Per the article in the link below, the latest report by Brand Finance, a world leading independent brand valuation and strategy consultancy, revealed world's most valuable and strongest airline brands.
Highlights:
• American airlines continue to dominate in brand value
• Chinese airline brand values are taking off impressively
• Aeroflot remains the world’s strongest airline brand with AAA brand rating
• Lufthansa became the fastest growing brand value amongst the top ten

Any surprises for you regarding the ranking in the list?

https://ftnnews.com/aviation/34133-worl ... rands.html

Thanks for the info. I'm not a market analyst but I just have to stir the pot a little. Interesting that all the UK airlines have a significantly higher brand rating than the continental European ones. So maybe the Brexit doom and gloomsters haven't affected the airlines yet!!

How believable are these data though?

I'd love to know what some of their methods were, as I have a ton of trouble believing that "the world" would be anything more than passively familiar with the likes of Southwest, relative to airlines that actually fly to their continent (let alone country/city!)

....and while I'm sure that a billion Chinese might know Shenzhen Airlines, why would the other nearly 4billion people outside of Asia have any clue who they are, unless those people were either AvGeeks or make frequent southeastern Chinese travel? More so than Cathay, Swiss, KLM?? Wouldn't believe that for a second, without some manner of extraordinary explanation.

Juneyao Airlines more valuable than Swiss? I would like to try what those “analysts” smoked.

I'd group this in with Skytrax awards. I can't help but guess some digging would find links between this company and the supposed most valuable brands.

I'm not sure how they differentiate between most valuable brand and strongest brand either. I'd wager almost anyone in the world who has heard of an airline would have heard of Emirates (and have some vague belief that they're supposedly great), but would either have no idea who Aeroflot are or think they're a dubious airline. My wife flew Aeroflot once and most comments were either 'who?' or 'are they safe?'. Then their own ranking has them at 24th most valuable.

It's odd that Juneyao Airlines appear on the ranking which must be virtually unheard of outside China, but not far more well known ones named after countries like Vietnam Airlines, Alitalia, TAP Air Portugal, Finnair, or Malaysia Airlines. How are they grading their 'value'?

In fact there's 8 Chinese airlines in the top 50 of most valuable brands. Unlikely?

Oh please, come one, spare us a.netters more manure.
Where are these *experts* based? How are they connected to the top US3? Any connection to their shareholders?
How could Southwest -a purely domestic carrier- have a stronger brand than a global and internationally recognized carrier like Lufthansa?
To say that this piece of finance-crap is biased is a great understatement.

Etihad and Norwegian, which are on the verge of bankruptcy according to some here, are rated AAA (AA for Etihad). What should we think about that?

This is how they calculate brand value, based on their latest report:

Brand Finance calculates the values of the brands in its league tables using the Royalty Relief approach – a brand valuation method compliant with the industry standards set in ISO 10668.

This involves estimating the likely future revenues that are attributable to a brand by calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for its use, to arrive at a ‘brand value’ understood as a net economic benefit that a licensor would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.

The steps in this process are as follows:
1 Calculate brand strength using a balanced scorecard of metrics assessing Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and Business Performance. Brand strength is expressed as a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score on a scale of 0 to 100.
2 Determine royalty range for each industry, reflecting the importance of brand to purchasing decisions. In luxury, the maximum percentage is high, in extractive industry, where goods are often commoditised, it is lower. This is done by reviewing comparable licensing agreements sourced from Brand Finance’s extensive database.
3 Calculate royalty rate. The BSI score is applied to the royalty range to arrive at a royalty rate. For example, if the royalty range in a sector is 0-5% and a brand has a BSI score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given sector will be 4%.
4 Determine brand-specific revenues by estimating a proportion of parent company revenues attributable to a brand.
5 Determine forecast revenues using a function of historic revenues, equity analyst forecasts, and economic growth rates.
6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to derive brand revenues.
7 Brand revenues are discounted post-tax to a net present value which equals the brand value.

http://brandirectory.com/Brand-Finance- ... t-2018.pdf

If you can make sense of that, bravo!

steveinbc wrote:

... Interesting that all the UK airlines have a significantly higher brand rating than the continental European ones. So maybe the Brexit doom and gloomsters haven't affected the airlines yet!!

Maybe I'm misreading your comment but:
UK: ranks 8, 19,49 vs
EU: ranks 10,17, 18, 33, 38, 46, 47

Huh?

