Vodafone loses ground against Verizon
Vodafone loses ground against Verizon, Australian Telcos pick up speed
Brand Finance, the leading brand valuation and marketing experts have today released their annual Telecoms 500 study. The report, which lists the world’s most valuable telecom brands, shows that several network operators have faced a very challenging year whilst Australian Telcos have weathered the economic instability affecting their counterparts in other parts of the world.
Australian Telco Telstra has dropped two places to become the world’s 27th most valuable Telecoms Brand, with a total brand value of US$6.1b. However, while it fell two places it actually increased its brand value by US$777m after recently posting profits of more than $1.6 billion.
Optus has also much to cheer about, gaining ground with a growth in brand value of $US446m. This saw it rise five places to 51st on the list of most valuable Telecoms Brands. Other significant upward movement saw Sensis and TPG Telecom increase their brand values by US$107m and US$67m respectively.
Commenting on the results, Brand Finance Australia Managing Director, Xander Bird said: “Telstra’s brand has performed well, which is important given the potential breakup of the business in the rollout of the National Broadband Network (NBN). As the market changes it is imperative for Telstra to keep its brand fresh, to ensure that it can still capitalise on its brand going forward”.
Australia’s Most Valuable Telco Brands
Australian Rank 2013 | Global Rank 2013 | Global Rank 2012 | Brand | Domicile | Brand Value 2013 (US$m) | Brand Value 2012 (US$m) | Change (US$m) | Brand Rating 2013 | Brand Rating 2012 |
1 | 27 | 25 | Telstra | AUSTRALIA | 6,060 | 5,283 | 777 | AA+ | AA |
2 | 51 | 56 | Optus | AUSTRALIA | 2,974 | 2,528 | 446 | AA | AA |
3 | 136 | 145 | Sensis | AUSTRALIA | 683 | 576 | 107 | A+ | AA- |
4 | 242 | 290 | TPG Telecom | AUSTRALIA | 213 | 146 | 67 | A | A |
5 | 348 | 404 | M2 | AUSTRALIA | 78 | 64 | 14 | A | A |
6 | 393 | 500 | Amcom Telecom | AUSTRALIA | 53 | 31 | 23 | A | A |
7 | 424 | 489 | Service Stream | AUSTRALIA | 43 | 32 | 11 | A | A |
8 | 434 | N/A | Macquarie Telecom | AUSTRALIA | 40 | N/A | N/A | A | N/A |
9 | 445 | 444 | Codan | AUSTRALIA | 37 | 47 | (10) | A | A+ |
Source: The BrandFinance® Telecoms 500 (2013), figures to 1 decimal place
Whilst overseas, European providers in particular have suffered significant losses. Spain’s Telefónica has taken a double hit; its Movistar brand’s value has been cut by $3.3bn, making it this year’s biggest faller, while the UK’s O2 has also lost brand value, though a more modest $85m. France’s Orange has fallen from 5th to 7th in the table following a 12% brand value fall of $2.2bn. Overall, global mobile phone sales fell 3% in 2012 with consumers in struggling Eurozone economies with high unemployment rates, cutting back. Most dramatically the UK’s Vodafone, which has ranked number 1 in the BrandFinance® Telecoms 500 since its inception in 2010, has fallen to 4th. Over US$3bn of lost brand value means its brand is now worth just over US$27bn while its brand strength has been downgraded from a near-perfect AAA+ to AAA.
Verizon of the USA, in which Vodafone owns a 45% stake, was once a minor player but has now leapfrogged the UK giant to become the world’s most valuable operator and second most valuable telecommunications brand. Its brand value of US$30.7bn illustrates the impressive growth of Verizon Wireless in particular, now the America’s 2nd biggest mobile operator. Vodafone’s share price has risen sharply in recent weeks following rumours that Verizon are keen to take full control of Wireless and are willing to pay over the odds to do so. Managing the sale carefully could prove crucial to Vodafone’s future as the windfall could help it cover outstanding tax liabilities and more importantly invest in developing a ‘quad-play’ offering to counter the challenge from integrated rivals such as BT (British Telecom) and Virgin Media.
