DOCSLIB.ORG

2017 the Annual Report on the World’S Most Valuable Brands February 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2017 the Annual Report on the World’S Most Valuable Brands February 2017 Global 500 2017 The annual report on the world’s most valuable brands February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 1. Foreword Contents steady downward spiral of poor communication, Definitions 4 wasted resources and a negative impact on the bottom line. Methodology 6 Executive Summary 8 Brand Finance bridges the gap between the marketing and financial worlds. Our teams have Full Table 18 experience across a wide range of disciplines from market research and visual identity to tax Understand Your Brand’s Value 28 and accounting. We understand the importance of design, advertising and marketing, but we How We Can Help 30 also believe that the ultimate and overriding Contact Details 31 purpose of brands is to make money. That is why we connect brands to the bottom line. By valuing brands, we provide a mutually intelligible language for marketers and finance teams. David Haigh, CEO Marketers then have the ability to communicate Brand Finance the significance of what they do and boards can use the information to chart a course that maximises profits. Without knowing the precise, What is the purpose of a strong brand; to attract financial value of an asset, how can you know if customers, to build loyalty, to motivate staff? All you are maximising your returns? If you are true, but for a commercial brand at least, the first intending to license a brand, how can you know answer must always be ‘to make money’. Huge you are getting a fair price? If you are intending investments are made in the design, launch and to sell, how do you know what the right time is? ongoing promotion of brands. Given their How do you decide which brands to discontinue, potential financial value, this makes sense. whether to rebrand and how to arrange your Unfortunately, most organisations fail to go brand architecture? Brand Finance has beyond that, missing huge opportunities to conducted thousands of brand and branded- effectively make use of what are often their most business valuations to help answer these important assets. Monitoring of brand questions. performance should be the next step, but is often sporadic. Where it does take place it Brand Finance’s recently conducted share price frequently lacks financial rigour and is heavily study revealed the compelling link between reliant on qualitative measures poorly strong brands and stock market performance. It understood by non-marketers. As a result, was found that investing in the most highly marketing teams struggle to communicate the branded companies would lead to a return value of their work and boards then almost double that of the average for the S&P underestimate the significance of their brands to 500 as a whole. Acknowledging and managing a the business. Skeptical finance teams, company’s intangible assets taps into the hidden unconvinced by what they perceive as marketing value that lies within it. The following report is a mumbo jumbo may fail to agree necessary first step to understanding more about brands, investments. What marketing spend there is can how to value them and how to use that end up poorly directed as marketers are left to information to benefit the business. The team operate with insufficient financial guidance or and I look forward to continuing the conversation accountability. The end result can be a slow but with you. 2. Brand Finance GlobalAirlines 500 30 30February February 20162017 2015 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 2. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 3. Definitions Effect of a Brand on Stakeholders Definitions E.g. + Enterprise Value – the value of the Unilever entire enterprise, made up of Directors Potential Middle ‘Branded‘Branded multiple branded businesses Customers Managers Enterprise’Enterprise’ Existing All Other ‘Branded‘Branded + Branded Business Value – the Customers Employees Business’ E.g. Business’ Persil value of a single branded business operating under the subject brand ‘Brand’ Contribution’ Influencers Production + Brand Contribution– The total e.g. Media Brand E.g. economic benefit derived by a Persil business from its brand ‘Brand Value’ Trade Sales Channels + Brand Value – the value of the Persil trade marks (and relating Strategic marketing IP and ‘goodwill’ Debt Allies & providers attached to it) within the branded Suppliers Investors business