Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Media (Apple) Media

Apple, Google World's Top Brands 319

Posted by CmdrTaco from the i-wish-i-had-a-q-rating dept.
Anil Kandangath writes "BrandChannel readers have picked the top global brands for 2004. Apple is the leader, closely followed by Google. Arab-centric Al-Jazeera ranks fifth in global as well as Europe/Africa ratings. In regionwise ratings, Google tops North America, Ikea tops Europe/Africa, Sony tops Asia-pacific while Mexican cement brand Cemex tops Latin America An interesting fact is that Steve Jobs headed Apple is the top North American brand while his other venture Pixar comes fifth in the same zeitgeist."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple, Google World's Top Brands More

Apple, Google World's Top Brands

Comments Filter:

  • 3 out of the top 10 from US and Canada are people (Score:3, Interesting)

    by xmas2003 ( 739875 ) * on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:38AM (#11528471) Homepage
    Impressive (or perhaps sad?) that 3 of the top 10 "brands" in US and Canada are people - The Donald, Martha, and Oprah.

    Too bad my favorite Big Green Guy [komar.org] didn't make the list! ;-)

  • It must be true (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:38AM (#11528472)

    because a tiny niche insignificant internet website says so !!

  • I call BS! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:40AM (#11528488)
    Coke, Pepsi, McDonalds...whatever

    • Re:I call BS! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by l4m3z0r ( 799504 ) <kevinNO@SPAMuberstyle.net> on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:58AM (#11528731)
      While Coke, Pepsi, McDonalds, Walmart etc. are all bigger companies they don't have the same visibility in the media as Apple, Pixr, Al-Jazeera etc. No one is hyping it up about some new coke product, I didn't hear about any keynot speechs from the McDonalds CEO unveiling the latest burger trends. And pepsi didn't introduce some new product recently that dominated some new part of the market they previously weren't represented in.

      The fact is the three brands you mentioned are all transparent. I have my preferences of Coke vs. Pepsi, McDonalds vs. Burger King etc but they don't have the cult following. We ignore those brands because they are giant and stable, they aren't taking any risks and they plainly don't have the media love that jobs and his babies have.

      • Re:I call BS! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by furball ( 2853 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @12:12PM (#11528874) Journal
        You need to think a little more clearly on this. They have visibility but if I drop you in the middle of Africa with a 12-pack of Coke and Google T-shirt guess which brand the natives are going to recognize?

        Brands are very difficult thing to build. Apple/Google are currently (rightly so) should be monitored but they haven't built their brands to be recognizable world-wide yet.

        For the record, Coke still stands as the #1 most recognizable brand in the world. Best of luck toppling that monstrosity.
        • Right but you are still ignoring the fact that no one consciously thinks about the Coke brand. Everyone knows what it is but so what, there ain't not discussion going on right now about the qualities of Cokes latest release. The prospects for the future or how they are positioning themselves for a "beverage revolution".

          Apple, Pixr have recognition and penetration beyond what there sales would indicate. And thats because they are doing different things, getting media love and genuinely are in a position

          • Re:I call BS! (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Reignking ( 832642 )
            Right but you are still ignoring the fact that no one consciously thinks about the Coke brand.

            That sounds like a great brand, established to me, then. Apple, Google, etc are simply more "buzzworthy" because they are new(er), growing, and high-tech.
        • But the list wasn't the "most recognisable", it was "most global impact". Coke is well known, but it has little impact. It's familiar and boring. If there's an article about Coke and one about Apple, people are probably going to be more interested in Apple. More to the point, if there are two ads side by side with Coke and Apple logos on, people are going to look at the Apple one.

        • Re:I call BS! (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Queer Boy ( 451309 )
          Apple/Google are currently (rightly so) should be monitored but they haven't built their brands to be recognizable world-wide yet.

          Apple has been around 30 years and they aren't recognisable worldwide yet?

  • None suprised me (Score:4, Insightful)

    by digitalgimpus ( 468277 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:42AM (#11528517) Homepage
    I can't say 1 of them shocked me.

    Then again, I think with the advent of the net, things are changing.

    10 years ago, not many of us Americans would know so many European brands, but now that we see ads for european products (even if they aren't available in the US), articles, etc. etc...

    it's sometimes hard to remember what is in the US or not.

    I'm guessing in another 10 years, that continental divide will close even more.

