· Five most valuable Danish brands lose over DKK10 billion of brand value year on year
· Lego remains Denmark’s most valuable and strongest brand by far with DKK47.9 billion value and an AAA+ rating
· Nykredit is the fastest-growing brand in the Brand Finance Denmark 50 league table, up 41% to DKK5.4 billion
View the full list of 50 most valuable Danish brands here
The five most valuable Danish brands each fell in value over the last year, but Lego remained on top according to the latest report by Brand Finance, the world’s leading independent brand valuation and strategy consultancy. In addition to taking honours as the most valuable Danish brand, Lego is also the strongest Danish brand.
Lego’s brand value dropped 5% over the last year to DKK47.9 billion, as the company’s signature product faces increasing global competition from digital entertainment. The revenue for the full year declined 8% to DKK35.0 billion, down from DKK37.9 billion the previous year, with sales dropping in both North America and Europe. Two bright spots for the Lego brand were in China, where the company achieved significant sales growth, and in the brand’s ability to reduce inventory, which may allow the company to be nimbler in responding to customer needs in the future.
Lego is also Denmark’s strongest brand
Next to measuring overall brand value, Brand Finance also evaluates the relative strength of brands, based on factors such as marketing investment, customer familiarity, staff satisfaction, and corporate reputation. Along with the level of revenues, brand strength is a crucial driver of brand value.
According to these criteria, Lego is also Denmark’s strongest brand this year with a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score of 90.6 and a corresponding brand rating of AAA+. While the brand faces significant challenges from digital entertainment options, it continues to be extremely highly regarded by its key stakeholders – both children and their parents. This strength is based upon the brand’s long-term reputation as a wholesome and high-quality toy.
David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance, commented:
“Lego remains Denmark’s most valuable and strongest brand because it is recognised by customers as a high-quality toy that stimulates creativity, learning, and fun. Lego’s brand strength will be particularly important as the rise of digital entertainment and a falling demand for their iconic bricks in the West continue to reshape the market. Building on the success of brand partnerships and on continued expansion in emerging markets, Lego still holds substantial potential as a brand.”
Arla, Danske Bank, Maersk, Pandora all drop in value but maintain ranking
Dairy cooperative Arla (brand value down 13% to DKK21.7 billion) remained the second-most valuable Danish brand, with projections of future milk prices subduing earning expectations. Arla-endorsed Lurpak (down 37% to DKK2.8 billion) and Harmonie (down 29% to DKK1.0 billion) also recorded significant drop of brand value. Another Arla brand, Cultura, entered the Brand Finance Denmark 50 league table ranked 46th.
Danske Bank (brand value down 10% to DKK21.6 billion) and Maersk (brand value down 12% to DKK19.7 billion) each retained their respective rankings. Danske Bank remains the market leader in banking in Denmark and Northern Ireland but is a smaller brand relative to competitors in Sweden, Norway, and Finland. In recent years, the challenging economic conditions have created a difficult environment, but the brand is refocusing on improving customer experience, especially through online digital services.
For Maersk, 2017 was a year of fast and significant change as it sought to deliver on a new strategy of finding new solutions for their energy businesses, while also integrating and transforming Maersk’s transport and logistics operations. In time, Maersk’s brand will be evaluated on whether it can successfully deliver integrated container shipping, ports, and logistics services, while creating value through the broader transport industry. Its recent acquisition of Hamburg Süd will be a key determinant in that strategy.
Denmark’s fifth most valuable brand, Pandora also followed the wider downward trend as its brand value fell 1% to DKK19.1 billion. Altogether, the top 5 most valuable Danish brands lost nearly DKK10.9 billion of brand value over the past year.
David Haigh, CEO of Brand Finance, commented:
“Although operating in different sectors, all top five Danish brands are coincidentally facing significant market challenges. Adjusting to adverse conditions can take a toll on a brand’s value and strength in the short run, but thanks to a smart transition strategy, those playing the long game can safeguard years of positive returns. Denmark’s top five need to take this opportunity to focus on identifying brand drivers and mapping stakeholder preferences to overcome the current difficulties.”
Nykredit is Denmark’s fastest-growing brand
Bucking the downward trend among the country’s top brands, Nykredit’s brand value went up by 41% to DKK5.4 billion, earning it the title of Denmark’s fastest-growing brand of 2018. Well-regarded for its stable operations and responsible lending, the co-operative bank did not go into an IPO last year. Instead, in a cautious decision which better reflects Nykredit’s brand values, its owners decided to raise extra DKK11.6 billion cash by offering minority stakes to Danish pension funds, and in effect reassured stakeholders and analysts of the brand’s continued prospects of financial stability in the years to come.
