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. Build core business through market expansion

4. Build core business through product development Brand equity

Maximising a strong brand 3. Portfolio management/rebranding Group companies

2. Optimise brand positioning and strength Brand Weak brand performance Forecast revenues 1. Base-case brand and business valuation (using internal data), growth strategy Evaluate ongoing performance formulation, target-setting, scorecard and Brand strength BSI score applied to an Royalty rate applied to Post-tax brand tracker set-up expressed as a BSI appropriate sector forecast revenues to revenues are score out of 100. royalty rate range. derive brand values. discounted to a net Current brand and Target brand and business value business value present value (NPV) which equals the brand value.

6. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 7.

Executive Summary

Rank 2017: 1 2016: 2 Rank 2017: 6 2016: 7 BV 2017: $109,470m BV 2017: $ 66,219m 1 +24% 6 +13% BV 2016: $88,173m BV 2016: $ 58,619m Brand Rating: AAA+ Brand Rating: AAA- Global Rank 2017: 2 2016: 1 Rank 2017: 7 2016: 5 BV 2017: $107,141m BV 2017: $ 65,875m 2 -27% 7 +4% BV 2016: $145,918m BV 2016: $ 63,116m Brand Rating: AAA Brand Rating: AAA-

Rank 2017: 3 2016: 3 Rank 2017: 8 2016: 8 BV 2017: $106,369m BV 2017: $ 62,496m 3 +53% 8 +16% BV 2016: $69,642m BV 2016: $ 53,657m 500 Brand Rating: AAA- Brand Rating: AA+

Rank 2017: 4 2016: 6 Rank 2017: 9 2016: 17 BV 2017: $87,016m BV 2017: $ 61,998m 4 +45% 9 +82% BV 2016: $59,904m BV 2016: $ 34,002m Brand Rating: AAA Brand Rating: AAA

Rank 2017: 5 2016: 4 Rank 2017: 10 2016: 13 BV 2017: $76,265m BV 2017: $ 47,832m 5 +13% 10 +32% BV 2016: $ 67,258m BV 2016: $ 36,334m Brand Rating: AAA Brand Rating: AAA

Apple has for the last five years held sway as the material changes were expected. world’s most valuable brand. effectively, Google is persevering. For example world’s most valuable brand. Apple was once a 2016 saw the introduction of ‘bumper ads’, short, paragon of branding excellence. It has a Put simply, Apple has over-exploited the goodwill Apple’s loss has been Google’s gain. Six years 6-second video ads better suited to the short meticulously constructed, sleek and innovative of its customers, it has failed to generate after it last held the title in 2011, Google is now clips that form an increasing part of media visual identity that runs consistently through all its significant revenues from newer products such the world’s most valuable brand with a value of consumption on Google sites such as Youtube. products, services and retail sites. Its mono- as the Apple Watch and cannot demonstrate that US$109 billion. brand structure created marketing efficiencies genuinely innovative technologies desired by Increasing revenues are not the only explanation and helped to cement its logo as an icon of the consumers are in the pipeline. Its brand has lost It is perhaps fitting that the brand which enables for Google’s success however. Its brand strength 21st century. Reliability, user-friendly interfaces, its luster and must now compete on an the world’s biggest brands reach their customers score is up by two points indicating improving knowledgeable staff and, most importantly, its increasingly level playing field not just with and build their own brand equity (through search underlying brand equity. Some are wont to transformative technology meant that the brand traditional rival Samsung, but a slew of Chinese and advertising respectively) has itself become question the significance of brand equity for tech fulfilled its promises. Loyalty and advocacy brands such as Huawei and OnePlus in the the world’s most valuable. Google remains firms, convinced that the functional properties of reached cultish proportions with fans waiting smartphone market, Apple’s key source of largely unchallenged in its core search business, a particular service are the only relevant concern. days outside Apple stores for the latest release. profitability. which is the mainstay of its advertising income. However, a brand can have a powerful impact Ad revenues were up 20% in 2016, despite a fall both in the growth phase and in sustaining long However, Apple’s evangelists are beginning to Brand Finance’s analysts had remained bullish in cost per click, as ad budgets are increasingly term success for tech brands. As the examples of lose their faith. The snaking queues of early about Apple’s potential to recover its lost directed online. Desktop advertising remains far Apple and Yahoo arguably show, accumulated adopters have shrunk almost to the point of momentum, but the rot has now truly set in, with more lucrative than mobile, despite its brand equity can enable a tech business to retain invisibility. Apple has failed to maintain its brand value falling 27% since early 2016 to prematurely diagnosed decline. Though mobile customers or even command a price premium technological advantage and has repeatedly US$107 billion, which sees it lose its status as the advertising has proved a challenge to monetize that its products and services might not disillusioned its advocates with tweaks when

8. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 9.

