Slashdot Mirror
Apple The Current Fastest Growing Brand
Will Stewart writes "According to Apple News, in a recently published report, Vivaldi Partners and Forbes magazine showed Apple has increased its brand value by 38 percent in the last four years, largely on the popularity of its iPod digital media device. Vivaldi Partners estimated Apple's overall brand value for 2005 at US$5.3 billion. Google and Blackberry tie for second, while Amazon is in fourth place. The ranking was determined by taking the compound annual growth rate of each brand over a period of the last four years."
Also of note is Pixar at number 9. So, Steve Jobs is 2 of the 10.
-- Scott
-nt-
-Randy
I understand maybe in business circles, Blackberries might be big. But saying that it's tied with Google, which has become an everyday verb for most even outside of the computer-nerd crowd, is ridiculous.
The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
"Users average a 53-minute-a-day productivity gain, says Research in Motion."
:P
What the article fails to mention is the 8 hour/week headache that the IT staff gets to deal with. "Productivity gain" is so subjective.
As for Apple being #1, it's not really a surprise to me. The iPod is *everywhere* - and in recent days, so is the Mac mini. OS X has been getting glowing reviews all over the place too.
Note that it also says they have an 18% "brand owners market capitalization" - maybe someone that speaks Wall Street can explain that one in English?
Apple: The fasest growing topic on slashdot!
Pretty Pictures!
MS is nowhere on the list.
"The newly born animals are then whisked off for a quick run through a giant baking oven." --heard on Food Network
Oh right, asleep.
.. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
Only Yahoo, and this report is crediting their new music subscription service for Yahoo's success.
I for one say kudos to Steve Jobs, and all of Apple on a job well done. Even though I don't use an Apple at the moment, I am very pleased that Microsoft's biggest competitor is doing well. Perhaps this will strike some fear into the folks over at Microsoft, encouraging them to reduce prices and improve their products. Now it just remains to be seen if Apple can maintain this level of growth.
- Just because we CAN do a thing, does not mean we SHOULD do that thing.
From MSN News: Microsoft has all the market share, is better and more secure than Linux, BSD and Apple.
grr im mad
What a meaningful stat! I have nothing against Apple, but the whole idea of branding is pretty suspect.
Sorry, I don't usually respond to trolls, but if I recall correctly, it was IBM who could not keep up with the volume which Apple demanded of new G5 chips. While I don't believe that Intel will necessarily get everything together by this time next year, you must admit that Intel has much larger production capabilities than IBM, concerning the chips which Apple will most likely use.
Plus, even if the Intel deal turns out to be a bust - and it might, you never know - there will always be a devout Apple following and they always have the iPod, anyway. Apple has a nice-sized nest egg - they can deal with problems if Intel fails to come through.
Who would had thought that a 25 something year old brand is the fastest growing brand in the whole world.
According to the article, the valuation of both brands grew by 36%. Of course BlackBerry is much smaller, but they measure "fastest growth".
Not very meaningful anyway, since it's not very clear how they come up with the value for the brand or even who qualifies for the survey. E.g. if Joe's Rubber Duckies (tm) grew from $100 to $200, it beats all the above.
See charts for twitter trends on Trendistic
Or talk to AMD or Via instead of just one company.
Why?
1. iPod inventories are building up
2. The switch to Intel chips will make corporate and private equipment buyers postpone purchases
Watch for a missed quarter and/or lowered guidance and/or an earnings pre-announcement.
Then, if you have Apple shares, watch out below.
Dedicated Linux servers (root access) $45 p.M.
What a lame-ass thing to do, I used to think. Now Intel is more than just a brand, it's a platform; business bought into it, and you'll find there are many corporations that won't even consider AMD-powered equipment. I bet that's changing now, but nevertheless it's amazing the brand recognition a chip company managed to achieve.
Apple is to me quite the enigma. The company gets far more press and adulation relative to its size than any other company I can think of (not that I'm trying that hard; I'm sure someone will come up with some excellent examples). But its hardware has just about all of the issues that Dell and other PC makers have, be it computers or consumer electronics. Yet the overall feeling about Apple seems to range from more of a warm fuzzy to outright adoration; who else has managed anything even close besides Google?
- Leo
You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right.
