Millward Brown, a subsidiary of the WPP, has come out with its annual list and report, BrandZ, that ranks the most valuable brands in the world. Unsurprisingly, Google tops the list for the third year in a row, with the Google brand valued at $100 billion, rising 16% in value over the past year from $86 billion. Microsoft comes in second, with its brand valued at $76.2 billion, only rising 8% in value over the past year. Last summer, Google had the no. 2 reputation in the world, according to The Reputation Index, and Microsoft didn’t even break into the top 40 (the company was ranked #43 in terms of reputation). In last year’s BrandZ rankings, Microsoft was third on the list behind General Electric, so the company has inched a little closer to Google.
Other notable tech companies that made the top 10 in this years most valuable brands list were IBM (no. 4, valuation: $66.6B), Apple (no. 6, Valuation: $63.1B), China Mobile (no. 7, Valuation: $61.2B), and Vodafone (no. 9, valuation: $53.7B). Ten of the top 25 brands are technology brands. Amazon is no. 26, AT&T is no. 28, Cisco is no. 30, eBay is no. 54 and Yahoo is no. 81, falling from no. 62 last year. Yahoo’s brand value went from $11.5B to $7.9B.
Here’s the top 20 list and a screenshot of the top 100 below:
1. Google ($100 B)
2. Microsoft ($76.2 B)
3. Coca-Cola ($67.6 B)
4. IBM ($66.6 B)
5. McDonalds ($66.5 B)
6. Apple ($66.1 B)
7. China Mobile ($61.2 B)
8. GE ($59.7 B)
9. Vodafone ($53.7 B)
10. Marlboro ($49.4 B)
11. Walmart ($41 B)
12. ICBC ($35 B)
13. Nokia ($35.1 B)
14. Toyota ($29.9 B)
15. UPS ($27.8 B)
16. Blackberry ($27.4 B)
17. HP ($26.7 B)
18. BMW ($23.9 B)
19. SAP ($23.6 B)
20. Disney ($23.1 B)
21. Tesco ($22.9 B)
22. Gillete ($22.9 B)
23. Intel ($22.8 B)
24. China Construction Bank ($22.8 B)
25. Oracle ($21.4 B)
It would be interesting to see a reputation index for popular start-ups. Has anyone come across something like this?
online ads revenue dip was not known during this report release.
49.4B for Marlboro?!? I need a smoke.
nobody has that kind of money to pay to google. great and sad at the same time…:P
cheers,
marvin
http://yousuggest.us
The net worth of the haulted construction projects of Dubai;s King crosses 500 Billion .. So its not like ‘nobody has that kind of money’ but ya .. very less ppl really would put their bets on stuff like that .. !!
Not a tech related comments, but didn’t Nike dominate lists like this for years. Shocked to see them outside of the top 50 now.
I don’t think it’s that surprising, Steve. Nike’s brand still has a lot of cachet, but I certainly don’t think any of their recent marketing campaigns have had the same generation-defining appeal that made them such an idolized brand in the ’90s.
Google over the Big Mac?
(here’s a rhyme)
Millward Brown is smoking Crack!
Hell if Google brings in more revenue than McDonalds. McDs had BILLIONS served way before Sergey and his boy was munching on Big N Tasty’s tryng to string those first server together.
Love Google to death, but given the choice to live without Google search or McD’s fries… Back to the library my friends.
Yeah, damn straight. What the hell is the world coming to?
Here’s the real list.
1. Walmart
2. McDonald’s
3. Marlboro
4. Pabst Blue Ribbon
5. Jack Daniels
6. (screw everything else)
Think again, this is the real list:
1. Coca-Cola
2. McDonalds
3. Marlboro
No one in developing worlds give two shits about Walmart or Google. There isn’t a place on this planet I haven’t been able to find a Coca-Cola sign or a bottle of their drink. From Cambodia to Africa to the developed cities, it is everywhere. Bhutan might be the only exception.
What is retarded is all the talk about Market Cap. It is TOTALLY unrelated to this conversation. Why isn’t anyone complaining that Walmarts brand 5x less than it’s market cap? Yes Walmart is 200Billion market cap.
Learn to separate brand from company. It is an intangible asset al la “goodwill”
Investopedia explains Brand
Once a brand has created positive sentiment among its target audience, the firm is said to have built brand equity. Some examples of firms with brand equity – possessing very recognizable brands of products – are Microsoft, Coca-Cola, Ferrari, Sony, The Gap and Nokia.
Google over the Big Mac?
(here’s a rhyme)
Millward Brown is smoking Crack!
Hell if Google brings in more revenue than McDonalds. McDs had BILLIONS served way before Sergey and his boy was munching on Big N Tasty’s tryng to string those first server together.
Love Google to death, but given the choice to live without Google search or McD’s fries… Back to the library my friends.
Seriously?
You would rather do without things like GMail, Google Maps, etc. instead of f’n McNasty McDonalds?
Eat up fatty.
You must be french
what a joke!!! idiots
Well… I’m sure next year (or in 2012) we will see the name: facebook and twitter there as well
==
http://twitter-...zz.blogspot.com
I seriously doubt that!
Yeah, what the hell are you smoking lee?
The Google brand is worth $100 billion but the market cap is near $125 billion.
The two are unrelated. Market cap is about profits and revenue. Brand is about your image and how many people know your logo.
If you strip Google and Coca-Cola of all their assets but let them keep their name and logo who will be able to rebuild faster? I mean everything. Google gets zero computers, zero lines of code. Coca-Cola gets zero factories. Who wins? Coca-Cola. Slap it on a bottle and it sells. Plus they don’t have to own any factories, all the distributors do.
This example makes a lot of sense to me. Take away everything else, and see how much the company is worth when left with just the name.
Coca-cola generates almost all of its value through marketing. Google is a company of engineers, and it still seems to me that they don’t really get marketing.
facebook / twitter? may be…don’t seem such cool brands to think about, do they? I mean facebook has been there for quite sometime.
Marvin
http://yousuggest.us
this is crap
Originally I thought you guys were going to guess it was http://www.worstpizza.com, but then I realized we aren’t work 100k let alone billions!
This is silly. These valuations are highly subjective and largely irrelevant since the price of any asset is limited by what the market will pay. I especially like the Intel brand valuation since it suggests that any competitor could profitably stay on the forefront of x86 chip development but without the Intel brand, the company would be nearly worthless.
CRAP
is it just me? am I blind? or is there no Sony on that list?
McDonalds?
the list sample seems biased.
marvin
#22 should be “Gillette”… not “Gillete”
so what… one letter got shaved off.
4. IBM ($66.6 B)
the numbers speak for themselves
Google stock will see 700 with n18 months because it’s immune to the fake, media generated recession. huge growth, market dominance, constant innovation. htp://iamned.com/blog/ keep buying stocks
What is the point of this list? Is anyone going to be buying the brands without buying the whole company? Uh, no. So why would anyone care about this exercise? And because of the way they calculate it, the brand’s value is directly related to the current earnings of the company anyway. Why not just have a list of the most profitable companies and be done with it? I feel like this list and the people who produced it belong in a Dilbert cartoon.
Here’s a quick example of the relevance of “brand value”:
Their 2007 #7: Citi with a brand value of $33.7B.
Today’s Citigroup market cap: $17B.
This is retarded.
Google’s market cap is $125B. $100B of that is the word “Google” and 4 colors?
All the IP, hardware, cash, buildings, data, and that dinosaur at the headquarters are 20% of their value?
Shouldn’t Exxon Mobil be on this list somewhere?
This is years the most retarded study…
Blackberry that high?? WOW!!
100 billion? That’s it? The brand i’m thinking of actually isn’t a brand, but rather a family crest. Wanna know who? The Rothschild family. Their Trillionaires. Think i’m nuts? Google info on their wealth. Some say they have an estimated 400-500 trillion dollars. Oh yeah, their evil too.
re: “Some say they have an estimated 400-500 trillion dollars”
I love it!
it must be true!
I Read It On The Internet!
Zimbabwean dollars?
