Slashdot Mirror
Coca-Cola Loses Fizz To Microsoft
Kinlan writes: "This article at the BBC mentions that while Coca-Cola still has the most valuable brand name, Microsoft is a close second. Another interesting thing is how many other tech stocks are increasing their brand values, even with the recent slump in tech stocks." You know, when you're dragging a corporation's name around through the news and the court systems, it's free advertising. I wonder how this would have compared with an 'O.J. Simpson' brand a few years back.
Version 2 was expected sometime soon so imagine how perplexed us tech support engineers were when the customers started calling us and asking us about the upcoming version 3.5.
We told the customers there must be some mistake because we were only just about to release version 2.
The calls got so frequent that finally we asked a customer where they'd heard about this 3.5 (not sure if that was the exact number but that's approximately correct). He'd seen it in our full-page magazine ad in a major Unix magazine.
I asked our ad guy what that version number was. He told me that they'd decided to go with version 3.5 because the Santa Cruz Operation was on version 3.4.
Of course we were all pretty pissed off, not just that the company was being dishonest but that they didn't tell the people who took the phone calls - those of us on tech support - and the customers must have thought it was hilarious when the ads kept appearing even though they'd heard it straight from the company that they were misinformed!
And, BTW, look at the reason why Slackware jumped from version 4 to 7
-- Could you use my software consulting serv
Sorry to say, but the only news source for many Americans is the tabloid rack next to a grocery store's checkout counter.
Well, that and the fact that the entire media is now one big tabloid....
Coca-Cola was foolish enough several years ago to change a Good Thing
One word you have to add to that -- radically. Coke has changed the "secret formula" more than half-a-dozen times in the last 50 years, but always with some effort to keep the taste pretty similar. But the Coke you drink today is not the same formula as the Coke you drank in 1980, and neither is the same as the Coke you drank in 1960.
Steven E. Ehrbar
That would be an urban legend.
--
..!!in an intastella burst i am back to save the universe!!
Top 75 list here. Duracell is 41st but Ferrari, Mercedes-Benz and Harley-Davidson are not on the list, surprised?
It's a Jewish religious holiday.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
While I won't object to the first three, I think Kodak is less often used in place of picture than the other three are always used.
And as for Microsoft, in my three years of working technical support for a college I've only heard that term used once in the context you state. And it was used like this:
"I see you guys updated my Microsoft to eight." (Referring to updating her Power Mac from 7.5.5 to OS 8.)
The woman was not a technical person, and we (the other support person and I) just threw it off as something that didn't need to be corrected.
Now that I think about it though, it probably would have been a good idea to mention that it was Apple's "OS 8" and had nothing to do with Microsoft.
The only problem is, educating people on simple matters like this is:
1. Useless - They'll most likely forget it in a week anyway
2. Time consuming - Especially in an English Department where they always ask follow-up questions
3. Unproductive - When it comes down to it, they think I'm just spouting off my geek talk and trying to appear uber-human
4. Dangerous - If everyone in the world knew Microsoft was a company and not an "OS", there'd be more geeks in the world. My job requires that I be more of a geek than the rest of faculty where I work. If I'm not, there is no need for me.
Still, I could have probably mentioned something.
But the real reason is that we kept getting calls like this:
CUSTOMER: "What version is TurboLinux?"
TL: "The current version is 4."
CUSTOMER: "Oh, well, then I'll go get Red Hat; it's version 5 and therefore newer."
TL: "No, wait! Ours just came out and is...."
*click*
The Doctor What (KF6VNC)
How about some chocolate covered espresso beans? Man, those things are addictive.
--
The real Webmaven is user ID 27463. I don't rate an imposter, because my ID is such a lame-ass high number.
Vpc = ns * csp / nc
Where Vpc is the value per character, ns is the number of stocks issued, csp is the current stock price and nc is the number of characters in the name of the brand.
For coke,
Vpc = 8,730,000 * 42 / 8 = 45,832,500
(Note that I'm using the brand name Coca-Cola in this calculation, and am not counting the hyphen)
For Microsoft,
Vpc = 5,600,000,000 * 78 / 9 = 48,533,333,333.
