homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 50.17.107.233
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Accredited PayPal World Seller

Home / Forums Index / Local / Foo
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: incrediBILL & lawman

Foo Forum

    
Google Now in The World's Top Ten Brands
engine




msg:3747922
 2:58 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Google Now in The World's Top Ten [telegraph.co.uk] Brands
Google has joined the definitive list of the 10 most valuable global brands. Interbrand's annual audit said that the company, which has built on its dominance in internet searches, and expanded into software, video, mapping and web browsing, was "the undisputed king of the internet world".

1. Coca-Cola
2. IBM
3. Microsoft
4. GE
5. Nokia
6. Toyota
7. Intel
8. McDonald's
9. Disney
10. Google

 

timster




msg:3747931
 3:16 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

That's an odd list, kind of stodgy. It doesn't even include that company that makes the iPhone.

Millard Brown has had Google as the #1 brand for more than a year now.

skipfactor




msg:3747932
 3:17 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Ten years to the global top ten. Wonder if that was in their first business plan?

SEOMike




msg:3747954
 3:26 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

The two biggest movers of the year included Google, which jumped 10 spots to number 10 on the list, and Apple, which jumped nine spots to 24.

There's your iPhone maker...

wyweb




msg:3747998
 3:58 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

I would have guessed they were already there.

LifeinAsia




msg:3748007
 4:11 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Remember that this is a *world* top 10 list. From what I have seen, Apple has not been a very strong brand in a lot of countries outside the U.S. It has a strong niche, but not a strong brand. It's (apparently) been changing recently, but they still have a little further to go.

Fourteen spots, in fact. :)

maximillianos




msg:3748050
 4:52 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Sad that none of the big three US automakers are in the top ten. I would have expected General Motors to be there since they have a very strong global sales record. Procter & Gamble is also a huge global brand I would have expected to see.

It is interesting to see 8/10 are US companies...

[edited by: maximillianos at 4:55 pm (utc) on Sep. 19, 2008]

StoutFiles




msg:3748052
 4:52 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

I'm surprised IBM is #2.

AlienDev211




msg:3748062
 4:59 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

It hurts to be happy for Google. I would love to hate them, and I hate to love them. As much as they make me angry, google it. I use so many of their products, because they are good. I just hate trying to work with them for rankings and AdWords stuff.

Congrats Google!

httpwebwitch




msg:3748068
 5:04 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

primary source:
Interbrand top brands 2008 [interbrand.com]

Companies are ranked by "brand value". And Google's brand is valued at over 25 billion.

How does one measure that?
What makes Google's brand worth $25,590,000,000, while VISA's brand (#100 on the list) is worth a measly $3,338,000,000?

Their methodology is explained here [interbrand.com]... it's not about recognizability; the brand's value is measured by how much coin is exchanged for products bearing or representing the brand, temprered by some strict criteria. For instance, WalMart doesn't make the list because while they do business internationally, they don't do it under the WalMart brand.

Fascinating data pron.

httpwebwitch




msg:3748073
 5:11 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

also interesting to note new arrivals to the top 100:
Blackberry (at #73), Ferrari, Armani, FedEx, VISA, Mariott, H&M.

nickreynolds




msg:3748075
 5:13 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

What I'd be interested in is the top 10 brands by recognizability not by $$$$$

rogerd




msg:3748077
 5:16 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

The methodology produces some odd top brands, like Oracle at #23. Few outside corporate geekdom would have a clue as to what Oracle does, much less name an Oracle product.

hutcheson




msg:3748079
 5:23 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

I got the impression that the calculation was something like, how much less would customers pay for this tooth-dissolving high-caloric no-nutrition syrup if it didn't say "Coca cola" on the package?

Or, similarly, how much less would businesses pay for this huge rack of mostly-commodity integrated circuits and wires if it didn't say "IBM" on it?

A GM four-wheeling planet-burner wrapped in odd-shaped sheet metal doesn't command a price premium over other similar-functioned products. The COMPANY is big, but its brand doesn't contribute much to the bottom line--unlike Toyota, whose rolling stock command a price higher than comparably-sized competitive cars.

Conversely, Apple's brand is strong -- 50% or more of its retail price tag may be attributable to the brand name. But IBM's volume, even with a smaller brand multiplier, pushes it higher on the list. And Microsoft, for all its vaunted advertising, gets most of its business by technical tie-ins (often involving illegally suppressing competition) not because anyone would, given a free choice, actually pay anything at all for its trash.

Caveat: I'm no marketing expert, and I may have missed the whole point.

grelmar




msg:3748131
 6:28 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

My main day gig is with an asset remarketing outfit. This list strikes me as dead on, based on what I've seen.

In North Am, Europe, Japan - the brands aren't as important as the specs. If we're shipping to Africa, South America, the Middle East, and most of Asia, then brand is everything - it's the easiest way for the end customers to determine a base level of quality.

Used IBM hardware commands an easy 20% premium over similarly specced machines when we sell to those regions. Intel's multiplier is even stronger - to the point where we almost can't unload other chipsets. Unless it's inside an IBM case.

Interesting study.

johnnie




msg:3748169
 7:18 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Where's nintendo?

pageoneresults




msg:3748190
 7:31 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

I would have guessed they were already there.

Me too! And, a bit higher up on the list.

timster




msg:3748246
 8:46 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Here's the Millard Brown list I'd seen a while ago, also a list of global brands. This list just made a lot more sense to me.

[millwardbrown.com ]

Nick, here's a list of most recognized brands:

[rtoonline.com ]

maximillianos




msg:3748299
 10:32 pm on Sep 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Very odd that the world's largest automaker, GM, is not in the top 100.

Alcoholico




msg:3748341
 12:14 am on Sep 20, 2008 (gmt 0)

That's because GM is not a brand per se, Vauxhall, Opel or Chevrolet are.

cdcaveman




msg:3748676
 7:13 pm on Sep 20, 2008 (gmt 0)

as in most companies, they seem to have a life. Google is in the stage of expanding and growth. i would love to see when they take this to its extremity with crap thinclient attempts like chrome. the money over there is flowing like a river. there is so much of it right now they aren't using it properly i'm sure. just a general assumption. but take a look at there more recent projects! i am not a hater for sure. just seems like we are children of google these days. just in hopes to please our master so he will grant us traffic.

m0thman




msg:3748982
 11:33 am on Sep 21, 2008 (gmt 0)

McDonalds, Coca Cola and Disney. Getting ready to hurl already.

IanTurner




msg:3750552
 4:11 pm on Sep 23, 2008 (gmt 0)

Who are GE?

engine




msg:3750561
 4:20 pm on Sep 23, 2008 (gmt 0)

General Electric

cdcaveman




msg:3750582
 4:45 pm on Sep 23, 2008 (gmt 0)

wow! haha what about big blue

LifeinAsia




msg:3750583
 4:51 pm on Sep 23, 2008 (gmt 0)

wow! haha what about big blue

#2

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Local / Foo
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved