Brand Valuation Services – Approaches And Methods
- Brand Valuation
- Profit or EVA generation
- Economic brand worth calculation
- Brand-Attributable Liabilities Method
- Brand future potential
- Brand Equity Ten Technique
- Assets are adequately used
Before going ahead with the topic, let us first understand what a brand is. Any intangible marketing or business concept that allows people to recognize a firm, a product, or a person, is considered a brand.
It is a word that is commonly used but is still quite easy to misinterpret. What exactly is brand valuation, and how is it beneficial to us? It is the process of estimating a brand's monetary value. It considers a variety of aspects, including whether the brand has the requisite capacity to continue developing unique mechanizations and goods to meet the wants of its clients. In other terms, it refers to the amount of money that another company is ready to pay for the use of a particular brand.
Importance of brand valuation:
Recent academic work demonstrates and emphasizes the benefits of calculating and comprehending brand value and why it should not be limited to mergers and acquisitions. To begin with, brand value is critical to the development of a great brand. It ensures that resources are properly steered to maximize value. For example, it assists the firm in determining the right amount of marketing costs and imposing brand licensing fees that accurately represent the benefit received. Furthermore, brand valuation allows for the evaluation of brand manager performance and compensation trends and the creation of an incentive plan that aids decision-making and marketing. Depending on the valuation purpose and technique, the final outcome will be more or less trustworthy or subjective, based on historical or forward-looking data.
Let us now consider approaches to different Brand Valuation methods :
Consumer-based Approach brand valuation:
The first major distinction between brand valuation approach strategies is the distinction between consumer-based and financial approaches.
According to the Consumer-based school of thinking, customers' preferences stated for a brand are larger than what a straightforward assessment of the usefulness of the product's qualities would have shown.
According to customer-
oriented brand valuation, customers are the ultimate creators of value because their decision to commit to a product system dictates the degree of future revenues.
There are 2 commonly known methods for brand valuation approach that is Consumer-based, they are as follows:
- Conversion Model
- Customer Preference Model
Let us have a brief on both of these methods.
The Conversion Model calculates the total price based on the quantity of understanding gained to pull off today's sales. On the other hand, power-assisted entire recall is just one of the possible allocations that distinguish a whole in the whole theory. Demarcation, connectivity, and approval are the other three elements that a powerful whole must be obliged to have in conjunction with knowledge and information, according to Young & Rubicam's "Brand plus Valuator."
The Client Preferences Model assesses the total value of the product by tying an increase in awareness to an increase in market share. According to Aaker (1991), the issue is "how much of the exaggerated market share is due to the brand's increased awareness and how much is due to other factors." However, there is a possibility that there isn't a linear relationship between awareness and market share in this scenario.
Financial-based Approach to brand valuation:
The concept of brand as a conditional asset emerges from the financial-based approach. A concrete basis and product or service are required for a brand to generate profit or EVA (Economic Value Added). After accounting for the capital necessary for its manufacture and the cost of other intangible assets that have contributed to the firm, the brand is considered an added value. After all of the immediately valued assets have been taken into account, the residual will be used to calculate the economic worth of the brand and other intangibles that are difficult to assess directly. It is the most frequently used brand valuation method and uses four approaches – Cost, Market, Economic, and Formulary approach.
Cost-based approach: It is an approach based on the cost of development. The brand is evaluated based on the cost of development. This is a historical analysis based on hard data. In general, the cost method is better for valuing assets that can be quickly replaced, such as software or customer databases.
The following strategies are included in the cost-based approach:
Accumulated Cost or Historical cost method:
The Historical Cost of Creation, The historical cost of establishing the brand is used to assess the underlying brand value. When specific market uses and benefits aren't yet apparent, it's frequently used in the early stages of brand creation. It sums up all or most of the past manufacturing costs like that of the value. To put it another way, the approach calculates the true brand value based on the brand's historical budget of the project. When specific market uses and benefits aren't yet apparent, it's typically used throughout the initial stages of brand development. This approach isolates the brand's direct costs. It allows auxiliary costs such as salesforce and general expenses to be assigned and provides a floor minimum value for the brand. However, this strategy overlooks non-monetary long-term investments such as quality controls, specialized competencies, and employee engagement, as well as the possible implications of presenting enhanced goods at a lower price than counterparts.