Branded Business Value Brand Contribution Brand Value Brand Strength A brand should be viewed in the context of the The brand values contained in our league In the very broadest sense, a brand is the focus Brand Strength is the part of our analysis most business in which it operates. For this reason tables are those of the potentially transferable for all the expectations and opinions held by directly and easily influenced by those Brand Finance always conducts a Branded brand asset only, but for marketers and customers, staff and other stakeholders about responsible for marketing and brand Business Valuation as part of any brand managers alike. An assessment of overall an organisation and its products and services. management. In order to determine the valuation. Where a company has a purely mono- brand contribution to a business provides However, when looking at brands as business strength of a brand we have developed the branded architecture, the business value is the powerful insights to help optimise performance. assets that can be bought, sold and licensed, a Brand Strength Index (BSI). We analyse same as the overall company value or more technical definition is required. marketing investment, brand equity (the ‘enterprise value’. Brand Contribution represents the overall uplift goodwill accumulated with customers, staff and in shareholder value that the business derives Brand Finance helped to craft the internationally other stakeholders) and finally the impact of In the more usual situation where a company from owning the brand rather than operating a recognised standard on Brand Valuation, ISO those on business performance. owns multiple brands, business value refers to generic brand. 10668. That defines a brand as “a marketing- the value of the assets and revenue stream of related intangible asset including, but not limited Following this analysis, each brand is assigned the business line attached to that brand Brands affect a variety of stakeholders, not just to, names, terms, signs, symbols, logos and a BSI score out of 100, which is fed into the specifically. We evaluate the full brand value customers but also staff, strategic partners, designs, or a combination of these, intended to brand value calculation. Based on the score, chain in order to understand the links between regulators, investors and more, having a identify goods, services or entities, or a each brand in the league table is assigned a marketing investment, brand tracking data, significant impact on financial value beyond combination of these, creating distinctive rating between AAA+ and D in a format similar stakeholder behaviour and business value to what can be bought or sold in a transaction. images and associations in the minds of to a credit rating. AAA+ brands are maximise the returns business owners can stakeholders, thereby generating economic exceptionally strong and well managed while a obtain from their brands. benefits/value” failing brand would be assigned a D grade. 4. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 5. Methodology League Table Valuation Methodology Brand Finance Typical Project Approach Brand Finance calculates the values of the 2 Determine the royalty rate range for the respective brands in its league tables using the brand sectors. This is done by reviewing ‘Royalty Relief approach’. This approach comparable licensing agreements sourced from involves estimating the likely future sales that are Brand Finance’s extensive database of license attributable to a brand and calculating a royalty agreements and other online databases. Brand Equity Stakeholder Brand Inputs Performance rate that would be charged for the use of the 3 Calculate royalty rate. The brand strength score is Value Drivers Behaviour Contribution brand, i.e. what the owner would have to pay for applied to the royalty rate range to arrive at a royalty the use of the brand—assuming it were not rate. For example, if the royalty rate range in a already owned. brand’s sector is 1-5% and a brand has a brand strength score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate 1 2 3 4 The steps in this process are as follows: royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given Brand Audit Trial & Preference Acquisition & Valuation Modelling sector will be 4.2%. Retention 1 Calculate brand strength on a scale of 0 to 100 4 Determine brand specific revenues estimating a based on a number of attributes such as emotional proportion of parent company revenues attributable Audit the impact Run analytics to