Most valuable brands in the world: Google second, Samsung eighth

September 30, 2013

    brand-value

    From computers to mobile devices and the Internet, we lead lives that are very much centered around modern technology. In turn, technology brands continue to grow in importance. The biggest evidence of this change can be seen by taking a gander at Interbrand’s list of 100 most valuable brands in the world.

    For thirteen years, Interbrand has been compiling this list, using financial performance and other factors to determine brand value. What’s so special about this year? For the first time ever, Coca Cola is no longer at the very top of the list. Apple is now ranked first, with Google following closely as the second most valuable brand.

    Just glancing at the list above, you’ll notice that tech companies clearly dominate the top 10 list, with companies like IBM, Microsoft, Samsung and Intel all making it to the top ten.

    Brands like Apple and Google and Samsung are changing our behavior: how we buy, how we communicate with each other, even whether we speak with each other. They have literally changed the way we live our lives.
    Jez Frampton
    Global chief executive at Interbrand

    For us Android fans, the biggest takeaway is that two important players in the Android world place in the top ten, with Google in second and Samsung in eighth place. As Android continues to kick butt and take names, we wonder how much longer it will be before Apple drops behind Google on the list. We also wonder if Samsung will soon find itself ranking within the top 5 most valuable brands.

    With Android continuing to spread its influence across the globe, we’d say its bound to happen sooner or later.

    0 45 403

    Source

    Comments

    • BDPSU

      America, fvck yeah! 8/10 are American companies.

      • Bryan Z

        you sir are the only one to see the bigger picture here

      • APPLE FTW

        APPLE FTW

        • Bryan Z

          lol

      • MasterMuffin

        Nokia used to be there :’(

      • Roberto Tomás

        you could really say “10/10″ because they are all large multinationals with significant percentages of their companies in many nations (mostly china and the usa).

        Intel is an interesting example. about 10% of its fabs (roughly, maybe less really) are in the USA.

    • Grahaman27

      This is garbage, how is ge above McDonald’s?

      • Luka Mlinar

        McDonald is McDonald. GE owns a ton of stuff. If i am not mistaken.

    • Jose Roman

      If america got 8/10 in most valuable brands why we have a weak economy?

      • Mike Bastable

        margins

      • Yep

        exploding size of government and high taxes…basically socialism is causing the weak economy. It always does.

        pretty soon, some of these firms may relocate to Singapore or China.

        • Amine Elouakil

          Euh? then why the most Prospere countries and the world are under a fair model of socialism ; Nordic european countries, Germany, France, Taiwan, SK………..

        • mobilemann

          so many people using the word socialism without understanding it’s meaning.

        • Andraz Pirnovar

          You have no idea what socialism is, do you?

        • Jose Roman

          I can’t deny it, you got a good point, my friend you used the word socialism and you woke up oppositions and haters, lol

      • Hellz

        because those companies only have their HQ in US. all their manufacturing business is done somewhere else. there isnt a big number of stock holders who get all the money fom those companies. all you get is biggest number of rich people

      • Q.

        Poor government.

        • Jose Roman

          I agree my friend

      • john

        As a person who only lived in US for short while, I don’t think the term “weakest” is quite correct.
        Volatile, unstable, maybe even a bit vulnerable, but it sure is freaking huge.

        • Jose Roman

          Thanks, that’s the word I was supposed to use unstable, instead of weak.. And it’s true is freaking huge, I heard n news that US owes 16 trillion dollars.. That’s frightening

          • Cole Raney

            The debt is hugely misunderstood. Most of that money is either owed to other parts of the government or the citizens. For the remainder, countries owe us almost as much as we owe other countries. After all that, the debt is actually not a big issue, right now. If we keep defecit pending, the debt can turn into a long term problem.

    • Amine Elouakil

      This ranking is flawed, let’s just take the mentioned brand as an example : Samsung

      I don’t understand why they only take Samsung electronics into consideration and not Samsung the Holding that does everything like they do with GE wierd.

