Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I am a little surprised at the lack of knowledge about IBM in this thread. Most people reading this have used something made by, or designed by, IBM today. It could be the scanner and backend software/hardware at the supermarket (IBM invented the UPC). Or perhaps the ATM (invented that too). They are into many industries, and are well diversified.

Just last year their value surpassed Microsoft's for the first time since 1996. All without selling a single laptop.




Michael

The lack of IBM knowledge here is just pure ignorance. While it may not seem all that exciting, their stuff just "works".

Actually, they wrote the book on it. Fairly detailed in fact.
 
Another BS list put together by "ANALysts"

Macrumors really has gone down the tube. I'm "switching" to 9to5Mac...
 
I am a little surprised at the lack of knowledge about IBM in this thread. Most people reading this have used something made by, or designed by, IBM today. It could be the scanner and backend software/hardware at the supermarket (IBM invented the UPC). Or perhaps the ATM (invented that too). They are into many industries, and are well diversified.

Just last year their value surpassed Microsoft's for the first time since 1996. All without selling a single laptop.
This.

IBM is less visible to the common consumer because they've largely left the consumer space, but they do big business with big customers (meaning governments and other large companies), and are involved in enormous amounts of cutting edge research and development.

I know we all love Apple and use their consumer products, but when did Apple develop AIs that could defeat the world's best human players in chess or Jeopardy?
 
Not surprised Google dropped in brand value. Their recent privacy violations and other unwanted actions didn't sit well with many people and the Google name has lost quite a bit of the positive association it used to have.

The "don't be evil" thing was actually something people believed around 2006 or so but lately it has become a running joke.

Yeah, Google Chrome has been quite annoying. I always get ads telling me that it will speed up my internet browsing or something. I tried it, and it was slower and hogged CPU and RAM, then it eventually just stopped loading any pages at all.

It's all a big scheme to get people sucked in. The problem is that their half-baked idea of a cloud-based PC failed, so I guess they have to stay in the advertising industry.

----------

Another BS list put together by "ANALysts"

Macrumors really has gone down the tube. I'm "switching" to 9to5Mac...

Not really... most of the stuff here is good. As long as there isn't so much junk that it makes me miss the good articles or waste a lot of my time, I'm fine.

This article is pretty sketchy. Where is Disney? And why is Marlboro so high up?

----------

This.

IBM is less visible to the common consumer because they've largely left the consumer space, but they do big business with big customers (meaning governments and other large companies), and are involved in enormous amounts of cutting edge research and development.

I know we all love Apple and use their consumer products, but when did Apple develop AIs that could defeat the world's best human players in chess or Jeopardy?

My dad told me about IBM in the old days. They were super super advanced. I've never used an IBM consumer product (because of course they don't make many), but I don't doubt their high value.
 
Given that AT&T and Verizon cracked the top 10, I'm not sure how much I trust these rankings. What about Nike? GE? Amazon.com?

Edit: I decided to check out the full 100 list. Looks like GE and Amazon.com were close at 11 and 18, respectively. But Nike was 44th? Behind such venerable brands as HP, SAP, and HSBC? Yeah, sure.

Nike's brand has lowered significantly in the past 10-15 years. I don't find that surprising at all.

----------

If the value were based on users, you would be right. Problem is Americans pay a major premium for Verizon and AT&T services. If I pay ten times as much for my mobile service and I'm one person, aren't I equally as valuable as ten people?

----------

The Vodafone list include Verizon subscribers. Your point is still a good one, but just an FYI.

Americans are worth more than other people and Texans are worth more than other Americans. What one Texan buys is worth like what 500 people in France buy.
 
Given that AT&T and Verizon cracked the top 10, I'm not sure how much I trust these rankings. What about Nike? GE? Amazon.com?

Edit: I decided to check out the full 100 list. Looks like GE and Amazon.com were close at 11 and 18, respectively. But Nike was 44th? Behind such venerable brands as HP, SAP, and HSBC? Yeah, sure.

I agree with you, but it would be worth noting that Nike isn't as popular in the rest of the world, as it is in the U.S.
Even tho 44 is way to low, top 20 seems like a better spot
 
Your flaw is that you are narrowing your brand from AT&T to AT&T Mobility, and Verizon to Verizon Wireless. Both are significantly smaller than their overall brands/company.

Yeah Vodafone has a market cap of 138 billion and AT&T has one of 198 billion.

Sometimes I think people get confused about how different European and American cell service is.

----------

What a confusing list, ATT is pretty much unanimously feared and was a finalist in Consumerists "worst company in america" contest, their branding actually hurts them. So is it a measure of how many people know the brand (which isnt the case with some of the weird tech brands so high), how much money each company makes, or something else? There is simply no possible way ATT has what is considered a positive brand, the only thing they are known for is sucking, Sony was actually booed by a whole auditorium when they announced the Vita would be exclusive to ATT.. booed!

