Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > Mac Blog Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old May 21, 2013, 11:33 PM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Apple Named World's Most Valuable Brand for Third Year in a Row




Millward Brown today released its annual BrandZ study of global brands (via AllThingsD), which found Apple to be the world's most valuable brand for the third straight year.

Although Apple topped the list once again, its brand value only increased 1% to $185 billion, which is not as impressive as the 19% increase (from $153 billion in 2011 to $183 billion in 2012) it received last year. Apple rival Google jumped back up to the second spot with a brand value of $137 billion (a 5% increase) and Samsung clocked in a 51% increase and a $21.4 billion brand value at the 30th spot.

Overall, Millward Brown said that the technology sector was "flat," declining after 5 years of growth:
Quote:
Without the surge in*Apple*and*Facebook*brand value that helped drive category growth,*Technology declined 1 percent*in the BrandZ(TM) 2013 ranking, after five years averaging 8 percent annual category growth.
Among other top brands, IBM fell down to the third spot with a brand value of $112 billion while Microsoft dropped 9% to $69.8 billion and Facebook fell 36% to $21 billion. Yahoo, which fell out of the top 100 years ago, returned to the 92nd spot with a brand value of $9.8 billion.

While "brand value" studies can be difficult to compare, because of the use of differing methodologies used by those who gather the data can lead to much different results, they can be a good look at marketing and branding trends.

Article Link: Apple Named World's Most Valuable Brand for Third Year in a Row
MacRumors is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 11:50 PM   #2
toaster64
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
McDonald's is a valuable brand? Most people I know (including me) stay clear of anything labeled with that "M".

Apple deserves a high spot, but put Beats up on #1. That "b" sells $30 headphones for >$200.

Last edited by toaster64; May 22, 2013 at 12:11 AM.
toaster64 is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 11:52 PM   #3
-LikesMac-
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
I'm wondering what exactly does brand value represent. Also, how is Coca Cola rising?
__________________

13'' MBP, 2.7GHz i7, 4GB RAM, 500GB HDD, HD3000
-LikesMac- is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 11:54 PM   #4
toaster64
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by -LikesMac- View Post
I'm wondering what exactly does brand value represent. Also, how is Coca Cola rising?
Rising economy => less people buying Shasta knockoffs?
toaster64 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 11:54 PM   #5
tutubibi
macrumors 6502a
 
tutubibi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: localhost
It's billions not millions, look at the column heading.
Based on that Apple brand is worth 185 Billion $, makes much more sense than 185 million $ as that would be pocket change compared to Apple's market valuation.
tutubibi is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2013, 11:58 PM   #6
toaster64
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by tutubibi View Post
It's billions not millions, look at the column heading.
Based on that Apple brand is worth 185 Billion $, makes much more sense than 185 million $ as that would be pocket change compared to Apple's market valuation.
Brand value is not related to market cap, I think.
toaster64 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 12:01 AM   #7
tutubibi
macrumors 6502a
 
tutubibi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: localhost
Quote:
Originally Posted by toaster64 View Post
Brand value is not related to market cap.
I am not saying it is ... just saying that 185 million is too small compared to Apple's value as a company. 185 billion (correct figure) makes much more sense.

In fact, there is some relationship ... imagine if some company is selling exactly the same products as Apple, same quality, same everything, but label does not say Apple, that company would be worth 185 B$ less than Apple.

Last edited by tutubibi; May 22, 2013 at 12:13 AM. Reason: spelling
tutubibi is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 12:11 AM   #8
toaster64
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by tutubibi View Post
In fact, there is some relation ... image if some company is selling exactly the same products as Apple, same quality, same everything, but label does not say Apple, that company would be worth 185 B$ less than Apple.
Makes sense. Besides, Samsung was recently worth about $185G less than Apple
toaster64 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 12:13 AM   #9
linuxcooldude
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by tutubibi View Post
I am not saying it is ... just saying that 185 million is too small compared to Apple's value as a company. 185 billion (correct figure) makes much more sense.

In fact, there is some relation ... image if some company is selling exactly the same products as Apple, same quality, same everything, but label does not say Apple, that company would be worth 185 B$ less than Apple.
McDonald & Coca Cola have been far more consistant then Apple over the long term. We seen Apples stocks drop over $300 very quickly.
__________________
Techshow:http://www.justin.tv/linuxcooldude
linuxcooldude is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 12:13 AM   #10
jclo
Editor
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by tutubibi View Post
I am not saying it is ... just saying that 185 million is too small compared to Apple's value as a company. 185 billion (correct figure) makes much more sense.

In fact, there is some relationship ... imagine if some company is selling exactly the same products as Apple, same quality, same everything, but label does not say Apple, that company would be worth 185 B$ less than Apple.
It is billions, not millions. Post has been updated.
jclo is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 12:16 AM   #11
spicynujac
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2012
I agree Apple is probably the most valuable brand In the USA. But I would think worldwide Coca Cola and McDonalds would take the prize. Smartphones only THIS year surpassed feature phOnes in sales volume in the USA. Worldwide, they are only a fraction, and most people can't afford Apple products. They are gaining recognition but I can't believe they are as well known as McD or Coke.

But what I really disagree with is IBM and Google. I couldn't tell you anything about IBM except that they used to make great notebooks. And Google with all it's spying and violations of the don't be evil rule--I use it but mainly out of habit and cause I have gmail. I don't necessarily think its the best search engine out there. And it doesn't have the brand cachet that Apple does.
spicynujac is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 12:18 AM   #12
tech4all
macrumors 68040
 
tech4all's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: NorCal
Quote:
Originally Posted by toaster64 View Post
McDonald's is a valuable brand? Most people I know (including me) stay clear of anything labeled with that "M".
Unless you know everyone on this planet, your point is moot.
__________________
I use OS X because of Windows. And I use Android because of iOS.
tech4all is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 12:19 AM   #13
ArtOfWarfare
macrumors 603
 
ArtOfWarfare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Send a message via Skype™ to ArtOfWarfare
Quote:
Originally Posted by toaster64 View Post
McDonald's is a valuable brand? Most people I know (including me) stay clear of anything labeled with that "M".
I was turned off of McD's about 12 years ago. I'm doing a business research project on them and have found that they've actually really reinvented themselves over the last decade. They've done away with a lot of the childish things (the characters, the play places,) and have been trying to make themselves into more of a cafe kind of place, like StarBucks.

Nutritional information is no longer something that they try to keep a secret from customers - it's plainly printed on everything for you to look at and think, "That's interesting - I'm consuming the amount of salt with this one product that doctors think I should each day." and then stop caring because it tastes okay and the price is dirt cheap.

Not that I eat it on a regular basis by any stretch of the imagination. I've had McDonald's four times in the past 5 years... and my bias isn't against fast food in general, I eat at Burger King and Wendy's on a monthly basis.
__________________
Don't tell me Macs don't last: 2007 iMac, 2007 Mac Mini, 2008 MacBook Air, all Vintage.
(iMac obsoletion: April 28, 2015, MBA: October 14, 2015, Mac Mini: March 9, 2016)
ArtOfWarfare is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 12:30 AM   #14
linuxcooldude
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtOfWarfare View Post
I was turned off of McD's about 12 years ago. I'm doing a business research project on them and have found that they've actually really reinvented themselves over the last decade. They've done away with a lot of the childish things (the characters, the play places,) and have been trying to make themselves into more of a cafe kind of place, like StarBucks.

Nutritional information is no longer something that they try to keep a secret from customers - it's plainly printed on everything for you to look at and think, "That's interesting - I'm consuming the amount of salt with this one product that doctors think I should each day." and then stop caring because it tastes okay and the price is dirt cheap.

Not that I eat it on a regular basis by any stretch of the imagination. I've had McDonald's four times in the past 5 years... and my bias isn't against fast food in general, I eat at Burger King and Wendy's on a monthly basis.
You will find most businesses do that. Apples no different going into the mobile market was reinventing themselves and going in a different direction.

I don't think its no secret fast food is fattening. Nutritional information is now required by law in the U.S.
__________________
Techshow:http://www.justin.tv/linuxcooldude
linuxcooldude is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 02:18 AM   #15
ALange
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Poland
Quote:
Originally Posted by spicynujac View Post
But what I really disagree with is IBM and Google. I couldn't tell you anything about IBM except that they used to make great notebooks. And Google with all it's spying and violations of the don't be evil rule--I use it but mainly out of habit and cause I have gmail. I don't necessarily think its the best search engine out there. And it doesn't have the brand cachet that Apple does.
wahahhahaha icant stop laughing. get more knowlesge about what ibm was and is doing.

damn, kids this days are brainwashed...
ALange is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 03:54 AM   #16
iMikeT
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: California
Is there any real value in any of this?
iMikeT is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 04:28 AM   #17
ArchAndroid
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: London, England
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxcooldude View Post
McDonald & Coca Cola have been far more consistant then Apple over the long term. We seen Apples stocks drop over $300 very quickly.
The technology companies are much more impressive because they are under constant pressure to keep on evolving.