      • Mike Bastable

        it does take these things into accounts. This REPORT is NOT a blog posting, but a serious yearly “state of the union” report taking all relevant holdings into account, including huge wads of cash, hence Apple on top.

        • ferro

          soo..
          if Apple want to stay on top, they need to expand to other business like fastfood, appliance, automobile..
          :D

        • Amine Elouakil

          You don’t answer my point, and what if the report is not a blog posting? does mean it is objective, or the criteria of selection of them self are objectif, and taking again the Samsung example, Samsung as at least 5x times as big as Apple and make 5x as much money if not more heck alot of it assests around the world are unknown to the public

          • Mike Bastable

            Amine:
            Samsung is a listed company, if it has hidden assets around the world they are acting illegally which would seriously damage their value as a brand. A blog posting is often more led by opinion than by facts.
            This brand value report is regarded with great regard for its impartiality and true reflection of the many areas that many areas that make up the ethereal “value of a brand”. Samsung’s placing is a HUGE achievement and really shows how they have progressed beyond the corruption and copying scandals of the past. I expect to see them rise even more in future reports. This report is independent of the whole Android vs Apple argument, it reflects the perceived and actual value of a brand, which surely puts Apple at nr1 (it is a retailing giant of unheralded proportions!), Samsung will, as it develops, move more into retail hopefully and increase its score accordingly.
            The fact that US Tech companies are dominating is probably the main story here. Samsung’s net cash reserves, excluding listed debt, is currently (sorry this has to be approximate because latest financials are not available) is 45 billion, Apple in contrast is 160 billion….a big gap. Apple makes electronics, Samsung everything from Ships to Apartment blocks…so many markets have an effect on brand perception and value (as each market fluctuates independent of the activities of other core market segments)…THIS is why Apple, Google and Coca-Cola score so well. Clearly defined brand in a clearly defined market segment, again underlining Samsung’s achievement in making this list!

            • Amine Elouakil

              Of course it listed, and I didn’t say they are hidding I said alot of it assets are unknow to the pubic (average joe), administratively everything is listed.

              “A blog posting is often more led by opinion than by facts” I disagree, while it can be true it’s not always the case, and the same can be said to any form of media, examples : TV Channels such Fox, Some goverment agencies (Iraq)…….

              I’m not arguing about the Android vs Apple war, I’m impartial about that.

              “The fact that US Tech companies are dominating is probably the main story here.” And do you agree with this? I remind you that tech is not limited to Software.

              “Samsung’s net cash reserves, excluding listed debt, is currently (sorry this has to be approximate because latest financials are not available) is 45 billion, Apple in contrast is 160 billion….a big gap. Apple makes electronics, Samsung everything from Ships to Apartment blocks…so many markets have an effect on brand perception and value (as each market fluctuates independent of the activities of other core market segments)…THIS is why Apple, Google and Coca-Cola score so well.”

              Only shows that Apple doesn’t have the ability to inverst it money, where as Samsung keps expending and using the cash flow it has (while of course keeping up a decent reserve)

              And again this doesn’t answer my point which is : Why they take GE as a Holding (and not one specific Branch) while they are ONLY taking into consideration Samsung electronics

              “Samsung everything from Ships to Apartment blocks…so many markets have an effect on brand perception and value (as each market fluctuates independent of the activities of other core market segments)” counter example listed above

            • Mike Bastable

              GE is GE the Brand, Samsung has (and i contacted a financial wizz ex colleague to check this) companies that under Korean Law, whilst they bear the name Samsung (in some part of their listing) are not legally associated with any other Samsung. It seems complicated but they have a totally different Board and independent internal financial situations. To collate all of these as SAMSUNG would be like collating Pepsi, and all other Colas into the brand COCA-COLA.
              You really seem to love Samsung!. The report is assessing BRAND not (underline this) how big something is, how much money they make etc just BRAND value.
              For instance if we threw in the issue of BRAND recognition we could include the BATMAN logo on this list, since it is a valued (and globally instantly recognizable) brand.