Link stakeholder Model the impact of behaviour on connection, financial performance and sustainability, to a specific brand. of brand understand how behaviour with core financial performance and among others. This score is known as the Brand management and perceptions link to key financial isolating the value of the brand 5 Determine forecast brand specific revenues using a Strength Index, and is calculated using brand data investment on behaviour value drivers contribution function of historic revenues, equity analyst from the BrandAsset® Valuator database, the brand equity forecasts and economic growth rates. world’s largest database of brands, which measures 6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to brand equity, consideration and emotional imagery derive brand revenues. attributes to assess brand personality in a category 7 Brand revenues are discounted post tax to a net agnostic manner. present value which equals the brand value. Brand strength Brand Brand revenues Brand value How We Help to Maximise Value index ‘Royalty rate’ (BSI) 6. Build scale through licensing/franchising/partnerships Brand Strong brand investment 5.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dreyer's Grand Ice Cream Business Time Line
    Dreyer’s Grand Ice Cream Business Time Line: DATE Event Description 4th Origins of ice cream being made… China, Persians faloodeh, Nero in Rome (62 AD) century BC 15th Spanish, Italian royalty and wealthy store mountain ice in pits for summer use Century 16th Ice Cream breakthrough is when Italians learn to make ice by immersing a bucket of Century water in snow and adding potassium nitrate… later just use common salt. 1700s Jefferson and Washington In US serving ice cream 1776 First US ice cream parlor in New York City and American colonists first to use the term ice cream 1832 Augustus Jackson (Black) in Philadelphia adds salt to lower temp. White House chef to a catering business. 1846 Nancy Johnson patented hand-crank freezer 1848 William Young patents an ice cream freezer 1851 Jacob Fussell in Seven Valleys, Pennsylvania established the first large-scale commercial ice cream plant… moved to Baltimore 1870s Development of Industrial Refrigeration by German engineer Carl von Linde 1904 Walk away edible cone at the St Louis World’s Fair 1906 William Dreyer made his first frozen dessert to celebrate his German ship's arrival in America. Made Ice Cream in New York then moves to Northern California began 20 year apprenticeship with ice cream makers like National Ice Cream Company and Peerless Ice Cream. 1921 Dreyer opens own ice creamery in Visalia and one first prize at Pacific Slope Dairy Show. 1920s – Dreyer taught ice cream courses at the University of California and served as an officer in 1930s the California Dairy Industries Association.
    [Show full text]
  • The Formation of Unilever 16944-Unilever 20Pp A5:Layout 1 15/11/11 14:35 Page 2
    16944-Unilever 20pp A5:Layout 1 15/11/11 14:35 Page 1 The Formation of Unilever 16944-Unilever 20pp A5:Layout 1 15/11/11 14:35 Page 2 Unilever House, London, c1930 16944-Unilever 20pp A5:Layout 1 15/11/11 14:36 Page 03 In September 1929 an agreement was signed which created what The Economist described as "one of the biggest industrial amalgamations in European history". It provided for the merger in the following year of the Margarine Union and Lever Brothers Limited. The Margarine Union had been formed in 1927 by the Van den Bergh and Jurgens companies based in the Netherlands, and was later joined by a number of other Dutch and central European companies. Its main strength lay in Europe, especially Germany and the UK and its interests, whilst mostly in margarine and other edible fats, were also oil milling and animal feeds, retail companies and some soap production. Lever Brothers Limited was based in the UK but owned companies throughout the world, especially in Europe, the United States and the British Dominions. Its interests were in soap, toilet preparations, food (including some margarine), oil milling and animal feeds, plantations and African trading. One of the main reasons for the merger was competition for raw materials - animal and vegetable oils - used in both the manufacture of margarine and soap. However, the two businesses were very similar, so it made sense to merge as Unilever rather than continue to compete for the same raw materials and in the same markets. To understand how Unilever came into being you have to go back to the family companies that were instrumental in its formation.
