Top 50 Report[1]

Full text

(1)

Malaysia’s Performance

on Intangible Assets

How Hard do Malaysian Companies

Work at their Brands?

08.08.2008

(2)

contents

About Brand Finance

01

Foreword

02

Glossary of Terms

03

Executive Summary

04

Key Findings

08

Most Valuable Malaysian Brand

09

Most Highly Rated Malaysian Brand

10

Malaysia’s Top 10

11

Malaysia’s Top 50

17

Intangible Assets

18

Financial Reporting of Intangible Assets

19

(3)

A B O U T B R A N D F I N A N C E

Brand Finance is the world’s leading independent brand and intangible asset valuation firm. We advise organisations across a wide range of sectors on how to maximise shareholder value through effective management of their

intangible assets. Headquartered in London, Brand Finance was founded in 1996 and now has 23 offices in 22 countries. Our services complement and support each other, resulting in an in-depth understanding of intangible assets from financial, consumer and commercial perspectives:

VALUATION

We are an international leader in the field of intangible asset valuation and

transfer pricing.

-

purchase price allocations and impairment reviews

-

financial reporting

-

transfer pricing

-

litigation

ANALYTICS

We help companies quantify the return on marketing investment and track

brand performance.

-

brand investment dashboards

-

return on marketing investment

-

marketing mix modelling

-

benchmarking

STRATEGY

We use value-based management and marketing tools to enable

management to allocate resources to activities that create the most value.

-

scenario modeling and valuation

-

brand architecture

-

resource allocation and budget setting

-

portfolio evaluation and strategy

TRANSACTIONS

We help clients extract value from their intellectual property through transactions.

-

intellectual property and brand due diligence

-

intellectual property structuring

-

licensing

-

joint venture, mergers, acquisitions, investment and

divestment decisions

Brand Finance has worked with many of the world’s leading brand owners and branded enterprises. We also advise private equity companies, investment banks, intellectual property lawyers and tax authorities.

(4)

The global economic paradigm has shifted from one that valued

tangible assets to one that increasingly favours intangible assets.

Developed economies are relying more on intangible assets to

generate economic value. Even fast developing economies like

China and India recognise the need for their companies to own and

develop intellectual property (IP).

Malaysia is no different. To support its vision of developing a

knowledge-based economy, Malaysia has embarked on a series of

IP reforms to improve the country’s IP-related international ties,

enhance IP protection via legal and procedural changes, and to

raise the awareness of IP management. These efforts will yield

long term benefits for the Malaysian economy.

As the market leader in reviewing brand and intangible asset

values, Brand Finance has been dedicated to the measurement of

brand strength and value for over a decade. We use quantitative

market data, detailed financial information and expert judgment to

provide reliable Brand Ratings and Brand Values. Our methods are

technically advanced and well recognised by our peers, by various

technical authorities and by academic institutions.

Brand Finance’s reports are highly actionable for accounting, tax

litigation and commercial purposes. They also produce diagnostics

and analytics that can be used to better manage corporate

strategy. This is how we add value to our clients’ brands and

intangible assets.

Our objective in this study is to highlight that Malaysian companies

can do more to leverage the value of their intangible assets and

brands. The emphasis is not about ranking or the value, it is about

using these important assets to drive greater enterprise value.

David Haigh Chief Executive Brand Finance plc

F O R E W O R D

(5)

Fair Market Value (FMV)

The price at which a business or assets would change hands between a willing buyer and a willing seller, neither of whom are under compulsion to buy or sell, and both having reasonable knowledge of all relevant facts at the time.

Holding Company

A company controlling management and operations in another company or group of other companies. Intangible Asset

An identifiable non-monetary asset without physical substance.

Net Present Value (NPV)

The present value of an asset’s net cash flows (minus any initial investment).

Tangible Value

The fair market value of the monetary and physical assets of a business.

Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC)

An average representing the expected return on all of a company’s securities. Each source of capital, such as stocks, bonds and other debts, is assigned a required rate of return, and then these required rates of return are weighted in proportion to the share each source of capital contributes to the company’s capital structure.

Other notes

The valuation date of this report is 31 December 2007.

Quantitative data is obtained from Bloomberg, listed company data sources such as annual reports, websites, analyst and industry reports and other publicly available data sources.

Neither all nor portions of this report may be reproduced or published without acknowledgment to, or the express written authorisation of Brand

G L O S S A R Y O F T E R M S

Brand Portfolio Value

The value of trademarks and trademark licenses, together with associated goodwill.

ßrandßeta®

Brand Finance’s proprietary method for adjusting a weighted average cost of capital to arrive at a specific discount rate for each brand (based on its Brand Rating). Branded Business

The whole business trading under particular brands, the associated goodwill and all the other tangible and intangible elements at work within the business. Brand Rating

A summary opinion, similar to a credit rating, on a brand based on its strength as measured by Brand Finance’s ‘Brand Strength Index’.

Brand Value

The net present value of the estimated future cash flows attributable to the brand (see Methodology section for more detail).

Discounted Cash Flow (DCF)

A method of evaluating an asset value by estimating future cash flows and taking into consideration the time value of money and risk attributed to the future cash flows.

Discount Rate

The interest rate used in discounting future cash flows. Enterprise Value

The combined market value of the equity and debt of a business, less cash and cash equivalents.

(6)

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

Objective of Study

The argument for intangible assets has gained much prominence in the past decade. Brand Finance plc has been a champion of brands and intangible assets since it began operations in the UK in 1996. Today, Brand Finance has 23 offices in 22 countries, an affirmation of the rising interest amongst companies to understand brands and intangible assets and learn how to manage them well.

While intangible assets now account for 66% of global market value, management skills have not grown at the same pace. Many companies are poor at taking stock of their intangible assets, let alone using these intangible assets to drive cash flow and enterprise value.

This study will identify the most valuable brands and brand portfolios of Malaysia and the best rated brands. It will also be timely to benchmark the findings of this study with the inaugural study which Brand Finance conducted last year.

Malaysia’s report card on intangible value creation

A useful starting point is Brand Finance’s Global Intangible Tracker 2007 where Malaysia can glean useful insights regarding the performance of its intangible assets on a global level. Global Intangible Tracker is the most extensive study on intangible assets, covering 32 leading stock markets, more than 10,000 companies and 99% of global listed value. It validates the importance of intangibles and demonstrates the significant growth in global intangible value, even in countries which have traditionally been dominated by commoditised sectors. Aside from brands, intangible assets include patents and technology, contracts, copyright, customer relationships, design rights and human capital. Along with South Korea, Croatia, Turkey and Japan, Malaysia is one of five countries with the largest proportion of their value made up of tangible net assets. Malaysia is ranked 29th in the world for intangible assets’ contribution to enterprise value. This compares with the US in the first spot, where intangible assets make up 75% of enterprise value. India and China are ahead of Malaysia with intangibles contributing 73% and 58% to enterprise value respectively. Compared to neighbouring Singapore where intangible assets account for 50% of enterprise value, Malaysia’s intangible asset contribution stands at 43%.