Contrary to the article, the Microsoft brand name is already much more valuable. I can only assume that the author must have been using the the Coke/Microsoft Corporation comparison.
All joking aside, they probably use market research in conjunction with statistical methods such as confidence intervals to form one huge SWAG. I wouldn't take it too seriously.
-- Good judgement comes with experience. -- Experience comes with bad judgement.
As long as the answer is right, who cares if the question is wrong?
*sigh* I felt the same way.
On another note, I had some suggestions for branding/brainwashing the public:
Coca-Cola == Caffeinated motor oil
Microsoft == Daily systems crash
Mountain Dew == Caffeinated urine
Gap == Clothing I paid $50 too much to obtain
Old Navy == Clothing the Gap deemed not worthy for their store, for which I still paid $50 too much to obtain
Nike == Michael Jordan
AOL == Misrouted email
Napster == Metallica
Open Source == Was, is, or soon will be proprietary
Use these in your daily conversations!
"Hey, I was listening to that new Napster album while I lost some AOL and my computer Microsofted the other day when I installed some Open Source software. Then, while watching TV I saw Nike drinking this cool new motor oil!"
It's interesting to note that Amazon's brand value has managed to rise - in spite of haemorraging money left right and center ever since its inception..
I'd have to say that Amazon's entire value is in the brand - there's just too many companies that follow the same business model for it to be considered unique anymore. It shows just how much a couple of billion dollars in adverts and specials can buy.
tsf.
The basic thesis of the cluetrain manifesto is that carefully controlled corporate communications are basically hopeless in the age of the internet, because information is readily available to anyone and anyone can publish it.
For an example of this, see my own cluetraining on the subject of high-tech headhunters at GoingWare's Policy on Recruiters and Headhunters.
Another (old) example is an ironically named one about why I chose not to develop macintosh software anymore after being dicked around too many times by Apple Computer:
I'm worried about my future. That's why I'm a Be developer.
(For those of you who don't know, Be's history has been to screw its developers even harder than Apple.)
Vast numbers of people have their own web pages where they speak out about companies and business practices that they don't like. Do you have any examples? (let's not forget Mr. Sorehands).
-- Could you use my software consulting serv
But in the article, the Interbrand consultants say that for many companies, their brands are their most important asset, estimated at more than half their total stock market value.
Maybe there's a relationship between stock market valuation and total tangible assets? But Microsoft lost over $100bn in market cap recently, while Microsoft's brand value increased by 24%.
Hmmm. Maybe the only way to learn about their brand valuation methodology, is to spend $10K on a presentation ;)
Coca-Cola sold out when they replaced cane sugar with corn syrup. The only time you can get real Coca-Cola is during Passover, when they switch back to cane sugar.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
I read a study once where something like 50+% of people said the first thing that popped into their mind when they saw a combination of red and white in correct proportions was the words "Coca-Cola" - and that was spanning a whole bunch of different ethnicities. Microsoft may be a common phrase amongst stock-laden Gen-Xers (and Yers, I guess), and anyone else American who hasn't been living in a cave for the last few years, but it's nothing compared to the incredible brand recognition that Coke has built in literally every single country in the civilized world. It's cheesy, but Coke's entire theme of it being a common denominator of all humanity is kind of true - they sell it everywhere.
:) Coke's reach and recognition is staggering, and far supercedes anything Microsoft will probably ever have to offer, unless they start making shoes...
Funny enough, they also sell it for whatever they can get it for. I'll never forget being in Indonesia during the height of a civil war and acquiring glass bottles of Coke (the big ones, not the little 8 oz'rs) for the equivalent of like 4 or 5 US cents.
Anyways, those are my little, offtopics Coke tidbits
--
I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
What relevance does this article have to anything at all? Has Slashdot mistaken itself for a marketing magazine? - ah wait a minute - yes, of course, it's that magic word Microsoft again: I guess that makes it relevant after all.
Come on now, Slashdot, give us a break.
No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
Nah, Linux should have GNUt Beer - an archive of beer recipies, with FAQs on brewing equipment and similar. You're free to download the recipie and brew your own, as long as you note on each bottle that it's brewed from a GNUt Beer recipie and don't try to pass it off as your own.
