The top 10 Singapore brands continue to dominate
Brand Finance Plc today releases the fifth annual “Top 100 Singapore Brands” league table showing strong growth from the country’s top brands. The Top 10 Singapore Brands have been valued at 18.01 bn US$ in 2011, storming ahead of the remaining 90 brands featured in the leagues that have a total combined value of 35.042 bn US$.
Two brands not previously featured in the Brand Finance Top 100 Singapore Brands entered the leagues in the top 10. Astra International achieved the fourth position and Flextronics squeezed into the top 10 at number eight. Despite the competition from growing brands, the top three brands from 2010 held steady retaining their coveted positions.
Singapore Airlines continues to fly high taking the top place for the fourth consecutive year, despite moderate brand value increases of just 3% (3.75 bn US$). This compares to an overall average brand value growth of 26.1% amongst the top 10 brands. Singapore Airlines has a comfortable lead of 656 mn US$ over the number two ranked brand Wilmar International.
The top three risers by brand value growth amongst the top 10 brands were Great Eastern (83%), UOB (37%) and DBS (34%). This is in line with the general trend around the world of financial brands rebounding after the 2008 crisis. However these three brands have achieved a more marked recovery than their western peers because of their proximity to the major rapidly developing economies.
DBS Bank remained at the number three position increasing its brand value to 2.10 bn US$, a brand value growth of 34% over 2010. It is building its brand presence in the three key markets of South East Asia, South Asia and Greater China as it seeks to diversify its revenues away from its home market, through a major regional brand campaign. Singtel also kept their number five position with a 25% increase in brand value at 1.35 bn US$.
Overall, the three new brands in the top 10 had a combined brand value of 4.09 bn US$.
The top 10 brands added an impressive 30.17% to the combined brand value, with Willmar International contributing the most as the brand value gained 0.60 bn US$.
Similar to other Asian markets, there is also a sharp contrast in the contribution of the top 10 compared to the next 10 brands (51.4% vs. 19.57%). This clearly indicates the large growth potential available to a majority of the top 50 Singaporean brands. It also indicates the dominance of the top 10 and the benefits of robust brand management at the top.
More change seen in the remaining top 100
The value growth of top 10 in 2011 compared to 2010 is only 30.17%. It is a relatively small number when compared to an average brand value increase of over 70% for the rest of the top 100 brands. Brands ranked 11-20 had a value growth of 63.25% , 21-30 had a growth of 97.06%, 31-40 grew by 72.30%, 41-50 by 59.60% and the average for the brands ranked 51-100 nearly doubled their brand value (with a growth of 99.27%).
The brands ranked 51-100 nearly doubled their brand value (99.27%) indicating strong brand focus and brand building initiatives beyond the top 50 brands.
As a result of this strong growth, the bottom end of the brand value growth reached a high range of 51-22 mn US$. (Except the last two which were at 10 and 5 mn respectively). This range in 2010 was a mere 22-9 mn US$.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Segment Growth
There was evidence of uniform growth across all segments and categories.
• Banks have a healthy 34% brand value growth
• Telecom sector grew with an average Brand Value growth of 25%
• The two private health care giants Parkway and Raffles Medical Group performed particularly strongly with a massive brand value growth of 136% and 123% respectively.
• In the media category, while the SPH saw an increase of 54%, there were three new entrants, the Straits Times at number 43, Lianhe Zaobao at position 78 and Her World at position 83.
• Real estate saw enormous growth of 400% and 300% for certain brands and 13 of the 15 brands in this category grew well. Interestingly two brands in real estate suffered negative growth with CapitaLand down 13 % and Hoo Bee losing 38% of its brand value.
• The Transport category also performed well with SMRT increasing Brand Value by 189% and Comfort up 49% leading to strong double digit growth.
• Retail did well with an average Brand Value growth of over 60% except for YHI which had zero growth.
• All the hotels and motels brands continued to grow with three City Development brands (Millennium, Copthorne and Kingsgate Hotel) entering the top 100 for the first time.
Top Risers have representation from a variety of segments
Coming out of the crisis, all segments grew well. There was no dominant category amongst the top 10 risers. Five of the top 10 risers are also amongst the top 10 brands. All the top risers are within the top 22 ranked brands.
|
Winners |
Sector |
Change in Brand Value (US$ millions) |
|
Wilmar |
Agriculture |
603 |
|
Great Eastern |
Insurance |
523 |
|
DBS |
Banks |
521 |
|
Fraser and Neave |
Real Estate |
412 |
|
Guocoland |
Real Estate |
410 |
|
SIA Engineering Company |
Commercial Services |
362 |
|
UOB |
Banks |
348 |
|
SMRT |
Transportation |
340 |
|
Cycle & Carriage |
Distribution/Wholesale |
334 |
|
SingTel |
Telecoms Services |
273 |
Significant brand value loss amongst losers
The losers and dropouts had a value erosion of only 1.3 bn US$. There is no specific segment or industry or sector where brand value was seen to be eroded. The value erosion was present across industry and segments such as transportation, manufacturers, food, retail, real estate, commercial services. This indicates reduction in brand value was due to brand management practices as appose to market conditions effecting particular sectors.
|
Losers |
Sector |
Change in Brand Value (US$ millions) |
|
Pan-United |
Building Materials |
4 |
|
YEO'S |
Other Food |
4 |
|
Raffles Education Corp |
Commercial Services |
3 |
|
YHI |
Retail |
- 0 |
|
Delfi |
Food |
- 1 |
|
Hi-P |
Miscellaneous Manufacturer |
- 2 |
|
Ho Bee |
Real Estate |
- 31 |
|
Food Empire |
Other Food |
- 36 |
|
SBS Transit |
Transportation |
- 40 |
|
Capitaland |
Real Estate |
- 40 |
Quotable Quotes:
Samir Dixit, Managing Director of Brand Finance Singapore says.
‘It is very heartening to see that this year; the brand value growth has come from across industries and segments with no domination of any one category. This is particularly healthy from an economic development and market growth perspective. This all round growth and reduced contribution from the top 10 indicates strong brand management practices and the acceptance for brand management as a disciplined approach by all corporates, big and small’.
About Brand Finance
Brand Finance is an independent brand strategy and valuation consultancy focused on advising strongly branded organisations on how to maximise value through effective management of their brands and intangible assets. Since it was founded in 1996, Brand Finance has performed thousands of branded business, brand and intangible asset valuations worth trillions of dollars.
Its clients include international brand owners, tax authorities, IP lawyers and investment banks. Its work is frequently peer-reviewed by the big four audit practices and its reports have been accepted by various regulatory bodies, including the UK Takeover Panel.
Brand Finance is headquartered in London and has a network of international offices in Amsterdam, Athens, Bangalore, Barcelona, Cape Town, Colombo, Dubai, Geneva, Helsinki, Hong Kong, Istanbul, Lisbon, Madrid, Moscow, New York, Paris, Sao Paulo, Sydney, Singapore, Toronto and Zagreb.
Contact Details:
South East Asia:
Samir Dixit, Managing Director, Brand Finance Singapore
Email: s.dixit@brandfinance.com
T: +65 90698651 (Singapore)
London:
Katy Bergson, Media Relations Manager
Email: k.bergson@brandfinance.com
T: +44 207 389 9400
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.
