Google beats Microsoft, Coke in brand stakes

Google has knocked Microsoft off the top spot and been named the most powerful global brand of 2007 in a recently published ranking by market researcher Millward Brown Optimor. Factoring in financial performance and consumer sentiment, Google ranked first with a brand value of more than $66 billion, nearly double its value in the 2006 ranking. Microsoft came in third this year with a brand value of $55 billion. It's the second year in a row a tech brand has beaten household names.

Out of the complete top 100 listings, finance is the most dominant sector - it takes about 25% of the list. Technology is the second-most prolific, with one in five brands, and retail is the third-most popular sector. According to Millward Brown Optimor, here are the 10 most powerful global brands of 2007 and their corresponding brand value:

  1. Google--$66.4 billion
  2. General Electric--$61.9 billion
  3. Microsoft--$55 billion
  4. Coca-Cola--$44.1 billion
  5. China Mobile--$41.2 billion
  6. Marlboro--$39.2 billion
  7. Wal-Mart--$36.9 billion
  8. Citigroup--$33.7 billion
  9. IBM--$33.6 billion
  10. Toyota Motor--$33.4 billion
Link: Forum Discussion (Thanks Rappy)
View: BRANDZ Top 100 Report 2007 (PDF)
News source: News.com

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft to EC: Can't We Just Talk?

Next Story

Microsoft: DNS Vulnerability Not in Vista or XP

10 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Ha ha...favorite company...my favorite companies are all over the list!!

I was speaking about the way google is....sudden peak rise due to search & ads, and then picked/purchased some companies like youtube,now doubleclick to get there way ahead...see where it is in next 3 years at max...it will be like other companies.

GE, Microsoft, IBM & walmart etc are longterm enterprise companies & will survive...but others wont.

I am not bashing...i hate these kind of irregular tuneups.

guruparan said,
Ha ha...favorite company...my favorite companies are all over the list!!

I was speaking about the way google is....sudden peak rise due to search & ads, and then picked/purchased some companies like youtube,now doubleclick to get there way ahead...see where it is in next 3 years at max...it will be like other companies.

GE, Microsoft, IBM & walmart etc are longterm enterprise companies & will survive...but others wont.

I am not bashing...i hate these kind of irregular tuneups.

who's to say Google won't become another one of these giants? it wasn't exactly poor business decisions that got them where they are now lol...

That may be so, but they spend more time these days on side projects going nowhere than the product that made them a huge success to begin with, their search engine. How many years was google groups in a pathetic beta? Think of things like that. Their quest for advertising dollars has completely skewed their results, making them less than ideal in a lot of cases, granted it's still better than a lot of others, but it's not the best, it's just better than what's currently available, it still stinks.

Ideas Man said,
That may be so, but they spend more time these days on side projects going nowhere than the product that made them a huge success to begin with, their search engine. How many years was google groups in a pathetic beta? Think of things like that. Their quest for advertising dollars has completely skewed their results, making them less than ideal in a lot of cases, granted it's still better than a lot of others, but it's not the best, it's just better than what's currently available, it still stinks.

You can only do so much with search, and to do more, you have to expand. Google understands that putting more and more resources into a single project only provides marginal or even negative growth for every exponential increase. That is why employees are allowed to work on their own projects 20% of the time. The moment you become too specialized, you are close-minded, and are going to get beat even worse as the field innovates.

Ideas Man said,
That may be so, but they spend more time these days on side projects going nowhere than the product that made them a huge success to begin with, their search engine. How many years was google groups in a pathetic beta? Think of things like that. Their quest for advertising dollars has completely skewed their results, making them less than ideal in a lot of cases, granted it's still better than a lot of others, but it's not the best, it's just better than what's currently available, it still stinks.

Google is more like online Ad agency now. Sadly to say, it is the right choice for Google. You'v got tons of money, that doesn't guarantee you can do first-class works, but you can buy them. There are probably hundreds of small companies on search engine waiting to get picked up by Google or Yahoo. Why spends billions of dollars on R&D, when you can buy them with millions?

Now at first..tats ok..

when youtube is made with ads & low security & cracks peek into google, next year it will be pushed back..

after 2 yrs..it will be another yahoo. :rolleyes:

In mean while, what Google stands for...an ad company, a search company or some say is tat a "innovation" company?...

guruparan said,
Now at first..tats ok..

when youtube is made with ads & low security & cracks peek into google, next year it will be pushed back..

after 2 yrs..it will be another yahoo. :rolleyes:

In mean while, what Google stands for...an ad company, a search company or some say is tat a "innovation" company?...

How can anybody make such assumptions? Yahoo has never been anything like Google has been, and that is an innovative company in one retrospect, yes.

#1 at what... brand value? How does this type of ranking benefit anyone/thing except the self-serving sides of marketing and advertising? Help me out here, does this in anyway affect individual consumers or even any part of the tech industry?... after all, to quote Austin Power's Fat B******, <best Scottish accent> "Let's have a smell all right? Ooh, everyone likes their own brand, don't they? Oh, this is magic!"

Personally, I dislike "brand loyalty"; it's a catalyst for stifling diversity. It limits choices that people make... this blind devotion prevents them from trying alternative options that might be better suited for their needs.