    [Show full text]
  • 1967 Annual Report and Accounts
    T AND AC OUNTS I967 Directors H. S. A. HARTOG, Cha'imn J. J. H. NAGEL THE LORD COLE, We-Chairman D. A. ORR RUDOLF G. JURGENS, Vice-Chairman F. J. PEDLER A. F. H. BLAAUW R. H. SIDDONS A. W. J. CARON E. SMIT J. G. COLLINGWOOD SIR ARTHUR SMITH J. M. GOUDSWAARD J. P. STUBBS 6. D. A. KLIJNSTRA S. G. SWEETMAN J. F. KNIGHT THE VISCOUNT TRENCHARD P. KUIN E. G. WOODROOFE D. J. MA" Advisory Directors J. M. HONIG F. J. M. A. H. HOUBEN A. E. J. NYSINGH F. J. TEMPEL G. E. VAN WALSUM Secretaries A. A. HAAK P. A. MACRORY 'Auditors PRICE WATERHOUSE & Co. COOPER BROTHERS & Co. This is a translation of the origillal Dutch report. The Report and Accounts as usual combine the results and operations of UNILEVER N.V. (‘N.v.’) and UNILEVER LIMITED (‘LIMITED’) with the figures expressed in guilders. The basis on which the devaluation of sterling in November, 1967, has been dealt with is explained on page 31. Contents Page 6 Salient figures 7 Report for the year 1967 7 The year in brief 8 Sales to third parties, profit and capital employed by geographical areas 1958 and 1967 (chart) 9 Return on capital employed and on turnover 1958-1967 (chart) 10 Summary of combined figures 1958-1967 11 The background 12 Indonesia 13 Taxation 13 Analysis of turnover 14 Margarine, other edible fats and oils 15 Other foods 17 Detergents and toilet preparations 19 Animal feeds 20 Paper, printing, packaging and plastics 20 Chemicals 21 The United Africa Group 22 Plantations 23 Exports 24 Finance 25 Capital projects 26 Research 27 Personnel 28 Capital and membership 28 Dividends 29 Directors 30 Retirement of Directors 30 Auditors 31 Accounts 1967 31 Treatment of devaluation of Sterling 32 Consolidated profit and loss accounts (Statement A) 34 Consolidated balance sheets (Statement B) 38 Balance sheet-N.V.
    [Show full text]
  • Campaign Categories Shortlist Category Title/Media Owner
    Campaign Categories Shortlist Category Title/Media Owner Company Country Other credits Brand Brand Owner Best Communications / Axe Cheesegirls Nota Bene South Africa Hardy Boys, Red Cube Axe Unilever Entertainment Platform Best Communications / Gordon's and Gordon Carat UK - Gordon's Gin Diageo Entertainment Platform Best Communications / Havas Sports & The Coca-Cola Destapados Copa Coca-Cola Argentina MPG, Media Contacts Coca-Cola Entertainment Platform Entertainment Company McCann Erickson, Media Prima TV Networks, Best Communications / The Coca-Cola Bebaskan-lah UM Malaysia Coca-Cola Marketing Coca-Cola Entertainment Platform Company Team (Malaysia & Singapore) Best Communications / Miracle of Love Mindshare Indonesia - Ponds Unilever Entertainment Platform Best Communications / The Coca-Cola Coke & Meal MediaCom Pakistan SOHO square Coca-Cola Entertainment Platform Company Best Communications / Starcom Entertainment, Earn Your Stripes Starcom United States Frosted Flakes Kellogg's Entertainment Platform Leo Burnett, ESPN Best Communications Rexona for Women - Tatoo Romania & Rexona for Mindshare - Unilever Strategy Experiment Bulgaria Women Best Communications Green Room Good Bye Cellulite OMD United States Nivea Beiersdorf Strategy Entertainment Best Communications 15 Seconds a Day to Stronger Mindshare United States - Vaseline Men Unilever Strategy Skin Best Communications Amtrak rail offers you less MPG United States Media Contacts, Mobext Amtrak Amtrak Strategy hassle Best Communications Häagen-Dazs Loves Honey Goodby, Silverstein
    [Show full text]
  • M 5658 Unilever Sara Lee Decision Non-Confidential V2
    This text is made available for information purposes only. A summary of this decision is published in all Community languages in the Official Journal of the European Union. Case No COMP/M.5658 – UNILEVER/SARA LEE Only the English text is authentic. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 8 (2) Date: 17/11/2010 EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 17.11.2010 C(2010) 7934final PUBLIC VERSION COMMISSION DECISION of 17.11.2010 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.5658 – Unilever/Sara Lee Body Care) 2 COMMISSION DECISION of 17.11.2010 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.5658 – Unilever/Sara Lee Body Care) (Only the English text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 57 thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings1, and in particular Article 8(2) thereof, Having regard to the Commission's Decision of 31 May 2010 to initiate proceedings in this case, Having given the undertakings concerned the opportunity to make known their views on the objections raised by the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of the Advisory Committee on Concentrations2, Having regard to the final report of the Hearing Officer in this case 3, 1 OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p.