Executive Summary Brand Value Over Time Brand Value Change 2016-2017 ($m)

150 Amazon.com 36,754 Spectrum 354% Facebook 27,996 Broadcom 223% 140 Verizon AT&T 27,112 Chubb 180% 130 Google 21,297 Porsche 178% 120 Samsung Alibaba 16,890 Country Garden 168% 110 Tencent 12,334 Geely 154% Spectrum 12,294 136% 100 FIS Microsoft Dell Technologies 11,591 China Resources Land 132% 90 ICBC 11,498 SK Group 126% 80 SK Group 10,796 Tencent 124% AT&T 70 -3821 Hyundai Group -27% KFC 60 -3971 McDonald's -28% Baidu Nestle

Brand ae n -3979 Sam's Club 50 Amazon -29% -4149 Ericsson -30% Shinhan Financial Group 40 -4605 Baidu -33% EE 30 Apple -5175 3M -38% BT 20 -5989 Vodafone -41% Deutsche Bank -6958 BT 10 -44% Ericsson Google -11,646 HP -47% 3M 0 -38,776 Apple -60% HP 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Image: Alphabet corporate structure -45000.000000-19285.714286-6428.5714296428.57142919285.71428632142.857143-32142.857143 -70 -13 44 101 158 215 272 329 386 443 500 otherwise sustain. Meanwhile intensive, well- Google stable, such as Youtube, which has helps improve brand equity with one frequently suggests that Amazon may well see a new brand targeted marketing communications behind a retained its brand long after acquisition. overlooked stakeholder group. Government at the top of the Brand Finance Global 500 in credibly executed brand can be fundamental to organisations might not be frequently discussed 2018. building the critical mass and network effect This diversified approach may well just be the as a brand audience but they can have a required to make businesses such as Facebook consequence of rapid diversification and potentially fundamental effect on firms’ Facebook continues to climb the ranks following and Uber succeed. Google’s ability to attract ad repeated acquisitions. However there may be profitability and hence shareholder value. By 82% brand value growth, but has been outdone budgets may be in large part to its user base. something more strategic at work too. Google is diversifying its brand portfolio, Alphabet will hope by China’s biggest tech brands. Alibaba, WeChat However its third party and business services attracting more and more scrutiny over the to avoid perceptions of excessive scale and and Tencent have grown by 94%, 103% and have only been able to expand as rapidly as they erosion of personal privacy and potential divert regulatory attention. 124% respectively. WeChat has over 850 million have thanks to the strength of the Google brand. monopolistic behavior. In this climate, a users and despite being largely confined to its gargantuan mono-branded approach is probably Amazon’s 53% brand value growth meant it domestic market, could soon start to challenge Google’s brand architecture is somewhat more ill-advised. Google moved to further distance nearly secured the top spot for itself this year. Facebook for user numbers. WeChat offers a complicated than Apple’s. It has a hybrid itself from this approach in 2015 with a corporate The firm is growing strongly as it continues to more extensive range of services, than any structure that is somewhat difficult to classify. The restructure that saw Google become a division of both reshape the retail market and to capture an comparable brand, from mobile payments to Google master brand is prevalent, applied on new parent Alphabet. Its shift towards a ‘house of ever larger share of it. Amazon Fresh, its grocery video games and text messaging to video key, high profile services such as search and brands’ approach makes sense for operational service, is still relatively limited in scale but this sharing. As a result it is far more embedded in maps. However multiple brands have been reasons, but brand has been critical too. year began operating overseas for the first time, the life of the average user, even replacing work created or acquired that are merely ‘endorsed’ by Diversification limits the contagion of one serving Central and East London initially. Amazon emails for many Chinese, opening the door to the Google brand such as Android and Chrome. negative story affecting other branded has stated it will create 100,000 jobs in the US brand extension and further growth. There are also brands that merely sit within the businesses within the overall enterprise. It also over the next 18 months. Such confidence

10. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 11.

Executive Summary Brand Value Total for Top 5 Sectors (2008 and 2017) takeover of DirecTV. It has been rewarded with continued growth in brand value and an increase in market share. AT&T has taken a largely mono- 1200 1200 brand approach to its brand architecture. 2008 2008 Following the acquisition of DirecTV, it was quick to create an ‘endorsed’ brand, inserting its logo 1000 1000 and ‘Now part of the AT&T family’ beneath the 2017 2017 DirectTV wordmark. It has since moved a step closer to a unified branding, with the AT&T 800 800 master logo enlarged and the DirecTV wordmark reduced. 2016 has also seen a refresh of the DirecTV logo, which, though of less strategic importance, has practical advantages in that the 600 600 simplified design will be more easily rendered in both physical and digital formats.