While our report clearly shows that Malaysian companies are undervaluing their intangible assets, there is a silver lining. The total brand value of Malaysia’s Top 50 brands has increased by 9% from MYR 59.1 billion in 2006 to MYR 64.8 billion in 2007. We shall discuss this in greater detail in the later part of this report.

Disclaimer

Brand Finance Singapore has produced this study with an independent and unbiased analysis. The values derived and opinions produced in this study are based only on publicly available information. No independent verification or audit of such materials was undertaken. Brand Finance Singapore accepts no responsibility and will not be liable in the event that the publicly available information relied upon is subsequently found to be inaccurate.

The conclusions expressed are the opinions of Brand Finance Singapore and are not intended to be warranties or guarantees that a particular value or projection can be achieved in any transaction. The opinions expressed in the report are not to be construed as providing investment advice. Brand Finance Singapore does not intend the report to be relied upon for technical reasons and excludes all liability to any organisation.

(7)

The charts below show the split of enterprise value for listed companies in a selection of countries including Malaysia.

If Malaysia wishes to compete effectively in the global economy, which is rapidly shifting towards knowledge-based activities, it has to step up efforts to recognise and invest in intangible assets. It also has to equip companies with the management know-how and pertinent skill sets.

Brands, branding and brand management are amongst the most frequently discussed topics in the boardrooms and business schools. Companies that can master the science and art of branding stand in good stead to improve shareholder value, since brands represent a sizeable portion of intangible assets.

DkZgVaabVg`Zi

VcYG^h`6cVanh^h

&

'

HZ\bZci

6cVanh^h

HZ\bZci6

HZ\bZci7

HZ\bZci8

HZ\bZci6 HZ\bZci7 HZ\bZci8 GdnVain>cXdbZ 7gVcYVcY7gVcYZY 7jh^cZhhKVajZh &%% .% -% ,% +% *% )% (% '% &% % ;dgZXVhih GZkZcjZ 8dhih

(

;^cVcX^Va

6cVanh^h

) GdnVain

GViZ

HijYn

*

9^hXdjci

GViZ

+% JH J@ 6jhigVa^V >cY^V *' *( &% ,( & 8]^cV *- % =dc\@dc\ *' ( BVaVnh^V (+ , H^c\VedgZ )( , '* (' (, '+ )' )* *, *% &%% .% -% ,% +% *% )% (% '% &% % (+ , *, BVaVnh^V IVc\^WaZ6hhZih JcgZXdgYZYKVajZ IVc\^WaZ6hhZih 9^hXadhZY>ciVc\^WaZh 9^hXadhZY>ciVc\^WaZh JcgZXdgYZYKVajZ &* &+

DkZgVaabVg`Zi

VcYG^h`6cVanh^h

&

'

HZ\bZci

6cVanh^h

HZ\bZci6

HZ\bZci7

HZ\bZci8

HZ\bZci6 HZ\bZci7 HZ\bZci8 GdnVain>cXdbZ 7gVcYVcY7gVcYZY 7jh^cZhhKVajZh &%% .% -% ,% +% *% )% (% '% &% % ;dgZXVhih GZkZcjZ 8dhih

(

;^cVcX^Va

6cVanh^h

) GdnVain

GViZ

HijYn

*

9^hXdjci

GViZ

+% JH J@ 6jhigVa^V >cY^V *' *( &% ,( & 8]^cV *- % =dc\@dc\ *' ( BVaVnh^V (+ , H^c\VedgZ )( , '* (' (, '+ )' )* *, *% &%% .% -% ,% +% *% )% (% '% &% % (+ , *, BVaVnh^V IVc\^WaZ6hhZih JcgZXdgYZYKVajZ IVc\^WaZ6hhZih 9^hXadhZY>ciVc\^WaZh 9^hXadhZY>ciVc\^WaZh JcgZXdgYZYKVajZ &* &+

(8)

Malaysia’s Most Valuable Brands & Brand Portfolios

The total value of Malaysia’s 50 largest brands and brand portfolios is MYR 64.8 billion, representing a 9% jump over last year’s study. However, the increase is partly due to Brand Finance re-categorising some companies as conglomerates as opposed to treating them as separately listed entities. In addition, the brand value for most companies has increased as compared to last year except for the banking industry due to the sub prime crisis and credit crunch that affected the global financial market.

While some brands have demonstrated improvements in their value and we applaud their achievements, other brands have not been able to tackle challenges present in the challenging external environment. Unlike our study last year, this report puts the spotlight on conglomerates in Malaysia. A critical observation that Brand Finance has made about Malaysia is the presence of conglomerates which dominate Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange (KLSE). Except for banking and telecommunications, they have diverse businesses that range from agriculture, construction, oil and gas, shipping to entertainment. We believe that more intangible assets and intellectual property (IP) will be created not only in traditional manufacturing and service sectors, but also in the realm of service, education, arts and entertainment.

Brand Finance has ranked the brands and brand portfolios of KLSE listed companies by their absolute dollar value.

Congratulations to:

PETRONAS Group

for retaining the title of the ‘Most Valuable Malaysian’ brand; and

Genting

for being the Most Highly Rated Malaysian brand with an ‘AA+’ rating.

How do brands drive enterprise value?

Brands create value by shifting both the demand and supply curves. On the demand side, they influence consumer behaviour, leading to greater trial, improved frequency of use, increased loyalty and a willingness to pay a price premium. On the supply side, strong brands can attract better talent, influence terms of trade, and even reduce the cost of capital. An understanding of brand value is essential to various decision-makers in various ways:

• Brand managers need to understand how brands influence consumer perceptions and behaviour in order to develop strategies that optimise market performance and brand value.

• Finance managers are faced with impairment risks as well as transfer pricing considerations that require an understanding of intangible asset values. They also play a role in protecting brand value by maintaining adequate levels of brand investment in bad and good times.

• Deal makers increasingly need to gauge the investment value and value potential of brands in assessing the merits of a transaction.

(9)

2008 has been a rocky year thus far. With record high oil and

commodity prices, and inflation on the back of a credit crisis,

equity markets have been bearish. Investor confidence has been

shaken. There is no better time than now to defy conventional

wisdom because short-sighted reductions in brand investment can

destroy long term value. Companies with the courage to challenge

the status quo, cut through the market noise of gloom and doom,

will find worthy investments and use this time to strengthen their

brands and intangible assets.

Brand Finance wishes all Malaysian companies well in their

endeavors to build enduring brands and grow the intangible

asset base.

Lucy Gwee

Managing Director

Brand Finance Singapore

(10)

K E Y F I N D I N G S

• Intangible asset value increased steadily between 2001 and 2007 on a worldwide basis. Intangibles now

account for 66% of global market value. For Malaysia, intangibles account for 43% of the enterprise value

of Bursa Malaysia listed entities.