Interestingly, aside from Apple and Blackberry, no other computer hardware companies crack the top twenty brand value list(unless you count Samsung, but let's not), while five software-based companies, Google, Yahoo, Amazon, Pixar, and Ebay, are in the top ten.
What to do, then, if you are, say, the CMO of Dell computer? One idea would be to see what the top brands have in common. One notices that the two hardware companies mentioned have names that bring to mind round things, Apples and Blackberries.
Note also the popularity of double o's, Yahoo and Google both in the top 10.
Finally, we need a concept strongly associated with partying, bling bling, and sex, seeing as brands like Red Bull, Coach, and Victoria's Secret have done so well.
I therefore propose that Dell change its name to "Boobies! Computers". Yes, yes, you're welcome. No charge guys.
I know that it's due to the iPod, but lately I've been fielding a lot of questions from customers (even business customers) and other non-tech folks about Macs. Most are considering, for the first time, buying one. It's kind of a hunch but I think that they're moving beyond their usual market demographics.
I don't have one, but it will probably be the next computer I buy.
Awesome -- if you try and click "Next" to read more of the article, it merely resorts the chart according to the different criteria -- total sales, current worth, etc.
Nice "article" -- it looks like they pulled it straight from an MS template retrieved from asking Clippy McPaperClip: "How do I keep my forbes.com job this week?"
and now back to the fallout shelter...
Since then I've spent a little (not much) at the iTMS however most of my MP3 collection comes from CDs I have bought and as I don't buy much new music it's ideal for me.
You might be curious as to why I chose an iPod over something like a Creative player or similar which would have worked with the Napster-to-Go service (I use Napster subscription to listen to music on my workstation). The reason was pure and simple that it was made by Apple and their reputation of things "just working" plus of course it's nice design made it an instant decision and one which I don't regret at all. After installing the iTunes & iPod software it works a treat and does actually "just work".
With regards to their move to Intel, the recent speculation relating to their "Numbers" trademark, and the fact that Steve Jobs is IMO an astute businessman I've got the sneaky feeling that the processor isn't just a processor switch and is part of a longer term strategy.
Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
You're right. I'm tired. The possessive it holds its 's' close.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Apple, Google, and Blackberry owe all their success to Red Bull and Starbucks.
These are all overhyped niche companies. This is what the US produces nowadays, instead of steel, lumber, food, etc. What a fine foundation for future poverty we've laid.
dwarves = plural of dwarf
dwarfs = verb form of dwarf "to dwarf" -> to make look small
HTH
"[...] I'm no business expert [...]"
Neither am I. But, hey, it's Slashdot.
The big thing that the iPod does is get Apple back in people's minds as a purchasing choice. Even if people aren't in the market for an iPod, they are hearing reports about this new Mac OS X thing. Without the success of the iPod, the press wouldn't be talking too much about Apple.
I like to use Sony as an example. Back in the 1970s, the average consumer had never really heard of Sony--except, perhaps, as a "Oh, they make those VCRs that don't work with anybody else." The product that put Sony on the map was the Sony Walkman. It got people to sit up and take notice and now, when Sony does something, people listen.
Of course, Sony isn't all powerful--if they were, we'd be listening to mini-discs--but the Sony brand gets reporters interested and they will report on things that the company is doing. People have heard good things about Sony and will consider a Sony purchase. Heck, why buy a Sony VAIO when you can buy someone else's PC? But people buy them.
Apple had a similar problem. Even if Apple did something great, most the computer press went "Ho hum, small market-share, won't run Windows, going out of business, nobody cares." The iPod got people to sit up an take notice of Apple's products. So now when Apple announces something like a new version of Mac OS X, it gets reported. I don't remember the press caring that much about Mac OS 9 when it shipped.
"Why buy an iPod when you can get a good player for much less money? Just because it's an iPod? Apple's share of the home computer market is still quite low, and I can see their share of the MP3 player market going in that same direction."
I'll be the first to admit, part of the reason people buy iPods is that they want an iPod--not an iRiver ZQX-379. They hear good things about iPods, so they buy them. This will change at some point in the future, but it won't be for a few years yet. Remember that Apple has sold something like 15 million iPods--and they've sold the most! So the market has plenty of room to grow. Once I see figures like a hundred million MP3 players sold, I'll start getting concerned about it.
Also, by the time that the iPod loses it's crown as the top selling MP3 player, Apple may have something else new and exciting to take up the slack. And the fact that it comes from Apple will actually be a good thing in many consumers minds.