Brand ae n 400 Brand ae n 400 Telecoms is the source of the Global 500’s highest new entrant. Charter’s Spectrum brand has ballooned in size following Charter’s 200 200 takeovers of Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks, which were subsequently rebranded. Spectrum’s brand value is US$15.7 billion. 0 0 Tech TechBanks TelecomsBanks TelecomsRetail RetailAuto Auto STC, Saudi Arabia’s most valuable brand and the After tech, banking is the largest sector by brand scandal where over 2 million accounts and credit Middle East’s most valuable telecoms brand, value. Financial services brands comprise 20% of cards were opened/applied for without customer grew 11% in value this year to US$6.2 billion. The the Global 500. Chinese banks’ brand value knowledge or consent. Its brand value to market Riyadh-based giant demonstrates a departure growth has been rapidly outpacing that of capitalization ratio is just 14% in contrast to from its once traditional methods; it is embarking European and North American competitors since ICBC’s 20%. Although its brand equity will take a down a path of ‘humanisation’, re-engaging its the study’s inception. The nation’s vast while to repair, this particularly low figure many stakeholders with a fresh, personable population, organic expansion, foreign M&A suggests that a slight rebound could occur and outlook. A clear indication of its success is the activity and positive relationships with Chinese that Wells Fargo may have the potential to 5-point increase in its brand strength index score, consumers are a few common attributes Chinese recapture the top spot in 2018 or 2019. On the proving that putting some heart into it pays off. banks share which serve to explain the immense other hand, American payment service providers growth of this industry. Not only has China’s Visa and Mastercard enjoyed an 81% and 58% Nokia is one of the more remarkable success ICBC claimed the title as the most powerful increase in brand value, respectively. As their stories of 2017. It was a regular feature in the banking brand, it also dethrones Wells Fargo as core markets continue to move towards a Brand Finance Global 500 since the study’s the most valuable financial brand in the world. cashless society, consumers become inception and reached a peak brand value of Wells Fargo fell 6% after a turbulent year for the increasingly reliant on the services they provide. US$33.1 billion in 2008, making it the world’s 9th brand. Damage to its reputation has seen its most valuable brand. Its slow response to the brand significantly underperform this year. The AT&T saw its brand value grow 45% this year to emergence of smart phone technology led to a bank has endured a tough year and has been US$97 billion, overtaking Verizon as the most well-documented decline at the hands of Apple rocked by scandals, lawsuits and resignations. valuable telecoms brand. Its acquisitive growth in and Samsung. Brand Value sunk to a low of just The company has suffered due to the recent South America and Mexico follows its 2015 of US$2 billion in 2014.

12. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 13.

Executive Summary

However, after a period of consolidation, Nokia is with healthier challenger brands offering greater firmly on the road to recovery. After the mobile choice for consumers. Tim Horton’s has bucked device division was sold off, the brand survived the trend however, with a 45% increase in brand as Nokia Networks (rebranded from NSN). Nokia value. The coffee chain offering may be Networks acquired a controlling stake in Alcatel- considered run-of-the-mill to some, but its surge Lucent in 2016 to create one of the largest indicates that there is an under-exploited appetite players in the sector. Alcatel-Lucent has since for reasonably priced rather than premium coffee. been rebranded as Nokia, further reinforcing the Its merger with Burger King has benefitted both position of the Finnish brand. brands (Burger King’s brand value is up 11%) as well as shareholders; the brand’s combined 2017 marks another turning point in the market capitalization is US$4 billion higher now Scandinavian giant’s saga, as the Nokia brand than at the time of the merger. The deal provides will once again be visible on mobile devices opportunities for improved distribution and cost following the launch of the ‘Nokia 6’. The device saving. Tim Horton’s devotees may be comes from HMD (founded by Nokia veterans in concerned at the loss of a Canadian icon but the 2016) and promises to be the first of many, with strength and unique identities of both brands further releases expected at Mobile World would make the disappearance of either almost Congress in February. This newfound momentum unthinkable. sees Nokia’s brand value climb 62% to US$4.9 billion while the fundamental brand equity For the last five years Emirates, now ranked measures are improving too, which sees Nokia’s 264th, had held the title of world’s most valuable brand strength rating upgraded from AA to AA+. airline brand, but 2017 sees a dramatic shift. Last year, Emirates’ half-year profits plunged 75%. Coca-Cola was the world’s most valuable brand The lower oil price might have been expected to across all industries in 2007, with a brand value help all airlines, however it has worked against of US$43.1bn. Increasing concerns over the links the Gulf carriers, reducing demand from its home between carbonated drinks and obesity have region. The lower price has also levelled the begun to undermine what the Coca-Cola brand playing field for international rivals, leading to has represented for over one hundred years. increased competition, driving down fares. Over the last few years Coca-Cola has rolled out Finally, the strength of the dollar has increased a much publicized initiative to consolidate Coke, operating costs and also had a negative FX Diet Coke, Coke Zero and Coke Life under one impact on all non-US domiciled brands. As a master brand. Unfortunately however it has failed consequence, Emirates’ brand value is down to address changing consumer tastes in a 21% to US$6.1 billion, however, it retains its AAA substantive way. As alternatives marketed as rating. In contrast, the US’ airlines have all soared healthier or more natural have fragmented the in value. The Gulf carriers’ loss has been their soft drinks market, Coca-Cola’s brand value has gain, leading to 60%, 47% and 59% year on year declined. In the last year it has dropped 7% to for United, Delta and American, the last of which US$31.9 billion, putting it 27th across all has become the world’s most valuable airline industries. Pepsi is suffering from the same trend, brand. falling 4%. Boeing and Lockheed Martin have grown The same trend is evident in the fast food impressively in brand value, rising 17% and 32% industry. The brand values of McDonald’s, KFC, respectively. President Trump’s commitment to Subway and Domino’s have all fallen heavy increase military spending and his apparent competition in an increasingly fragmented market economic patriotism have improved forecasts

14. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 15.