Customers like being abused. I am happy I lost faith in humanity a long time ago.

oldannyboy wrote:

Oh please, come one, spare us a.netters more manure.
Where are these *experts* based? How are they connected to the top US3? Any connection to their shareholders?
How could Southwest -a purely domestic carrier- have a stronger brand than a global and internationally recognized carrier like Lufthansa?
To say that this piece of finance-crap is biased is a great understatement.

It starts with a B and ends with a S. Fill the blanks

Are they connecting associated companies with the result? Like Qantas Frequent Flyer to QF? Of just the base airline?

Big differences between QF and Virgin there. Similar sized fleet both in a monopoly market.

Smells like paid for research...

The methodology doesn't even make sense

US3 brands all dropped in "value", CN3 each up double digits. Yeah, the whole concept sounds like a crock to me, but that part makes a little sense.

vhtje wrote:

I understand your point (and I largely agree with it) - except to add, if 1.4 billion people in China are very aware of Shenzen Airlines, that might be a lot more than the 750 million Europeans who are aware of Swiss and KLM. It should make no difference where the people are.

Can't say I agree with that, as unlike Shenzen Airlines (until recently), Swiss and KLM aren't limited to their home region.

People from places as widely-ranging as the Dutch Caribbean, to central Africa, to Indonesia are all intimately familiar with KLM for various reasons; as are people in the largest Chinese cities.

Which is why, as stated: even accounting for a billion+ Chinese people knowing ZH... there's no way it can numerically compare in brand recognition to an airline that's served five continents for the better part of a century, including China itself.

LAX772LR wrote:

How believable are these data though?

I'd love to know what some of their methods were, as I have a ton of trouble believing that "the world" would be anything more than passively familiar with the likes of Southwest, relative to airlines that actually fly to their continent (let alone country/city!)

....and while I'm sure that a billion Chinese might know Shenzhen Airlines, why would the other nearly 4billion people outside of Asia have any clue who they are, unless those people were either AvGeeks or make frequent southeastern Chinese travel? More so than Cathay, Swiss, KLM?? Wouldn't believe that for a second, without some manner of extraordinary explanation.

I understand your point (and I largely agree with it) - except to add, if 1.4 billion people in China are very aware of Shenzen Airlines, that might be a lot more than the 750 million Europeans who are aware of Swiss and KLM. It should make no difference where the people are. But it may account for what look like odd rankings in this survey: I presume in preparing this list, Brand Finance have used some formula based around population reach each airlines' home countries, and of each airlines' destinations served, among other factors.

I find it bizarre that the linked article does not indicate how Brand Finance came up with the figures or ranking.

Moral of the story, airlines cannot ignore PR budget.

As a former employee of Brand Finance, I would not give it a great deal of credibility

waly777 wrote:

Smells like paid for research...

The methodology doesn't even make sense

Probably based on number of likes by facebook and totally approved by the Zuckerberg Empire.

BartSimpson wrote:

steveinbc wrote:

... Interesting that all the UK airlines have a significantly higher brand rating than the continental European ones. So maybe the Brexit doom and gloomsters haven't affected the airlines yet!!

Maybe I'm misreading your comment but:
UK: ranks 8, 19,49 vs
EU: ranks 10,17, 18, 33, 38, 46, 47

Huh?

Hi Bart
I was reading the Brand Rating column where UK airlines show AAA and mainland European show AA. Just an observation to be mischievous and not to be taken too seriously
Thanks
Steve

This is another bogus survey. How can US airlines brand recognition be strong where they don't have near the reach that most European airlines have. I would say tops are airlines like Lufthansa, Air France and British Airways. None of theses surveys can be believed anymore because everything is bought and paid for with advertising dollars.

I have never heard of Brand Finance. I guees the data selected and the assumptions made determine the outcome. All I can say is I see some heritage quality Brands down the ranking that still are able to adk a premium based on their Brand value.

Maybe it is a US company trying to market itself with the largest local carriers?

EK and QR probably spend more on marketing in a year than their entire brand is worth...

the traditional Asian power brands Cathay and Singapore both dropped over 20%
what the heck is this based on?

I know of literally no one in NZ,INDIA,CHINA where I extensively travel that think
CZ/MU/AA are stronger brands than SQ/CX

what next?

Forever 21 is more powerful than PRADA?!

steveinbc wrote:

Hi Bart
I was reading the Brand Rating column where UK airlines show AAA and mainland European show AA. Just an observation to be mischievous and not to be taken too seriously
Thanks
Steve

Thanks for clarification. I didn't see the last two columns.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

This is how they calculate brand value, based on their latest report:

Brand Finance calculates the values of the brands in its league tables using the Royalty Relief approach – a brand valuation method compliant with the industry standards set in ISO 10668.