Jobs is a great marketeer and businessman. He will do what he feels is best to grow Apple. He will do it on his terms.
I'm not completely sure I understand the "cult of Jobs". Watching the keynote was amazing. Being able to present to a room full of Apple developers who have just cleared the transition hurdle to OSX, and dropping the "new transition to Intel" bomb on them and receiving thunderous applause. It was awesome. Having the Intel CEO come out and get thunderous applause was awesome. Having all these PowerPC thumping crowds turn around and embrace the new Intel direction like a flip of the switch - awesome.
For cross platform developers this is probably ultimately a move that will save them money (and get a few Mac specific devs fired) as it will ease porting. The little Mac only devs will probably be hardest hit. Especially the old timers who are still using Codewarrior and have been coding Mac since it's launch. It represents an additional cost outlay for them, to reach the same market they are already targetting. Wheee!
Sometimes my arms bend back.
You couldn't be more wrong. The hardest hit folks are the mid-level companies who are having trouble supporting the Mac as it is. These companies often have one engineer and that is their entire "Mac Department." They are the companies for whom it makes the most sense to just drop the Mac version and ask people to dual-boot. The little developers are not in trouble at all. They have a good loyal market (the small mac-specific apps are the reason the platform is so vibrant) and this switch will not represent a hard hit -- if anything, they will force users to buy the apps all over again. Awesome.
Refresh my memory; when was Apple ever in charge? Even in the heyday of MSDOS, Macs were a small minority of the computer market. And back in the days when Apple IIs roamed the earth, nobody was "in charge" because there was no single dominant platform (though you could make a case for CP/M).
I usually describe mine as an "iPod consumer oriented digital media entertainment playback device", to distinguish it from my tape backup and my digital camcorder.
The Wikipedia article is factually correct, but pretty dry.
(all following information from book iCon)
The Wiki article mentions that Pixar was obtained from Jobs for $10 million. But, what it leaves out is why and how,
At that time, Lucas was going through his divorce. His wife got a huge settlement, but Lucas didn't have much real money - his money was all tied up in companies he created so he started searching for bits to sell.
The bit that is Pixar had done some cool things for him but was costing money, so he wanted to sell. Jobs really liked the people there and what they were doing - but Lucas wanted $30m for the company and Jobs was hurting for cash having sunk a lot of money into NeXT at that point.
So, Jobs talked with Lucas a little about it but backed away, waiting.
In the meantime, Ross Perot (yes that Perot) came along, negotiating an offer for GM to buy the Pixar bit (not called Pixar at that point) for almost $30M. But they day he was to sign the contract GM cut ties to Perot, ending any negotiating power he had on their behalf and thus scuttling the deal.
Now Lucas was really hurting. He needed that money really badly. It was at this stage that Jobs stepped in - and that's how he got Pixar for only $10m.
It wasn't all roses from there though, he put a LOT of money into t hat company before it bore fruit and there are probably few other negotiators that could have dealt with Disney as effectively to bring it away from the brink of extinction, so he really deserves a lot of credit for where he arrived at (though so does Lassider by the sound of things, without whome Disney would not really have had any interest whatsoever).
One funny coincidence there is that Ross Perot also was the first investor in NeXT! He took a bath on that one.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I am amazed. Seriously. I walked by the Apple store in my local mall the other day, and saw a ton of hot chicks in there! When was the last time even 1 hot chick was in your local computer store? This may just turn out to be every slashdotter's dream come true!
...Had this been an actual emergency, we would have fled in terror, and you would not have been informed.
Spot on for the most part, but the thing about Steve Jobs is that he has an innate sense of taste. He obsesses about every small detail about his products, from the angles of the bevels on the Apple II case, to the layout of the 128k Mac's motherboard, to the inclusion of authentic fonts (Helvetica instead of Arial, Times instead of Times New Roman) in Mac OS X, to the precise shade of glass in Apple Store storefronts. So while he may be a great marketer and a great businessman--and I know some people who might dispute that last bit, actually--the important thing, and what earns him adulation, is his keen aesthetic sense that's unfortunately so rare in the rest of the industry. The fact that not everybody appreciates these things doesn't hurt the cultishness of his following, either.
Have you tried the punch yet? It's really good.