    • 10 years ago, not many of us Americans would know so many European brands, but now that we see ads for european products (even if they aren't available in the US), articles, etc. etc...

      Balderdash!

      I think ten years ago plenty of people knew Mercedes-Benz, Saab, BMW, Country Crock, Lipton, Knorr, Dove, Guiness, Michelin, Gucci, Chanel, Doc Marten's, Nestle, Ferrari, Absolut, BP, British Airways, Lufthansa, Ikea, Evian, Cadbury, Adidas, Lacoste, Perrier, Peugeot, Bennetton (what happened to them?), and of

  • Coke? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by YouHaveSnail ( 202852 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:42AM (#11528518)
    Amazing that Apple and Pixar both beat Coca-Cola! I'm a big fan of both, but it's hard to imagine that Coke doesn't have a larger following worldwide.
    • Well Coca Cola did themselves no end of damage in the UK and a lot of Europe with the Dasani furore.
    • Contrary to what the company and its ads are likely to be made you to believe, it is not a _popular_ brand. I mean - have you ever told your friend - "Dude, you should drink Coke, it's _amazing_!!!". I think not. Or we have different concept of "following". Normally people don't give a fuck about Coke or some shampoo or whatever. "It works for me? - cool" - that's their approach. Now Apple!!! Need I say any more? Witness slashdot. Even Pixar - if there is ever a rumour that they are to release a new movie,

    • Re:Coke? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Herbmaster ( 1486 )

      I'm not sure what they think they're measuring in this survey, so it's kind of futile. Coke's product offerings are pretty limited. Under the Coca-Cola/Coke brand, they sell cola, reduced-calorie cola, and flavored cola. The company makes any other products, but they don't even call it "Coca-Cola brand lemon-lime soft drink" - they call it "Sprite" with no mention of the Coke brand in the name. Sure lots of people all over the world recognize this made up phrase, but so what? The term is practically ge

  • "North America" ? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AtariAmarok ( 451306 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:43AM (#11528523)
    It appears that their North America ratings leave out a large number of countries from Mexico south to the Colombian border which are also part of North America.
    • Central America isn't part of North America.

      • It always has been (Score:3, Informative)

        by AtariAmarok ( 451306 )
        North America is a continent that includes Central America. Central America is a region, and has never been considered to be a continent (just as Iberia is a region of Europe). See the dictionary:

        "The northern continent of the Western Hemisphere, extending northward from the Colombia-Panama border and including Central America, Mexico, the islands of the Caribbean Sea, the United States, Canada, the Arctic Archipelago, and Greenland."

        Always striving to correct errors of basic geography....

  • Apple's always been one of the strongest brands out there, at least in my eyes. Until I switched(tm), I always loved their design and even just the look and feel of all things Apple. I think that's what makes them such a cult favorite. (Ok, cult may not be the right word, but you get where I'm going.)

  • Steve Jobs (Score:5, Informative)

    by pHatidic ( 163975 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:44AM (#11528541)
    Steve Jobs strength is that he makes good decisions. However a lot of Apple's loyalty can be attributed to Guy Kawasaki, who is credited with creating the image that attracts crazed fanboys. /crazed fanboy

    • Re:Steve Jobs (Score:3, Interesting)

      by LakeSolon ( 699033 )
      Wow, it's been a while since I've seen that name. I remember always looking forward to the latest MacUser and MacWorld magazines to read Guy Kawasaki and and Andy Inhakto... Inhanitko? Inakto? Errr. He actually wrote a column once on the premise of how impossible it was to spell his name so I don't feel too bad not getting it right.

      Great Folks. Anyone feel like saving me the Googling (speaking of brands) and give a first person account of what's become of them?

      ~Lake

  • Zeitgeist (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    i love it when people use words thinking they are clever when they dont even understand the meaning of them

    Zeitgeist is a German word. Zeit meaning "time" and Geist meaning "ghost," Zeitgeist means the spirit of the age or times

    so i the context used in the summary it is a completely inappropriate usage, but as Google use it for their statistics page it must be cool

  • Starbucks (Off Topic) (Score:5, Funny)

    by gowen ( 141411 ) <gwowen@gmail.com> on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:46AM (#11528555) Homepage Journal
    Seeing Starbucks in there reminded me of a great ad I saw in Sunday's paper. Wales [wikipedia.org] is now advertising itself as a tourist destination based on its historical heritage, and the fact it's still relatively unspoiled by the various global brands that homogenise most city centres in England. The advert is a double page photo of the inside of Cardiff Castle [castlewales.com] with the slogan

    "Wales :
    641 Castles
    5 Starbucks."
    • 5 seems a little low. I know of at least 2 in Swansea (although there are 3 Costa's within a hundred yards of the city centre one, so I don't feel the need to visit it). I would be highly surprised if there are only 3 others in the whole of Wales - I would imagine that there are at least that many in Cardiff alone.
  • And where stands our beloved community?! Must be a top five brand for geeks?
    • Must be a top five brand for geeks?

