2010年全球銀行品牌500強排行榜

用手机看条目

出自 MBA智库百科(https://wiki.mbalib.com/)

本條目包含過多不是中文的內容，歡迎協助翻譯。

若已有相當內容譯為中文，可逕自去除本模板。

Top 500 Banking Brands

2010年全球銀行品牌500強概述

“在金融領域如此動蕩的時代，強有力的品牌比以往任何時候都更加重要。《銀行家》的全球品牌500強排行榜為世界頂級品牌做了排名。” Brian Caplen報道。

金融危機的一個副作用是，它喚醒了銀行們對品牌的重視。以前，許多銀行認為他們的品牌代表了傳統價值如信用和穩定性，並且沒必要花精力去提高它。顧客們會很樂意將錢存到銀行，因為他們十分明白那裡絕對安全，所以晚上可以放心睡大覺。

現在世界突然變了，事實是，即便是長期屹立不倒的品牌銀行也經歷了困境，使得儲戶的信心受到動搖。這產生了一種顛覆，即在傳統強勢品牌需要一些重組的時候，銀行業領域足夠開放，讓用戶有理由去嘗試之前從未考慮過的銀行，去嘗試新的品牌。

但是說到品牌，所有方面必須得到整合，包括產品、服務、技術、員工，以及強勢和穩定性，才能發揮最大的作用。

《銀行家》的世界品牌500強向我們展示了在上述各方面都非常出色的品牌，比如匯豐和桑坦德，都保持和提升了在排行榜中的排名。匯豐保持了第一名，桑坦德從第四名前進到第三名的過程中，品牌價值翻了一番。

儘管有來自各方面的批評，高盛也極大的提升了自己的排名，從第17名躍升到第7名，這表明顧客心中的品牌形象和某些媒體宣傳的有相當大的不同。在業內（投資銀行），高盛仍然是值得效仿的品牌。

另一個持久的趨勢是新興市場品牌在逐漸壯大。巴西的Bradesco已經從第12名上升到第9名，Banco do Brasil從36上升到26，印度國家銀行躍升了34位排名到第36名。大型中國銀行像中國工商銀行、中國建設銀行和中國銀行排名方面都略有落後，但是在品牌價值上都有提升。

桑坦德的霸主地位來源於2005年採取的一項決策，該決策致力於爭取一個全球品牌，儘管在特定國家中的轉換依賴當地環境。 María Sánchez del Corral是集團全球品牌市場的負責人，他說：“業已證實，唯一品牌的戰略在實力和償付能力方面壯大了我們的聲譽，它為我們吸引了更多的客戶，提高了客戶忠誠度，也使得招募和留住高素質人才更加容易。一個統一的品牌會產生巨大的協同力，在廣告和贊助方面也節省了很多開支。”桑坦德選擇對第一方程式賽車贊助，因為該體育賽事能傳達跨國界的理念，並展現公司鼓舞人心的個性。

1月份santander在英國由Abbey向santander的轉型，就是環境如何使品牌騰飛的例子。“改變品牌向來是我們的目標，但是經濟危機中我們表現出的堅挺，才給了我們前進所需的信用度。”桑坦德駐英國的品牌執行官，Keith Moor說道。

匯豐從1998年開始就實行單一品牌戰略，但至今它的logo仍然十分混亂，簡直是“混亂的設計”，匯豐市場總監Tracy Britton這樣形容道。

"We decided to organise our offerings around propositions relating to five basic consumer segments," she says. "As a global brand, you evolve, you don't take sharp turns," she adds, explaining how the famous advertising campaign displaying its international knowledge will move on to the next stage.

In a way, the development of the Facebook-using, internet-savvy global consumer is playing to the strengths of banks such as Santander and HSBC and helping to keep them at the top of the ranking. But staying at the front is always a challenge and is the result of considerable branding forethought that permeates each institution.

METHODOLOGY

The methodology employed by Brand Finance in this Top 500 Banking Brands listing uses a discounted cash flow (DCF) technique to discount estimated future royalties at an appropriate discount rate, to arrive at a net present value (NPV) of the trademark and associated intellectual property: the brand value.

The steps in this process are to:

1. Obtain brand-specific financial and revenue data. The revenue was then segmented into the following revenue streams: retail banking, commercial banking, wholesale/investment banking, insurance asset management and credit cards.

2. Model the market to identify market demand and the position of individual banks in the context of all other market competitors.

Three forecast periods were used:

- Estimated financial results for 2009 using Institutional Brokers Estimate System (IBES) consensus forecast.

- A five-year forecast period (2010 to 2014) based on three sources: IBES, historic growth and gross domestic product (GDP) growth.

- Perpetuity growth based on a combination of growth expectations (GDP and IBES).

3. Establish the royalty rate for each bank.

This is done by:

- Calculating brand strength - on a scale of zero to 100 - according to a number of attributes such as asset strength, emotional connection, market share and profitability among others.

- Determining the royalty rate for each of the revenue streams mentioned in step one.

- Calculating future royalty income stream.

4. Calculate the discount rate specific to each bank, taking account of its size, geographical presence, reputation, gearing and brand rating.

5. Discount future royalty stream (explicit forecast and perpetuity periods) to a net present value - ie. the brand value.

Royalty relief approach

Brand Finance uses a 'relief from royalty' methodology that determines the value of the brand in relation to the royalty rate that would be payable for its use, were it owned by a third party. The royalty rate is applied to future revenue to determine an earnings stream that is attributable to the brand. The brand earnings stream is then discounted back to a net present value. The 'relief from royalty' approach is used for two reasons: it is favoured by tax authorities and the courts because it calculates brand values by reference to documented third-party transactions and it can be done based on publicly available financial information.

Brand ratings

These are calculated using Brand Finance's ßrandßeta analysis which benchmarks the strength, risk and potential of a brand, relative to its competitors, on a scale ranging from AAA to D. It is conceptually similar to a credit rating. The data used to calculate the ratings comes from various sources including Bloomberg annual reports and Brand Finance research.

Brand ratings definitions:

AAA -- Extremely strong

AA -- Very strong

A -- Strong

BBB-B -- Average

CCC-C -- Weak

DDD-D -- Failing

Valuation date: All brand values in the report are for the year ending December 31, 2009.

[編輯]