Table of Contents
Overview
-
- What you need to know
- Products covered in this report
Executive Summary
-
- Market leaders dominate on usage
-
- Figure 1: Top brands by overall usage, January 2014-October 2016
- Functional, familiar brands more capable of generating trust
-
- Figure 2: Top brands by agreement with “A brand that I trust”, January 2014-October 2016
- Most differentiated brands skewed towards premium brands
-
- Figure 3: Top brands by perceived differentiation (net of agreement with “It stands out as being somewhat different from other brands” and “It’s a unique brand which really stands out from other brands”), January 2014-October 2016
- Premium brands often more likely to satisfy
-
- Figure 4: Top brands by proportion of positive endorsements among users (net of “good” and “excellent” experience), January 2014-October 2016
- Household staples earn most preference
-
- Figure 5: Top brands by brand commitment (net of “I prefer this brand over others” and “This is a favourite brand”), January 2014-October 2016
- Brands need the chance to demonstrate quality
-
- Figure 6: Top brands by agreement with “A brand that has consistently high quality”, January 2014-October 2016
- Technology is a rapidly changing sector
-
- Figure 7: Top brands by agreement with “A brand that is innovative”, January 2014-October 2016
- Niche beauty brands able to convey ethical messaging
-
- Figure 8: Top brands by agreement with “Ethical”, January 2014-October 2016
- What we think
Brand Overview – What You Need to Know
-
- FMCG and retailers dominate usage but digital shift evident
- Functional, familiar brands more capable of generating trust
- Different ways to promote a unique image
- Premium brands often more likely to satisfy
- Household staples earn most preference
Brand Usage
-
- Market leaders enjoy high usage
-
- Figure 9: Top brands by overall usage, January 2014-October 2016
- Google and Microsoft shake things up
-
- Figure 10: Top brands by usage in the last 12 months, January 2014-October 2016
- Technology brands further increasing involvement in lifestyles
-
- Figure 11: Top brands by usage described as “All the time”, January 2014-October 2016
Brand Trust
-
- Usage helps to boost trust
-
- Figure 12: Top brands by agreement with “A brand that I trust”, January 2014-October 2016
- Amazon goes from strength to strength
- NIVEA Sun benefits from brand name and functionality
- Technology influence apparent
Brand Differentiation
-
- Premium brands considered to stand out
-
- Figure 13: Top brands by perceived differentiation (net of agreement with “It stands out as being somewhat different from other brands” and “It’s a unique brand which really stands out from other brands”), January 2014-October 2016
- eBay and IKEA offer something different
- Unique brands more skewed towards premium
-
- Figure 14: Top brands by agreement with “It’s a unique brand which really stands out from other brands”, January 2014-October 2016
Brand Satisfaction and Recommendation
-
- Premium brands most likely to satisfy
- Amazon comes out on top
-
- Figure 15: Top brands by proportion of positive endorsements among users (net of “Good” and “Excellent” experience), January 2014-October 2016
- Figure 16: Top brands by proportion of excellent reviews, January 2014-October 2016
- More functional brands likely to earn recommendation
-
- Figure 17: Top brands by proportion of users who would recommend the brand, January 2014-October 2016
- Clear pattern between satisfaction and recommendation
-
- Figure 18: Proportion of users who would recommend the brand, by proportion of users who describe their experience as “Excellent” or “Good”, January 2014–October 2016
Brand Preference
-
- Amazon’s strong all-round performance promotes commitment
-
- Figure 19: Top brands by brand commitment (net of “I prefer this brand over others” and “This is a favourite brand”), January 2014-October 2016
- Preference built on strong foundations
- Usage is potentially most important factor
Quality and Reputation
-
- Market leaders have a perception of quality
-
- Figure 20: Top brands by agreement with “A brand that has consistently high quality”, January 2014-October 2016
- Quality and reputation interlinked
-
- Figure 21: Top brands by agreement with “A brand that has a good reputation”, January 2014-October 2016
-
- Figure 22: Agreement with “A brand that has consistently high quality”, by agreement with “A brand that has a good reputation”, January 2014-October 2016
Innovation
-
- Tech brands dominate perception of innovation
-
- Figure 23: Top brands by agreement with “A brand that is innovative”, January 2014-October 2016
- Müller Corner and Twinings represent FMCG brands
Customer Service
-
- Still a need for traditional customer service
-
- Figure 24: Top brands by agreement with “A brand that has great customer service”, January 2014-October 2016
Value
-
- Value not necessarily about price
-
- Figure 25: Top brands by agreement with “A brand that offers good value”, January 2014-October 2016
- Retailers easier to judge than products
Ethics
-
- Niche beauty brands among the most ethical
-
- Figure 26: Top brands by agreement with “Ethical”, January 2014-October 2016
- Ecover considered a leader in perceived ethicality
- Other initiatives promote ethical image
Sector Review – What You Need To Know
-
- FMCG sectors follow a similar pattern
- Fallout of financial services crash still impacting brands
- Amazon dominates retail sector
- Streaming brands upsetting the apple cart
- Consumers becoming more aligned with tech brands
Automotive
-
- Ford leads automotive sector on usage metrics
-
- Figure 27: Brand usage metrics for the automotive sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Exclusive brands tend to fare best