Executive Summary

The World’s 10 Most Powerful Brands. and American brands in the industry can expect successes have transformed Lego’s fortunes. These are the world’s most powerful brands, all awarded to benefit in the near future. Conversely, Airbus the top AAA+ brand rating based on Brand Finance’s has seen a 10% drop in value. The company has The release of the Lego Movie in 2014 provided Brand Strength Index (BSI). been forced to rein in production of the A380 the final push required to make it not just a very after winning fewer orders than expected, leaving powerful brand, but the world’s most powerful BSI Score the company in financial disappointment. brand in 2015. The film was both a critical and Speculation has arisen that Airbus might commercial success (it was the top grossing film consider cancelling the superjumbo, which of 2014 in the UK and Ireland), providing not just 92.7 would hurt the brand value further. immediate revenue but also an unrivalled BSI Score marketing tool. The first sequel, the Lego Batman Lego has regained its status as the world’s most Movie will be released on February 9th. Its powerful brand, based on Brand Finance’s Brand predicted impact has helped Lego regain its top 92.1 Strength Index (BSI) assessment. The BSI is the position, lost to Disney in 2016. Further releases BSI Score part of Brand Finance’s analysis most directly are planned for September 2017, March 2018 influenced by those responsible for marketing and 2019, which will continue to build the brand and brand management and so the brands that for years to come, while contributing significantly 92.1 perform best are particularly worthy of attention. to Lego’s already vast licensing income. Lego scores highly on a wide variety of BSI BSI Score metrics such familiarity, loyalty, promotion, Geographic expansion provides further marketing investment, staff satisfaction and opportunities for growth. Lego opened its first 91.9 corporate reputation. factory in China in Jiaxing in 2014 as well as a new Asian Head Office in Shanghai. China BSI Score The building blocks for Lego’s brand strength presents risks, including the fact that Lego have always been present. Its appeal spans cannot rely on the nostalgia or awareness that it 91.5 generations; as well as the creative freedom it has enjoyed in Europe and the US for decades, gives children, the brand appeals to the nostalgia however it is also a huge opportunity. China is a BSI Score of adults. It generally avoids gendered marketing, vast market (there are nearly 150 million children by appealing to boys and girls equally Lego under the age of 10) but domestic scandals over 91.3 maximises the size of its target demographic. the safety of children’s products leave fertile That approach also pleases parents, as concerns ground for a foreign firm with a reputation for BSI Score mount over the effect toys may have on the reliability, high standards of production and for outlook and ambitions of children, and girls in nurturing children’s creative and cognitive 91.3 particular. development. BSI Score In the early 2000s, Lego was facing near Whilst Lego will always draw its strength and bankruptcy. An overextended product range and brand identity from the simplicity of its tangible 90.9 problems with stock control had led the company products, it is also responding to the digital era. to a nadir. The downward spiral was arrested Lego Boost, set to launch in August, allows BSI Score following the appointment of Jørgen Vig children to turn Lego creations into Knudstorp, who discontinued unpopular ranges programmable robots using a smartphone app. 90.1 and ensured that all products were compatible Meanwhile Lego Life, launched in the UK in with the core range, both visually and November 2016, enables them to post pictures of BSI Score mechanically, helping to reverse the dilution of their proudest creations or imagine new ones the brand and enhance brand equity. Since then and makes Lego a profoundly social experience 89.8 a decade of repeated marketing and financial as well as a personal one.

16. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 17. Brand Finance Global 500 – Full Table

Top 500 most valuable brands 1-50. Top 500 most valuable brands 51-100.