    [Show full text]
  • 1980 Annual Reports and Accounts
    u*x ** Unilever Report and Accounts 1980 Unilever N.V., Rotterdam Report and Accounts 1980 The Unilever group of companies provides a wide range of products and services in some 75countries, employing about 300 000 people. In most of these countries the products are manufactured locally. Unilever has existed for more than 50 years as a group, but can trace its roots much further back than that. There are two parent companies: Unilever N.V., Rotterdam, and Unilever Limited, London. They have identical Boards of Directors and are linked by agreements, one of which equalises the dividends payable on the ordinary capital of N.V. and of Limited, according to a formula set out elsewhere in this Report. Unilever operates as one group. The combined affairs of N.V. and Limited are, therefore, more important to shareholders than those of the two separate companies and the Report and Accounts deal, as usual, with the operations and results of Unilever as a whole: except where stated otherwise, all the figures are for N.V. and Limited combined. The larger part of Unilever’s business is in branded and packaged consumer goods: mainly foods, detergents and toilet preparations. The foods include margarine, other fats and oils, ice cream, frozen and other convenience products, meat, fish, tea and other drinks. Unilever has other important activities, such as chemicals, paper, plastics and packaging, animal feeds, transport and tropical plantations. UAC International, a major Unilever company, has substantial interests in Africa and other parts of the world in diverse industrial ventures, and as merchants and specialist distributors.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report and Accounts 2014 and Is an Exact Copy of the Printed Document Provided to Unilever’S Shareholders
    DISCLAIMER This is a PDF version of the Unilever Annual Report and Accounts 2014 and is an exact copy of the printed document provided to Unilever’s shareholders. Certain sections of the Unilever Annual Report and Accounts 2014 have been audited. These are on pages 84 to 135, 137 to 139, and those parts noted as audited within the Directors’ Remuneration Report on pages 65 to 77. The maintenance and integrity of the Unilever website is the responsibility of the Directors; the work carried out by the auditors does not involve consideration of these matters. Accordingly, the auditors accept no responsibility for any changes that may have occurred to the financial statements since they were initially placed on the website. Legislation in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands governing the preparation and dissemination of financial statements may differ from legislation in other jurisdictions. Except where you are a shareholder, this material is provided for information purposes only and is not, in particular, intended to confer any legal rights on you. This Annual Report and Accounts does not constitute an invitation to invest in Unilever shares. Any decisions you make in reliance on this information are solely your responsibility. The information is given as of the dates specified, is not updated, and any forward–looking statements are made subject to the reservations specified in the cautionary statement on the inside back cover of this PDF. Unilever accepts no responsibility for any information on other websites that may be accessed from this site by hyperlinks. MAKING SUSTAINABLE LIVING ANNUAL REPORT AND ACCOUNTS 2014 COMMONPLACE STRATEGIC REPORT NEW DOVE BOTTLES – LESS PLASTIC, LOWER COSTS In 2014 Unilever launched a newly developed The technology represents a breakthrough for packaging technology for Dove Body Wash bottles Unilever and the industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Unilever Reformulation Case Study
