Quantcast
Xbox is the 87th Most Valuable Brand in the world

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Xbox is the 87th Most Valuable Brand in the world

Zombie9ers said:

Just FYI- how they calculated this list (from their own website):

Step 1

We begin with the brand’s parent company, which generates earnings from:
Tangible assets – (assets with a physical form, which include fixed assets - e.g. buildings, machinery, land & current assets e.g. cash and inventory)
Intangible assets (such as patents, trademarks and brands)
Example - ‘Volkswagen AG’ is a parent company that generates earnings from tangible assets like its manufacturing plants and equipment, as well as its intangible assets - the brand names under which the cars are sold – Volkswagen, Audi, SEAT etc.
To determine the proportion of earnings directly derived from the company’s intangible assets we begin with Corporate Earnings - sourced from Bloomberg, which represent the latest annual earnings reported by the parent company. Then by using other financial data from the same source, we calculate and apply a metric called the Intangible Ratio.
By multiplying Corporate Earnings by the Intangible Ratio, we are left with Intangible Earnings, which represent earnings derived from intangible assets.

Step 2

Next, we need to determine the proportion of these Intangible Earnings that are directly attributable to the brand we want to value.
To do this we take the Intangible Earnings identified in Step 1 and apply the Attribution Rate, which literally attributes a proportion of the parent company’s Intangible Earnings to the brand we want to value.
The Attribution Rate is determined by analysis of brand level financial information from the parent company’s published financial reports and other credible sources, such as data from Kantar’s Consulting and Worldpanel Divisions.
Once the Attribution Rate is applied to Intangible Earnings, we are left with Branded Intangible Earnings i.e. the proportion of the parent company’s Intangible Earnings that can be attributed to the specific brand in question e.g. this step would attribute a proportion of Volkswagen AG’s Intangible Earnings to Volkswagen, Audi, SEAT etc.

Step 3

The final step is to consider the projected earnings of the brand in question, which measures the brand’s ability to generate earnings in the future and requires the addition of a final component – the Brand Multiple, which is also calculated from financial data sourced from Bloomberg. It’s similar to the calculation used by financial analysts to determine the market value of stocks (Example: 6X earnings or 12X earnings).
When we multiply the Branded Intangible Earnings from Step 2 by the Brand Multiple, we reach the brand’s true Financial Value – i.e. the proportion of the parent company’s $ value that can be attributed to the brand in question accounting for current and projected performance

So for me these rankings tell me they're piggybacking off of the success of the parent company's (Microsoft's) financial earnings, as well as projected future earnings, and don't really focus on actual gaming brand recognition.  Which makes since when you look at actual sales data- with both Sony and Nintendo outselling the Xbox brand 2-1, 3-1, 10-1, sometimes even 1000-1 in worldwide markets.

So Microsoft > Sony = Xbox > Playstation....



Around the Network
ArchangelMadzz said:
Zombie9ers said:

Just FYI- how they calculated this list (from their own website):

Step 1

We begin with the brand’s parent company, which generates earnings from:
Tangible assets – (assets with a physical form, which include fixed assets - e.g. buildings, machinery, land & current assets e.g. cash and inventory)
Intangible assets (such as patents, trademarks and brands)
Example - ‘Volkswagen AG’ is a parent company that generates earnings from tangible assets like its manufacturing plants and equipment, as well as its intangible assets - the brand names under which the cars are sold – Volkswagen, Audi, SEAT etc.
To determine the proportion of earnings directly derived from the company’s intangible assets we begin with Corporate Earnings - sourced from Bloomberg, which represent the latest annual earnings reported by the parent company. Then by using other financial data from the same source, we calculate and apply a metric called the Intangible Ratio.
By multiplying Corporate Earnings by the Intangible Ratio, we are left with Intangible Earnings, which represent earnings derived from intangible assets.

Step 2

Next, we need to determine the proportion of these Intangible Earnings that are directly attributable to the brand we want to value.
To do this we take the Intangible Earnings identified in Step 1 and apply the Attribution Rate, which literally attributes a proportion of the parent company’s Intangible Earnings to the brand we want to value.
The Attribution Rate is determined by analysis of brand level financial information from the parent company’s published financial reports and other credible sources, such as data from Kantar’s Consulting and Worldpanel Divisions.
Once the Attribution Rate is applied to Intangible Earnings, we are left with Branded Intangible Earnings i.e. the proportion of the parent company’s Intangible Earnings that can be attributed to the specific brand in question e.g. this step would attribute a proportion of Volkswagen AG’s Intangible Earnings to Volkswagen, Audi, SEAT etc.

Step 3

The final step is to consider the projected earnings of the brand in question, which measures the brand’s ability to generate earnings in the future and requires the addition of a final component – the Brand Multiple, which is also calculated from financial data sourced from Bloomberg. It’s similar to the calculation used by financial analysts to determine the market value of stocks (Example: 6X earnings or 12X earnings).
When we multiply the Branded Intangible Earnings from Step 2 by the Brand Multiple, we reach the brand’s true Financial Value – i.e. the proportion of the parent company’s $ value that can be attributed to the brand in question accounting for current and projected performance

So for me these rankings tell me they're piggybacking off of the success of the parent company's (Microsoft's) financial earnings, as well as projected future earnings, and don't really focus on actual gaming brand recognition.  Which makes since when you look at actual sales data- with both Sony and Nintendo outselling the Xbox brand 2-1, 3-1, 10-1, sometimes even 1000-1 in worldwide markets.