            • Amine Elouakil

              GE is GE Brand,and Samsung is not a brand? and I don’t like Samsung trust me on that, you can check my comment history. Samsung is a Brand recongnized globaly and trust me there are less people that knows about GE than Samsung.

              “SAMSUNG would be like collating Pepsi, and all other Colas into the brand COCA-COLA.””

              Totally wrong, because in the listing they are talking about COCA-COLA Company which includs brands like Fanta, sprite, nestea..;.and also your techy friend seems to confuse affiliate and subsudaries (if I’m not mistaking the words in english) and also the Samsung has a board of director and a chairman (a new one should be appointed soon)

            • Mike Bastable

              Not worth further discussion since you seem unable to grasp the simple fact that samsung is not a huge company but there are many large companies seperate that bear name samsung. My cola point was very clear…generic colas are not coca colas, not all samsungs are samsung as you know it.

            • Amine Elouakil

              They are not seperate or can you prove they are separate ?, No your point is not clear, because we are not talking about the same brand Pepsi group is not related to coca-cola in any way where as, Fanta, Sprite, Nestea ….. (40 or more) are all brands under the Coca-Cola compagny label which is taken in consideration here (notice how they say Beverage besides the Coca-cola name

            • Mike Bastable

              Without the Korean company statutes you will not be satisfied, suffice to say that this discussion is typical of an Android site. Samsung, as a whole is not a BRAND but a CONGLOMERATE! (please consult a dictionary for an explanation of this term).

              ALL the companies listed above have divisions that may be regarded as being branded, thus becoming a BRAND. Samsung electronics IS indeed a brand (a good one). Coke, IBM, Apple are all also multinational brands.

              For an up to date list of major conglomerates please consult:

              http://www.therichest.com/business/top-10-biggest-conglomerates-in-the-world-based-by-revenue/

              and refer to Wikipedia for Samsung and it’s many operations and joint ventures.

              I have tried to explain this enough now, there is another list somewhere and on it Samsung will be above Google and Apple, if i find it i will mail to you to frame. To reiterate JUST HAVING the name Samsung attached does NOT mean it is the same BRAND or COMPANY. This is basic stuff.

            • Amine Elouakil

              - “Without the Korean company statutes you will not be satisfied, suffice
              to say that this discussion is typical of an Android site. Samsung, as a
              whole is not a BRAND but a CONGLOMERATE! (please consult a dictionary
              for an explanation of this term).”

              Isn’t that the same as GE for example? GE is a CONGLOMERATE as well and this my is point since my first comment, so I don’t understand what are you trying to point out here, and what are you trying to allure to here, typical discussion of an Android site? just to make things clear I am not a fan of Samsung (point easly proven in my comment history) but I am being objectif here.

              - “ALL the companies listed above have divisions that may be regarded asbeing branded, thus becoming a BRAND. Samsung electronics IS indeed a brand (a good one). Coke, IBM, Apple are all also multinational brands.
              For an up to date list of major conglomerates please consult:
              http://www.therichest.com/busi…”

              Again what’s your point, GE, Coca-Cola, IBM……. all the listed conglomerate are taken as whole in this ranking, where as for Samsung, they took Samsung electronics a sole DIVISION. which doesn’t make sense, it’s like for GE they took GE Capital, or Aviation, or GE Healthcare, and NOT GE as a whole, I don’t see what can’t you understand here????!!

              -”I have tried to explain this enough now, there is another list somewhere and on it Samsung will be above Google and Apple, if i find it i will mail to you to frame. To reiterate JUST HAVING the name Samsung attacheddoes NOT mean it is the same BRAND or COMPANY. This is basic stuff.”

              A point you didn’t prove at any single point, and again and I repeat for the 102255155255545255654585259568565651654649696 time what does make Samsung status any different than GE for example, both conglomerate, both have divisions in many different areas, One is taken as a whole in this ranking the other NOT.

