Apple, Google, Microsoft among 10 most valuable brands

Interbrand has released its 2013 report for the "Top 100 Best Global Brands" on their website which includes brands from all types of industries, though this year technology is king.

The top 10 brands this year have been dominated by computer technology companies, replacing fast food and car companies. Apple toppled Coca-Cola as the most valuable brand and is considered worth $98.3 billion by Interbrand. Google has also shown a heavy rise in position from earlier and sits at number two with a total worth of $93 billion. Microsoft has been a slow riser and is placed at number five, just behind IBM. Samsung increased its brand value 20 percent and moved into the top 10 for the first time, placing eighth; Intel followed in ninth.

Other top risers include Amazon and Facebook. Facebook, which first entered the top 100 in 2012, has shown a growth of 43 percent to reach the 52nd position from 69th. Among the biggest losers, Nokia, Sony and Dell from the tech world have shown slump in brand value from previous year. Nokia, which is now worth $7.4 billion, has lost 65 percent brand value and dropped from 19th position to 57th. Sony is at 46th while Dell is 61st. 

Apple, Google and Microsoft recently topped off a brand survey in Japan and also the one carried out by BrandZ. Coca-Cola has lost the top spot for the very first time since 2000. This survey marks the general global trend of tech products becoming part of pop culture and changes in people's perception with respect to these products.

Source: Interbrand via CNET | Image via Interbrand

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Sharp to release Windows 8.1 tablet with 2560x1600 display in Japan

Next Story

Microsoft to launch Translator app for Word and PowerPoint 2013 today

41 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I'm surprised about HP's position in this listing, but the others are to be expected.

I just don't see HP as a brand to look for any more. They don't really do anything that stands out.

I always find it funny that Apple and Google are worth more than MS. The world would not stop if either of them disappeared tomorrow, but the Business world RUNS on Windows. All Commerce would stop tomorrow and the markets would crash and burn if MS disappeared.

Apple is doomed! LMAO! Based on the comments in this thread so far, most people don't understand what "valuable" means.

Spicoli said,
If you based it on revenue, most of those wouldn't be on there. Walmart would be #1 followed by a mostly commodity companies.

However brand value isn't solely based on revenue (Or profit for that matter)...

Toyota is more valuable brand than Mercedes? Are you kidding me?

Also I have no idea what the 6'th, 21'st and 25'th brands even are?

alwaysonacoffebreak said,
Toyota is more valuable brand than Mercedes? Are you kidding me?

Also I have no idea what the 6'th, 21'st and 25'th brands even are?

Yes, yes they are.

Also you don't know General Electric?

alwaysonacoffebreak said,
Also I have no idea what the 6'th, 21'st and 25'th brands even are?

General Electric (makes a crapton of different products, consumer to military, aviation, medical, financial services, etc, hard not to see stuff they make), H&M (big clothing/home stuff chain) and SAP (popular enterprise software/services)

Usually you base it on profitability which means you have to sell a lot and for a good markup. Luxury brands get a good markup but not a lot of volume. Ferrari and Rolls Royce can demand far more money than both of those.

Selling a lot of all vehicles is more valuable than a decent number of luxury cars. To be honest, I'm surprised Mercedes-Benz and BMW are that high. It's also very telling that GM, Ford and Chrysler are nowhere to be seen in this top ranking.

alwaysonacoffebreak said,
Toyota is more valuable brand than Mercedes? Are you kidding me?

Also I have no idea what the 6'th, 21'st and 25'th brands even are?

How do you not know who GE is? There is almost a 100% chance you've used or are using one of their products or services, even without knowing... Heck they design a lot of power plants, mainly nuclear, but they make steam turbines for all kinds of power plants, they were a very large light bulb mfg, and still are making a ton of them, they made a lot of appliances, they make railroad engines, if you've been to the hospital chances are you've seen or had been near one of their pieces of healthcare equipment... they make so much its impossible to list here

We have nor will have any nuclear powerplants. Nor do I know if any other kind of turbines work on something they've made. Our railroad engines are purely made in the CCCP and kept working after that. Light bulbs - don't know. Most of the hospital eq. comes from ABB or other Scandinavian manufacturers.

