Every year, leading brand valuation and strategy consultancy Brand Finance puts thousands of the world’s top brands to the test, evaluating which are the most powerful and valuable, publishing the Brand Finance Top 100 Indonesian Brands.
In terms of brand value, Telkom Indonesia retains its #1 position in the Brand Finance Top 100 Most Valuable Indonesian Brands in 2017. Telecom sector has increased its dominance in the top 10 by Indosat Ooredoo climbed into 9th place thereby pushing Garuda Indonesian out of the top 10. Telecom Indonesia also managed to retain the AAA- brand strength rating with 65% increase in brand value.
Growing Big 4
The four largest Indonesian banks have been performing well for a number of years and in 2017 as BRI climbed to third, BCA fifth and BNI to seventh place. Bank Mandiri was the only bank in the top 10 that not only dropped 3 places but had a marginal 3% increase of brand value. The total value of the four Indonesian banks in the table grew 171% to US$ 7.49 billion. Moreover, the brand strength of these banks has improved at least one level in terms of brand rating with BCA and Bank Mandiri being the strongest Indonesian brands with AAA rating.
Telkom Indonesia and Indosat Ooredoo both seem to have significantly benefited from the high growth in mobile usage and should benefit further with penetration of smart phones gathering pace as Indonesia’s consumers are quick to embrace technological upgrades and adoption. With a fast growing younger population and increasing disposable incomes, brand building and brand stickiness in the telecom sector will be the key for companies to increase usage and penetration and win greater market share.
Indosat Ooredoo, recorded a net income increase by 184.4% to Rp 1.1 trillion, has seen its brand value rising 51% to US$844m.
“Financial companies make up 31% of the top 100 value. As Indonesia further develops, we expect consolidation in the banking sector, so it will be interesting to see which brands remain. Banks who can digitalise and remain relevant will be the ones who will win.” said Jake Ng, Consultant at Brand Finance Asia Pacific.
Samir Dixit, Manging Director of Brand Finance Asia Pacific highlighted that “While the Indonesian brands have grown extremely well at the top with both Telekom Indonesia and Sampoerna increasing their brand value by over US$ 1.7 billion each, it is the brand strength for most brands that still remains a concern. Also, the rankings still remains very top heavy with 4 banks and 4 tobacco brands and 2 telcos amongst the top 10 contributing to over 63% of the total brand value. We would like to see a more diverse mix at the top and more significant value increase at the bottom which means other brands must start focussing on their value and brand strength.”
Samir Dixit also challenged the Indonesian companies to be more brand-driven and not sales and offers-driven. These while help sell in the short term absolutely destroy the long term value and the strength of the brand. Brand has to be a strategic agenda for the senior management and boards and must be managed like any other business asset and not just a legal trademark.”
It is exciting to see the top 2 Indonesian brands, Telkom Indonesia and Sampoerna having finally made it to the Brand Finance Global 500 rankings in 2017. BRI and Gudang Garam are also strong potentials to enter the Global 500 in the near future. Other than the 2 Indonesian brands, there are only handful of ASEAN brands in the Global 500, including the Big 3 in Singapore – DBS, OCBC and UOB; Malaysia and Thailand state-owned oil & gas giants – Petronas and PTT.
The brand strength, measured by Brand Strength Index (‘BSI’), the average BSI of the Top 100 Most Valuable Indonesian Brands, has improved marginally from 62.9 to 64.0 in 2017. The brands have remained stagnant in terms of their brand strength and while they may be doing well locally, they have been losing out to some of the key competitors in the region as they clearly lack competitiveness outside of Indonesian market.
This year, it is noticed that the brand values are largely affected by uncontrollable external factors such as country economic outlook, risk free rate, currency exchange rate etc. In this case, Indonesian brands enjoyed the benefits of lower discount rate and better exchange rate to USD that pushed their brand values higher in 2017.
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.