      Yeah, but we'd immediately break down into a long, branching discussion tree of just how you define a "top brand".

      I noticed that the article didn't exactly make this clear. Most recognized? Best image? Most purchased? Can't tell. /. readers really shouldn't let them get away with such fuzziness. We're geeks, after all, right?

    • Must be a top five brand for geeks?

      Probably the most hated name among non-geek website administrators, who see their monthly transfer limit exceeded within a few seconds, see their hard work crushed under the weight good ol' fashioned slashdotting...

  • Why?!? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by M3rk1n_Muffl3y ( 833866 )
    Why is Europe and Africa lumped together into one category? Is it the similar demographics?

  • Sample size (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ruger ( 237212 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:48AM (#11528586) Homepage
    Wow! A whopping 1984 respondents worldwide, of which the US& Canada make up about 50%. Seems a bit skewed to me.

    Ruger
    • I agree. For example, Cemex seems to be the top brand in Latin America. Well, I'm from Argentina and neither I nor anyone I know have ever heard of it.

      • Re:Sample size (Score:3, Informative)

        by Dun Malg ( 230075 )
        I agree. For example, Cemex seems to be the top brand in Latin America. Well, I'm from Argentina and neither I nor anyone I know have ever heard of it.

        That's because you have wood in Argentina. In Mexico, wood is outrageously expensive. For years the most popular building materials have been brick and cement block. For the last couple decades, though, Cemex has been pushing cast concrete structures. They do more than just make cement. They also provide loans to contractors to buy the casting equipment, ar

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:48AM (#11528592)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Is Slashdot's an advertising bitch for Apple? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Phiu-x ( 513322 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:49AM (#11528608)
    At any given time since a couple of weeks there's a front story about Apple. Now the Apple Mini and IShuffle were news. But now this one and yesterday it was about a loser who crammed pc parts in the Mac Mini. Is Apple's the new google?
    • Actually, slashdot is a distributed spelling/grammar/diction checker. Analysis follows: This is not a diner. There is no Bob Slashdot. Therefore, 's/Slashdot's/Slashdot/'. Next, 's/IShuffle/iShuffle/', and 's/ pc / PC /', and in the same vein as the first correction, 's/Apple's/Apple/'.

      Slashdot reflects the feelings and interests of its "editors" first and its userbase second. Anything you see here may or may not be representative of anything else. If you want to know whose bitch they are, look at the ads

    • Re:Is Slashdot's an advertising bitch for Apple? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by OmniVector ( 569062 ) <see my homepage> on Monday January 31, 2005 @12:10PM (#11528852) Homepage
      in some ways, sure. apple's done a lot to change their image not only for street cred (iPod) but geek cred too (BSD in OS X). google changed the way we use search engines -- such a simple webpage can find so much. apple's changing the way we think about technology now more than ever with the digital lifestyle of iLife + iPod + iMac.
    • Preferences, man, preferences. Don't wanna read about Apple? Set it in your user options and it will be so. Some of us like hearing what's going on outside of the 98% marketshare...

      You're right about Kevin Rose though, the guy is a doushe. "Look at me, I spent $500 on a case that came with all these Mac part thingies I don't need!" I'm sure the next thing he'll be doing is a Segway destruction derby.

  • Google or Apple? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by NicolaiBSD ( 460297 ) <spam@van d e r s m a gt.nl> on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:50AM (#11528618) Homepage
    In regionwise ratings, Google tops North America
    ...
    An interesting fact is that Steve Jobs headed Apple is the top North American brand

    So which one is it?

  • I bet more people know of apple the fruit than apple the company

  • bogus survey (Score:5, Informative)

    by theMerovingian ( 722983 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:52AM (#11528648) Journal

    This was the "Reader's Choice" award for brandchannel.com. As an online survey, it would be heavily weighted towards technology companies such as Apple and Google.