View the full Brand Finance Denmark 50 2018 report here
ENDS
Note to Editors
Every year, leading valuation and strategy consultancy Brand Finance values the world’s biggest brands. The 50 most valuable brands in Denmark are included in the Brand Finance Denmark 50 2018 league table.
Brand value is equal to a net economic benefit that a brand owner would achieve by licensing the brand. Brand strength is used to determine what proportion of a business’s revenue is contributed by the brand.
More information about the methodology as well as definitions of key terms are available in the Brand Finance Denmark 50 2018 report.
Data compiled for the Brand Finance league tables and reports are provided for the benefit of the media and are not to be used for any commercial or technical purpose without written permission from Brand Finance.
Brand Finance is the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Bridging the gap between marketing and finance for more than 25 years, Brand Finance evaluates the strength of brands and quantifies their financial value to help organizations of all kinds make strategic decisions.
Headquartered in London, Brand Finance has offices in over 20 countries, offering services on all continents. Every year, Brand Finance conducts more than 5,000 brand valuations, supported by original market research, and publishes over 100 reports which rank brands across all sectors and countries.
Brand Finance also operates the Global Brand Equity Monitor, conducting original market research annually on over 5,000 brands, surveying more than 150,000 respondents across 38 countries and 31 industry sectors. Combining perceptual data from the Global Brand Equity Monitor with data from its valuation database enables Brand Finance to arm brand leaders with the data and analytics they need to enhance brand and business value.
Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm, leading the standardization of the brand valuation industry. Brand Finance was the first to be certified by independent auditors as compliant with both ISO 10668 and ISO 20671 and has received the official endorsement of the Marketing Accountability Standards Board (MASB) in the United States.
Brand is defined as a marketing-related intangible asset including, but not limited to, names, terms, signs, symbols, logos, and designs, intended to identify goods, services, or entities, creating distinctive images and associations in the minds of stakeholders, thereby generating economic benefits.
Brand strength is the efficacy of a brand’s performance on intangible measures relative to its competitors. Brand Finance evaluates brand strength in a process compliant with ISO 20671, looking at Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and the impact of those on Business Performance. The data used is derived from Brand Finance’s proprietary market research programme and from publicly available sources.
Each brand is assigned a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score out of 100, which feeds into the brand value calculation. Based on the score, each brand is assigned a corresponding Brand Rating up to AAA+ in a format similar to a credit rating.
Brand Finance calculates the values of brands in its rankings using the Royalty Relief approach – a brand valuation method compliant with the industry standards set in ISO 10668. It involves estimating the likely future revenues that are attributable to a brand by calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for its use, to arrive at a ‘brand value’ understood as a net economic benefit that a brand owner would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.
The steps in this process are as follows:
1 Calculate brand strength using a balanced scorecard of metrics assessing Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and Business Performance. Brand strength is expressed as a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score on a scale of 0 to 100.
2 Determine royalty range for each industry, reflecting the importance of brand to purchasing decisions. In luxury, the maximum percentage is high, while in extractive industry, where goods are often commoditised, it is lower. This is done by reviewing comparable licensing agreements sourced from Brand Finance’s extensive database.
3 Calculate royalty rate. The BSI score is applied to the royalty range to arrive at a royalty rate. For example, if the royalty range in a sector is 0-5% and a brand has a BSI score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given sector will be 4%.
4 Determine brand-specific revenues by estimating a proportion of parent company revenues attributable to a brand.
5 Determine forecast revenues using a function of historic revenues, equity analyst forecasts, and economic growth rates.
6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to derive brand revenues.
7 Discount post-tax brand revenues to a net present value which equals the brand value.
Brand Finance has produced this study with an independent and unbiased analysis. The values derived and opinions presented in this study are based on publicly available information and certain assumptions that Brand Finance used where such data was deficient or unclear. Brand Finance accepts no responsibility and will not be liable in the event that the publicly available information relied upon is subsequently found to be inaccurate. The opinions and financial analysis expressed in the study are not to be construed as providing investment or business advice. Brand Finance does not intend the study to be relied upon for any reason and excludes all liability to any body, government, or organisation.
The data presented in this study form part of Brand Finance's proprietary database, are provided for the benefit of the media, and are not to be used in part or in full for any commercial or technical purpose without written permission from Brand Finance.