Rank Rank Brand name Industry Domicile Brand % Brand Brand Brand Rank Rank Brand name Industry Domicile Brand % Brand Brand Brand 2017 2016 Group value ($m) change value ($m) rating rating 2017 2016 Group value ($m) change value ($m) rating rating 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 1 2 Google Technology United States 109,470 24% 88,173 AAA+ AAA+ 51 53 Orange Telecoms France 21,526 13% 19,096 AAA- AA+ 2 1 Apple Technology United States 107,141 -27% 145,918 AAA AAA 52 49 Honda Automobiles Japan 21,318 10% 19,332 AAA- AAA- 3 3 Amazon.com Technology United States 106,396 53% 69,642 AAA- AA+ 53 44 CSCEC Engineering & China 21,050 4% 20,214 AA- AA- 4 6 AT&T Telecoms United States 87,016 45% 59,904 AAA AA+ 54 51 ExxonMobil Oil & Gas United States 20,736 8% 19,227 AA+ AA 5 4 Microsoft Technology United States 76,265 13% 67,258 AAA AAA 55 52 Cisco Technology United States 20,734 8% 19,162 AA+ AAA- 6 7 Samsung Group Conglomerate South Korea 66,219 13% 58,619 AAA- AAA- 56 36 HSBC Banks United Kingdom 20,688 -14% 24,174 AA+ AAA- 7 5 Verizon Telecoms United States 65,875 4% 63,116 AAA- AAA- 57 101 Visa Banks United States 20,660 81% 11,394 AAA+ AAA- 8 8 Walmart Retail United States 62,211 16% 53,657 AA+ AA 58 67 SoftBank Telecoms Japan 20,621 26% 16,371 AA AA 9 17 Facebook Technology United States 61,998 82% 34,002 AAA AAA- 59 41 Intel Technology United States 20,369 -11% 22,845 AAA AA+ 10 13 ICBC Banks China 47,832 32% 36,334 AAA AA+ 60 37 Hyundai Group Conglomerate South Korea 19,975 -16% 23,796 AA- AA- 11 9 China Mobile Telecoms China 46,734 -6% 49,810 AAA AAA- 61 38 Nestlé Food Switzerland 19,416 -17% 23,395 AAA- AAA 12 11 Toyota Automobiles Japan 46,255 7% 43,064 AAA- AAA- 62 144 SK Group Conglomerate South Korea 19,358 126% 8,582 A+ AA- 13 10 Wells Fargo Banks United States 41,618 -6% 44,170 AA+ AAA- 63 74 H&M Apparel Sweden 19,177 24% 15,510 AAA AA+ 14 14 China Construction Bank Banks China 41,377 17% 35,394 AAA- AAA 64 64 BP Oil & Gas United Kingdom 18,857 11% 16,962 AA+ AA 15 22 NTT Group Conglomerate Japan 40,542 28% 31,678 AA+ AA 65 78 Total Oil & Gas France 18,514 26% 14,737 AAA- AA 16 12 McDonald's Restaurants United States 38,966 -9% 42,937 AAA AAA 66 57 PWC Pro Services - United States 18,510 0% 18,569 AAA+ AAA+ 17 15 BMW Automobiles Germany 37,124 6% 34,968 AAA- AAA 67 55 Pepsi Non Alcoholic Drinks United States 18,279 -4% 18,947 AAA AAA 18 23 Shell Oil & Gas Netherlands 36,783 16% 31,665 AAA- AA+ 68 120 Dell Technology United States 18,186 86% 9,786 AA AA 19 18 T (Deutsche Telekom) Telecoms Germany 36,433 10% 33,194 AA+ AA+ 69 71 Bosch Engineering & Germany 17,991 15% 15,612 AAA- AAA- 20 21 IBM Technology United States 36,112 14% 31,786 AA+ AA 70 83 China Telecom Telecoms China 17,599 29% 13,684 AA+ AA 21 20 Mercedes-Benz Automobiles Germany 35,544 11% 32,049 AAA- AAA 71 89 Accenture Technology United States 17,464 38% 12,687 AA+ AA+ 22 27 General Electric Engineering & United States 35,318 21% 29,211 AAA AA+ 72 90 Sumitomo Group Conglomerate Japan 17,209 36% 12,678 A- A+ 23 60 Alibaba Technology China 34,859 94% 17,968 AA+ AA+ 73 85 FedEx Logistics United States 17,092 31% 13,079 AA+ AA 24 24 Walt Disney Media United States 34,454 10% 31,231 AAA+ AAA+ 74 75 Target Retail United States 17,016 11% 15,331 AA+ AA 25 25 Chase Banks United States 33,737 10% 30,603 AAA- AAA- 75 87 au Telecoms Japan 16,919 32% 12,788 AAA- AA 26 26 Marlboro Tobacco United States 32,471 8% 29,935 AA+ AAA- 76 76 Johnson's Cosmetics & Personal United States 16,829 11% 15,115 AAA AAA+ 27 16 Coca-Cola Non Alcoholic United States 31,885 -7% 34,180 AAA AAA+ 77 69 Deloitte Pro Services - United States 16,776 4% 16,160 AAA AAA 28 29 Nike Apparel United States 31,762 13% 28,041 AAA+ AAA+ 78 80 Boeing Aerospace & Defence United States 16,333 17% 13,956 AAA AAA 29 32 Bank of China Banks China 31,250 13% 27,735 AAA AAA 79 92 Ping An Insurance China 16,324 29% 12,671 AAA- AAA+ 30 33 Bank of America Banks United States 30,273 12% 26,928 AAA- AA 80 79 Walgreens Retail United States 15,969 12% 14,315 AA+ AA 31 28 Home Depot Retail 30,216 5% 28,798 AAA- AAA- 81 70 Santander Banks Spain 15,929 2% 15,689 AA+ AA+ 32 45 Sinopec Oil & Gas China 29,555 47% 20,156 AA+ AA 82 72 Fox Media United States 15,814 2% 15,541 AAA- AAA- 33 43 PetroChina Oil & Gas China 29,003 43% 20,318 AA+ AA 83 New Spectrum Telecoms United States 15,738 AA 34 19 Agricultural Bank Of China Banks China 28,511 -12% 32,264 AA+ AAA 84 86 J.P. Morgan Banks United States 15,710 21% 12,948 AA AA- 35 31 Mitsubishi Group Conglomerate Japan 27,954 1% 27,775 A+ AA- 85 65 Allianz Insurance Germany 15,197 -7% 16,426 AA AA 36 34 Citi Banks United States 27,674 6% 26,031 AA+ AA+ 86 134 SAP Technology United States 15,158 66% 9,107 AA- AA 37 35 Xfinity Telecoms United States 26,180 8% 24,186 AA+ AA+ 87 58 American Express Banks United States 15,014 -19% 18,483 AA+ AA+ 38 42 Oracle Technology United States 25,878 17% 22,136 AA AA 88 81 Hitachi Group Conglomerate Japan 14,766 8% 13,697 AA+ A+ 39 39 Starbucks Restaurants United States 25,615 10% 23,185 AAA AAA- 89 105 Uber Technology United States 14,596 32% 11,023 AA- AA 40 47 Huawei Technology China 25,230 28% 19,743 AAA- AA 90 115 Zara Apparel Spain 14,399 43% 10,086 AAA- AA+ 41 56 Volkswagen Automobiles Germany 25,014 32% 18,923 AAA AA+ 91 84 China Merchants Bank Banks China 14,269 8% 13,239 AAA- AAA 42 62 Nissan Automobiles Japan 24,768 39% 17,785 AAA- AAA- 92 88 Lowe's Retail United States 13,938 10% 12,717 AAA- AA 43 63 IKEA Retail Sweden 24,119 42% 17,009 AA AA 93 100 NBC Media United States 13,736 20% 11,401 AAA+ AAA+ 44 40 CVS Caremark Retail United States 23,286 2% 22,891 AA+ AA+ 94 73 BNP Paribas Banks France 13,644 -12% 15,531 AA AA+ 45 54 Siemens Engineering & Germany 23,088 22% 19,002 AAA- AA+ 95 97 Costco Retail United States 13,455 14% 11,847 AA AA+ 46 46 Ford Automobiles United States 22,432 13% 19,771 AAA- AAA- 96 77 UnitedHealth Group Pro Services - Healthcare United States 13,379 -10% 14,934 AA AA 47 117 Tencent Technology China 22,287 124% 9,953 AAA AA+ 97 130 JD.com Technology China 13,377 46% 9,194 A+ A+ 48 48 UPS Logistics United States 22,128 13% 19,565 AAA- AA+ 98 91 EY Pro Services - United Kingdom 13,357 5% 12,672 AAA AAA 49 61 Chevron Oil & Gas United States 22,058 24% 17,822 AAA- AA+ 99 93 MUFG Banks Japan 13,215 4% 12,651 AA AA 50 30 Vodafone Telecoms United Kingdom 21,831 -22% 27,820 AA+ AA+ 100 207 WeChat Technology China 13,189 103% 6,496 AAA- AA+

18. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 19. Brand Finance Global 500 – Full Table

Top 500 most valuable brands 100 - 150. Top 500 most valuable brands 151 - 200

20. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 21. Brand Finance Global 500 – Full Table

Top 500 most valuable brands 201 -250. Top 500 most valuable brands 251 - 300.

22. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 23. Brand Finance Global 500 – Full Table

Top 500 most valuable brands 301 - 350. Top 500 most valuable brands 351 - 400.

24. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 25. Brand Finance Global 500 – Full Table

Top 500 most valuable brands 401 - 450. Top 500 most valuable brands 451 - 500.

26. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 27. Understand Your Brand’s Value

Drivers of Change Brand Strength Index 2016 An ideal balanced scorecard of fundamental brand related measures Brand Value Dashboard Three key areas impact Brand Value (EURm) Brand Valuation Assumptions Effective BSI Weighting Attributes 18 131 Underlying economic assumptions used in valuation 34 $707m $882m $10,216m 6.25% Product: R&D expenditure, Widely recognised factors deployed by Brand Capital expenditure Strong brand (EUR) (EUR) Marketers to create brand loyalty and Brand [XXX] Brand Value Brand Value (EUR) Brand value (EURm) Investment Enterprise Value AA+ Investment 25% 6.25% Place: Website Ranking 729 729 Inputs market share. We therefore benchmark 78/100 616 616 650 6.25% People: Number of Employees, €650m €729m €9,399m Employee Growth brands against relevant input measures by Brand 25% Equity X 6.25% Promotion: Marketing expenditure sector against each of these factors. % = Historic brand value performance (EURm) Peer Group Comparison (USDm) $650 Brand Performance Forecast revenues $6,265 2015 Brand Strength Business Performance External Changes 2016 5.00% Familiarity 800 729 Weak brand $ $3,031 7.50% Consideration How do stakeholders feel about the brand 650 $2,328 $1,913 $707 700 607 7.50% Preference vs. competitors? Brand Strength Business Outlook Economic Outlook Customer 35% 7.50% Satisfaction 600 [XXX] [XXX]’s brand strength has increased compared to last year. Brands drive higher revenues. An investor would therefore All future returns are subject to risk. If the risk of not 7.50% Recommendation/NPS • Brand equity accounts for 50% to reflect Revenue Long Term Growth Rate Tax Rate Discount Rate 500 pay more for a brand that makes more money. receiving the forecast returns is higher (increasing the Brand the importance of stakeholder As the brand continues its sustainability drive, [XXX] has discount rate), the brand’s market is not growing as quickly Equity 5.00% Employee Score Licensing payments for the use of a After the explicit forecasts, the brand Forecasted royalties are reduced by Earnings in the future are worth less 320 Staff 5% perceptions to behaviour 400 Brand Value by Product Segment been improving across all CSR scores. It now has the [XXX]’s revenue base and the 5 year forecast growth have as expected (lower long term growth rate) or the tax rate in brand are derived from revenue. will continue to grow. However, it is the tax rate to reflect the actual than consumption now. This rate is 275 highest CSR scores it has had in the last four years across fallen this year, resulting in a loss of $177m USD to total the brand’s regions of operation is higher, then the brand’s 300 Increases or decreases in forecasted unlikely that the company will sustain amount that would be received by therefore used to reduce future 213 Environment, Employees and Governance. brand value. value is reduced and vice versa. 50% 2.50% Credit Rating • Brand Equity is important to all 37% Financial 5% revenue increase or decrease the extraordinary returns into the future the brand owner after tax. earnings to their value today. Nutrition 2.50% Analyst Recommendation stakeholder groups with customers being 200 The premium approach is also leading to significant margin However, it is important to note that this has arisen as a final valuation. so forecast industry growth rates are advantages – positively affecting “performance”. result of the company divesting a number of divisions. the most important 100 Performance Materials 1.67% Environment Score applied. 58% External 5% 1.67% Community Score 0 Other Activities 4% 1.67% Governance Score 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016 2015 2016 2015 2016 2015 5 year Compound Annual Growth Rate Long Term Growth Rate Tax Rate Discount Rate Brand 5 Year Forecast 6.25% Revenue (CAGR) 78 76 2.6% 3.4% Discount Rate 9.1% 8.6% Brand Strength Index Strength Growth Quantitative market, market share and 7% Brand 6.25% % Margin financial measures resulting from the Long Term Growth 3.2% 2.6% 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 Base Year 8,205 9,570 Performance Outputs 25% 6.25% % Forecast Margin Revenue (EURm) strength of the brand. 6.25% % Forecast Revenue Growth Tax 28.9% 30.2% 25% 2.6% 3.4% -0.8% 3.2% 2.6% +0.6% 29% 30% -1.3% 9.1% 8.6% +0.5%

