Apple named world's most valuable brand for second straight year
One year after taking the top spot away from Coca-Cola, Apple on Thursday was once again ranked as the world's best brand according to Interbrand's "Best Global Brands" report for 2014.
Source: Interbrand
Interbrand, a brand consulting firm based out of New York, rated Apple's brand valuation at $118.9 billion, a 21 percent rise from 2013, reports The New York Times.
Interbrand cited a number of reasons for Apple's continued rise in brand value, including new products and services like Apple Watch and Apple Pay. The company's latest large-screened iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus handsets were also mentioned for their role in boosting sales in burgeoning Asian markets.
Rounding out the top five was Coca-Cola, IBM and Microsoft with respective valuations of $81.6 billion, $72.2 billion and $61.2 billion. Apple rival Samsung came in at No. 7, jumping one position from the 2013 report.
Technology companies are quickly growing in valuation, with four of the top-ten brands coming from the sector. The result would be higher, but Interbrand considers IBM a business brand. Overall, the technology category is the most valuable, ending up with a collective value of $493.2 billion. As for the fastest climber on Interbrand's list, Facebook took the crown with $14.3 billion, a jump of 86 percent from last year.
Source: Interbrand
Interbrand, a brand consulting firm based out of New York, rated Apple's brand valuation at $118.9 billion, a 21 percent rise from 2013, reports The New York Times.
Interbrand cited a number of reasons for Apple's continued rise in brand value, including new products and services like Apple Watch and Apple Pay. The company's latest large-screened iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus handsets were also mentioned for their role in boosting sales in burgeoning Asian markets.
Coming in behind Apple with a brand valuation of $107.4 billion was fellow tech giant Google, which unseated former No. 1 Coca-Cola. Google's estimate represents a 15 percent bump from last year and marks the first time two brands in the "Best Global Brands" report were valued at over $100 billion.Not only is Apple using devices to broaden its penetration, it's also credibly extending into new spaces. With the unveiling of Apple Watch-reportedly more capable than any other smartwatch on the market, not least of all in terms of advanced health monitoring-Apple's future will rely heavily on its ability to partner effectively with healthcare companies. CarPlay, giving drivers access to their iPhone's best features in the car, has brought the brand into the automotive space. HomeKit, providing seamless integration between accessories, promises to make our homes smarter. Apple Pay certainly has the potential to become the most powerful payment platform around.
Rounding out the top five was Coca-Cola, IBM and Microsoft with respective valuations of $81.6 billion, $72.2 billion and $61.2 billion. Apple rival Samsung came in at No. 7, jumping one position from the 2013 report.
Technology companies are quickly growing in valuation, with four of the top-ten brands coming from the sector. The result would be higher, but Interbrand considers IBM a business brand. Overall, the technology category is the most valuable, ending up with a collective value of $493.2 billion. As for the fastest climber on Interbrand's list, Facebook took the crown with $14.3 billion, a jump of 86 percent from last year.
Comments
Yes yes, and their revenue is also exploding. Too bad for them that people are leaving FB behind though:
https://www.stonetemple.com/how-are-people-using-facebook-vii/
I've noticed a serious decline of active Facebook users over the last couple of months. I'm not the only one, others have brought it up without me mentioning it in conversations. I think they're about done. Glad I did not invest. AAPL may be a rollercoaster but there's a bright future in it.
1) Buying their stock isn't an issue; it's just not that incentive. It climbs, but doesn't really do much unless you own a gazillion of them. They supposedly have doubled their income through increased advertising, and while that's a good thing for the company, users aren't happy with it. Many don't mind, but many more think it's annoying.
2) Usage decline is worrisome for them, not for society. I left a post on that site I linked, which awaits moderation:
3) I laughed at this:
4) Keep enjoying the AAPL roller coaster.
I hear John Sculley III is open to offers.
Yeah you're probably right. You shouldn't trust the study findings at all as they are obviously based on a flawed premise using unreliable data as you surmised. Who knows who's really #1. /s
Apple has been killing it this decade, for sure.
Quote:
Funny to see MS being superseded by a company that sells sugared water.
Everybody used to be superseded by a company that sells sugared water. For a very very long time. Actually, they're more of a marketing company than a beverage company. They sell syrup to bottlers and their brand to consumers. Although they cycle in and out of bottler ownership.
