· Norwegian grows 78% in brand value to US$853 million
· Statoil, the Norway’s most valuable brand, has a value of US$7.6 billion
· Ninth-placed Storebrand’s value is up 13% to US$521 million
Every year, leading valuation and strategy consultancy Brand Finance values the brands of thousands of the world’s biggest companies. A brand’s strength is assessed (based on factors such as marketing investment, familiarity, preference, sustainability and margins) to determine what proportion of a business’s revenue is contributed by the brand. This is projected into perpetuity and discounted to determine the brand’s value. The 10 most valuable Norwegian brands are included in the Brand Finance Norway 10 league table.
Airline brand Norwegian is the nation’s fastest growing brand with value up 78% to US$853 million. Its ambitious expansion though investing in cheap long-haul flights to America and the Far East is giving established airlines worldwide cause for concern. Creative, attention-grabbing, marketing tactics have supported this investment. Norwegian cheekily capitalised on the break-up of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, releasing an ad (which soon went viral) with the strapline ‘Brad is Single’ as a reason for customers to jump on a flight to LA. Norwegian’s marketing is agile and digital-led, saving money (which helps to improve ROI) but is also clearly effective.
Statoil tops the table with a brand value of US$7.6 billion and a 16% growth year on year. It is also the country’s most powerful brand with a Brand Strength Index (BSI) of 82. Statoil’s Q1 results for 2017 significantly exceeded market expectations, with reported operating profit of US$3.3 billion compared to US$857 million in 2016, buoyed by recovering crude prices.
The recent rebranding of Statoil stations into Circle K will mean a reduction in the visibility of the brand in the public arena. However, the sale of the downstream business to Couche-Tard has allowed Statoil to channel its focus onto more profitable midstream and upstream sectors of the business, helping to consolidate the strength of the brand.
Despite the recent uptick in the oil price, Statoil is looking to the future to prepare for long term decline in the industry. 2016 saw the launch of Statoil Energy Ventures, one of the world’s largest renewable energy VC funds. Statoil also recently announced that by 2030 it plans to devote 15-20% of all spend on renewables, up from 5% today. This is essential from a purely financial point of view as we move into a new energy era, but at the same time it also helps to support the Statoil brand, improving CSR metrics and perceptions.
Storebrand is also embracing this trend. Just last month it launched two new fossil-free funds, calling on the Norwegian government to follow suit and reduce the country’s exposure to oil and gas. Recognising the changing face of the Norwegian society, it is making moves into Islamic finance. These progressive moves are helping to improve brand reputation, but also the ‘consideration’ metric amongst emerging consumer groups. At an operational level, Storebrand has embarked on a digital transformation drive with an Indian IT firm Cognizant to refresh its current systems and help better track and respond to consumer behaviour. Storebrand’s brand value is up 13% to US$521 million, securing 9th place among Norwegian brands.
Telenor defends second place, with a 15% increase in brand value from 2016 to US$7.2 billion. As with many incumbent telecoms businesses, Telenor is vulnerable to disruptive innovations and the erosion of margins from core services such as data provision which are increasingly commoditised. Telcos are under increasing pressure to offer multiple ‘play’ offerings and with this in mind, Telenor recently sealed partnership with Netflix, providing Telenor’s subscribers across Europe and Asia with easy access to digital TV. Telenor is also looking to tap into the rapidly growing Asian mobile advertising market and further expand its digital presence in the region.
Note to Editors
For more definitions of key terms, methodology and more stories, please consult the Brand Finance Norway 10 report document.
Brand values are reported in USD. For conversions into local currency, please consult the hover over the ‘i’ button on the web version of the table and select.
Brand Finance is the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Bridging the gap between marketing and finance, Brand Finance evaluates the strength of brands and quantifies their financial value to help organisations 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 nearly 100 reports which rank brands across all sectors and countries.
Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm, leading the standardisation 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.