Determining the Royalty Rate Brand Performance Brand Investment In order to apply the Brand Strength Index, a hypothetical royalty rate range needs to be set Competitor Royalty Rates An ideal balanced scorecard of fundamental brand related measures Proven inputs that drive the Brand Equity and financial results Following the OECD guidelines, Brand Finance sets the hypothetical brand royalty rate ranges by reference to three tests: Competitor royalty rates will be different based on different strengths of the brand, having Brand Strength Index Brand Strength Index different operating segments and company-specific long term affordability • Comparable Agreements: A search of comparable licensing agreements for brands in each industry is conducted every year. The margin analyses Brand Investment Brand Performance are then compared against the royalty rates found in these agreements to analyse the importance of brand in the industry and set an appropriate 1.2% average industry royalty rate. 10.0 1.0% 10.0 9.3 • Industry Margins: An analysis of 25% to 40% of margins, generally accepted as rules of thumb for licensing rates for all intangible assets in a 8.9 8.9 8.0 7.7 company. These rates are adjusted to take into account the importance of brand in a given industry. 8.0 8.1 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 6.4 6.0 • Affordability: Thirdly, an analysis of the brand’s specific royalties is conducted. If the brand has been able to sustain extraordinary profits over an 0.7% 6.0 5.3 0.6% extended time it is likely that hypothetical brand owners would be willing to pay closer to the company’s margins than the industry average. In the 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 5.0 4.0 case of Brand Finance’s League Table models, affordability will be based on the forecast EBIT. 4.0 [XXX]DSM Best in Class Competitor Average 0.5% DSM[XXX] Best in Class Competitor Average 2.0 • Average industry royalty rate ranges can be seen below 2.0 0.0 High 0.0 Effective Effective Weighting 6.25% 6.25% 6.25% 6.25% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Weighting 6.25% 6.25% 6.25% 6.25% DSM BASF Dow Du Pont Akzo Nobel Akzo Nobel Best in Best in Class [XXX] Du Pont Multiple Akzo Nobel Mid Class Akzo Nobel Dow Akzo Nobel Du Pont Product Place People Promotion [XXX] Revenue Margin % Forecast Revenue Growth % Forecast Margin % Low Relative quality of the brand’s investment in Relative quality of a brand’s distribution Relative quality of the human network Relative quality of the brand’s promotions. its products. The measure can include R&D network. It can include the quality of supporting the brand. This may include the Marketing investment, the quality of visual Akzo Nobel – Paints and spend and capital expenditure. logistical infrastructure available to the size of the support network, its likely future identity and the effectiveness of the [XXX] BASF Dow Du Pont Akzo Nobel - Corporate The brand’s ability to drive a The brand’s ability to drive a The brand’s ability to improve Coatings brand, the quality of its online presence, or growth or the investment in workforce brand’s social media is covered by this volume premium. Implied by price premium. Implied by business prospects across the number and quality of its retail outlets. training and human resources. measure. 78 78 80 80 82 82 current and future revenue. current and future margins. various KPIs

A Brand Value Report provides a complete + Internal understanding of brand Royalty Rates Trademark Audit breakdown of the assumptions, data + Brand value tracking sources and calculations used to arrive at Analysis of competitor royalty rates, industry Analysis of the current level of protection for the your brand’s value. Each report includes + Competitor benchmarking royalty rate ranges and margin analysis used to brands word marks and trademark iconography expert recommendations for growing brand + Historical brand value determine brand specific royalty rate. highlighting areas where the marks are in need value to drive business performance and offers a + Transfer pricing of protection. cost-effective way to gaining a better + Highlight unprotected marks understanding of your position against Brand Strength Index + Licensing/ franchising negotiation competitors. + Spot potential infringement A breakdown of how the brand performed on + International licensing + Trademark registration strategy A full report includes the following sections various metrics of brand strength, benchmarked + Competitor benchmarking which can also be purchased individually. against competitor brands in a balanced scorecard framework. Cost of Capital For more information regarding our League Table Reports, please contact: Brand Valuation Summary + Brand strength tracking A breakdown of the cost of capital calculation, + Brand strength analysis including risk free rates, brand debt risk Alex Haigh Overview of the brand valuation including Director of League Tables, Brand Finance executive summary, explanation of changes in + Management KPI’s premiums and the cost of equity through CAPM. brand value and historic and peer group + Competitor benchmarking + Independent view of cost of capital for internal [email protected] comparisons. valuations and project appraisal exercises +44 (0)207 389 9400

28. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 29. How we can help Contact details

1. Valuation: What are my intangible assets 2. Analytics: How can I improve marketing worth? effectiveness? Contact us Our offices