Replacement Cost Method:
It analyzes market levels to ascertain the profitability of recreating the brand today, also known as The Cost to Recreate Method. Like the Absorption Costing of Creation Method, the Cost to Recreate Method is suitable for determining a limited benefit and working with a newly developed brand. The Replacement Cost Method evaluates a brand by factoring in the costs and investments required to replace it with a new one that performs similarly to the company. This product's valuation will be susceptible to the same hazards and deterioration as the company's intangible assets. Finally, the cost to copy methodology is still not a credible predictor of the future.
Method for Capitalization of Brand-Attributable Expenses:
The Capitalization of Brand-Attributable Liabilities Method defines brand value as the business value attributable to the brand, which is determined by the percentage of the incremental promotional price to the comprehensive marketing budget, which encompasses other percentages of sales costs.
Method of Residual Value:
The depreciated accumulated depreciation produced by discounting sequential brand charges from consecutive brand earnings pertaining to the trademark is the worth of the brand, as per the Residual Value Method.
Market-based approach: It focuses on the price at which a brand is sold, as well as the maximum price that a "willing buyer and seller" are willing to pay for an asset. The brand value is calculated using open market prices. This study is based on current estimations or hard facts.
- The following strategies are included in the market-based approach:
- Method of Brand Sale Comparison:
The Brand Sale Comparison Method determines the worth of a brand by researching transaction information encompassing various brands in about the same area and correlating figures. Because there are few brand transactions or sales, this concept is not viable in all contexts wherein reliable statistics are lacking. Nevertheless, the price paid for a similar brand involves the buyer's affinities and distinct goals. It so is not exactly comparable and pertinent to the value of the brand in dispute.
Brand Sale Comparison Method:
The Brand Acquisition Assessment Method assesses a brand's worth by examining previous transactions involving similar brands in the same sector and comparing multiples. Because there are few brand acquisitions or sales, this strategy isn't appropriate in all areas when comparable data is rare. Additionally, the premium charged for a similar brand encompasses the buyer's synergies and particular aspirations. It is not necessarily comparable and pertinent towards the quality of the asset in question.
The intangible asset acquired when the net asset value is removed from the market capitalization has been used to value intangibles in the Residual Method. A negative intangible value can be calculated when a stock's price goes below its net asset value, and a negative brand equity value is inferred.
When the equity coefficient is negative, leveraging it on the balance sheet causes accounting issues. The Residual Method, like the Brand Equity Based on Equity Valuation Method, presumes that capitalism is good in its current manifestation but also that assets are adequately used.
Brand Equity Based on Equity Valuation Method:
The Brand Equity Based on Equity Valuation Method establishes brand value as the superposition of two constituents: payback on "liquidity" operations and anticipated marketing cost reductions from labeled promotional campaigns.
Income-based approach: Also known as the Economic Use approach, the value of the brand is dictated by the future expected cash flows that will be attributable to the brand itself. This study is based on projections for the future. This method is extremely successful since this reveals the future potential of a brand that its owner already retains, and the value is significant when juxtaposed to open market capitalization. That's because the owner can ascertain the revenue relinquished by continuing on the current trajectory.
The following strategies are included in the market-based approach:
Price Premium Method:
The Price Premium Method calculates brand value by multiplying the difference in price between a copyrighted manufacturer's product and a formulaic one by the bulk weight of branded sales. It is assumed that the brand provides customers with an additional advantage for which they are willing to pay premium prices. The Price Premium Method determines brand value by multiplying the branded product's profit margin over a standardized drug by the total volume of branded sales. It is assumed that the brand provides buyers with an additional advantage for which they are willing to pay a premium.