• Malaysia is ranked 29th for the contribution of intangible assets to enterprise value and lags India and

China where intangibles account for 73% and 58% of enterprise value respectively. The global leaders are

the USA and Switzerland where intangibles contribute about 75% of market value.

• Malaysia’s 50 largest brands and brand portfolios are worth MYR 64.8 billion (US$19.4 billion). Compare

this with Singapore’s Top 50 brands which amount to S$36.2 billion (US$25.0 billion). and Australia’s Top

50 brands which account for A$80 billion (US$69.6 billion).

• PETRONAS Group has the most valuable brand portfolio of listed Bursa Malaysia companies with a brand

value of MYR 8.3 billion.

• Genting is the most highly rated brand and the only Malaysian brand to receive an ‘AA+’ rating.

• Resorts World makes its first entry into the Malaysia’s Top 10 brands with a brand value of MYR 2.3 billion

in place of Malaysian Airlines, which is now ranked 12th place. The improved revenues and prospects of

Resorts World can be attributed to the continued investments in its brand.

(11)

PETRONAS, the only Malaysian company in the Fortune Global 500 list of the world’s biggest firms,

has recaptured the number one position in this year’s league table.

As part of their forward-looking strategy, PETRONAS is considering the development of palm oil based

biofuels in view of the growing popularity of renewable energy. As one of the world’s largest exporters of

crude palm oil, there is an enormous opportunity for PETRONAS to expand its research and development into

biofuels.

In a bid to enhance its branding efforts and place PETRONAS on the international stage, PETRONAS became

involved in Formula One (F1) with its sponsorship of the then Red Bull Sauber Ford Racing Team. This foray

turned out to be a successful one and continual sponsorship in F1 motorsports helped boost PETRONAS’

corporate image and heightened its brand presence. Not only did the global awareness of the PETRONAS

brand increase, its engagement in F1 reinforced its technological capabilities through research and

development based on F1 technology.

The PETRONAS brand is also well received by the community due to its commitment in spreading public

service messages. It has a long running tradition of coming up with heartwarming advertisements during

festive seasons, and its advertisements have received many top awards.

(12)

M O S T H I G H LY R A T E D M A L A Y S I A N B R A N D

Genting Berhad has emerged to be the most highly rated Malaysian brand with an ‘AA+’ rating,

which translates to a “Very Strong” brand.

The ‘AA+’ brand rating ties to a brand score of 70 (out of 100) which is an indicator of the brand strength of

Genting. As with most conglomerates, Genting has deployed a monolithic brand strategy to unify the group’s

diverse business units and accord each business unit strength, credibility and trust.

Compared to Brand Finance’s Malaysian Brand Study in 2006, the Genting brand value has risen close to 12%

from MYR 3.73 billion to MYR 4.17 billion in 2007. The stronger Genting brand has helped the group deliver

steady earnings. Revenues for the group increased by 17.4% and 27.3% to MYR 5.45 billion and MYR 6.94

billion for 2005 and 2006 respectively. Net profit recorded an impressive jump of 34.4% for 2005 and 23.8% in

2006. For the 3 months ended 31 March 2008, revenues are up 7% to MYR 2.16 billion. The sustained revenue

growth reflects an increase in the demand for Genting’s products and services.

The Genting brand will now expand outside its home base to Singapore. As one of Singapore’s two integrated

resorts, we believe that the additional brand exposure and additional revenue will generate a higher brand

value for the brand.

(13)

1. PETRONAS GROUP

Incorporated in 1974, Petroliam Nasional Berhad (PETRONAS) has emerged to become Malaysia’s most valuable brand. Wholly owned by the Government, this fully integrated oil and gas corporation has grown rapidly to include 103 wholly owned subsidiaries, 19 partly owned outfits and 57 associated companies. PETRONAS, with an extensive network in more than 32 countries worldwide, has been ranked by Fortune to be the 8th most profitable company globally and the most profitable in Asia.

In line with its vision to become the “Leading Oil and Gas Multinational of Choice”, PETRONAS forayed into the motorsports business in 1995 and managed to secure title sponsorship rights to Formula One Grand Prix. These sponsorship efforts helped heighten the awareness of its brand, placing both PETRONAS and Malaysia on the international stage.

Standing tall at 88 floors, the PETRONAS Twin Towers (once termed the world’s tallest buildings) has been an icon for Malaysia since its completion, reflecting Malaysia’s financial stability and success. Its Merdeka campaigns have also been well-received by Malaysians over the years as it leverages on the country’s national values. Most recently, PETRONAS responded to cyclone-hit Myanmar by sending aids to the victims and sending employees to assist in the coordination of

RANK PARENT COMPANY BRAND ENTERPRISE VALUE (MYR) TRADEMARK VALUE(MYR)

BRAND/ ENTERPRISE VALUE BRAND RATING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PETRONAS Group Genting Bhd Malayan Banking Bhd Maxis Communications Bhd Tenaga Nasional Bhd Sime Darby Berhad

Bumiputera-Commerce Hldgs Bhd Telekom Malaysia Bhd Public Bank Bhd Resorts World Bhd PETRONAS Genting Maybank Maxis TNB Sime Darby CIMB TM Public Bank Resorts World 413,928 34,165 51,470 39,390 61,856 50,263 40,971 20,640 39,203 19,107 8,279 4,175 4,141 3,348 3,241 2,960 2,743 2,621 2,577 2,260 2% 12% 8% 9% 5% 6% 7% 13% 7% 12% A-AA+ AA-A A A+ AA-A+ 2007 Enterprise Value (est.) MYR 413,928 m 2007 Trademark Value MYR 8,279 m 2007 Total Revenue MYR 184,100 m

The ten most valuable brands and brand portfolios (listed in the table below) of Malaysia are

worth MYR 36.3 billion which represent approximately 56% of the total brand value of the Top 50

Malaysian brands. Our brand valuation methodology can be found at the end of this report.

(14)

2. GENTING BERHAD

The Genting Group, a collective name for Genting Berhad and its subsidiaries and associates, was founded back in 1965. Genting Berhad is the investment holding and management company of Genting Group and is currently one of the leading and lowest cost palm oil producers in Malaysia. From its initial engagement of leisure and hospitality activities, the Genting Group has diversified into other operations, comprising power generation, oil palm plantation, property development and oil & gas. From just a 38-room hotel, the Group has developed into a global empire spanning resorts, with more than 27,000 employees worldwide, 11,000 acres of prime resort land and over 80,000 hectares of plantations. The Group today has evolved to become one of Asia’s leading and best managed multinational corporations, renowned for its strong management leadership, financial prudence and sound investment discipline.

3. MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD

Malayan Banking, more commonly known as Maybank, commenced operations in 1960 and is today the largest financial services group in Malaysia by market capitalisation. 1994 was a landmark year for Maybank as it became the first financial institution in the country to exceed the RM1 billion profit mark. As a leading financial group in Malaysia for over three and a half decades, the domestic bank has an established network of more than 450 branches nationwide and presence in 14 countries with over 80 international offices. The Group offers an extensive range of financial products and services including commercial banking, trustee services, stock broking, investment banking and venture capital.

Widely recognised by consumers and the industry for its corporate governance, management skills, excellence and trustworthiness, Maybank has garnered several awards and accolades. The outstanding ones include Maybank being named the Best Foreign Exchange Bank by Global Finance in 2008 and is also ranked 91 within Brand Finance’s study of Global Top 100 Most Valuable Banking Brands.

The Maybank brand, distinct for its black and yellow corporate hues, is often associated with its commitment to make banking simple and accessible for its customers. Maybank recently stepped up promotional campaigns targeting its diverse customer base by introducing upscale signature branches to offer a complete range of services in strategic and major locations. In addition, Maybank is expanding its foothold aggressively throughout South East Asia via acquisition, including a recent 15 percent stake in Vietnam’s An Binh Bank and 20 percent of the ordinary shares in MCB Bank Ltd., the fourth largest bank by asset in Pakistan.

M A L A Y S I A’ S T O P 1 0

2007 Enterprise Value MYR 34,165 m 2007 Trademark Value MYR 4,175 m 2007 Total Revenue (est.) MYR 6,193 m 2007 Enterprise Value MYR 51,470 m 2007 Trademark Value MYR 4,141 m 2007 Total Revenue MYR 10,647 m

(15)

5. TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD

Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB), with a history that can be traced back to 1949, started out as a Central Electricity Board serving 45,000 customers. Today, TNB has expanded rapidly to become the largest electricity utility company in Malaysia, with a customer base of more than 7 million being served by 28,000 employees. Its infrastructure lies in the generation, distribution and transmission of electricity, controlling Malaysia’s largest generation capacity of about 11,200 megawatts. TNB is also involved in several diversified businesses related to the power industry, which includes the manufacture of transformers, property development, architectural engineering and project management services. Besides being among the top 10 most valuable brands of Malaysia, TNB is fast becoming an internationally respected and recognised company. Its recent achievement in becoming 1 of the top 5 finalists for the “Power Company of the Year” in the 2007 Platts Global Energy Awards has made it the only Asian company shortlisted.

TNB is also recognised for its contribution to its country when it celebrated Malaysia’s 50th Independence Anniversary by sponsoring a national patriotic song and video clip, specially created to celebrate the occasion. TNB has increased its efforts

4. MAXIS COMMUNICATIONS BERHAD

Maxis Communications Berhad (Maxis) began commercial operations in 1995 as a private company. Since then, it has successfully grown to become a leading mobile communications service provider, with a dominant market share of 41.5% and a subscriber base of about 8.5 million in 2007. Other than operating its business in Malaysia, Maxis has ventured into 2 of the world’s fast growing and low penetration markets, namely Indonesia and India. This overseas expansion is in line with Maxis’ aspiration to become the regional communications leader of choice. In Malaysia, Maxis’ mobile service is offered under the Maxis brand for postpaid services and Hotlink for prepaid services.

Maxis has received much recognition for its excellence in the Malaysian Telecommunications industry and outstanding awards include being named Service Provider of the Year by Frost & Suvillian in 2008. It was also awarded Asian Mobile Operator of the Year at the Asian Mobile News Award 2008 in Singapore, for its efforts in innovation, rewarding customer experience and fast growth in the industry. In an effort to continue maintaining its position as the market leader through increasing brand awareness, Maxis has been aggressive in its marketing efforts. Maxis came up third in advertising expenditure in 2007 according to Nielsen. Recently, Maxis entered an exclusive partnership with Yahoo! which will see to a variety of graphic advertisements sold and served by the giant search engine.

Maxis was de-listed from Bursa Malaysia on 25th June 2007 following the successful completion of the privatization offer by Binariang GSM Sdn Bhd. 2007 Enterprise Value MYR 61,856 m 2007 Trademark Value MYR 3,241 m 2007 Total Revenue MYR 23,320 m 2007 Enterprise Value (est.) MYR 39,390 m 2007 Trademark Value MYR 3,885 m 2007 Total Revenue (est.) MYR 9,301 m

M A L A Y S I A’ S T O P 1 0

(16)

6. SIME DARBY BERHAD

Established in 1910, Sime Darby Berhad took its name from its 2 founders, William Middleton Sime and Henry Darby. Sime Darby has since made great strides and has grown from a single company providing a sole product and service in Malaysia, into a successful multinational company with principal activities in plantation, property, motors, industrial, energy and utilities. In 2007, 3 Malaysian giants, Golden Hope Plantations Berhad, Kumpulan Guthrie Berhad and Sime Darby Berhad successfully merged into the vehicle identity called Synergy Drive.

With this merger, it became one of the world’s largest listed oil palm plantation groups, accounting for nearly 6% of the total palm oil production in the world. Sime Darby also holds exclusive dealership Caterpillar rights in the Asia Pacific region and its Property Division is currently focusing on developing residential and commercial properties. Examples of carriers of the Sime Darby brand are Wisma Sime Darby building, PNB Darby Park, Darby Park Executive Suites, Sime Darby Convention Centre (“SDCC”), Sime Darby Enterprise Center, Sime Fresh (a sub-brand within the food division), Sime Tyres (product brand in manufacturing), Sime Darby Travel services, Sime Darby Engineering services, and Subang Jaya Medical Centre (a strongly endorsed sub-brand).

With a global footprint spanning across 20 countries (including Singapore, Australia, United Kingdom and Vietnam), it is supported by more than 100,000 employees all over the world. Sime Darby has been venturing into China, aiming to establish a strong foothold in the utilities and infrastructure sectors.

7. BUMIPUTRA-COMMERCE

HOLDINGS BERHAD

Bumiputra-Commerce Holdings Berhad (BCHB), previously known as Commerce Asset-Holding Berhad, has a heritage that began way back in 1924 in Kuching. BCHB is now the listed holding company for the CIMB Group, which carries out a wide range of business activities. The Group operations include consumer banking, investment banking, asset management, insurance products and services catered for various customers, from the smallest retail client to the largest corporations. Headquartered in Kuala Lumpur, CIMB operates its business through 3 main brand entities, namely CIMB Bank, CIMB Investment Bank, CIMB Islamic, as well as Niaga Bank in Indonesia. With about 7 million customers served by a total staff strength of over 25,000, the Group’s operations extend across 11 countries, with main markets in Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore.

CIMB in the recent years has transformed itself from one of Malaysia’s top investment banks to one of South East Asia’s leading universal banking groups. In 2007, the Group had focused its resources to achieve its long term aspiration of becoming “South East Asia’s most valued universal bank” based on 2 main themes: Optimization and Regionalization. CIMB is fast establishing its regional footprint, and was ranked 22nd in the 2007 Asian Banker poll on Asia Pacific’s 300 strongest banks. The new “CIMB Group” brand and its brand entities have collectively established themselves as a leading Malaysian brand in a very short period of time. All branches were rebranded as “CIMB Bank”, by August 2007 and diverse advertising mediums were undertaken to drive acceptance of the new brand.