Valuations may be conducted for technical purposes Analytical services help to uncover drivers of demand For brand value report and to set a baseline against which potential strategic and insights. Identifying the factors which drive brand scenarios can be evaluated. consumer behaviour allow an understanding enquiries, please contact: N 2. IO AN of how brands create bottom-line impact. Alex Haigh T A A L U Y Director of League Tables L T A I Brand Finance V C • Branded Business Valuation • Trademark Valuation . S • Market Research Analytics • Brand Audits [email protected] 1 • Intangible Asset Valuation • Brand Contribution Brand & • Brand Scorecard Tracking • Return on Marketing Investment

For media enquiries,

N Business Value

4. Transactions: Is it a good 3 3. Strategy: How can I increase please contact:

. I

deal? Can I leverage my S the value of my branded business? Robert Haigh T

intangible assets? R Marketing & Communications

A Strategic marketing services enable brands A

E to be leveraged to grow businesses. Scenario Director Brand Finance

Transaction services help buyers, sellers and A

Y T . 4 owners of branded businesses get a better deal modelling will identify the best opportunities, [email protected] by leveraging the value of their intangibles. ensuring resources are allocated to those activities which have the most impact on brand and business value. For all other enquiries, please contact: • M&A Due Diligence • Franchising & Licensing • Brand Governance • Brand Architecture & Portfolio Management • Tax & Transfer Pricing • Expert Witness • Brand Transition • Brand Positioning & Extension [email protected] +44 (0)207 389 9400 For further information on Brand Finance®’s services and valuation experience, please contact your local representative: Country Contact Email address Australia Mark Crowe [email protected] Brazil Pedro Tavares [email protected] MARKETING FINANCE TAX LEGAL linkedin.com/company/ Canada Bill Ratcliffe [email protected] brand-finance China Minnie Fu [email protected]

We help marketers to connect We provide financiers and We help brand owners and We help clients to enforce and Caribbean Nigel Cooper [email protected] their brands to business auditors with an independent fiscal authorities to understand exploit their intellectual East Africa Jawad Jaffer [email protected] performance by evaluating the assessment on all forms of the implications of different property rights by providing France Victoire Ruault [email protected] return on investment (ROI) of brand and intangible asset tax, transfer pricing and brand independent expert advice in- facebook.com/brandfinance Germany Dr. Holger Mühlbauer h.mü[email protected] brand based decisions and valuations. ownership arrangements. and outside of the courtroom. Greece Ioannis Lionis [email protected] strategies. Holland Marc Cloosterman [email protected] India Ajimon Francis [email protected] + Branded Business Valuation + Branded Business Valuation + Branded Business Valuation + Branded Business Valuation twitter.com/brandfinance Indonesia Jimmy Halim [email protected] + Brand Contribution + Brand Contribution + Brand Contribution + Brand Contribution Italy Massimo Pizzo [email protected] + Trademark Valuation + Trademark Valuation + Trademark Valuation + Trademark Valuation Malaysia Samir Dixit [email protected] + Intangible Asset Valuation + Intangible Asset Valuation + Intangible Asset Valuation + Intangible Asset Valuation Disclaimer + Brand Audit + Brand Audit + Brand Audit + Brand Audit Mexico Laurence Newell [email protected] Brand Finance has produced this study LatAm (exc. Brazil) Laurence Newell [email protected] + Market Research Analytics + Market Research Analytics + Market Research Analytics + Tax & Transfer Pricing with an independent and unbiased + Brand Scorecard Tracking + Brand Scorecard Tracking + Franchising & Licensing + Expert Witness analysis. The values derived and Middle East Andrew Campbell [email protected] opinions produced in this study are Nigeria Babatunde Odumeru [email protected] + Return on Marketing + Return on Marketing + Tax & Transfer Pricing based only on publicly available Investment Investment + Expert Witness information and certain assumptions Nordics Alexander Todoran [email protected] + Brand Transition + Brand Transition that Brand Finance used where such Portugal Pedro Tavares [email protected] data was deficient or unclear . Brand + Brand Governance + Brand Governance Finance accepts no responsibility and Russia Alexander Eremenko [email protected] + Brand Architecture & + Brand Architecture & will not be liable in the event that the Singapore Samir Dixit [email protected] Portfolio Management Portfolio Management publicly available information relied upon is subsequently found to be South Africa Jeremy Sampson [email protected] + Brand Positioning & + Brand Positioning & inaccurate. Spain Lorena Jorge Ramirez [email protected] Extension Extension Sri Lanka Ruchi Gunewardene [email protected] + Franchising & Licensing + Mergers, Acquisitions and The opinions and financial analysis expressed in the report are not to be Switzerland Victoire Ruault [email protected] Finance Raising Due construed as providing investment or Diligence business advice. Brand Finance does Turkey Muhterem Ilgüner [email protected] not intend the report to be relied upon UK Richard Haigh [email protected] + Franchising & Licensing for any reason and excludes all liability + Tax & Transfer Pricing to any body, government or USA Ken Runkel [email protected] + Expert Witness organisation. Vietnam Lai Tien Manh [email protected]

30. Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 Brand Finance Global 500 February 2017 31. Contact us.

The World’s Leading Independent Branded Business Valuation and Strategy Consultancy T: +44 (0)20 7389 9400 E: [email protected] www.brandfinance.com

32. Brand Finance BridgingGlobal 500 February the 2017gap between marketing and finance