    Brands such as Q-tips, Kleenex, Jell-O, Cheerios, Jiff, the Green Bay Packers, and Tide all probably have higher recognition rates as a percentage of the total (US) population.

  • No brazilian company between the Latin America top 5 is really awesome. I don't mean Cemex dosen't have merits, it's just that most brazilian companies work on almost every latin american contries, see Petrobras as a example, they even work on africa and middle east.

  • Interesting comparison... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by GillBates0 ( 664202 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:52AM (#11528658) Homepage Journal
    with the 2004 Google Zeitgeist [google.com].

    Google's search statistics may be regarded as a similar but more accurate poll because of the much bigger sample space.

    The problem is that their statistics are biased towards brands/corporations which have a bigger web presence (eg Amazon, etc) which occur in their "Top Consumer Brands" category. Hence companies like Cemex, Samsung etc do not figure in the Google Zeitgeist.

    On a related note, SCO seems to be proud [sco.com] it figured in the Google Zeitgeist. The following quote from the "news" on their webpage (couldn't find permanent link):

    SCO Ranked #1 Corporate Query Site by Google. Based on billions of searches conducted by Google users around the world, the 2004 Year-End Zeitgeist ranks SCO's corporate Website as the most searched site for the year. Find Out More Here >

    • Who ARE those people in the various Popular Men and Popular Women categories?

      I recognise maybe three or four of the names in the categories that list the names of Men and Women; I recognise all of the entries in all of the other categories.

    • SCO (Score:2)

      by Secrity ( 742221 )
      SCO is in odd company for Top Company Queries

      1. sco
      2. johnson & johnson
      3. ing
      4. ge aircraft engines
      5. fleet

      I mean, come on, how many people even know what product "ing" sells? Were the "fleet" queries looking for a loan or did they need a laxative? Somehow I just can't imagine a whole bunch of people doing queries for "ge aircraft engines".

  • Coca Cola (Score:2, Insightful)

    by timeflux ( 853294 )
    Where's Coca Cola? If i remind correct, they've been the top brand of recent years, followed by McDonalds and Nokia.

  • BrandChannel is owned by... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I work in the branding industry. I have to say, brandchannel.com is owned by Interbrand. There is a conflict of interest. Interbrand is one of the larger branding and identity firms, and they do try to be unbiased. I wouldn't say that they are just "some little website that says," but then are not an uninvolved 3rd party.
  • Europe and Africa?

    Why the hell are Europe and Africa being lumped together? It's not as if they share that much in any cultural way.

    Maybe I should RTFA.

  • How relevant is this poll? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by windowpain ( 211052 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @11:59AM (#11528740) Journal
    So Interbrand asks some people who are very interested in branding what they think the top brands are. Who cares? The whole concept of a brand is to make a lasting, favorable on your customers and potential customers.

    Pixar is the fifth-highest rated brand in North America? Come off it. I bet not one person in five could say who they are, let alone what they like about them. Coke, Pepsi, Levis, McDonald's, Sony, Toyota, VW all would have much higher name recognition and positive associations than Pixar not matter how good a company Pixar is (or, for example, how gross a lot of people think Mickey D's burgers are).

  • movie companies (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geoffspear ( 692508 ) * on Monday January 31, 2005 @12:06PM (#11528807) Homepage
    I found it interesting that in the full results, Pixar came in #5 while releasing just 1 movie for the year, while Dreamworks released 4 and came in #40, while Disney managed #37.

    Of course, it should be noted that these are marketing people voting. "Coca-cola" is still the 2nd most recognized word worldwide, after "okay", and it certainly belongs above #7 worldwide.

    On the other hand, their brand saturation is so complete that they almost don't need to advertise anymore. I'd imagine marketing people prefer things that actually need some marketing to sell, as opposed to Coke, whose commercials serve no purpose anymore except to annoy people at movie theaters (does anyone ever see those commercials and think "oh, maybe that Coke stuff is good, I should try it sometime..."?)

    • Re:movie companies (Score:3, Insightful)

      by angle_slam ( 623817 )
      Pixar only makes one type of film, which is why it is such a big deal when a Pixar movie comes out. Dreamworks, Miramax, Disney, etc. market many movies a year and without a coherent theme. In fact, with the exception of Pixar films, I can't tell you what movie studio makes most movies I watch.