M A L A Y S I A’ S T O P 1 0

2007 Enterprise Value MYR 50,263 m 2007 Trademark Value MYR 2,960 m 2007 Total Revenue MYR 28,220 m 2007 Enterprise Value MYR 40,971 m 2007 Trademark Value MYR 2,743 m 2007 Total Revenue MYR 8,352 m

(17)

9. PUBLIC BANK BERHAD

Public Bank was established back in 1966, and from the humble beginnings of a single branch, Public Bank has grown to cover a well distributed network of 241 full service bank branches nationwide. The bank is supported by more than 14,000 employees across Malaysia, Hong Kong, China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and Sri Lanka. As a premier banking group in Malaysia today, the Group has a diversified portfolio of banking and financial services, including commercial banking, retail wealth management and card businesses. It has earned recognition and trust for its strong financial performance, and, bagged 31 awards in 2007, including the “Best Domestic Bank in Malaysia 2007” by The Asset. 2007 was a landmark year for Public Bank as its pre-tax profits crossed the RM 3 billion mark for the first time.

Down through the years, Public Bank has positioned itself as the bank which is committed to making a difference in serving its customers and earning the loyalty from each one of them. The focus on customer care has been ingrained as part of its resources to increase customer satisfaction. The interlocking of the 2 octagons in the logo of the bank depict

8. TELEKOM MALAYSIA

Founded in 1946 as a Malayan Telecommunications Department, Telekom Malaysia has since expanded to become a leading communications corporation in Asia today. TM was first listed on the main board in 1990, and undertook several identity changes over the years. In 2005, marking its 15th anniversary, it went through a major brand transformation and TM was adopted as the new brand.

The TM Group underwent a recent demerger in 2007 into 2 business entities: RegionCo (TM International) and FixedCo (TM), of which the latter entity is being valued in this case. RegionCo would group TM’s regional mobile operations under TM International, domestic mobile operations under Celcom, and pursue listing status as a separate entity. On the other hand, FixedCo (TM) would keep hold of TM’s domestic interests in fixed line, voice, broadband, data and other non-telecommunication services. TM has a stronghold in the Malaysia market, with 95% and 96% market share in the fixed-line and broadband business respectively. TM’s success in the broadband business has been widely recognised and at the 2008 Frost & Sullivan Malaysia Telecom Awards, TM was awarded the Broadband Service Provider of the year. Furthermore, TM and the Government are spending a total of RM15.6 billion to ensure that Malaysia will have top quality, competitive high speed broadband infrastructure within the next ten years. TM also aspires to achieve 50% household broadband penetration rate by 2010.

In late 2007, TM chose Malaysian based Total Sports Asia (TSA) as its sports marketing agency. TSA will support TM’s sports and sponsorship strategy and activities. TM’s engagement in sports, including holding the title sponsorship of the Malaysian Football League, is driven by TM’s plan to build the nation, enhance its brand and develop new revenue avenues.

2007 Enterprise Value (est.) MYR 36,467 m 2007 Trademark Value MYR 2,621 m 2007 Total Revenue (est.) MYR 7,301 m

M A L A Y S I A’ S T O P 1 0

2007 Enterprise Value MYR 39,203 m 2007 Trademark Value MYR 2,577 m 2007 Total Revenue MYR 5,256 m

(18)

10. RESORTS WORLD BERHAD

Incorporated in 1965, Resorts World today plays a pivotal role in the development of Malaysia’s tourism industry by actively engaging in leisure and hospitality services. Genting Highland Resort, more popularly known as Genting – The City of Entertainment, is the currently the main face of the brand. Catered for families and holidaymakers, this leading highland resort offers 6 hotels, a theme park, 170 dining and shopping places, mega shows, and business convention facilities all at one location. Genting, a brand name synonymous with endless entertainment and fun, is gaining a strong foothold in the tourism industry, where it managed to draw 19.6 million visitors in 2007 from Malaysia and its neighbouring countries.

Resorts World leverages on the use of Information Technology and e-Commerce to enhance its overall business operations. Its website has proved to be a very successful online marketing channel. On average, over 29,000 unique visitors would access the website on a peak day, and online sales have increased by 23% in 2007. The Group’s customer loyalty programme has also expanded to reach 2.5 million cardholders in 2007, and is recognised at more than 2,200 locations in Malaysia, Singapore and Hong Kong.

As the proud winner of the World’s Leading Casino Resort (2005 and 2007) and 2008 Hospitality Asia Platinum Award, it is a testimony for its hard work and commitment towards quality and excellence. Besides this integrated resort, Resorts World has further extended its resort management expertise to include the Awana chain resort of hotels and operating two seaside properties in Malaysia. As of 30 April 2008, the Group also holds a 19.3% stake in Star Cruises Limited, a global cruise brand ranked as the 3rd largest cruise operator in the world.

Notes:

1. Since our report emphasises brands of Malaysian origin, the following brands have been excluded: • Carlsberg • Guinness-Anchor • Heineken • Pelikan • Jusco • Shell • KFC • Esso • Lafarge

2. There are many conglomerates in Malaysia that adopt monolithic branding strategy. Hence, Brand Finance has chosen to consolidate the individually listed entities of the holding company to better reflect the value of the master brand.

3. Due to the demerger of Telekom Malaysia in 2007, we have treated Celcom as a separate brand from TM, where it was included in last year’s brand value of TM as an entire group.

4. Although these brands are not listed on KLSE, they are included for their Malaysian origin and sizeable revenues. • Maxis

M A L A Y S I A’ S T O P 1 0

2007 Enterprise Value MYR 19,107 m 2007 Trademark Value MYR 2,260 m 2007 Total Revenue MYR 4,352 m

(19)

RANK PARENT COMPANY BRAND ENTERPRISE VALUE (MYR m) TRADEMARK VALUE (MYR m) BRAND/ ENTERPRISE VALUE BRAND RATING PETRONAS Genting Maybank Maxis TNB Sime Darby CIMB TM Public Bank Resorts World Celcom Malaysian Airlines IOI YTL Group Berjaya Group Lion Group Hong Leong Group DiGi Astro RHB Capital Proton Magnum MISC AmBank UEM KLK PLUS Expressways UMW Affin Holdings Alliance Financial Group MMC

