Brand value quackery

Ad Age today reports:

Despite the pounding global business is taking, the $2 trillion value of the top 100 brands has held steady, according to Millward Brown’s annual BrandZ report. “Consumers are blaming companies and leaders for the current troubles, not the brands,” said Joanna Seddon, exec VP at Millward Brown, the WPP-owned research company.

Wow, wouldn’t we marketers like to believe that, our assets are still fine, aren’t we good.  But to believe this we have to close our eyes and pretend we are in wonderland.

An asset class that has remained immune to the global recession that has wiped trillions of dollars off the value of companies (the same companies that are made up of these brand assets).  Hmm.  So will WPP stand behind their valuations and be prepared to buy any of these brands at their recession-proof price?!  Ah, no, Sir Martin Sorrell isn’t stupid.

This to me is the 13th stroke of the clock (that makes one wonder about all that came before).  If anyone previously had any faith in the financial quackery that produces Brandz valuations then this should bring you back to reality.  Perhaps I shouldn’t be so mean to single out Millward Brown’s Brandz when there are plenty of other equally fanciful brand equity valuators, it’s just the sort of financial silliness that was practiced by so many (mind you, including some crooks) prior to the bubble bursting.  But what annoys me is that it sheds a poor light on marketers, it makes us look arrogant and stupid.  We don’t know enough about marketing but we think we can take on finance as well.


3 thoughts on “Brand value quackery

  1. It is true, it is true what you say and it is sad. And here in the US everyone is talking about metrics and measurements and accountability of marketing and how now slowly all CMOs really know how to measure and track marketing performance. It has been an enormous push of all the associations from the AMA to the ANA. So after all these years, there seems little of better understanding to show.

  2. Pingback: BrandZ ‘predicts’ Apple’s climb in brand value – long after it happenned « Marketing Science

  3. I think what you typed was very logical. But, think about this,
    what if you typed a catchier post title? I ain’t saying your content is not good., however suppose you added a post title that makes people want more? I mean Brand value quackery | Marketing Science is kinda vanilla. You ought to look at Yahoo’s home page and note how they write article headlines to grab people to
    open the links. You might add a video or a related pic or two to grab readers interested about what you’ve written. In my opinion, it would bring your posts a little bit more interesting.

Please comment on this article if you wish

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s