If you find a way to improve the beer, you can't copyright your own brand, but have to submit your new recipie back to the GNUt Beer project.
This just shows what the Geeks have known for some time - we really are taking over the world. Okay, so Microsoft aren't every Geek's favorite company, but it does show how important hi-tech has become outside of the Geek community.
Of course, we won't know we've really won until its Linux that has a greater brand recognition than Coke, right?
Sailing over the event horizon
Coca-Cola is drunk by people all over the world. Microsoft is used where people have computers. So they were able to have 70 billion in brand value for a market that's not even world wide. So I would probably Microsoft's might be a little more valuable (in dollars/person).
Just curious...anyone know just how exactly analysts measure the value of a brand name? Is there a formula of some sort?
---------------
---------------
JavaScript tutorials scripts
PS: I'm a Coke guy myself, Pepsi is too weak
Shine on, you crazy diamond.
And I bet the name "Adolf Hitler" is recognizable by a huge number of people, too. But I'm not about to name my kid after him.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
'I don't care what you write about me, just spell my name right.'
This sort of attitude may have worked once, but these days, there's a big difference between brand awareness and brand trust.
While Microsoft may be getting more 'brandwidth' as a result of all the news coverage, they are going to find it harder and harder to atract and retain top talent. They are probably running into problems of that sort already.
While it is probably better to be despised than to be unknown, Microsoft was hardly unknown. and it's getting to be more despised as time goes by.
Consumers are becoming more savvy, and usually don't let you pull the same trick on them twice.
Microsoft is running out of people to fool.
--
The real Webmaven is user ID 27463. I don't rate an imposter, because my ID is such a lame-ass high number.
I just hope MS doesn't tamper with one of my favorite soda drinks! Sooner or later, we'll start seeing Windows logos on Coca Cola cans. :(
Maybe Linux should do Pepsi. Or Dew [grin].
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Perhaps the poster has the causal sequence reversed. Perhaps Pepsi has had such a diverse range of commericials precisely because they haven't figured out how to achieve Coke's recognition...
Anyway, the best salvo in the cola wars, IMHO, was the RC Cola commericial toward the end of the Cold War, when they show a "unification" between the two big brands (from the colors, obviously Coke and Pepsi) and say, "But somewhere, freedom of choice still lives" (paraphrased). They cut to some sort of vibrant village festival where everyone is drinking RC ... and then the Cola Nazi break down the doors. I can't remember the tagline but it was hilarious.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
From the BBC article:
Interbrand's survey looks at the future earnings potential of the companies concerned and tries to assess how much of that can be attributed to the brands they own.
If I recall correctly, this process boils down to "brand equity = Market cap - everything we can attach a value to" So companies with enormous market capitalization (GE, Microsoft, Cisco) but few tangible assets (software companies) yield large brand equities.
"one treats others with courtesy not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but because you are" --G. Henrichs
Anyone can form sentences using those first couple product names as generic nouns/verbs:
"Do you want a coke?"
"Do you have any kleenex?"
"Would you go xerox these?"
But how do you use Microsoft in a sentence like that?
"My car was in the shop for a week the last time it Microsofted!"
"Do you think NASA's going to Microsoft their next Mars probe, too?"
I've only seen someone use "Microsoft" as a synonym for "Operating System" once, and the sentence was, "Would you help me get this Microsoft off my hard drive?"
Microsoft does buy/clone an awful lot of stuff, but they have developed some concepts in-house, too (here's a partial list):
Bought:
MS-DOS
PowerPoint
FoxPro
Internet Explorer (originally bought from Spyglass)
Visio
Hotmail
Cloned:
MS Mouse
Windows
Media Player
Streets Plus
Original:
Excel (probably their best single original achievment)
Word
Access
Actually, one thing I give Microsoft credit for is not sticking to the NIH model. If someone else has a good idea, they are willing to buy it. Some companies will just ignore anything they didn't create in-house.
When it comes to integrating their purchases, though, I'd put Microsoft somewhere in the middle of the continuum, with Cisco the best example of hiw to integrate a company, and Computer Associates by far the worst.