The Star AirAsia EON Bank Group Kulim PPB Setia Hap Seng Tradewinds Boustead Holdings WCT Titan Chemicals Scomi Bank Islam OSK IJM Wah Seong KPJ Healthcare AmInvestment 413,928 34,165 51,470 39,390 61,856 50,263 40,971 20,640 39,203 19,107 34,410 3,766 38,647 26,797 14,693 15,438 17,939 18,323 9,600 14,360 3,117 4,477 38,864 9,230 11,850 14,799 24,009 8,431 4,911 3,980 33,171 2,134 6,432 5,359 3,643 12,534 5,707 2,806 9,245 7,535 3,344 3,734 2,453 1,439 1,869 6,517 2,172 1,058 3,700 8,279 4,175 4,141 3,348 3,241 2,960 2,743 2,621 2,577 2,260 2,191 2,073 1,892 1,748 1,714 1,587 1,574 1,477 1,347 993 969 968 828 792 759 618 560 440 363 355 354 343 332 321 310 302 274 268 260 255 250 246 239 226 216 215 208 191 191 2% 12% 8% 9% 5% 6% 7% 13% 7% 12% 6% 55% 5% 7% 12% 10% 9% 8% 14% 7% 31% 22% 2% 9% 6% 4% 2% 5% 7% 9% 1% 16% 5% 6% 9% 2% 5% 10% 3% 3% 7% 7% 10% 16% 12% 3% 10% 18% 5% PETRONAS Group Genting Bhd Malayan Banking Bhd Maxis Communications Bhd Tenaga Nasional Bhd Sime Darby Berhad

Bumiputra-Commerce Hldgs Bhd Telekom Malaysia Bhd

Public Bank Bhd Resorts World Bhd TM International Bhd Malaysian Airline System Bhd IOI Corporate Bhd

YTL Corporation Bhd Berjaya Corporation Bhd Lion Corporation Bhd Hong Leong Group DiGi.Com Bhd

ASTRO ALL ASIA NETWORKS pic RHB Capital Bhd

Proton Holdings Bhd Magnum Corporation Sdn Bhd MISC Bhd

AMMB Holdings Bhd UEM World Berhad Kuala Lumpur Kepong Bhd PLUS Expressways Bhd UMW Holdings Berhad Affin Holdings Berhad Alliance Financial Group Bhd MMC Corporation Bhd

Star Publications (Malaysian) Bhd AirAsia Bhd

EON Capital Bhd Kulim (Malaysia) Bhd PPB Group Berhad S P Setia Bhd Hap Seng Consolidated Tradewinds Corporation Bhd Boustead Holdings Bhd WCT Bhd

Titan Chemicals Corporation Bhd Scomi Group Bhd

Bimb Holdings Bhd OSK Holdings Bhd IJM Corp Bhd

Wah Seong Corporation Bhd KPJ Healthcare Berhad AmInvestment Group Bhd 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 A-AA+ AA-A A A+ AA-A+ A AA-BBB A A-A AA-BBB A A A+ A-A A+ A-BBB A A-A A-BBB A-A A-BBB A-A+ A BBB A-BBB A A+

(20)

Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) is a set of accounting standards issued or adopted by Malaysian Accounting Standards Board (MASB) for application by all entities other than private entities.

There are different definitions of ‘intangible assets’. According to Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 138 ‘Intangible Asset’ (revised from the International Accounting Standard (IAS) 38 ‘Intangible Asset’), an intangible asset is ‘an

identifiable non-monetary asset without physical substance held for use in the production or supply of goods or services, for rental to others, or for administrative purposes’. According to FRS 138, the definition of an intangible asset requires it to be:

A) Non-monetary

B) Without physical substance C) ‘Identifiable’

In order to be ‘identifiable’ it must either be separable (capable of being separated from the entity and sold, transferred or licensed) or it must arise from contractual or legal rights (irrespective of whether those rights are themselves ‘separable’). Intangible assets can be broadly grouped into three categories:

(1) Rights: leases; distribution agreements; employment contracts’ covenants’ financing arrangements; supply contracts; licenses; certifications; franchises.

(2) Relationships: trained and assembled workforce; customer and distribution relationships.

(3) Intellectual Property: trademarks; patents; copyrights’ proprietary technology (e.g. formulas; recipes; specifications; formulations; training programs; marketing strategies; artistic techniques; customer lists; demographic studies; product test results; business knowledge – processes; lead times; cost and pricing data; trade secrets and know-how). In addition, there is what is sometimes termed ‘Unidentified Intangible Assets’, including ‘internally generated goodwill’ (or ‘going concern value’). It is important to recognize the distinction between internally-generated and acquired intangible assets. Current accounting standards only allow acquired intangible assets to be recognized on the balance sheet provided that they meet the above mentioned criteria. i.e.; the internally generated intangibles of a company cannot be explicitly stated on its balance sheet.

This results in what is sometimes described as ‘internally generated goodwill’. This is the difference between the fair market value of a business and the value of its identifiable net assets. Although not an intangible asset in a strict sense (i.e. a controlled “resource” expected to provide future benefits – see below), this residual value is treated as an intangible asset in a business combination when it is converted into goodwill on the acquiring company’s balance sheet. Intangible assets that may be recognized on a balance sheet under FRS 138 are typically only a fraction of the total intangible asset value of a business, with the remaining value continuing to be classified as ‘goodwill’. Brands, if

acquired, can be identified under these rules and added to the balance sheet. This results in the unusual situation where internally-generated brands of the acquiree may be recognised on the acquirer’s balance sheet but the acquirer’s own internally-generated brands may not. For this reason, Brand Finance thinks there is a strong case for the inclusion of internally-generated brands on the balance sheet.

Brands fulfill the definition of intangible assets above, in that they are controlled by management, provide future economic benefits and are identifiable and therefore can be sold, transferred or licensed as appropriate. We are increasingly seeing companies taking advantage of this transferability by moving brands (including trademarks and other associated intellectual property, such as design rights and other marketing collateral) to special purpose vehicles, such as brand holding companies, for the purpose of raising finance and tax planning.

I N T A N G I B L E A S S E T S

(21)

Until 2001, no countries required recognition of acquired intangible assets separately from goodwill. International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 3 now requires that, on acquisition, intangible assets should be separately disclosed on the acquiring company’s balance sheet providing they meet the above criteria and if the value of the intangible asset can be determined reliably (FAS 141 introduced the same requirement for US companies four years earlier, in 2001). In 2005, all listed companies in EU member countries – as well many other countries - switched to IFRS. Listed companies in most major markets outside the US are now required to adapt or report under International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) but there are a number of notable exceptions such as Japan, South Korea, Switzerland, Canada and the major South American markets. The table below summarises the countries which do and do not currently require all listed companies to report under IFRS.

The accounting standards mean that the value of disclosed intangible assets is likely to increase in the future. Strong advocates of ‘fair value reporting’ believe that the changes should go further and that all of a company’s tangible and intangible assets and liabilities should regularly be measured at fair value and reported on the balance sheet, including internally generated intangibles such as brands and patents, so long as valuation methods and corporate governance are sufficiently rigorous.

Some go as far as to suggest that ‘internally generated goodwill’ should be reported on the balance sheet at fair value, meaning that management would effectively be required to report its own estimate of the value of the business at each year end together with supporting assumptions. However, the current international consensus is that internally generated intangible assets generally should not be recognised on the balance sheet. Under IFRS, certain intangible assets should be recognised, but only if they are in the “development” (as opposed to “research”) phase, with conditions on, for example, technical feasibility and the intention and ability to complete and use the asset. ‘Internally generated goodwill’, as well as internally generated “brands, mastheads, publishing titles, customer lists and items similar in substance”, may not be recognised.

F I N A N C I A L R E P O R T I N G O F I N T A N G I B L E A S S E T S

Yes

Australia, Belgium, Finland,

France,Germany, Hong Kong,

Italy,

Malaysia

, Netherlands,

Singapore, South Africa,

Africa, Spain, Sweden, UK

No

Brazil, Canada, China, India,

Japan, Malaysia, Mexico,

Russia, South Korea,

Switzerland, Taiwan, US

(22)

FRS 3: Allocating the cost of a business combination

In Malaysia, the Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 3 ‘Business Combination’ is consistent with IFRS 3 in all material aspects. The Malaysia FRS 3 is effective as at 1 January 2006. This FRS requires all business combinations within its scope to be accounted for using the purchase method. It replaces the old FRS 122 where permitted business combinations are to be accounted for using one of two methods: the merger method for combinations classified as merger and the acquisition method for combinations classified as acquisitions.

Under FRS 3, at the date of acquisition, an acquirer must measure the cost of the business combination by recognising the acquiree’s identifiable assets (tangible and intangible), liabilities and contingent liabilities at their fair value. Any difference between the total of the net assets acquired and the cost of acquisition is treated as goodwill (or negative goodwill).

The following classification of intangible assets under FRS 3 include:-• Artistic-related intangible assets

• Marketing-related intangible assets • Technology-based intangible assets • Customer-related intangible assets • Contract-based intangible assets

Goodwill:

After initial recognition of goodwill, FRS 3 requires that goodwill be recorded at cost less accumulated impairment charges. Whereas previously goodwill was amortised over its useful economic life, it is now subject to impairment testing at least once a year. Amortisation is no longer permitted.

Negative Goodwill:

Negative goodwill arises where the purchase price is deemed to be less than the fair value of the net assets acquired. It must be recognised immediately as a profit in the profit and loss account. However, before concluding that “negative goodwill” has arisen, FRS 3 requires that an acquirer should “reassess” the identification and measurement of the acquired identifiable assets and liabilities.

Impairment of Assets

The old FRS 136 ‘Impairment of Assets’ required the recoverable amount of an asset to be measured whenever there is an indication that the asset may be impaired. This means that an impairment test was only required if a ‘triggering event’ indicated that impairment might have occurred. However, under the revised rules, FRS 136 now also requires an annual impairment test is required for certain assets, namely:

• Goodwill acquired in a business combination

• Intangible assets with an indefinite useful economic life (e.g. strong brands) and intangible assets not yet available for use. The recoverable amount of these assets must be measured annually (regardless of the existence or

otherwise of an indicator of impairment) and at any other time when an indicator of impairment exists. Brands are one major class of intangible assets that are often considered to have indefinite useful economic lives. Where acquired brands are recognised on the balance sheet post acquisition, it is important to establish a robust and supportable valuation model, using best practice valuation techniques that can be consistently applied at each annual impairment review. There are also new disclosure requirements, the principal one being the disclosure of the key assumptions used in the calculation. Increased disclosure is required where a reasonably possible change in a key assumption would result in actual impairment.

(23)

Management

Perhaps the most important impact of new reporting standards has been on management accountability. Greater transparency, rigorous impairment testing and additional disclosure should mean more scrutiny both internally and externally. The requirement for the acquiring company to attempt to explain at least a part of what was previously lumped into “goodwill” should help analysts to analyse deals more closely and gauge whether management has paid a sensible price. The new standards are also having a significant impact on the way companies plan their acquisitions. When considering an acquisition, a detailed analysis of all the target company’s potential assets and liabilities is recommended to assess the impact on the consolidated group balance sheet and profit and loss post-acquisition.

Companies need to pay close attention to the likely classification and useful economic lives of the identifiable intangible assets in the target company’s business. This will have a direct impact on the future earnings of the acquiring group. In addition to amortisation charges for intangible assets with finite useful economic lives, impairment tests on assets with indefinite useful economic lives may lead to one-off charges, particularly if the acquired business falls short of expectations post-acquisition. The requirement for separate balance sheet recognition of intangible assets, together with impairment testing of those assets and also goodwill, is expected to result in an increase in the involvement of independent specialist valuers to assist with valuations and on appropriate disclosure.

Investors

The requirement for companies to attempt to identify what intangible assets they are acquiring as part of a corporate transaction may provide evidence as to whether a group has paid too much in a deal. Subsequent impairment tests may also shed light on whether the price paid was a good one for the acquiring company’s shareholders. Regular impairment testing is likely to result in a greater volatility in financial results. Significant one-off impairment charges may indicate that a company has overpaid for an acquisition and have the potential to damage the credibility of management in the eyes of the investment community. Analysts and investors are often skeptical about disclosed intangible assets. In the case of brand (and other intangible asset) valuation, where a high degree of subjectivity can exist, it will be important to demonstrate that best practice techniques have been applied and that the impairment review process is robust.

I M P A C T O N M A N A G E M E N T A N D I N V E S T O R S

(24)

22

Royalty Relief Method

The ‘Royalty Relief’ method is based on the notion that a brand holding company owns the brand and licenses it to an operating company. The notional price paid by the operating company to the brand company is expressed as a royalty rate. The NPV of all forecast royalties represents the value of the brand to the business. The attraction of this method is that it is based on commercial practice in the real world. It involves estimating likely future sales, applying an appropriate royalty rate to them and then discounting estimated future, post-tax royalties, to arrive at a NPV.

Brand Finance uses the ‘Royalty Relief’ method for two reasons:

• It is favoured by tax authorities and the courts because it calculates brand values by reference to be documented, third-party transactions.

• It can be done based on publicly available financial information.

Steps in the Royalty Relief brand valuation process

DkZgVaabVg`Zi

VcYG^h`6cVanh^h

&

'

HZ\bZci

6cVanh^h

HZ\bZci6

HZ\bZci7

HZ\bZci8

HZ\bZci6 HZ\bZci7 HZ\bZci8 GdnVain>cXdbZ 7gVcYVcY7gVcYZY 7jh^cZhhKVajZh &%% .% -% ,% +% *% )% (% '% &% % ;dgZXVhih GZkZcjZ 8dhih

(

;^cVcX^Va

6cVanh^h

) GdnVain

GViZ

HijYn

*

9^hXdjci

GViZ

+% JH J@ 6jhigVa^V >cY^V *' *( &% ,( & 8]^cV *- % =dc\@dc\ *' ( BVaVnh^V (+ , H^c\VedgZ )( , '* (' (, '+ )' )* *, *% &%% .% -% ,% +% *% )% (% '% &% % (+ , *, IVc\^WaZ6hhZih JcgZXdgYZYKVajZ IVc\^WaZ6hhZih 9^hXadhZY>ciVc\^WaZh 9^hXadhZY>ciVc\^WaZh JcgZXdgYZYKVajZ &* &+ The steps in the brand valuation process are as follows:

1. Obtain brand specific financial and revenue data

This quantitative data is obtained from Bloomberg, company data sources such as websites and annual reports, investment analyst and industry expert reports and other publicly available data sources.