HoochieMamma said,

They are like Samsung, they do so much it's ridiculous.

The difference is GE is ethical. Samsung is not ethical as a company.

NeoPogo said,

The difference is GE is ethical. Samsung is not ethical as a company.

You have GOT to be kidding me? You're saying a company that's been involved in weapons manufacture is MORE ethical than a company making electronics and telecommunications gear? Are you high? Do you just hate on Samsung to make you seem cool? Cmon buddy, think for a bit before posting something that stupid.

The thing here is that this is for "Top 100 Best Global Brands" the fact that a lot of these companies are only big in the states shows how biased this is. The fact that American Express is no.23 and a lot of companies outside the USA refuse to use it, where Visa/Master card are.
GE/HM does a lot of stuff, but as coffee break says they dont have much brand awareness in other countries.

GE is a brand where you've used several of their products in your life but haven't given much thought to it. Like a microwaves etc.

Yes, but people here in India (and similarly in China et al) aspire to own Apple products and that says a lot about brand value.

Apple is very much global. I can't speak for other countries, though I doubt there is a difference, but here in Sweden apple dominates the smartphone market (though android has been making quite an impact since galaxy s3 released).

No, the market numbers show the US is what supports Apple. It's big because much of the cost is hidden and you don't realize you're paying $1200 for that $600 phone. Aspiring to own an electronic device is pretty sad.

Unfortunately, Apple is more global than MS (and I am an Apple hater/MS fanboy). I still can't pay for xbox music in my country (and we've been in the EU for almost 10 years), but I can buy music from Apple. I also want to give MS my money for XBL gold. Guess what, they don't want my money. So yeah. Sucks big time.

While I don't have any Apple products (they aren't for me) they deserve this, they are the most aspirational brand for most people. Android doesn't have nearly the same cachet, on the whole people buy it because it's cheaper and they would get the Apple equivalent if they had more money.

As for the other positions, usual rubbish for this report. Ok Coca-Cola is the number one "coke", but otherwise if I saw a drink with Coca-Cola on the side I'd avoid it cos I don't think they are very ecological or put much love into their products. I've seen orange juice with "a Coca-Cola product" on the side, much rather get Tropicana, Innocent or some smaller brand than something from such a global corporate. I'd cross the road to avoid McDonalds. Google, what they will sell my info, they will bombard me with ads and if the product doesn't make them enough money they will can it, no I'm in no rush to try their products. IBM, nothing against them, but apart from server engineers' who knows about IBM these days? GE, do they sell things outside the US; never seem anything apart from light-bulbs here in the UK. I could go on.

The service side is small change for both companies. I'm talking about where their revenue comes from. Apple's market value exists almost purely from selling iPhone hardware.

TheShark said,
While I don't have any Apple products (they aren't for me) they deserve this, they are the most aspirational brand for most people.

I assume you mean fashionable? The thing with fashion is it never lasts. Unlike more business brands that have been solid for decades. Apple has generally been a failure over the decades until they hit on one winner product. The problem they can't continue to demand the markup as phones before a commodity. Its' the same thing the killed the Mac in the early 90s. So the brand value looks good right now but it's a really bad investment.

Spicoli said,
No, the market numbers show the US is what supports Apple. It's big because much of the cost is hidden and you don't realize you're paying $1200 for that $600 phone. Aspiring to own an electronic device is pretty sad.

The Android and Windows Phones cost the same over the same 2 year contract.

Spicoli said,
Global brands? Apple is mostly big in the US were we still have the carrier contract scam thing.

So now you actually question whether Apple is a global brand? Oh my...your comments get more and more entertaining, gotta give you that...

Spicoli said,
No, the market numbers show the US is what supports Apple. It's big because much of the cost is hidden and you don't realize you're paying $1200 for that $600 phone. Aspiring to own an electronic device is pretty sad.

It's fun watching people's Reality Distortion Field start to evaporate.

Also, I'm the saddest bear on the block because I aspire to own an XBox One.