requirements of an ISO compliant brand valuation?

ISO 10668 is a 'meta standard' which succinctly specifies the principles to be followed and the types of work to be conducted in any brand valuation. It is a summary of existing best practice and intentionally avoids detailed methodological work steps and requirements. As such ISO 10668 applies to all proprietary and non-proprietary brand valuation approaches and methodologies that have been developed over the years, so long as they follow the fundamental principles specified in the meta standard. ISO 10668 specifies that when conducting a brand valuation the brand valuer must conduct 3 types of analysis before passing an opinion on the brand’s value.

These are Legal, Behavioural and Financial analysis. All 3 types of analysis are required to arrive at a thorough brand valuation opinion. This requirement applies to valuations of existing brands, new brands and brand extensions.

ISO 10668: Module 1 Legal analysis

The first requirement is to define what is meant by 'brand' and which intangible assets should be included in the brand valuation opinion. ISO 10668 begins by defining Trademarks in conventional terms but it also refers to other Intangible Assets (‘IA’) including Intellectual Property Rights (‘IPR’) which are often included in broader definitions of ‘brand’.

International Financial Reporting Standard 3 ('IFRS3'), specifies how all acquired assets should be defined, valued and accounted for post-acquisition. It refers to 5 specific IA types which can be separated from residual Goodwill arising on acquisition.

ISO 10668: Module 2 Behavioural analysis

The second requirement when valuing brands under ISO 10668 is a thorough behavioural analysis. The brand valuer must understand and form an opinion on likely stakeholder behaviour in each of the geographical, product and customer segments in which the subject brand operates.

ISO 10668: Module 3 Financial analysis

The third requirement when valuing brands under ISO 10668 is a thorough financial analysis.

ISO 10668 specifies three alternative brand valuation approaches - the Market, Cost and Income Approaches. The purpose of the brand valuation, the premise or basis of value and the characteristics of the subject brand dictate which primary approach should be used to calculate its value.

Fig1. Brand Valuation approaches include Market approach, Cost approach and Income approach.

Application of brand valuations

ISO 10668 was developed to provide a consistent framework for the valuation of local, national and international brands both large and small. The primary concern was to create an approach to brand valuation which was transparent, reconcilable and repeatable. In the wake of the standard’s launch it is expected that many companies will either value their brands for the first time or revalue them compliant with the standard.

Brand Valuations and Brand Strategy?

Common commercial applications of brand valuation are brand portfolio and brand architecture reviews.

Brand Portfolio reviews consider whether the right number of brands and sub-brands are in the portfolio. Brand Architecture reviews considers whether individual brands are too fragmented and extended.

In both these cases, brand valuation analysis can help to evaluate the most effective value adding strategy. Brand valuation can help companies rationalise and rebuild their brand portfolios and trim their brand architecture to best address current market conditions.

Brand Dashboards

Having determined an ideal brand portfolio and architecture at a point in time it is recommended to create a long term brand dashboard to monitor changes in brand equity and value so that swift corrective action can be taken if necessary.

Despite the ongoing disruption in the financial services sector, the brand value of insurers has seen a healthy increase. Results and looks at the opportunities for the coming year

By James Park

• What is best practice in brand advertising?

• Is there evidence of a long term value add to brands from advertising?

• Which parts of our communications activity provides the most value?

• How can we amplify the value of our marketing spend?

• How can we improve the marketing process for greater efficiency?

• Can we truly measure and articulate the value of advertising to brand equity?

For the past 15 years Brand Finance has been at the centre of the branding sector, working with strongly branded organisations to help them maximize value through effective management of intangible assets.

As part of that process we host an annual forum which focuses on the value of a series of trends and influences to brands and businesses. This year, as the Institute of Practitioners in Advertising celebrates 30 years of their Advertising Effectiveness Awards, we will scrutinise the value of advertising to brands.

The advertising of brands is a US$450 billion business, yet are we totally clear about the correlation between spend and brand equity? Moreover, Brand Finance research indicates that as much as 62% of the World's business is now intangible – what are the implications for M&A, bid defence and balance sheet valuations?

We hope you can join us as we take an objective look at the evidence and aim to answer these key questions with help from some of the leading figures in our industry including our keynote speaker John A. Quelch, Lincoln Filene Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School.

Who should attend?

The delegates of previous forums have included CEOs, CMOs and CFOs of business to business and consumer facing brands at the national and international level. Academics, marketers, advertising consultants, politicians and senior NGO staff have also found our events of great interest - see pages 10-12 for details. The Brand Finance Forum 2010 ‘Understanding the Value of Advertising’ will be our largest event to date with a greater range and seniority of speakers than ever before.

Brands such as China Mobile, ICBC and Midea now have almost as much financial value as household names Verizon, Barclays and Whirlpool, reflecting not only the strength of the businesses they represent in the domestic Chinese market, but also their increasing presence in the international marketplace.

The new study, BrandFinance® China 100 Brands, published today by Brand Finance (Hong Kong) Ltd, indicates that many Chinese brands currently known largely inside the country are poised to have a significant impact on international consumers in the near future.

The total brand value of the top ten China 100 Brands in the report is US$117.795 billion, equivalent to 36.4% of the total US$323.8 billion brand value for the top ten global brands as measured by the BrandFinance® Global 500 survey released earlier this year.

Brand Finance (Hong Kong) Ltd director Anthony Pettifer said: “The results of this study indicate that for China’s brands there are rich enough pickings in the domestic market to build significant brand value at a faster pace than elsewhere. But as they continue to mature at home, some of China’s leading brands are already achieving growth and making their presence felt in overseas markets. While there are only a small handful of truly international brands among the China 100, these brand owners are reporting increasing international sales.”

Of the 100 companies covered by the survey, China Mobile has the highest brand value, at US$22.6 billion. That positions it just below the top three global telecoms brands, currently Vodafone, AT&T and Verizon.

China’s biggest bank, ICBC, ranks second in the list, with a brand value of US$16.9 billion, from where it is set to break into the top 10 in terms of global banking brand value. Third is China Construction Bank, which comes right behind ICBC in the Global 500, at number 55. Agricultural Bank of China (ABC), which listed in Hong Kong and Shanghai in mid-July, entered the China 100 league table at number 5, with a brand value of US$11.4 billion.

At number 17 in the China rankings, white goods manufacturer Midea has a brand valuation of US$2.3 billion, putting it only slightly behind the US giant Whirlpool (US$2.4 billion) in the Global 500 valuation. Haier, Whirlpool’s biggest competitor in terms of current US sales, has a brand value of $1.4 billion, and ranks at number 34.

A further measure of the untapped global potential for Chinese brands is that Haier, which sponsors the NBA in the USA, now claims to be the global leader in its sector by market share.

At the same time, the top ten brands in China account for an aggregate of US$1,483 billion in enterprise value, fully 74% of their global counterparts. This further underscores the potential for future increases in the strength and value of China’s brands and the companies that own them, as well as the certainty that some of these brand names will feature in the upper ranks of global league tables in the very near future.

China’s fascination with brands, underpinned by rapidly-increasing middle class wealth, has already proven massively lucrative for luxury international brands like Louis Vuitton, Gucci, Dunhill, Rolex, Mercedes Benz and BMW (including their Mini and Rolls Royce brands). But it is clearly now also creating growing financial value for Chinese brands as yet largely unknown outside China, such as Snow Beer (#49), electrical retail group Suning (#21), and life insurer PingAn (#13).

Pettifer added: “As Chinese companies extend their brands into new markets there is little doubt we are approaching the point when names like Sinopharm (#54) may become as well known internationally as Pfizer or Roche”. “If you don’t know yet about Yingli, then you didn’t watch the World Cup, where the NYSE-listed solar panel maker was one of the events’ sponsors, reaching out to customers in its main markets of Europe and the US. It is also noticeable that Alibaba (#78), whose registered B2B customers are already twice the size of the population of Australia, continues aggressively expanding its international reach. Other brands such as BYD (#24), Gree (#29) and the recently rebranded Li Ning (#55) are names to watch out for in the future too.”

In common with all Brand Finance league table studies, the China 100 Brands report uses the royalty relief methodology to establish brand value. This valuation method assumes a benchmark royalty rate that would be payable to a third-party if the company did not own the brand. The royalty rate is applied to an estimate of future revenue - based on historical growth from company data, Institutional Brokers’ Estimate System (IBES) and GDP forecasts - to determine an earnings stream that is attributable to the brand. The brand earnings stream is then discounted back to a net present value.

Only Chinese brand-owning companies with a stock market listing are included, so that, for example, Huawei, recognised internationally as a leading telecoms supplier, does not figure in the rankings.

To download the report, please click here

Any media enquiries please contact:

蒋蕾, First City Public Relations: +86 138 0800 7147/ +852 2854 2666

Allan Piper, First City Public Relations: +852 9127 4810/ +852 2854 2666

Having spent many millions on promoting its „Beyond Petroleum‟ strapline and positioning itself as the most environmentally friendly of the oil companies, this disaster has had a highly detrimental impact on its brand value globally, especially in the US.

David Haigh, Chief Executive at Brand Finance Plc, commented: “Aside from the actual leak and the environmental impact in the Gulf of Mexico, BP has been heavily criticised for its repeated communication blunders during the crisis, further undermining the brand‟s reputation. Following on from the Toyota debacle, BP has provided the international business community with another case study in how not to handle a crisis of corporate reputation.

Haigh added: “Ironically, Tony Haywood, BP‟s departing CEO, had pledged to improve the company‟s safety record when he took over from Lord Browne immediately after the Texas City explosion. His American successor, veteran oilman Bob Dudley, said on July 27 that he intends to “accelerate that change” in the culture of the company. Progress will indeed have to accelerate, and be seen to accelerate, for their reputational issues to be resolved.”

Brand Finance‟s brand value estimate is based on updating analysis from its annual, global study of the world‟s most valuable brands, the BrandFinance® Global 500. Before the explosion on 20th May, BP‟s brand was ranked 53rd in the world, with a value of $12.2bn and an AA+ Brand Rating*. As at 25th June, its brand value has dropped to $4.7bn whilst the Brand Rating has dropped to a BB.

As part of the valuation, Brand Finance commissioned Brainjuicer, a leading market research agency, to assess consumer opinion relating to the BP brand.This research showed that negative opinions about BP were rising: disgust (+6), anger (+17) and sadness (+18) whilst good feelings were falling with happiness sharply down (-16). This would suggest that the perception that they traded safety for profits will be hard to redress.

Could the BP brand have suffered almost irreversible damage, particularly in the US? Brand Finance expects that the company will rebrand its US operations in the future, potentially reverting to its AMOCO brand, highlighting its American heritage and dependence on American workers and customers.

The lesson for large companies is that whilst cost and time savings are certainly key initiatives, senior management and the board needs to ensure that they do not happen at the risk of brand and stakeholder relationships.

Boards are inescapably concerned with risk management, and the risk to brand, customer and stakeholder value should surely rise to the top of their agenda. Locating the stewardship of these precious assets to secure corporate sustainability of valuable companies like BP is a task which cannot and should not be postponed.

Further information

• The fall in brand value is calculated by modelling the projected response of BP's main stakeholder groups, including the US government and the retail consumer market.
• The US administration‟s response to the situation is the most significant factor. President Obama‟s administration is facing mounting criticism for its own response to the crisis: Obama has repeatedly stated his intention to hold BP accountable for this „horrific disaster‟. BP will find it substantially harder to win US drilling contracts in the future, thereby severely affecting the company‟s growth prospects.
• Activist activity: In mid-July 44 petrol stations across the London area were targeted by Greepeace. This will inevitably affect BP‟s brand value and consumers‟ attitude to the company.
• Partnerships: if BP is found guilty of negligence, this could enable partner businesses to terminate agreements, and is likely to affect the success of joint ventures outside the US.
• The anticipated increase in legislation surrounding safety and drilling procedures will affect all major oil companies, with BP facing additional scrutiny.
• Valuation summary: forecast revenues (taken from Bloomberg) have dropped, the cost of capital has increased and the brand strength score has collapsed.

By Raymond Ma

To read the full article, please press here

by MaryLou Costa.

To download the full report, please press here

by Manish K. Pandey

To download the full report, please press here

In Feburary 2010 Brand Finance had observed in its annual research on the value of the IPL brand, that the “IPL Branded Ecosystem is rapidly approaching an inflection point in the next 6‐12 months”. BrandFinance had summarised that whilst the IPL brand had added significant value in a relatively short period of time, there are significant risks in terms of brand value governance & transparency, management systems & processes, and stakeholder alignment to future proof the exponential value generation capabilities of the brand.

The IPL brand along with its stakeholder relationships are the largest assets of the BCCI today and any damage to it will adversely impact its future.

IPL’s brand value erosion will send a shock wave through the entire ecosystem of stakeholders covering fans, corporates, sponsors, players and franchisee owners. This will be a dampener on the fledgling sports, merchandising and licensing business in India.

