百科 > 金融 > 银行 > 银行排行榜

2010年全球银行品牌500强排行榜

本条目包含过多不是中文的内容，欢迎协助翻译。

若已有相当内容译为中文，可迳自去除本模板。

Top 500 Banking Brands

2010年全球银行品牌500强概述

“在金融领域如此动荡的时代，强有力的品牌比以往任何时候都更加重要。《银行家》的全球品牌500强排行榜为世界顶级品牌做了排名。” Brian Caplen报道。

金融危机的一个副作用是，它唤醒了银行们对品牌的重视。以前，许多银行认为他们的品牌代表了传统价值如信用和稳定性，并且没必要花精力去提高它。顾客们会很乐意将钱存到银行，因为他们十分明白那里绝对安全，所以晚上可以放心睡大觉。

现在世界突然变了，事实是，即便是长期屹立不倒的品牌银行也经历了困境，使得储户的信心受到动摇。这产生了一种颠覆，即在传统强势品牌需要一些重组的时候，银行业领域足够开放，让用户有理由去尝试之前从未考虑过的银行，去尝试新的品牌。

但是说到品牌，所有方面必须得到整合，包括产品、服务、技术、员工，以及强势和稳定性，才能发挥最大的作用。

《银行家》的世界品牌500强向我们展示了在上述各方面都非常出色的品牌，比如汇丰和桑坦德，都保持和提升了在排行榜中的排名。汇丰保持了第一名，桑坦德从第四名前进到第三名的过程中，品牌价值翻了一番。

尽管有来自各方面的批评，高盛也极大的提升了自己的排名，从第17名跃升到第7名，这表明顾客心中的品牌形象和某些媒体宣传的有相当大的不同。在业内（投资银行），高盛仍然是值得效仿的品牌。

另一个持久的趋势是新兴市场品牌在逐渐壮大。巴西的Bradesco已经从第12名上升到第9名，Banco do Brasil从36上升到26，印度国家银行跃升了34位排名到第36名。大型中国银行像中国工商银行、中国建设银行和中国银行排名方面都略有落后，但是在品牌价值上都有提升。

桑坦德的霸主地位来源于2005年采取的一项决策，该决策致力于争取一个全球品牌，尽管在特定国家中的转换依赖当地环境。 María Sánchez del Corral是集团全球品牌市场的负责人，他说：“业已证实，唯一品牌的战略在实力和偿付能力方面壮大了我们的声誉，它为我们吸引了更多的客户，提高了客户忠诚度，也使得招募和留住高素质人才更加容易。一个统一的品牌会产生巨大的协同力，在广告和赞助方面也节省了很多开支。”桑坦德选择对第一方程式赛车赞助，因为该体育赛事能传达跨国界的理念，并展现公司鼓舞人心的个性。

1月份santander在英国由Abbey向santander的转型，就是环境如何使品牌腾飞的例子。“改变品牌向来是我们的目标，但是经济危机中我们表现出的坚挺，才给了我们前进所需的信用度。”桑坦德驻英国的品牌执行官，Keith Moor说道。

汇丰从1998年开始就实行单一品牌战略，但至今它的logo仍然十分混乱，简直是“混乱的设计”，汇丰市场总监Tracy Britton这样形容道。

"We decided to organise our offerings around propositions relating to five basic consumer segments," she says. "As a global brand, you evolve, you don't take sharp turns," she adds, explaining how the famous advertising campaign displaying its international knowledge will move on to the next stage.

In a way, the development of the Facebook-using, internet-savvy global consumer is playing to the strengths of banks such as Santander and HSBC and helping to keep them at the top of the ranking. But staying at the front is always a challenge and is the result of considerable branding forethought that permeates each institution.

METHODOLOGY

The methodology employed by Brand Finance in this Top 500 Banking Brands listing uses a discounted cash flow (DCF) technique to discount estimated future royalties at an appropriate discount rate, to arrive at a net present value (NPV) of the trademark and associated intellectual property: the brand value.

The steps in this process are to:

1. Obtain brand-specific financial and revenue data. The revenue was then segmented into the following revenue streams: retail banking, commercial banking, wholesale/investment banking, insurance asset management and credit cards.

2. Model the market to identify market demand and the position of individual banks in the context of all other market competitors.

Three forecast periods were used:

- Estimated financial results for 2009 using Institutional Brokers Estimate System (IBES) consensus forecast.

- A five-year forecast period (2010 to 2014) based on three sources: IBES, historic growth and gross domestic product (GDP) growth.

- Perpetuity growth based on a combination of growth expectations (GDP and IBES).

3. Establish the royalty rate for each bank.

This is done by:

- Calculating brand strength - on a scale of zero to 100 - according to a number of attributes such as asset strength, emotional connection, market share and profitability among others.

- Determining the royalty rate for each of the revenue streams mentioned in step one.

- Calculating future royalty income stream.

4. Calculate the discount rate specific to each bank, taking account of its size, geographical presence, reputation, gearing and brand rating.

5. Discount future royalty stream (explicit forecast and perpetuity periods) to a net present value - ie. the brand value.

Royalty relief approach

Brand Finance uses a 'relief from royalty' methodology that determines the value of the brand in relation to the royalty rate that would be payable for its use, were it 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. The 'relief from royalty' approach is used for two reasons: it is favoured by tax authorities and the courts because it calculates brand values by reference to documented third-party transactions and it can be done based on publicly available financial information.

Brand ratings

These are calculated using Brand Finance's ßrandßeta analysis which benchmarks the strength, risk and 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 comes from various sources including Bloomberg annual reports and Brand Finance research.

Brand ratings definitions:

AAA -- Extremely strong

AA -- Very strong

A -- Strong

BBB-B -- Average

CCC-C -- Weak

DDD-D -- Failing

Valuation date: All brand values in the report are for the year ending December 31, 2009.