(25)

2. Determine Market Related Revenue Forecast

Three forecast periods were created for each brand portfolio:

• Estimated financial results for 2007 using Institutional Brokers Estimate System (IBES) consensus forecasts. • Estimated four-year financial forecast (2008-2011), based on historic growth trends for the brand, IBES consensus

forecasts, and Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth forecasts.

• Perpetuity growth, based on a combination of growth expectations (IBES and OECD forecasts).

3. Determine Market Related Revenue Forecast

Steps in determining the notional Royalty Rate: Establish a royalty rate range for each industrial sector.

• Royalty rate ranges were set for each industry by reference to a review of comparable licensing agreements and industry norms. A review of publicly available licensing agreement indicates the royalty rates set between third

parties in arm’s length commercial transactions.

• Compare royalty rates with operating margins in the industrial sector.

• Fundamental profitability in each industrial sector influences the determination of royalty rate ranges. This must be taken into account when determining the royalty rate ranges. A ‘Rule of Thumb’ exists within the licensing industry (‘Rule of 25’), which states that, on average, a licensee should expect to pay between 25% and 40% of its expected profits for access to the licensed intellectual property.

• For example, if profit margin is 20%, an appropriate royalty rate should fall between 25% x 20% = 5% and

40% x 20% = 8%. The rule is based on heuristic evidence of a relationship between market royalty rates and margins earned in licensee businesses. Royalty rates may be higher or lower than 25% of profits, depending upon a variety of quantitative and qualitative factors that can and do affect commercial negotiations. When determining royalty rate ranges, the ‘25% rule’ is a useful indicator of what an appropriate royalty rate range might be in each industrial sector. • Conduct Brand Value Added (BVA®) analysis

• BVA® analysis is a research driven process, which estimates the proportion of income attributable to each category of intangible asset, including brand, to determine the proportion of margins, which should be attributed to the brand. This process uses a ‘Brand Power Matrix™’ to systematically map the relative importance of different tangible and intangible assets in the value creation process. The results of this BVA® analysis refine the margin analysis in determining royalty rate ranges.

• Establish the appropriate royalty rate within the range for each brand portfolio.

Having established the royalty rate range, it is necessary to pinpoint where in the range is appropriate for each brand

I M P A C T O N M A N A G E M E N T A N D I N V E S T O R S

(26)

‘ßrandßeta®’ analysis is a benchmarking study of the strength, risk and future potential of a brand relative to its competitor set. It is conceptually similar to a credit rating. Brand portfolios are awarded Brand Ratings based on their strength, risk and future earning potential.

A Brand Rating:

• Quantifies the strength and performance of the brand being valued . • Provides an indication of the risk attached to future earnings of the brand.

The Brand Finance plc Brand Ratings panel considered a variety of factors in this ‘ßrandßeta®’ analysis process. Factors include both ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ brand performance measures:

I. Input measures: • Brand Management • Brand Presence II. Brand Equity: • Familiarity • Functional Performance • Emotional Connection • Brand Preference III. Output measures: • Revenue Growth • Market Share • Profitability

• Analyst Rating Growth Probability • S&P Credit Rating

Brand Ratings incorporate both quantitative and qualitative data. Qualitative data is compiled by Brand Finance from secondary research. Quantitative data is sourced from Bloomberg and annual reports.

The final Brand Ratings are expressed as an index score from 0-100. Brand Ratings are also expressed alphabetically from AAA to D. AAA is a very strong and growing global brand. D is a sub-optimal or moribund brand.

(27)

Brand Rating Definitions

4. Calculate the notional future royalty income steam for each brand portfolio

This is calculated by applying the royalty rate, determined in step 3, to sales in the explicit forecast and perpetuity periods.

5. Calculate discount rate specific to each brand portfolio, taking account of its size, international presence,

reputation and Brand Rating

Brand Ratings are used to determine a Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC), debt costs, equity costs and the debt to equity ratio are all given a discount or premium based on the strength of the brand. The principle being that a strong brand should command a lower discount rate in the valuation calculation than a weak one.

6. Discount future royalty stream to a net present value (NPV)

The result is the brand value for inclusion in our table. Where enterprise values can be calculated by reference to public market information the brand value is expressed as a percentage of Enterprise Value (EV).

AAA

Extremely Strong

AA

Very Strong

A

Strong

BBB

Average

BB

Under-performing

B

Weak

CCC

Very Weak

CC

Extremely Weak

C

Failing

The ratings from AA to CCC can be altered by including a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to show their more detailed positioning in comparison with the general rating group.

(28)

Australia Brazil Canada Croatia Finland France Germany Greece Holland Hong Kong India Middle East Portugal Russia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Switzerland Turkey UK USA Tim Heberden Gilson Nunes Andrew Zimakas Borut Zemljic Jari Taipale Greg Linn Ferdy de Smeth Panos Michalopoulos Marc Cloosterman Rupert Purser Unni Krishnan Gautam Sen-Gupta Victor Mirabet Alexander Eremenko Dirk Kemp Victor Mirabet Ruchi Gunewardene Greg Linn Muhterem llguner David Haigh Hampton Bridwell Contact Details

Brand Finance is the leading independent intangible asset valuation and strategy firm, helping companies to manage their brands more intelligently for improved business results.

If you have further enquiries relating to this report or would like our assistance in articulating the study findings for your corporate communications, please contact:

Lucy Gwee, Managing Director l.gwee@brandfinance.com Josephine Wee, Director j.wee@brandfinance.com

For further information on Brand Finance’s services and valuation experience, please contact your local representatives as listed below:

Name of Contact Email Address t.heberden@brandfinance.com g.nunes@brandfinance.com a.zimakas@brandfinance.com b.zemljic@brandfinance.com j.taipale@brandfinance.com g.linn@brandfinance.com f.desmeth@brandfinance.com p.michalopoulos@brandfinance.com m.cloosterman@brandfinance.com r.purser@brandfinance.com u.krishnan@brandfinance.com g.sen-gupta@brandfinance.com v.mirabet@brandfinance.com a.eremenko@brandfinance.com d.kemp@brandfinance.com v.mirabet@brandfinance.com r.gunewardene@brandfinance.com g.linn@brandfinance.com m.ilguner@brandfinance.com d.haigh@brandfinance.com h.bridwell@brandfinance.com

Figure

Updating...

References

Updating...

Related subjects :