If it is a ranking based on how the brand helps their business then this research company is a joke.

You must live in a bizarro world.
 
If this were my website i would have blurred the name out.

Yeah, because the only thing we need more of is censorship...

----------

American-centric nonsense. Verizon and AT&T are totally unknown outside of the USA and as for IBM? Most people under 25 wouldn't know it existed.

This is clearly just made up.

Go to China, Romania, Australia or Thailand and ask about Verizon and you will get a strange look. Coca Cola or McDonalds, Facebook or Nike should be top.

Unfortunately for you, this list is not governed by popularity or fame. It's populated by the most VALUABLE companies.
 
Does this really cover the world's most valuable brands?

I'm surprised that AT&T and Verizon are listed here, given the limited number of people who are exposed to their products. Surely Vodafone and T-Mobile are more valuable given how many more subscribers they have.

(According to this

AT&T: 100m
Verizon: 108m
T-Mobile: 328m
Vodafone: 439m)

Using your method, Facebook would be #1. It's not about raw numbers. It's about brand respect and goodwill worldwide.
 
Nike's brand has lowered significantly in the past 10-15 years. I don't find that surprising at all.

----------



Americans are worth more than other people and Texans are worth more than other Americans. What one Texan buys is worth like what 500 people in France buy.


lmao i do like your statement (about texans more so then americans) but can you explain haha

----------

i think the majority of you people are confusing the meaning of "most valuable brand NAME" with "Most Valuable Companies in the World(money-wise)"
in which case apple still is number one of course haha, and the rest are very different.
 
I'm having a hard time trusting these values. There are a lot of companies I would have thought more valuable than IBM or Verizon.

This list seems to correlate very highly to the net profits of the companies listed, but that's not a fair indicator of brand power. Brand power is more about the ability to create consumer confidence, maintain it, and transcend barriers. I'd say the likes of Coke or Disney are more powerful in that regard than a lot of the first 7 on that list.
 
I'm surprised IBM is so high on that list ... If anything, I would think McDonalds would be higher.
I'm not surprised since IBM provides a very comprehensive set of exemplary enterprise services, to large scale corporations around the world. Those unfamiliar with big business would not be aware of this.
 
Hopefully Cook doesn't mess this up. Steve Jobs was a great visionary, Tim Cook just reminds me of a typical fat cat.

Jobs was an amazing marketer. He knew how to sell Apple products. What remains to be seen is if Cook can either emulate that marketing power, find new talent to replace it, or find a new way to make Apple a powerhouse.
 
I have witnessed Apple's explosion in the past 10 years, curious how the next 10 will pan out...
I too have been very close to Apple for many years. Between the slide to near extinction, then the resurgence to astronomical highs, has made Apple an interesting company to follow.

I'm very interested to see how long Apple can keep up this success before the decline creeps up on them. History of business teaches us that sooner or later their fortunes will change. It's only a matter of time.

When your on the top of the mountain you're a sitting duck :)
 
Now that definitely doesn't explain microsoft:)




Let's look at Disney. For instance, if I want to build a theme park and I work with six flags, I can charge around $40 for admission. Let's say Disney slaps its name on a theme park. The result is single day $80 tickets.

The Apple name is simply worth so much more than it's competitors. More people wait for Apple's response to a product or new technology than anyone else. Apple doesn't just double revenue like Disney over Six Flags, it makes 100 times as much as its competitors by selling more expensive products to hundreds of times the number of people.

Yeah, except I don't know anyone who trusts Microsoft. Even Windows users think MS sucks, but they like Dell or whatever hardware they are using.

----------

I too have been very close to Apple for many years. Between the slide to near extinction, then the resurgence to astronomical highs, has made Apple an interesting company to follow.

I'm very interested to see how long Apple can keep up this success before the decline creeps up on them. History of business teaches us that sooner or later their fortunes will change. It's only a matter of time.

When your on the top of the mountain you're a sitting duck :)

Facebook, for one, has nowhere to go but down. I am very confident that it is just a trend that will subside. People at my school who previously lived on facebook.com are now already ignoring it somewhat. And their IPO's failure was predictable with all of the overrating of Facebook.
 
Yeah, Google Chrome has been quite annoying. I always get ads telling me that it will speed up my internet browsing or something. I tried it, and it was slower and hogged CPU and RAM, then it eventually just stopped loading any pages at all.

It's all a big scheme to get people sucked in. The problem is that their half-baked idea of a cloud-based PC failed, so I guess they have to stay in the advertising industry.

I use Google Chrome on both my Mac and PC and have none of the issues you're experiences. I like Chrome's simple GUI. Odd that it would stop loading pages for you.
 
It's good to see Google sliding down the rankings. They'll fall even further when iWeb is relaunched as the world's most revolutionary and magical search engine with the total iAds experience.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.