With Coca Cola and McDonalds, it is pretty much invariable that people are going to consume fast food and fizzy drinks.
__________________
Intel Core i7-2600k | Sapphire R9 290 Tri-X | Asus P8P67-M Pro | Samsung 8GB DDR3-2133 | Samsung 830 256GB | WD 1.5TB + 1TB | Dell U2412M
MacBook Pro 15.4" 2.66GHz | Samsung Galaxy SIII | iPod Touch
ArchAndroid is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 07:39 AM   #18
Mr.damien
Guest
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tutubibi View Post
I am not saying it is ... just saying that 185 million is too small compared to Apple's value as a company. 185 billion (correct figure) makes much more sense.

In fact, there is some relationship ... imagine if some company is selling exactly the same products as Apple, same quality, same everything, but label does not say Apple, that company would be worth 185 B$ less than Apple.
Well no. Because nobody is able to reproduce what Apple is doing so...
  0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 07:41 AM   #19
Compile 'em all
macrumors 601
 
Compile 'em all's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Where is Samsung?
__________________
Compile 'em all is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 07:58 AM   #20
eawmp1
macrumors 601
 
eawmp1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: FL
Quote:
Originally Posted by compile 'em all View Post
where is samsung?
30
eawmp1 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 08:19 AM   #21
seek3r
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by spicynujac View Post
But what I really disagree with is IBM and Google. I couldn't tell you anything about IBM except that they used to make great notebooks.
Ever heard "no one ever got fired for buying IBM"? That's why their brand is so valuable.
seek3r is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 08:36 AM   #22
Greg.
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: London, UK
Really surprised that Nike is only 56th. Most of their profit is derived from the existence of their brand.
__________________
13.3" MacBook Pro || OnePlus One || Google Nexus 7
Greg. is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 09:00 AM   #23
210
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London, England
Send a message via ICQ to 210 Send a message via AIM to 210 Send a message via MSN to 210 Send a message via Yahoo to 210
I'm not sure if valuable brand equates to recognisable brand, but I think it would. Nearly everyone, whether they have one of its products or not, has heard of Apple and certainly recognises the logo. They have also heard of the iPod and iPhone, I'm sure as well.

However, by that logic I would have put Coca-Cola at number one as everyone on the planet knows the drink and very likely has tried it.

I have to agree that I am not sure why IBM is always so high in the list. Other than knowing the name, I don't think most of the public knows what they do.
__________________
210 - U Know The Name, U Know The Number
210 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 09:01 AM   #24
GoCubsGo
macrumors Nehalem
 
GoCubsGo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210 View Post
I'm not sure if valuable brand equates to recognisable brand, but I think it would.(snip)
I believe to some extent that noticeably plays a big role in value. I think you're right on the money here.
GoCubsGo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2013, 09:02 AM   #25
ConCat
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: In an ethereal plane of existence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spicynujac View Post
I agree Apple is probably the most valuable brand In the USA. But I would think worldwide Coca Cola and McDonalds would take the prize. Smartphones only THIS year surpassed feature phOnes in sales volume in the USA. Worldwide, they are only a fraction, and most people can't afford Apple products. They are gaining recognition but I can't believe they are as well known as McD or Coke.

But what I really disagree with is IBM and Google. I couldn't tell you anything about IBM except that they used to make great notebooks. And Google with all it's spying and violations of the don't be evil rule--I use it but mainly out of habit and cause I have gmail. I don't necessarily think its the best search engine out there. And it doesn't have the brand cachet that Apple does.
Take a look at what computers are used as cash registers these days. Usually IBM. The majority of their business isn't in the consumer market. IBM stuff

Interesting... Looks like Toshiba recently bought that specific part of their business. Go figure!

The thing about Google is just plain ignorant though... Ever heard of Android? It hasn't been a search engine+email for many years now...

Last edited by ConCat; May 22, 2013 at 09:16 AM.
ConCat is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > Mac Blog Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Google Beats Out Apple as World's Most Valuable Brand MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 126 May 27, 2014 02:53 PM
Apple Named Most Valuable Billion Dollar Brand in America MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 102 Mar 31, 2014 04:24 PM
Apple Tops Coca-Cola, Google to Become World's Most Valuable Brand MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 158 Oct 9, 2013 06:59 PM
Apple is back as the most valuable company in the world rMBP15 Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 2 Feb 7, 2013 11:08 AM
Apple Again The Second Most Valuable Publicly Traded Company in the World MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 267 Jan 30, 2013 07:36 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:02 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC