Columnist - Ritson
14/9/10
17:34
Page 86
ritson
mark
marketingweek.co.uk
WHAT IS THE TOP BRAND? LET ME GOOGLE IT…
It’s mid-September, the leaves are turning
brown, the swallows are heading south and a
marketer’s thoughts turn to brand valuation.
That’s because this is the week that the most
famous document in branding is published.
It is always fascinating to see which brands
have gained and lost equity over the past
12 months according to Interbrand’s annual Top
100 ranking of the world’s most valuable brands.
How far have Nokia and BP fallen? How much
has Apple’s brand equity increased?
But these are very much the side stories for
2010. The first thing I look at is to see which
brand occupies the top spot on Interbrand’s list.
Every year, since BusinessWeek started
publishing Interbrand’s Top 100 in 2001, CocaCola has been valued as the biggest brand in the
world. That probably made a lot more sense a
decade ago than it does in 2010. Clearly Coke is
a mighty brand, but is it really the most valuable
one on the planet? Even in 2001 BusinessWeek
added the caveat: “Coke is still No 1, but can it
hang on to the top spot?.” The answer for the
past ten years, according to Interbrand at least,
has been an unequivocal “yes”.
Alternative valuation firms, however, would
disagree. Both Brand Finance and WPP’s Brandz
index rank Coke at third and fifth, respectively.
While Brandz’ valuation of Coke’s brand equity
at $68bn tallies closely with Interbrand’s 2009
estimate, there are huge differences in how the
two firms assess the value of some of the other
big brands in contention for the top spot.
Notably, Interbrand valued Google’s brand
equity at only $32bn last year. That’s less than a
third of the value that Brandz attributed to
Google, which – at $114bn – made it the top
ranked brand on their list this year.
As my former colleague and marketing guru
Tim Ambler would remind us – all valuations are
subjective and prone to degrees of variance. But
by any standard, $82bn is one hell of a difference
of opinion. So I will be intrigued to see just how
much Google’s brand has improved in the eyes
of Interbrand this year.
How long can a 19th-century medicinal tonic
head the list of the world’s biggest brands? Or,
to put it another way, surely Google’s exemplary
brand associations combined with its
stranglehold on search in many parts of the
world make it a far more valuable asset than a
fizzy beverage whose best days are behind it? If
you could pick Coke or Google as a future bet,
which one would you prefer?
Certainly last week we witnessed the kind of
c
How long can a
19th-century
medicinal tonic
head the list of the
world’s biggest
brands?
See Mark Ritson
appear at The Annual,
Marketing Week’s new
conference on 29
September 2010
www.theannual.co.uk
86 | Marketing Week | 16 September 2010 | marketingweek.co.uk
brand management that will eventually make
Google the undisputed champion of the branding
universe. Visitors to Google’s home page
discovered to their delight that the logo on the
home page was composed of a multitude of dots
which moved and changed position as a user’s
mouse approached it. The internet was rapidly
abuzz with this latest variation of the Google
logo and what it signified.
Jump forward 24 hours and Google appeared
at San Francisco’s Museum of Modern Art to
announce Google Instant – a new modification to
its search engine that makes Google’s search
engine quicker, more efficient and even more
superior to the competition. But forget the
product improvement and look at the way that
this new innovation was marketed.
Only rarely do you actually glimpse true acts
of branded differentiation. This happens when a
brand transcends its category and competitors,
and does what its positioning dictates. The only
rule of branding is that there are no generic
rules. In Google’s case the brand defines itself
around “ten things that we know to be true”.
Thing number seven states that, “there is
always more information out there”. That means
that Google must be fluid, to change to reflect
new developments, information and daily
occurrences. If that is what Google’s brand
stands for then a fixed and rigid logo is simply
not appropriate for the brand. Hence the fact
that on a regular basis Google breaks one of the
central rules of branding – thou shalt not present
thy logo inconsistently – and changes its logo to
reflect what is happening around the world.
On St Patrick’s Day a shamrock appears inside
the Google logo. On the anniversary of the
invention of Lego – the Google logo is built from
bricks. And when Google upgrades itself to
allow more fluid, real-time searching its logo
changes to herald this new feature.
Show me a strong brand and I will show rules
being broken. Consistency is an overused word
in branding. Yes we must be congruent to the
positioning of our brand, but the implication of
that congruence – as Google ably demonstrates
– is to disrupt not only the rules of search but
also the general rules of branding.
So I will be looking carefully at the Top 100.
Because Google deserves the top spot.
Mark Ritson is an associate professor of
marketing, an award-winning columnist and
a consultant to some of the world’s biggest
brands