To shift gears here, cola brands in general have valuable brand names because that's the only thing most can differentiate themselves on. I'd give you odds that most of the Coke drinkers are there for the image, not the taste. Same with Pepsi and the rest. I think most folks wouldn't recognize their cola in a taste test (except for Moxie drinkers - yecch!). It's all branding.
(Steve Jobs, to John Sculley: "Do you want to sell sugared water, or do you want to change the world?")
- -Josh Turiel
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
People might think microsoft is evil, but I think the media portrays them as a kind of necessary evil. The same thing goes for anything else the media covers, like corporations, the government, taxes, or whatever.
So it shouldn't be suprising. People aren't calling for microsoft to be removed from existance, I don't think people that frequent this site would go even that far.
Our society is business and money oriented. I think most people believe microsoft has a right to pursue profit. Believing they should be broken up in some fashion doesn't go against that, either.
I'm sorry but brand valuations are HIGHLY subjective. It is difficult to truly place a value on the impact of brand. Usually they look at how much money has been put into marketing and protecting that mark. There is a point when there is a serious name recognition, but, is a brand really worth hundreds of millions or a billion dollars?! Really, it would be better to look at what that brand could possibly sell for on the open market. In other words, how much would Ross Perot pay for that brand.
kick some CAD
If we're willing to consider Windows as a clone, then Excel, Word and Access are also clones, of Lotus 1-2-3 (which cloned VisiCalc), WordPerfect and DBase respectively. These were the original applications to fill those niches, and there have been other options in these areas. Quatro Pro, Ami Pro and Paradox come to mind readily.
However there is one thing I am willing to give Microsoft full credit for: They know how to manipulate the computer industry. They figured out a new and original way of making money, licensing to the end-user, and only recently did the others really catch up. The backlash they're suffering comes mainly, IMO from the fact that people do not like being manipulated, even if they do make billions as a result.
Microsoft is a successful business because they understand their priorities. They are in business to make money, and the product is secondary. They're not idealists in the EFF/OSS sense, but they are good at what they do.
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
The Gap, which used to imply 'the generation gap' now plays of the 'sociological gap.' Folks in hicksville flock to the Gap because they think it's what all the cool urbanites wear. Cityfolk like the gap because (aside from the 'tech-vest debacle') in general it typifies a laid-back, more rural feel.
Coca-Cola gets its brand recognition by reaching into every crevice (figurativly) and not letting any child in an impoverished nation grow to the age of 6 without recognizing the logo. What's more, since we first-worlders are so saturated by the logo, Coca-Cola resorts to showing us impoverished third-world children experiencing Coke for the first time, so that we can get that otherwise unattainable vicarious thrill of our first Coke.
I wonder if Microsoft will adopt this strategy. A hotmail linkup in every village, a 'newbie of the week' using one of Hotmail's many security holes to let users read a Laotian girl's first emails to the world-at-large? Will they have the audacity to brand MicrosoftOps as the "choice of a new generation"?
It can't be long until the commercial where we see the Berber family in their adobe room touch a button, hear the chime of Win2K booting and sigh, for they can feel all their troubles slip away, for now they have a night light...
Kevin Fox
Kevin Fox
The whole survey wasn't based on what brands people recognize, contrary to popular belief. It only has to do with earning potential, thus meaning that "Open Source" software, such as Linux, will not be recognized by the survey. It is too bad really, because I'd like to see more info than just the top two or three companies.
Also, I've always wondered why Coca-Cola has had such high brand name recognition? I mean, think of all the ads you can remember that Coke has made. Now count anything done by Pepsi. I don't know about you, but Pepsi has that annoying little girl, the "Pepsi Challenge", and if you count Mountain Dew, a whole line of memorable commercials.
Maybe brand recognition doesn't have to do with soley commercials, but I'd think that it would be a large part of it.
Dunno, but if you really care, you could Ask OJ.
There are alot more similarities than you think:
Microsoft makes shitty software
The Gap makes shitty clothes
Microsoft forces their product down people's throats
The Gap makes shitty clothes
Microsoft employs soulless morons with the lure of free software and stock options
The Gap employs soulless teenagers with the lure of free shitty clothes.
It's really kinda eerie, don't you think?