      • Re:movie companies (Score:3, Interesting)

        by White Roses ( 211207 )
        Last night's Simpsons had a spoof CGI movie preview "coming from DreamWorks" about "Cards." Starring Eddie Murphy, and a cameo by Jack Nicholson ("You can't handle the twos."). And, sadly, that spoof is pretty much what I expect from DreamWorks: big names and sound bites. What I expect from Pixar is excellent voice acting and engaging, multi-faceted plots. The fact that "Cards" sounds superficially like "Cars," which is Pixar's next film, and given the tragic history of DreamWorks essentially hashing th

  • I'm a bit surprised Sony didn't make it to the list.

  • Not a brand recognition survey (Score:3, Insightful)

    by servognome ( 738846 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @12:12PM (#11528875)
    Looks like this was a survey of readers (I am assuming marketing type folks) as to their favorite brands, not which brands are most recognizable to people.
    Coca-Cola is by far the most recognizable brand in the world. You can go to rural areas in 3rd world countries and ask for a "coca-cola" or even a "coke" and they will know what you are talking about. Ask if they have an "apple" and they will most likely think of the fruit.
  • Apple reported a net profit of US$ 295 million in the last quarter of 2004 alone

    ....but you know Bill Gates is thinking "ahh thats cute, I make that in three weeks."

  • Cemex? (Score:2)

    by fsck! ( 98098 )
    What does this say about the state of the world where the most recognisable brands in America are sell information access (Google and Apple), Europe gets stylish furniture, and Latin America gets... cement? How do they make cement sexy?
  • Google tops North America, but Apple tops North America?

    I'm hoping it was just your writing, and no, I haven't RTFA. I will, and I'm sure doing so will sort things out, but please, let's have *some* modicum of editing.
  • This article is nothing but FLAIMBAIT for slashdot readers!! Too bad the article itself cannot be modded down or away. 0.02 percent if there were 100 million internet users is insignificant for selecting anything worldwide. Whoever even heard of that website!! Instead of commenting, slashdot users should just just tell the products they think should have been there. I'll bet that we can generate more comments/votes in an hour than the total poll used for it's selection. (Note that the 100 million is a n

  • Who the hell is Brandchannel.com? (Score:5, Informative)

    by burnsy ( 563104 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @12:34PM (#11529147)
    The traditional and respected ranking of global brands come from Business Week.

    You can see the top 10 list for 2004 here [businessweek.com].

    1. Coke
    2. Microsoft
    3. IBM
    4. GE
    5. Intel

    This popularity contest at brandchannel.com really seems to be ranking cult brands.

    • Exactly. It is a web-based "reader's poll".

      Thank you for posting the scientific survey.
      • Don't know how "scientific" this one is, all the brands listed below Coke are businesses offering services or products to other businesses. I doubt your average football (pronounced "soccer") fan would recognize Intel, but they sure as hell know Marlboro. I posit that the most recognized brands are going to be those of common consumer goods, especially those that are bad for you. E.g., Marlboro, Budweiser (in N.A.), Bacardi et. al. Also McDonalds, Starbucks, and other places ordinary people are likely t
    • GE? Who the hell is the consumer that says "to hell with that $200 stove. I'll take that $700 GE! Because, hell, it's GE! They bring good things to life!"

      Maybe GE gets their bang for buck on their missile systems? Most people tend to prefer the GE brand of missile over the "Crazy Eddie Just-Over-The-NC-Border" missiles, even if they come with a case of free Black Cats and M-80s.

  • What about companies that 'Do No Evil?' (Score:3, Insightful)

    by applecore ( 805364 ) * on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:04PM (#11529446) Homepage Journal
    It's Google's mantra, and Apple is well-known for its happy-fun simplicity. Even /. lets us keep track of the do-gooders.

    With accounting snafubars and corporate greed in other news, it's satisfying to see such 'Karma-positive' companies be so well-recognized.

  • Many people seem to think this thing is a recognizability or popularity award. I guess the need to RTFA is alive and swinging.

    If you look at the home page, it notes this is a reader survey to determine the brands with the most IMPACT.

    Apple and Google are high on this list because what they do affects what a lot of other people do.

    IBM and Coke are not because while they are of course more widley known, bit as much is changin because of them. They are solid companies but evoke change by degrees, not in b

  • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

Slashdot Top Deals

If you have a procedure with 10 parameters, you probably missed some.

Close