- Ford’s position of strength likely to continue
- The AA’s functionality may assist with recommendation
-
- Figure 28: Key brand metrics for the automotive sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Lack of engagement results in lower scores across sector
-
- Figure 29: Brand attitudes in the automotive sector, January 2014-October 2016
Beauty and Personal Care
-
- Colgate leads on usage in fragmented BPC sector
-
- Figure 30: Brand usage metrics for the BPC sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Colgate’s familiarity translates into preference
- Chanel’s glamour creates differentiated image
- More functional brands create more recommendation
-
- Figure 31: Key brand metrics for the BPC sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Colgate has particularly strong image
- The Body Shop and Green People have ethical associations
-
- Figure 32: Brand attitudes in the BPC sector, January 2014-October 2016
Drink
-
- CSD brands enjoy high usage in drinks sector
-
- Figure 33: Brand usage metrics for the drink sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Recognised drinks brands dominate key metrics
- Premium alcohol brands generate satisfaction
-
- Figure 34: Key brand metrics for the drink sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Innocent known for innovating and ethics
-
- Figure 35: Brand attitudes in the drink sector, January 2014-October 2016
Fashion
-
- Exclusivity means lower usage in fashion sector
- Nike and adidas closely matched
-
- Figure 36: Brand usage metrics for the fashion sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Exclusivity also impacts on brand preference
- Aspirational, luxury element boosts other traits
-
- Figure 37: Key brand metrics for the fashion sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Quality and status of fashion sector evident
-
- Figure 38: Brand attitudes in the fashion sector, January 2014-October 2016
Finance
-
- Post Office most likely to have been used in finance
- Barclays most likely to be regularly engaged with
-
- Figure 39: Brand usage metrics for the financial services sector, January 2014-October 2016
- American Express stands out
- Nationwide’s building society status benefits its image
- Non-traditional brands go beyond expectations
-
- Figure 40: Key brand metrics for the financial services sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Detached brands avoid recession hangover
-
- Figure 41: Brand attitudes in the financial services sector, January 2014-October 2016
Food
-
- Heinz most eaten brand in food sector
-
- Figure 42: Brand usage metrics for the food sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Magnum’s treat offering helps to boost satisfaction
- Consumers loyal to Heinz
-
- Figure 43: Key brand metrics for the food sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Heinz dominates apart from on ethics
- Müller Corner most likely to be seen as innovative
-
- Figure 44: Brand attitudes in the food sector, January 2014-October 2016
Foodservice
-
- McDonald’s convenient image boosts usage in foodservice sector
-
- Figure 45: Brand usage metrics for the foodservice sector, January 2014-October 2016
- McDonald’s likely to keep advantage
- YO! Sushi’s offering creates differentiation
- Recommendation likely to be influenced by accessibility
-
- Figure 46: Key brand metrics for the foodservice sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Established brands have all-round strength
- Pret A Manger’s ethical initiatives pay dividends
-
- Figure 47: Brand attitudes in the foodservice sector, January 2014-October 2016
Household Care
-
- Functionality of household sector creates usage
-
- Figure 48: Brand usage metrics for the household care sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Household sector gains brand preference
- Yankee Candle growth reflected in high satisfaction
- Dyson seen as particularly different
-
- Figure 49: Key brand metrics for the household care sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Fairy dominates but Ecover leads on ethics
-
- Figure 50: Brand attitudes in the household care sector, January 2014-October 2016
Media
-
- Daily Mail most read media title
-
- Figure 51: Brand usage metrics for the media sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Men’s Health benefits from straightforward offering
-
- Figure 52: Key brand metrics for the media sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Media brands viewed with suspicion
- Good Housekeeping benefits from all-round image
- Vogue’s fashion focus leads to quality, innovative image
- The Guardian leads on ethics
-
- Figure 53: Brand attitudes in the media sector, January 2014-October 2016
Retail
-
- Amazon dominates retail arena
-
- Figure 54: Brand usage metrics for the retail sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Amazon seeks to increase touchpoints
-
- Figure 55: Key brand metrics for the retail sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Lush dominates ethical space
- Mothercare offers care to select group of consumers
-
- Figure 56: Brand attitudes in the retail sector, January 2014-October 2016
Technology Products
-
- Google and Microsoft most used tech brands
-
- Figure 57: Brand usage metrics for the technology product sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Apple enthuses users but Samsung more likely to be recommended
- Google’s favouritism bodes well for expansion into other categories
-
- Figure 58: Key brand metrics for the technology product sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Apple’s innovative element is evident
- Samsung’s combination of quality and affordability creates positive image
-
- Figure 59: Brand attitudes in the technology product sector, January 2014-October 2016