Those companies are some big big fish!!
I’m surprised that Intel is at the bottom of the list and even more surprised that AMD didn’t make it in there.
The Coca Cola logo will always be iconic, long after its product has left us. The logos and graphic branding of Google and MS do not hold a candle to the Coca Cola logo. The next most recognizable logo in terms of branding is Ford’s wonderful logo. The author/analyst should explain his rankings and the criteria, particularly recognition versus monetization.
It’s quite obvious that it was Google Earth that was used to plan the TERRORIST ATTACKS.
Read the following article to know more in case you have not read it already:
by Nicholas Deleon on December 9, 2008
—————————————
” The terrorist attacks in Mumbai have once again put Google Earth in an unfavorable light. The one (“baby-faced”) terrorist that police caught has said that the terrorists used Google Earth the help plan the attacks. (That they also used everyday cellphones, GPS and other technologies appears to be lost on the ban happy Indian officials.) In order to prevent future attacks, so the line of thinking goes, officials there want at the very least to force Google to blur our sensitive sites from the software, if not ban it outright.
Let’s also keep in mind that India plans to launch its own version of Google Earth, so to speak.
While it seems an overreaction to me to want to ban what amounts to an electronic map—are we looking to ban regular, paper maps now?—in no way was I affected by the attacks, at least not directly, so it’s hard for me to qualify India’s reaction. It does seem that attacking (banning) tools instead of the idea and forces behind those tools is folly. ”
—————————————-
Above mentioned article is taken from :
http://www.crun...rorist-attacks/
—————————————-
In case Google does not understand the consequences, please feel free to click on:
http://images.g...=1&ct=title
————————————–
To the readers:
Ask yourself why is it acceptable if someone else gets hurt, when even a simple thought or fear of such thing happening with yourself is unacceptable. I did not know Google is a ‘good guy’ after being responsible for such a dreadful thing!
Even after becoming no 1 tech company, can Google stop being so greedy?
—————————————-
It’s quite obvious that it was Google Earth that was used to plan the TERRORIST ATTACKS.
Read the following article to know more in case readers have not read it already:
by Nicholas Deleon on December 9, 2008
—————————————
” The terrorist attacks in Mumbai have once again put Google Earth in an unfavorable light. The one (“baby-faced”) terrorist that police caught has said that the terrorists used Google Earth the help plan the attacks. (That they also used everyday cellphones, GPS and other technologies appears to be lost on the ban happy Indian officials.) In order to prevent future attacks, so the line of thinking goes, officials there want at the very least to force Google to blur our sensitive sites from the software, if not ban it outright.
Let’s also keep in mind that India plans to launch its own version of Google Earth, so to speak.
While it seems an overreaction to me to want to ban what amounts to an electronic map—are we looking to ban regular, paper maps now?—in no way was I affected by the attacks, at least not directly, so it’s hard for me to qualify India’s reaction. It does seem that attacking (banning) tools instead of the idea and forces behind those tools is folly. ”
—————————————-
Above mentioned article is taken from :
http://www.crun...rorist-attacks/
—————————————-
In case Google does not understand the consequences, please feel free to click on:
http://images.g...=1&ct=title
————————————–
To the readers:
Ask yourself why is it acceptable if someone else gets hurt, when even a simple thought or fear of such thing happening with yourself is unacceptable. I did not know Google is a ‘good guy’ after being responsible for such a dreadful thing!
Even after becoming no 1 tech company, can Google stop being so greedy?
—————————————-
How about the Best Global Brands List from Interbrand: http://www.inte...bal_brands.aspx
They haven’t updated it for 2009 yet unfortunately, but you can see that Google was nowhere near being worth 100m last year. Be interesting to see where they think it’ll come this year.
Google is king once again, and as noted on Worlds Top Brands – google is Worth Over $100 Billion fantastic work google keep it coming.
Love Google to death, but given the choice to live without Google search or McD’s fries… Back to the library my friends.
In order to prevent future attacks, so the line of thinking goes, officials there want at the very least to force Google to blur our sensitive sites from the software, if not ban it outright.