Sweet drinks in cans and bottles are falling out of fashion though.
This is total and utter BS.
Google ranked second? Total BS.
Google gives EVERYTHING away for 'Free'. If they started charging for their services they would be #1000.
What brand value does Google exactly have? If they were so valuable would not their branded phones and tablets sell more?
Google doesn't give away ad space for free. They also sell software and software services.
Their brand value drives people to use their software products, which allows Google to process their patterns, which allows them to put ads in front of people's eyeballs.
They don't have much marketing for their phones and tablets. They focus on selling ads.
You already knew all this though, right?
Yeah you're probably right. You shouldn't trust the study findings at all as they are obviously based on a flawed premise using unreliable data as you surmised. Who knows who's really #1. /s
lol
Google doesn't give away ad space for free. They also sell software and software services.
Their brand value drives people to use their software products, which allows Google to process their patterns, which allows them to put ads in front of people's eyeballs.
They don't have much marketing for their phones and tablets. They focus on selling ads.
I thought this was a study for brand power with consumers.
If you ask consumers I don't think any of them would think Google is a top 'brand'.
Apple, Louis Vutton, BMW, Merc Benz, ect would be obvious answers. Don't think Google would even be in the top 100.
I mean from a consumer stand point what on earth does Google 'sell'? Pretty much nothing significant except user data.
I disagree 100%. Like them or not, google is an incredibly powerful brand.
When 70% of the people on this planet (that includes consumers) are looking for something online, they use google. Lots of consumers (normal people), use google as their home page because using search is the number one reason they opened a browser window in the first place.
Lets not forget about android, youtube, maps, gmail, etc. as those all fall under the google brand umbrella. Much like coke, diet coke, dasani water, columbia pictures between 1981 and 1987, etc. fall under the coca cola company brand.
Would be great if you stopped thinking
I thought this was a study for brand power with consumers.
Nope.
I was going to say "tech lovers put google on a pedestal" then I saw @TechLover's straight faced defense of google's brand and LOL'd at the irony. It was perfect irony.
What's funny is a straight-faced dismissal of Google's brand. That's pretty naive.
I was going to say "tech lovers put google on a pedestal" then I saw @TechLover's straight faced defense of google's brand and LOL'd at the irony. It was perfect irony.
Sorry to be "that guy" but since you are talking about me, coincidence =/= irony.
Everyone knows what you meant. But what you should have said is "I was going to say "tech lovers put google on a pedestal" then I saw @TechLover's straight faced defense of google's brand and LOL'd at the coincidence. It was perfectly coincindental."
That last part is an awkward sentence, but you get the idea
So there's the reason for Icahn's activity. The man who successfully destroys such company, will be legend. This is not about money, it's just sports. And as american company, Apple is highly vulnerable to such manipulations. Let's be honest, Wall Street guys can do whatever they want and get away with anything because, as a matter of fact, they run the country.
So? That's what the big boys do when you get to that level. They are just playing with toys. The toys just happen to be companies.
I thought this was a study for brand power with consumers.
If you ask consumers I don't think any of them would think Google is a top 'brand'.
Apple, Louis Vutton, BMW, Merc Benz, ect would be obvious answers. Don't think Google would even be in the top 100.
I mean from a consumer stand point what on earth does Google 'sell'? Pretty much nothing significant except user data.
I see what you are trying to say with the brands you mentioned. Mercedes-Benz being my personal favorite brand. I don't think you understand just how big and powerful the Google Brand is to almost everyone. This includes consumers and most importantly, businesses.
Businesses rely on Google in a big way. Which is how those businesses connect to consumers. When you ask most people to look something up, what do they do. They Google it or say "let me Google that".
I get what you are saying as to Google gives a lot of their products out for free. Although, that's what people use and see several times each and every single day.
So? That's what the big boys do when you get to that level. They are just playing with toys. The toys just happen to be companies.
If they only played with companies, we'd be fine.
That depends on what you mean when you ask consumers to rank "top" brands.
Regarding this ranking, I found this relevant paragraph in the linked NYT article:
Is that what you meant by "top" brands, sog?
What part of valuable did you misinterpret for brand power?