On a much broader level, IPL has demonstrated the coming of age of India’s commercial prowess on a global stage and this will have implications on Brand India.

Iconic brands such as IPL are national assets and a source of wealth creation and especially so for a developing nation like India. It needs to be protected and governed in a manner befitting its importance. Locating the stewardship and governance frameworks to protect and sustain this valuable asset is a decision that cannot be postponed.

For further details contact - Mr. Rishav Kumar Jain.

To view the full article, please press here

To download the full article, please press here

To read the full article, please press here

The Top 500 most valuable brands in the world have grown in value by 26% to US$2,873 billion.

The Enterprise Value of the top 500 brands has grown by 16% to US$18,664 billion.

Walmart holds its position as the most valuable global brand Santander and Apple make huge leaps in brand value

The winners and losers in the global brand war have been announced, with Google climbing, Microsoft slipping back and Coca-Cola extending its advantage over main rival Pepsi.

Retail giant Walmart, whose brand value increased 2% this year, retains top spot in the annual survey, published by Brand Finance plc, the world‟s leading brand valuation consultancy.

Google, which has risen in the table from number five to number two, shares top ten status with other technology brands including IBM (4), Microsoft (5) and hp (9). GE, HSBC, Vodafone and Toyota complete the top ten.

Suffering most were non-essential sectors like airlines and retail. Of the top five airline brands, only Singapore Airlines, which came out top in that sector, climbed the table. The biggest airline „fallers‟ were Japan Airlines, American Airlines and British Airways, down 181, 169 and 117 places respectively.

In the retail sector, excluding Walmart, the picture is grim. The only other retailers to climb in the top ten retail brands were Walmart owned ASDA, up from 107th to 80th ; H&M, which rose from 146th to 93rd and Home Depot, which is up from 24th to 21st in the overall Global 500. McDonald‟s remains the second most valuable retail brand, despite slipping from 12th to 17th in the Global 500.

Tesco, which has aspirations of international expansion itself, is listed in the food sector rather than retail but saw its brand value rise by a significantly higher rate than Walmart – up 26% to US$20.7 billion; however, its brand value remains only half that of its American rival.Of the „new‟ iconic brands, every businessman‟s favourite accessory, Blackberry, appears in the Global 500 for the first time whilst Apple has climbed from 27th to 19th with a 45% increase in its brand value. Santander, the Spanish banking group, rises from 41st to 12th increasing in brand value by 136%.

“During the recession value-for-money brands have done well including Walmart, Coca Cola, Tesco to name a few. Many luxury brands have slipped but a small number of iconic luxury brands have done remarkably well for example Christian Dior and Porsche” explains David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance plc.

• HSBC World's leading bank brand for 3rd year in a row
• Santander is world's fastest growing retail bank brand
• Decline in US dominance of world banking industry
• Rise in banking brands from Middle East
• First Russian bank breaks into World Top 20 Bank brands

The banking sector has begun to show tangible signs of recovery, with the world’s 500 most valuable banking groups growing by 62% in terms of market capitalisation and their brand values cumulatively increasing by 49%, according to the fourth edition of the BrandFinance® Banking 500 – an annual review of the top banking brands in the world published in conjunction with The Banker.

The report, which measures companies by both brand strength and brand value as of 31st December 2009, details how all segments of the banking industry have recovered.

HSBC retains its place as the most valuable banking brand in the world for the third year in a row, increasing in brand value by 12% to US$28.5bn. Bank of America, the second most valuable global banking brand increased in brand value by 24% to US$26.1bn. However, smaller US brands showed much higher percentage increases than Bank of America including Goldman Sachs, Chase and JP Morgan (106%, 53% and 45% respectively).

Santander is the world’s fastest growing retail bank brand, coming third overall in the Top 500. The Spanish banking group saw its brand value rise by US$14.8bn, an increase of 136% to US$25.6bn. A significant factor in the growth in Santander’s brand value has been the consolidation of Abbey, Alliance & Leicester and Bradford & Bingley brands under the Santander brand.

The BrandFinance® Banking 500 rankings also track the rise of banking brands from emerging markets. Middle Eastern brands, and most particularly in the GCC states, revealed a strong performance increasing in brand value by 78%. This is a reflection of buoyant oil and gas receipts underpinning many Middle East economies and the growth of Islamic banking. However, the South American region experienced the highest growth in brand value increasing by 84%. This is a reflection of the resilient performance in the region, particularly in the Brazilian banking market.

US dominance of the global banking industry has declined with a decrease in the number of US banks in the Global Top 500 down from 95 in 2008 to 85 in 2009. Although US bank brands recovered during 2009 the overall increase in brand value was only 29%.

Whilst the number of European banks in the Global 500 has increased from 174 to 197, the number of UK banks has fallen from 24 to 22. This suggests that recovery in continental Europe – most particularly in France, Spain and Switzerland – has left British banks behind. European bank brands have recovered significantly growing their brand value in aggregate by 67%.

Asian markets continue to do well but grew by only 31% in brand value because Japanese brand values declined by 3% reflecting the continued instability of the Japanese market. By contrast India and China saw brand value growth by 137% and 58% respectively.

2009 is also the first year that a Russian bank – Sberbank – has made the Top 20 (No.15), with significant growth of 160% on the previous year, bringing its market capitalisation to US$51.1bn and its brand value to US$11.7bn.

Banks in the Pacific region, including Australia and New Zealand, have seen a recovery with growth of 58%.

“This year’s BrandFinance® Banking 500 shows how significant the recovery of global banking brands has been,” explains David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance plc. “The value of the Top 500 global bank brands is now 4% higher than in 2008, prior to the banking crisis. The total value of The top 500 global bank brands is $US 716bn, an increase of 49% on 2009.There has been a significant shift in the balance of power globally away from the US and towards banks in emerging markets.”

Brian Caplen, editor of The Banker added: "In the wake of the financial crisis, banks are approaching the issue of branding with renewed vigour. However this cannot be a short term project. What the Brand Finance® Banking 500 ranking shows is that successful banks such as HSBC and Santander work at getting all the parts of the operation to work in favour of the branding".

To download the full report, please visit www.brandfinance.com

The overall drop in the top 500’s brand value is US$218.1 billion (down 32%) and the drop in market capitalisation is US$3.9 trillion (down 51%). 209 of the brands present in last year’s study have fallen out of the new 500. Notable exits include the bailed Fannie Mae and the bust Lehman Brothers whilst the salvaged Merrill Lynch (Brand Rating: BBB) and Wachovia (BBB) plummet by 30 and 59 places respectively. The five largest collapsed brands (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers, Northern Rock and Bear Stearns) had a combined market capitalisation of US$109 billion and a brand value of US$14.3 billion in last year’s study.

HSBC’s brand value fell 40% to US$25.4 billion in 2009. Benefiting from being a truly global brand with a AAA+ Brand Rating, the geographic split of the ‘World’s Local Bank’ has buffered its exposure to the credit crisis, spreading risk both globally and across all revenue streams.

Of the biggest risers in the league table, emerging market brands of India, South Korea and Turkey dominate. This highlights the global trend where banks from emerging markets such as Brazil, Russia, India and China seem less exposed to the global financial crisis than established markets.

David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance commented:

“The World Bank in January 2008 said ‘resilient emerging markets are cushioning the global economy amid the downturn’. Emerging market brands have significantly outperformed world brands in 2008. Many of the best known developed world banks have died in 2008. Some are walking dead awaiting a silver bullet before they finally go. Governments hold the gun. Strong brands can help some of the zombie brands return from the dead in 2009."

The Banker's editor Brian Caplen said:

"The financial crisis has obviously taken its toll on bank brand values and will make major international institutions focus heavily on their branding. Banks from key emerging markets have fared well and are starting to chase some of the traditional names of banking."

by Brian Caplen

In March 2008 Brand Finance released the 2008 version of its report on the 500 most valuable Global Brands (See Report). The effective valuation date was 31st December 2007, using financial forecasts for 2008 and beyond.

Since January the economy has been hit by commodity prices rises, the credit crunch, rising unemployment and tumbling share prices. As a result of this Global economic crisis, Brand Finance has revisited its findings and has updated the values of the top 100 Global and top 100 US brands.

The study is calculated by Brand Finance based on the widely used and technically superior “Royalty from Relief” methodology, which assumes that a company does not own its brand name, and then calculates how much it would have to pay to license it from a third party.

The update reveals that:

Global trends:

• Between January and September the enterprise value of the 100 most valuable Global branded businesses has decreased by 13.3 percent, a drop of US$1.6 trillion.
• Between January and September the brand value of the 100 most valuable Global brands has decreased by 4.2 percent, a drop of US$67 billion.

Sector trends:

• As the price of oil continues to rise so does the value of the leading petrochemical brands. Four of the top five brands that record an increased in brand value belong to leading brands in the oil and gas sector. These include; ExxonMobil (19.4percent), BP (18.3percent), Chevron (17.9percent) and Shell (12.8percent).
• The only other sector to record a significant increase in overall brand value is healthcare, suggesting that despite a decrease in spending, consumers are prioritizing health and well-being. Johnson & Johnson does especially well and outperforms its competitors by jumping an impressive 16 places to 84 in the table, illustrating the trend across the sector.
• The retail sector‟s total enterprise value has risen by 9.1percent. During the current recession low-priced retailers are leveraging their position by providing customer with value for money goods.
• Everyday consumer brands have benefitted as consumers trade-down and rediscover good value products. McDonald‟s is an example of a brand that has benefitted from successful re-positioning as a healthier, value for money option. Trading on its heritage and consumer brand equity, McDonald‟s brand value increases by 9 percent to US$23,968m. On the other hand, brands such as Starbucks struggle to gain share of (shrinking) wallet as consumers cut unnecessary spending habits and turn to more essential goods.
• With the current economic conditions, it is not surprising that the financial services sector has decreased in brand value across the board. Financial service institutions need to refocus attention on the key value drivers of their brands and develop longer term strategies.

Brand Rankings:

• Wal-Mart has overtaken Coca-Cola, to become the most valuable global brand in the BrandFinance500. The value of the brand has increased 9percent since December, to US$42,567m driving a 23.5 percent increase in Wal-Mart‟s enterprise value over same period. Wal-Mart has turned the recession to its advantage by leveraging its reputation for low prices.
• CITI tumbled out of the top ten to fifteenth place with a brand value of US$24,058m (a 14 percent decrease) reflecting its poor performance in the current sub-prime crisis. This allows Vodafone to enter the top ten in ninth place as the leading telecommunications brand (with a brand value of US$26,688m) closely followed by Nokia (with a brand value of US$26,564m)

“In the current climate, it is essential to understand the absolute value of brands and what drives their value,” said David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance plc. “The BRANDFINANCE™Global 500 report provides an insight into the effect of recession on leading brands.”

“There is clear evidence that basic, value for money brands like WalMart, AT&T, Exxon and McDonalds are performing very strongly, particularly when they invest consistently in advertising and marketing. By contrast unnecessary or discretionary brands like Starbucks, Nike, Coca Cola and L‟Oreal are declining in value as consumers watch their finances more carefully.”

“There is also evidence at the global level that developing world brands are growing rapidly. Samsung, Tata, Bank of China and Lukoil are all good examples of this phenomenon.”

For a more detailed analysis of the BRANDFINANCE™ Global 500 report, please visit www.brandfinance.com

‘The reason for extending the study to include the Gulf Region is because it is imperative companies throughout the Gulf start looking at how shareholders are benefiting from the ‘brand value’ that their businesses have built up over time, whilst many of them are expanding into the global marketplace’ comments Gautam Sen-Gupta, Managing Director Brand Finance Middle East.

Brand Finance calculates the brand values in the study using the ‘Royalty Relief’ approach – a methodology recognised by technical authorities worldwide that ties back to the commercial reality of brands: their ability to command a premium in an arm’s length transaction. This method is highly actionable for accounting, tax, litigation and commercial purposes.

According to the study, Emirates Airlines is the most valuable brand within not only the UAE but in the whole Gulf Region. Emirates Airlines has a brand value of AED 11.8 billion and a brand strength rating of AA+, which is the highest brand score achieved in this year’s study. Despite rising jet fuel prices, Emirates Airlines continues to expand and become a truly global airline with a highly innovative service culture, which has evidently helped the brand grow and develop value.

On a regional basis, Bahrain’s most valuable brand is Batelco with a brand value of BD 190 million (US$ 503 million) and a brand strength rating of A. Kuwait’s most valuable brand is Zain with a brand value of KD 950 million (US$ 3.6 billion) and a brand strength rating of A+. Oman’s most valuable brand is Omantel with a brand value of OR 144 million (US$ 374 million) and a brand strength rating of A-. Qatar’s most valuable brand is Q-Tel with a brand value of QAR 6.3 billion (US$1.7 billion) and a brand strength rating of A+. Saudi Arabia’s most valuable brand is Saudi Telecom with a brand value of SAR 10.2 billion (US$ 2.7 billion) and a brand strength rating of A.

Evidently from these regional results the most valuable brands are all from the Telecommunications sector excluding the UAE’s most valuable Airline sector. This is illustrative of the Gulf Region’s Telecommunication sector being one of the fastest growing in the world. However, the telecommunications sector is only the second most valuable sector within the index with a total brand value of US$ 11.9 billion. Despite the economic downturn, the banking sector is the most valuable sector amongst the Gulf Regions with a total brand value of US$ 16.5 billion.

Commenting on the Brand Finance Gulf Region Index 2008, David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance plc states:

‘With only a few notably valuable brands predominantly in the banking, telecommunication and airline industry, the Gulf region’s sectors are generally not generating as much value as international leaders. Greater emphasis needs to be placed on determining the value drivers behind the brand and developing brand strategies that leverage this value amongst all the stakeholder groups. This is especially relevant in tightening economic conditions. Short sighted reductions in brand investment can destroy long term value.’

For a more detailed analysis of the Brand Finance Middle East Gulf Region Top Brands, please press here

Brand Finance’s methodology takes into account the following revenue lines: broadcasting, IPL sponsorship, team sponsorship, merchandising and gate receipts as well as the effect of performance, the catchment population of the city, the capacity of the stadium and the presence of iconic players. With India’s huge passion for cricket and its growing economy, the IPL has become the Asia’s premier sporting showcase and attractor of revenue.

“The ultimate proof of the success of the IPL Branded System will come when the franchisees decide to list their teams. This is a real possibility in the next 2-3 years,” commented Unni Krishnan, Managing Director of Brand Finance India.

Despite propping up the bottom of this year’s edition of the IPL taking place in South Africa, the Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) are the most valuable franchise brand at US$42.1million. Celebrity co-owner Shah Rukh Khan’s hard-selling of the KKR brand has counteracted the team’s poor on-field performance.

Rajasthan Royal’s brand value of US$39.5million at 59% of its franchise fee of US$67million, makes the reigning champions – part-owned by Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty – IPL’s most profitable investment.

“When determining our brand ratings we have paid particular attention the ability of the franchises to generate advertising revenue, as well as the potential size of their support base. Rajasthan and Kolkata scored highly in these respective measures,” said Brand Finance’s sports analyst, Alexander Bird.

“The success of each franchise will ultimately depend on its ability to attract and retain supporters who come to watch the team, and not just the players.”

To download this press release and table, please click: http://www.brandfinance.com/docs/news.asp

Full document download here

Brand Finance's new ranking of international financial brands has just been published. It covers all banking businesses and types of clients, from consumers to major corporations and institutional clients.

The ranking was established at the end of December 2007 and, therefore, reflects the initial impact of the sub-prime crisis on the reputation of the respective institutions. The BNP Paribas brand is ranked 7th in the Global 500 Financial Brands Index, with an estimated value of USD 14.6 billion, or approximately 15% of the Group's total value. BNP Paribas is up one place from the previous ranking published in 2006 and its brand value has risen more than USD 2 billion (+19%) despite the difficult economic situation. In terms of banks rather than all financial brands, the Group's brand ranks 6th as American Express is a credit card issuer rather than a bank.

The report ranks BNP Paribas in the Top 5 worldwide banking brands in the retail banking segment. Its brand value for retail customers is USD 8.5 billion. Brand Finance has upgraded its rating of BNP Paribas from A to A+. Part of BNP Paribas' success in this survey over the last 2 years is due to the successful integration of BNL which has helped the Group's brand achieve greater visibility. Another happy consequence of the BNP Paribas/BNL marriage is that BNL's brand now appears for the first time in this prestigious report, ranked 157 with a brand value of USD 717 million, a highly satisfying result for a brand that operates in a single country.

These improved rankings confirm that our brand is today a major asset for the Group and represents a genuine added value to its competitiveness. This progress is due to the Group's sales and financial performance, its improvement in terms of quality, and the high visibility of its communications strategy. The Brand Finance ranking is in line with numerous recent studies which have shown very positive developments in the perception of our brand: the No. 1 investment bank in Continental Europe according to the annual Financial Times survey; the No. 2 private bank in the eurozone according to Euromoney; the No. 1 French bank in fee competitiveness according to Mieux-Vivre, and most widely recognized sponsor in France (all sports included) according to Sport Lab. 

For full report, please press here