            • Mike Bastable

              bored now you are being willfully obtuse

            • Amine Elouakil

              Before calling someone obtuse, you’d better answer my point instead of avoiding it each time, my question is clear and simple and doesn’t require a wall of text to answer, not to mention that point by point you’ve been proven wrong, If you can’t answer then let me ask you two or tree questions that requires just a yes or a no as an anwser :7

              -Is GE a Coglomerate ? Yes or No
              -Is Samsung a coglomerate ? Yes or No
              -Is GE on that list (Coglomerate not a Division) ? Yes or No

            • Mike Bastable

              yes yes no (its a BRAND)
              You have proven nothing, i went to the source of the report, looked at their criteria for making the list, asked them some questions, discovered that this is purely based on brand perception and capital value. You are trying o prove Samsung is bigger (it is) but why>? that is NOT the issue with this list. Your replies are merely rehashes of your initial view. I have carefully read your replies, looked into your points and addressed them as clearly as i am able. By being obtuse and not accepting that this list is a brand list, the discussion becomes a vicious circle. Since i did NOT design the criteria for this list I believe GE is being treated as the brand GE (its valuation is otherwise extremely low for GE). I agree that sometimes these lists seem very random in their criteria however Brand assessment is clear here. By the way being obtuse is not always a negative, very important for triangles.

            • Amine Elouakil

              Let’s assume the answer to the last question is BRAND. so here is a question.

              Is SAMSUNG a Brand ? Yes or No

              and just for reference here is the definition of Brand according to Collins disctionary

              http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/brand

              Suffice to type Samsung + Brand on any search engine to find the answer…..

              My initial point is that the ranking criteria are biased and I’ve taken examples mentioned in the list to prove so that’s all to it

    • Brandon Miranda

      Forgot to mention whose on top.

      • Subzer0

        that would definitely have to be Marinela Gansito. XD

        • ferro

          LOL.. :D

      • Ram

        Its Apple on the top

        • Brandon Miranda

          You know what would’ve made that better? If Andrew said it in his post. It can go a bit like this, “and yes, Apple ‘frickin beat us again. Sorry guys.”

    • David

      usa suck…….come on the UK ;]

    • shermon mk 1

      coca cola….boo…am I the only one who thinks pepsico owns better drinks??

    • asd

      I think Google should have been number 1 only because of Google glass, maps YouTube Gmail Google search, driverless cars, Android etc they have more influence than apple in my opinion

      • Mike Bastable

        this is not based on vague THINKING but on facts ASD, wait a year or two and the order will be different.

      • mobilemann

        “I think google should have been number 1, because they made the OS for my phone, so everyone else is terrible!!!1!”

        FTFY

    • Rushan

      They should have take entire Samsung rather than only the electronics

    • TechDevil

      Apple on first? No, sorry, I won’t believe any list that places them first without a specific reason to do so. Apple may have changed our behavior “back in the day”, but today, they are losing their position rapidly. This list is just bad and inacurrate. Also, I dare to believe there are people using Google Maps, Gmail and other Google services without even owning a smartphone, while Apple is a company that we all know their smartphone/tablets are the primary feature. Google should undoubtedly be on top.

    • David chevilson

      this is f**k results. us brands only at the top . why like this ?

      • Mike Palmer

        Because this is a list of the most valuable brands in the world and that’s the list, sorry your country isn’t as awesome as mine haha

      • needa

        because tech is driving the world, and the creators of the tech are mostly over on this side of the pond. yall stop buying electronics and companies like bp and bmw will make the list.

    • Jon E

      Fingers crossed next year Crapple will fall a lot.

      And given that the US govt can’t even decide a simple decision I think all the US firms could slide down the list soon as the USD devalues

    • Roberto Tomás

      you have to be an ISOxxxxxx brand (whatever the standard is) to be on this list. then they modify the sales of the company by advertising indices.

      so for example, AliBaba is not a publicly traded company yet, but it has sales in excess of $150b. But it isn’t a brand, so it doesn’t get compared. If it were compared, they spend very little comparatively on advertising, so it probably wouldnt top the list.

    • Guest

      Looks like the Asian century is already over LOL

    • shatner

      Looks like the ‘Asian century’ is already over LOL

    • raj

      Go Google go

    Popular

    Latest