So Microsoft > Sony = Xbox > Playstation....

Amazon is above Disney on their list.

So that means:
Dowonton Abbey (Amazon Prime Original TV series) > Lion King




Maybe someday the Xbox brand lives up to what this Brandz company and die hard fans are fabulating. Until then i'll rely on a reliable source regarding the subject and platform holders who truly earned their good reputation.

https://www.forbes.com/powerful-brands/list/



Hunting Season is done...

What do they mean by most valuable? If they mean in terms of reach then Yeah I can see that since MS has been focusing a lot on PC and streaming lately.



Dante9 said:
I get the sense that the listing OP mentioned relates more to revenue than brand recognition. Maybe revenue streams under the Xbox name are bigger than those of Sony or Nintendo. Microsoft has always been one step ahead with their online services and whatnot.
But in terms of actual recognition? No way. Just no way. Microsoft is up there, because of Windows, but Xbox, not so much.

Maybe its including Xbox on PC aswell as the mulitplats that MS own on other platforms, something Nintendo and Sony dont do. So Xbox isnt just restricted in the console market scene. 

Minecraft continues to be PS4s top selling game and its also on the Switch selling extremly well too.

They also own more studios than before which i think is more than Sony. So maybe when it comes to sheer value including assets thats where they get there figures from. Not just from selling more hardware etc.



Around the Network
Azzanation said:
Dante9 said:
I get the sense that the listing OP mentioned relates more to revenue than brand recognition. Maybe revenue streams under the Xbox name are bigger than those of Sony or Nintendo. Microsoft has always been one step ahead with their online services and whatnot.
But in terms of actual recognition? No way. Just no way. Microsoft is up there, because of Windows, but Xbox, not so much.

Maybe its including Xbox on PC aswell as the mulitplats that MS own on other platforms, something Nintendo and Sony dont do. So Xbox isnt just restricted in the console market scene. 

Minecraft continues to be PS4s top selling game and its also on the Switch selling extremly well too.

They also own more studios than before which i think is more than Sony. So maybe when it comes to sheer value including assets thats where they get there figures from. Not just from selling more hardware etc.

This is not remotely true.



PotentHerbs said:
Azzanation said:

Maybe its including Xbox on PC aswell as the mulitplats that MS own on other platforms, something Nintendo and Sony dont do. So Xbox isnt just restricted in the console market scene. 

Minecraft continues to be PS4s top selling game and its also on the Switch selling extremly well too.

They also own more studios than before which i think is more than Sony. So maybe when it comes to sheer value including assets thats where they get there figures from. Not just from selling more hardware etc.

This is not remotely true.

It was just recently announced that MC was the top selling digital game on the PS4 in the US in July.

http://www.vgchartz.com/article/439899/minecraft-playstation-4-edition-tops-the-us-playstation-store-downloads-in-july-2019/

That is no easy feat especially for an old game like it is. 

It is also up there for the Switch and X1. I mean even if it isn't the biggest selling game it is still one of the juggernauts MS own that will be generating tons of cash.



Azzanation said:
Dante9 said:
I get the sense that the listing OP mentioned relates more to revenue than brand recognition. Maybe revenue streams under the Xbox name are bigger than those of Sony or Nintendo. Microsoft has always been one step ahead with their online services and whatnot.
But in terms of actual recognition? No way. Just no way. Microsoft is up there, because of Windows, but Xbox, not so much.

Maybe its including Xbox on PC aswell as the mulitplats that MS own on other platforms, something Nintendo and Sony dont do. So Xbox isnt just restricted in the console market scene. 

Minecraft continues to be PS4s top selling game and its also on the Switch selling extremly well too.

They also own more studios than before which i think is more than Sony. So maybe when it comes to sheer value including assets thats where they get there figures from. Not just from selling more hardware etc.

That's the Minecraft branding, not Xbox.  No one associates Minecraft with Xbox.  They now associate it with MS.



thismeintiel said:

That's the Minecraft branding, not Xbox.  No one associates Minecraft with Xbox.  They now associate it with MS.

Erm.. how does that relate to where the money goes when Minecraft is sold on a PS4? 



Azzanation said:
thismeintiel said:

That's the Minecraft branding, not Xbox.  No one associates Minecraft with Xbox.  They now associate it with MS.

Erm.. how does that relate to where the money goes when Minecraft is sold on a PS4? 

What he means is that Mojang is the game creator splash screen on both PS4 and Switch, it at no point mentions Xbox, Switch has an option of logging in with your Microsoft account to earn achievements but in terms of brand recognition Minecraft falls under Mojang which has Xbox Game Studios as the parent company. As for the age of Minecraft having an impact on people wanting to get it on a new system... Minecraft is pretty timeless in what it offers, it's like Tetris, game is old as sin but put it on a new platform with a lick of paint and it will sell regardless of it being a game which first came out in 1984.



Fancy hearing me on an amateur podcast with friends gushing over one of my favourite games? https://youtu.be/1I7JfMMxhf8