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
--
There is a very significant difference between Microsoft and Coca-Cola at this point. Coca-Cola still produces it's product, while Microsoft only buys/licenses other, lesser brands, and repackages them as it's own. In this respect, Microsoft is more like Tommy Hilfiger than Coca-Cola.
Coca-Cola was foolish enough several years ago to change a Good Thing. The population unanimously (or as close at this is possible) vetoed the New Coke, and Coca-Cola bent to consumer pressure and reverted to what people wanted. When was the last time Microsoft did anything even remotely in response to customer wishes?
Microsoft has NEVER created an original product. Even if you go back as far as you can, to Bill Gates and Paul Allen coding BASIC for the Altair, what they did was port someone elses product to another machine - this was respectable, but here is where the Innovation(tm) ended. DOS was bought, and each new feature that was added to it was included to squeeze an add-on or competitor out of the market. Windows was clearly a work-alike of MacOS, which itself was a work-alike of Xerox PARC research. NT is really DEC Prism in disguise (Dave Cutler left DEC in disgust when the Prism project was killed, and took the OS design with him), and was supposed to be OS/2 until Gates' ego swelled a bit too much for Big Blue to handle. IE was another DOS-feature-levarage maneuver like EMS/XMS management (QuarterDeck's QUEMM386 died for that one) and DoubleSpace (Stacker anyone?), but this time aimed at Netscape... The only MS product whose history I am unclear on is their development tools, but I know for a fact that Borland did it first and better; and don't even start on Java...
Hilfiger does the same thing. He buys other manufacturer's products, sans labels, and has a facility where they sow on his name. That's all. He's not a designer, he's not an innovator. He's a poseur and a brand-pirate. Just like Gates.
Microsoft tactics are even worse than this. They don't actually buy another product to propagate their brand. They license it. Then they output version 1.0; and they study what they've licensed. By the time version 2.0 is ready, it's a reverse-engineered clone of the original. The license dies and soon after, so does the licensor.
Coca-Cola has brand loyalty, it has a pedigree and a reputation. This means something in the market. Microsoft has Gestapo/strongarm tactics that got it a monopolistic market-share. Microsoft brand 'loyalty' stems not from it's reputation and pedigree but from the fact that all/most available alternatives have been killed, and the brand has been burned into 95% of all PC's sold in the last decade. People choose to drink Coca-Cola; people do not really have a choice about running Microsoft software.
Average people do not have a choice because Linux takes experience to get off the ground, and most people have real work to do instead of reading HOWTO's. Mac software isn't really available to the general public - you have to own a Mac to get to those resources in the first place, and that's a huge leap of faith for the under-informed. The under-informed are that way due to Microsoft's propaganda engine. Not even geeky people have much choice, since we have to talk to other systems, and those use Microsoft-brand file formats.
Well, there it is. Microsoft is a brand by force, they're rustlers and pirates; they're the Jay Gatsby of Silicon Valley, all flash and poise standing on shaky and shady foundations.
"Where do you want to go today?" To the kitchen, to get myself a Coke.
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.
Damn, OJ and Microsoft. That's an ugly picture.
With OJ, one byatch got screwed and eventually murdered.
With Gates...all the world is a byatch...
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
Coke=caffeinated dark soda Kleenex=tissue Xerox=paper copy Kodak=picture (a kodak moment, if you will) Microsoft=Operating system/software Now that's branding, having your product recognized as "the" product. It just makes me think of how far linux has to go in terms of the PR war.
This is another view of the world.
You know, when you're dragging a corporation's name around through the news and the court systems, it's free advertising.
That's how it always is! What, do you think hackers like to hack just because it gives them an excuse to destroy their vision by staring at a computer screen for eight hours straight? That Monika had a few nights on the town with Bill Clinton just to be able to brag to her friends that the president offered her a cigar? That Darva decided to marry Rick just because she was having a great time in Vegas? It's all for publicity. Americans are ravageous pitbulls when it comes to dirt. We crave it. So, when someone's involved in something dirty, everyone hears about it.
There was an interesting poll I read a while back that showed percentages of people who knew who the current president of the United States was. Suddenly, after the Lewinsky affair, 8% more Americans knew who their president was. Sorry to say, but the only news source for many Americans is the tabloid rack next to a grocery store's checkout counter.