    UNILEVER REFORMULATION CASE STUDY WHO: Unilever Australasia is an international manufacturer and Product range: Continental manufactures an extensive marketer of food as well as home and personal care products. range of cooking products including soup, stock (liquid, Unilever is a purpose driven company and a market leader in a powders and cubes) and meal solutions including pasta, rice number of food categories in Australia and New Zealand under side dishes and inspirational recipe base products. Please brands such as Continental, Streets, Hellman’s and Knorr. visit our website for more information on our product range. With more than 400 global brands sold in over 190 countries, our purpose is to make sustainable living commonplace. COMMITMENT TO FOOD & NUTRITION: Health and wellbeing have always been a key focus for our comprehensive reformulation programme for reducing Unilever, and we are committed to producing great-tasting sodium, saturated fat and sugar across our foods and food which makes a positive contribution to a healthy diet. refreshment portfolio. One of our 3 big pillar USLP goals Unilever’s blueprint for responsible business is through is to help more than 1 billion people take action to improve our Unilever Sustainable Living Plan (USLP), launched in their health and wellbeing by 2020. 2010 and houses our global nutrition targets which drive COMMITMENT TO SALT REDUCTION: Unilever has been on a sodium reduction journey since the late innovations must meet our strict product specific 1990’s. In 2009 we launched our sodium reduction strategy sodium targets detailed below to be permitted for which was further intensified through the development of launch.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to Your Inquiry Into Corporate Social Responsibility and Triple Bottom Line Reporting
    Unilever Australasia 20 Cambridge St Epping NSW 2121 Private Bag 2 Epping NSW 1710 Committee Secretary Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services Department of the Senate Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Australia [email protected] 28 September 2005 Dear Sir/Madam, Thank you for the opportunity to provide a submission to your inquiry into Corporate Social Responsibility and Triple Bottom Line reporting. I attach here Unilever’s submission, and I would be happy to discuss with the Committee any of the information presented here. If you require any clarification or further information, please don’t hesitate to contact me. Kind regards, Sarah Clarry Corporate Social Responsibility & Communications Manager Tel: +61 (0)2 9869 6321 Email: [email protected] Parliamentary Joint Committee Inquiry into Corporate Social Responsibility Submission from Unilever Australasia Executive Summary Corporate Social Responsibility is increasingly the focus of many conferences, round tables, publications and networking exercises, as businesses start to recognise the implications of sustainability and socially responsible behaviour on their markets, their employees, their communities and the environments in which they operate. Companies that may once have had no reason to collaborate, or who may even have been competitors, are now seeking to work together and discover ways in which they can support social change. CSR is the vehicle through which these businesses to work together for common good. Corporate Social Responsibility is a natural attractor for creativity and innovation, as it requires a different way of viewing the business model. The imposition of regulations on this area of business will serve only to stifle this natural innovation and energy, and shift the focus of CSR from its essential role of ensuring the future of the community and environment, to one of obligation and bureaucracy.
    [Show full text]
  • Univocity, Analogy and the Analytic-Continental Divide in Philosophy
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by British Columbia's network of post-secondary digital repositories Univocity, Analogy and the Analytic-Continental Divide in Philosophy by Joshua Harris A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Master of Arts in Interdisciplinary Humanities, Philosophy Stream ……………………………………………. Dr. Jens Zimmermann, PhD; Thesis Supervisor …………………………………………….. Dr. Christopher Morrissey, PhD; Second Reader Trinity Western University May, 2013 Harris 2 Introduction: The Analytic-Continental Divide For most of the twentieth and now also the twenty-first century, the world of academic philosophy has been plagued by the so-called “analytic-continental divide.” In recent years, numerous attempts have been made to understand and bridge the ‘divide’ because leading philosophers have realized that the sharp division between the two styles or traditions of philosophy has produced some harmful results for the discipline as a whole. Brian Leiter, who occupies an important position in the academic profession of philosophy due to his leading role in “The Philosophical Gourmet Report,” a semi- official ranking of philosophy departments in the English-speaking world, has been vocal about these negative developments in contemporary philosophy: “There are rather unadmirable reasons for identifying on one side of the divide or the other… it entitles you not to know certain things…. It encourages a destructive kind of parochialism.”1 There is an “acceptable sphere of ignorance” that comes with a direct identification with either side of the divide that tends to result in a sort of intellectual incest amongst the different camps.