There are at least two quantitative methods of determining the price premium:
Conjoint Analysis is a statistical technique for determining the importance that customers can place on distinct product features. A measure of customers' willingness to spend for only certain product features may be established by asking them how much of one character they are willing to give up in exchange for more of another. The brand value may be computed because this is one of the features of the product.
It assesses the revenue as a proportion of the numerous product variables and quantifies their effectiveness. The total of the values generated by each bundle of attributes, including or disregarding the brand, may be used to compute the product price. The system revenue made by the brand is calculated by deducting the price that eliminates the brand's value from the price that includes it.
Demand Driver/Brand Strength Analysis Method:
The "Reasons-to-Buy" Method evaluates the impacts of brand equity on quantity demanded to identify how much leverage the brand has on the consumer decision-making process and identification of opportunities. The Demand Driver/Brand Vitality Analysis Method will help you figure out which require drivers to generate value for the organization. To estimate the brand's contribution to profit-generating, absolute or relative methodologies might be applied. Absolute procedures account for a fraction of private label elements in accordance with the overall number of factors examined throughout the purchasing process. Relative methodologies treat the brand as either a quality that affects all of the product's traits or as separate property. The first sort of relative approach, throughout particular, classifies demand drivers by priority and then evaluates the brand's input to each of them.
The formulary techniques have been frequently applied professionally by consultancy firms. This methodology is identical to the income or socioeconomic use method, but it contrasts in the quantity of commercial usage and uses numerous variables to estimate the brand's worth.
The processes and techniques should be included in prescriptive approaches:
Financial World Magazine Method:
The "brand index," which uses the same seven components and factor loadings as the Financial World magazine methodology, is used. Different formulas are used to assess the high price profitability attributed to the brand. This premium is computed by deducting the revenue of a similar inferior quality product from the anticipated income owing to the label. This value can be determined, for example, by maintaining a 5% net rate of interest expended for a conventional version of the product (Keller, 1998). After deducting taxes, the top quality profit is augmented by the performance index multiplier.
Brand Equity Ten Method:
Thus according to Aaker, the Brand Equity Ten Technique determines brand equity across five dimensions: loyalty, perceived quality or leadership, other customer-oriented associations or differentiation measures such as brand personality, brand awareness, and products and services at competitive measures which include market share, market price, and distribution coverage. As a result, Brand Equity ten investigates the customer loyalty component of corporate reputation and the metrics used to generate an assessment instrument.
Brand Finance Limited:
Brand Finance Ltd. is a UK-based consultancy company that performs brand valuations by determining the brand's competitiveness in the global market, total business net profit from the brand, the added value of yearly compensation attributed specifically to the brand, and the release candidate risk factor associated with the earnings. It lowers the brand economic benefit after tax at a proportion that matches the brand risk exposure based on the obtained value.
After having reviewed the techniques and practices stated above, it is clear that brands and the process of valuing them are critical for promotional purposes and profitability for the company that acquires them, and that the rapidly expanding literature in this area reflects the growing interest within and between various stakeholder groups and academic researchers.
However, despite the wide range of methodologies available and their relative ease of understanding, a perennial dilemma is the lack of uniformity in the approaches being used and achieving the desired goals since there are enormous variances in the value amount reached. These variables may or may not impact the value of a brand, depending on the approach used to assess it. While it may be true that somehow this process of assessing only affects the company that possesses or purchases the brand, the involvement of a supervising authority would eliminate variations and subsequent conflicts and prevent organizations from asserting inflated brand costs.
Navigation, reassurance, and commitment seem to be the three essential roles of brands. To expound, the layout is when brands assist customers in making decisions from a bewildering menu of opportunities, so even though the sense of security ensures that brand names share information the intrinsic quality of the product or service and reassure consumers at the point of purchase, and engagement characteristics that make up distinct and unique visual images and associations that encourage clients to express with the brand.
It goes without saying that the valuation of brands and the process of appraising them seem to be significant. Although similar in composition to Brand Equity, the idea of Brand Value is fundamental. Broadly said, while brand equity is more preoccupied with both the customer, the value proposition is more preoccupied with the enterprise.
To know more or to get your brand valuation done, feel free to contact us.