The World's Most Valuable Telecoms Brands
Rank 2013 | Rank 2012 | Brand | Domicile | Brand Value 2013 (US$bn) | Brand Value 2012 (US$bn) | Change (US$bn) | Brand Rating 2013 | Brand Rating 2012 |
1 | 4 | Apple | US | 48.4 | 27.4 | 21.0 | AAA+ | AAA |
2 | 3 | Verizon | US | 30.7 | 27.6 | 3.1 | AA+ | AA |
3 | 2 | AT&T | US | 30.4 | 28.3 | 2.1 | AA+ | AA+ |
4 | 1 | Vodafone | UK | 27.0 | 30.0 | -3.0 | AAA | AAA+ |
5 | 12 | Samsung | South Korea | 23.7 | 10.8 | 12.9 | AAA- | AAA |
6 | 6 | China Mobile | Hong Kong | 23.1 | 18.0 | 5.1 | AA | AA |
7 | 5 | Orange | France | 16.3 | 18.6 | -2.3 | AA+ | AA+ |
8 | 8 | Cisco | US | 15.5 | 12.9 | 2.6 | AAA- | AAA- |
9 | 15 | NTT | Japan | 14.3 | 13.2 | 1.1 | AA | AA- |
10 | 9 | Comcast | US | 12.8 | 12.5 | 0.3 | AA+ | AA+ |
Source: The BrandFinance® Telecoms 500 (2013), figures to 1 decimal place
Power Shifts from Operator Brands as
Handsets Control Consumer Choice
The most striking
change of all however is illustrated by 2013’s most
valuable Telecoms brand. The handsets segment of the Apple
brand* has surged to the top of the table following brand
value growth of US$21bn. As smartphone uptake continues and
smaller rivals such as HTC, Blackberry and Nokia struggle, Apple has gained market
share and grown its brand value by 77% in the face of its
volatile share price. Samsung too has had a successful year.
The segment of its brand* derived from handsets has more
than doubled this year, growing 121% to US$23.7bn, making it
this year’s fastest riser.
The rise of Apple and Samsung represents a shift in the power balance between mobile operators and handset manufactures. For operators, voice and even data are no longer enough, with threats from all sides they must act quickly to embrace quadruple-play or face falling sales and eroding margins.
For the full results of the BrandFinance® Telecoms 500 please click here and for further insight and analysis please read the latest edition of Total Telecom.
*The brand values for Apple and Samsung in the BrandFinance® Telecoms 500 include only the contribution from handsets. The total brand values for Apple and Samsung, as reported in the BrandFinance® Global 500 are US$87.3bn and US$57.8bn respectively.
Methodology:
The methodology used in calculating the brand values uses a discounted cash flow (DCF) technique to discount estimated future royalties at an appropriate discount rate and to arrive at a new present value (NPV) of the trademark and associated intellectual property rights in order to compute brand value.
Royalty Relief Approach
The royalty
relief methodology determines the value of the brand in
relation to the royalty rate that would be payable for its
use if it were owned by a third party. The royalty rate is
applied to future revenue to determine an earnings stream
that is attributable to the brand. The brand earnings stream
is then discounted back to a net present value.
There is a six-step process involved in making the brand value calculations:
1. Obtain specific financial and revenue data.
2. Model the market to identify market demand and
the position of individual brands in the context of all
other market competitors. There are three forecast periods
used:
o historical financial results up to 2012. Where
these are not available using Institutional Brokers Estimate
System (IBES), consensus forecasts are used;
o a
five-year forecast period (2012-2016), based on three data
sources (IBES, historic growth and GDP growth);
and
o perpetuity growth, based on a combination of growth
expectations (GDP and IBES).
3. Calculate the royalty rate
for each brand by:
o calculating brand strength – on a
scale of 0-100, according to the number of attributes such
as financial, brand equity, market share and profitability,
among others;
o using brand strength to determine
randeta® index score; and
o applying Brand Strength
Score to the royalty rate range to determine the royalty
rate for the brand. The royalty rate is determined by a
combination of the sector of operations, historic royalties
paid in that sector and profitability of the
company.
4. Calculate the future post-tax royalty income stream.
5. Calculate the discount rate specific to each brand, taking account of its size, geographical presence, reputation, gearing and brand rating.
6. Discount future royalty stream (explicit forecast and perpetuity periods) to a net present value – ie. the brand value
Brand
Ratings
These are calculated using Brand Strength
analysis, which benchmarks the strength, risk and future
potential of a brand relative to its competitors on a scale
ranging from AAA to D. It is conceptually similar to a
credit rating. The data used to calculate the ratings is
taken from a variety of sources including Bloomberg, annual
reports and proprietary research by Brand Finance. Note: The
AAA to A ratings can be altered by including a plus (+) or
minus (-) sign to show their more detailed
positioning
Valuation Date
All brand values in
the Telecoms 500 are for the end of the year, 31 December
2012.
www.brandfinance.com | www.brandirectory.com | www.brandfinanceforum.com
ENDS