By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

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.

Flawed methodology....

Instead of just focusing on the Xbox division, and what profits it brings to the table, their looking at Microsofts (as a whole).

The fact that claims from Microsoft of reaching "2 billion gamers" might factor into the value of the brand on this list is silly.
Silly claims shouldn't increase a brands value (imo).


Basically this list is pure PR Bullsh*t.



Around the Network

Do they release their metric for value?


Cause it surely isn't based on revenue, profit, market saturation and global prevalence.



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

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....



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

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.



Around the Network
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.



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?