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Owns Our Food
    Who owns our Food Top companies according to Food & Drink Magazine 2014 Company Products l Owned by: (Researched) 1 Fonterra Woolworths Milk Home Brand, NZ: 42% foreign owned shares (Major concern) Anchor, Fonterra Co-operative group - Founded in 2001 Bega, HALAL CERTIFIED http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10850648 Mainland, Perfect Italiano, Western Star, , Tamar Valley, Diploma Instant Milk, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10850648 CalciYum, Nestle Soleil, Riverina Fresh, Ski Activ, Ski Yoghurt, Western Star Butter. 2 Lion Nathan Pura; Dairy Farmers; Moove; Farmers Union; Dare; Big M; Masters M; Yoplait; Japan: Kirin Holdings/Mitsubishi MEGA COMPANY Fruche; Yogo; Divine Classic; Berri; Daily Juice; Just Juice; Mildura; Prima; (see attached) HALAL CERTIFIED Sunnyboy; Zooper Dooper; Summit; Kyneton Springs; Coon; King Island Diary; Lion Nathan merged with National Foods (owned by Kirin 2007) to form Lion Nathan National Foods Tasmanian Heritage; Mersey Valley; South Cape; Cracker Barrel; Australian Gold; Mil Lel; Heidi Farm; and Vitasoy. http://www.smh.com.au/business/sad-farewell-for-australasias-lion-nathan-20090917- fsvt.html Lion also owns dozens of alcohol brands including Tooheys, XXXX, Heineken and James Squire. Owned by (shareholding) Mitsubishi: Shareholders who??? https://www.mitsubishi.com/php/users/category_result_member.php?company_id=00000001 &lang=1 3 Coca Cola Drinks: Coca-Cola; Fanta; Lift; Deep Spring; Mother; Appletiser; Grapetiser; USA: Muhtar Kent – Muslim CEO (MAJOR CONCERN) Kirks; Bisleri; Mount Franklin; Pump; Peats Ridge; Vitamin Water; Powerade; http://www.todayszaman.com/business_coca-cola-ceo-in-us-group-to- Nestea; Neverfail; Goulburn Valley; Fruit Box; and Grinders Coffee.
    [Show full text]
  • Poppack for UNILEVER: Superior Functionality for Packaging
    EasyPop® by PopPack® – An easy-open, multi-sensory and functional packaging design for flexible and semi-rigid packaging: Pop the air bubble to easily open the package and enjoy! PopPack for UNILEVER: Superior Functionality for Packaging Submission Date: 27 July 2020 Summary PopPack’s EasyPop® is a tactile air bubble incorporated into a flexible or semi-rigid package. When the air bubble is popped by the consumer with one hand, the package’s top seal is broken, making the package very easy for the consumer to open, dispense and consume the product. EasyPop® is an innovative design-tech feature. PopPack’s EasyPop®: Superior Functionality for Unilever A globally patented and trademarked portfolio of next generation packaging design-tech enhancements that improve consumer interactions for packaging that attracts, protects and brings convenience, sensory experiences (audio-visual, tactile), product protection and practical functionality for Unilever’s consumers. EasyPop®: An innovation that offers an easy-open, cost-effective all-in-one solution: PopPack® is changing the way people of all ages, throughout the world open packages – with a simple, novel and sensational “pop” of an air bubble. EasyPop® uses an high-performance feature to open packages using the Power of Air™. The EasyPop® design-tech feature makes Unilever’s flexible and semi-rigid packaging containers easy and safe to open and use, functional, convenient, attractive, interactive and sustainable. The EasyPop® air bubble design is ideal for many types, shapes and sizes of packaging – for single-use, multi-use and re-fill products – suitable for diverse consumer lifestyles. EasyPop® for Unilever can make packages sensory through a unique “popping sound”, with a visually distinctive appeal, tactile experience with practical and durable functionality.
    [Show full text]