Technology Service Providers
-
- Established tech service providers brands create more usage in
-
- Figure 60: Brand usage metrics for the technology service providers sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Sky maintains preference but faces pressure from new competitors
-
- Figure 61: Key brand metrics for the technology service provider sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Netflix outscores brands in tech service provider sector
- Sky still maintains innovative edge
-
- Figure 62: Brand attitudes in the technology service provider sector, January 2014-October 2016
Travel
-
- Travel brands struggle to create usage opportunities
-
- Figure 63: Brand usage metrics for the travel sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Full-service airlines seen in favourable light
- Premier Inn most likely to be recommended
-
- Figure 64: Key brand metrics for the travel sector, January 2014-October 2016
- Positive brand image does not always translate into usage advantage
-
- Figure 65: Brand attitudes in the travel sector, January 2014-October 2016
Brand Leaders – What You Need to Know
-
- Amazon is archetypal brand leader
- Consumers are used to Heinz’s success
- Fairy meets consumer needs
- Colgate is moving with the times
- Google inspires confidence
- Samsung’s strong brand image may be at risk
- British Airways’ national roots provide a benefit
Amazon
-
- Amazon dominates brand attributes
- Amazon image is steadfast
-
- Figure 66: Consumer agreement with selected attributes in relation to Amazon, March 2012–June 2016
- Amazon constantly innovating
- Amazon set to fly
- Satisfaction remains high
-
- Figure 67: Proportion of positive endorsements (net of “good” and “excellent” responses) and proportion of excellent responses for Amazon, March 2012-June 2016
Heinz
-
- Heinz’s heritage in different categories boosts exposure
- Consumers familiar with Heinz as a market leader
-
- Figure 68: Value sales of Heinz in the Soup, Tables Sauces and Pasta categories, 2015
- Consistent NPD ensures an innovative image too
-
- Figure 69: New product launches by Heinz, by launch type, 2011-15
Fairy
-
- Fairy image built on years of heritage
-
- Figure 70: Selected attributes for Fairy, January 2013-February 2016
- Different consumer mindset means second place in machine segment
Colgate
-
- Colgate offers reliability and comfort
- Market share translates into brand image
- Competitors can compete on expertise, but not heritage
- Colgate keeps pace as technology changes
-
- Figure 71: Agreement with “A brand that is innovative” for Colgate and Oral-B, November 2011-April 2016
- Colgate’s accessibility promotes strong image
-
- Figure 72: Usage of selected oral care brands, by household income, April 2016 and March 2015*
-
- Digital lifestyles influence Google’s success
- Traditional influencers still apply
- Google inspires confidence
-
- Figure 73: Agreement with selected attributes for Google, June 2016
- Google unaffected by tax issues
-
- Figure 74: Topic cloud around mentions of Google, January-October 2016
Samsung
-
- Samsung is a well-rounded brand
- Impact of a difficult 2016 yet to be discovered
-
- Figure 75: Proportion of online conversation around the Samsung brand, January 2012-October 2016
-
- Figure 76: Topic cloud around Samsung mentions, January 2012-October 2016
- Samsung image has been improving
-
- Figure 77: Key brand metrics for Samsung, November 2011-June 2016
-
- Figure 78: Selected brand attributes for Samsung, November 2011-June 2016
- Mobile device ownership a huge boon to Samsung
-
- Figure 79: Ownership of mobile phones, January 2012-July 2016
- Samsung in unprecedented waters
British Airways
-
- British links boost BA’s brand image
-
- Figure 80: Agreement with selected attributes for British Airways, July 2016
- Long- and short-haul flights promotes quality and accessibility
- British Airways image remains steady
-
- Figure 81: Selected attributes of British Airways, May 2012- July 2016
- Safety a potentially important attribute to have
-
- Figure 82: Proportion of all online conversation surrounding British Airways, January 2012-October 2016
Challenger Brands – What You Need to Know
-
- Netflix makes an immediate impression
- Dyson’s innovation opens up opportunities
- First Direct leads on excellent reviews
Netflix
-
- Netflix makes a splash
- TV viewing habits shifting
-
- Figure 83: Media purchases of TV and streaming services, June 2015 and June 2016
- Netflix suits a younger audience
-
- Figure 84: Usage of Netflix and Sky, by age group, January 2016
- Netflix has a cost advantage
- Online conversation guided by content
-
- Figure 85: Proportion of online conversation around Netflix, January 2012-October 2016
- Figure 86: Topic cloud around Netflix, January 2012-October 2016
- Clarkson poses a threat
Dyson
-
- Dyson noted for innovation
-
- Figure 87: Agreement with selected attributes for Dyson, July 2015
- Haircare represents a new area of focus
- New Dyson store launches
-
- Figure 88: Dyson’s Oxford Street store, July 2016
- Sir James Dyson acts as a figurehead
-
- Figure 89: Online mentions of Dyson, January 2012-October 2016
- Influence of James Dyson may be set to increase
First Direct
-
- First Direct’s proportion of excellent reviews sets standard
- A challenge to break into mainstream
-
- Figure 90: Top brands by agreement with “excellent” in the financial services sector, July 2014-May 2016
- Customer service offers opportunities but also drawbacks
-
- Figure 91: Most important qualities when choosing a provider – ‘Any selected’, August 2016
- More openness to branchless banking
Appendix – Data Sources, Abbreviations and Supporting Information
-
- Abbreviations
Appendix – Brands Covered
Back to top