This involves estimating the likely future revenues that are attributable to a brand by calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for its use, to arrive at a ‘brand value’ understood as a net economic benefit that a licensor would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.

The steps in this process are as follows:
1 Calculate brand strength using a balanced scorecard of metrics assessing Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and Business Performance. Brand strength is expressed as a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score on a scale of 0 to 100.
2 Determine royalty range for each industry, reflecting the importance of brand to purchasing decisions. In luxury, the maximum percentage is high, in extractive industry, where goods are often commoditised, it is lower. This is done by reviewing comparable licensing agreements sourced from Brand Finance’s extensive database.
3 Calculate royalty rate. The BSI score is applied to the royalty range to arrive at a royalty rate. For example, if the royalty range in a sector is 0-5% and a brand has a BSI score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given sector will be 4%.
4 Determine brand-specific revenues by estimating a proportion of parent company revenues attributable to a brand.
5 Determine forecast revenues using a function of historic revenues, equity analyst forecasts, and economic growth rates.
6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to derive brand revenues.
7 Brand revenues are discounted post-tax to a net present value which equals the brand value.

http://brandirectory.com/Brand-Finance- ... t-2018.pdf

If you can make sense of that, bravo!

Now, there are a lot of buzzwords for the Bullshit-Bingo game!

Idk... I have met quite a few people here in the US that don't know what B6 is. I find it hard to believe that those same people would know what Hainan is, just as I'm sure someone in Russia isn't a very likely TrueBlue member...

But I could be wrong. Companies like this get paid a LOT of money to come up with these lists.

Wait... they get paid a lot of money.... to come up with... these lists.
Hm.

We all know which the american carriers are, after all we need to know which airlines to avoid eh?

I came from a company that was a “Brand Vaulation” agency, in fact, the one who invented the idea to begin with 30 years ago. Other agencies invested a lot trying to outdo us, Futurebrand for one. All that said I never heard of “Brand Finance”. I will look them up.
Unless they have a model I’m unaware of, determining the value of a brand (not just its assets, but the soft parts, like the name and its meaning to consumers and the financial community is like nailing Jell-O to a tree. It’s possible to come up with estimates, Ford used its brand during the Great Recession as collateral for loans, but it’s a lot of facts cobbled together with quantitative consumer and stakeholder data. Not easy and very expensive to conduct.
I’ll try and read up more on it.
Imagine Delta lost all its money, aircraft, employees, real estate and routes: how much is the brand name “Delta Air Lines” worth??? Perhaps more than United or Alitalia etc, but still very difficult to obtain.
How much was paid to own Pan American or VARIG?

Jayafe wrote:

Customers like being abused. I am happy I lost faith in humanity a long time ago.

oldannyboy wrote:

Oh please, come one, spare us a.netters more manure.
Where are these *experts* based? How are they connected to the top US3? Any connection to their shareholders?
How could Southwest -a purely domestic carrier- have a stronger brand than a global and internationally recognized carrier like Lufthansa?
To say that this piece of finance-crap is biased is a great understatement.

It starts with a B and ends with a S. Fill the blanks

Balls? Or do you mean it starts with a B and ends with a T?

vhtje wrote:

...if 1.4 billion people in China are very aware of Shenzen Airlines, that might be a lot more than the 750 million Europeans who are aware of Swiss and KLM. It should make no difference where the people are. But it may account for what look like odd rankings in this survey: I presume in preparing this list, Brand Finance have used some formula based around population reach each airlines' home countries, and of each airlines' destinations served, among other factors.

There are so many factors in the real world.
If 1.4billion people in China know of Shenzen Airlines, but only 3% of that population can afford to purchase a ticket (or have any actual need to leave their remote village), then that is beaten by 750 million Europeans, some 25% of whom might well fly somewhere in the next 12 mths, which in turn could be beaten by 360 million Americans some of whom fly almost as often as they visit Pizza Hut.
An airline like SouthWest doesn't need global recognition in order to sell millions of flights in it's geographically limited home market. That makes it's brand valuable in pure $$$, which I believe is the underlying purpose of this (dubious) survey.

If it simply came down to brand recognition from the widest number of people across the globe, regardless of whether they were ever likely to purchase a flight in the next 12 mths, then BA would be right up there, along with Air France and most of the legacy airlines. Hell, there are probably still plenty of people who would vote for Pan Am!

But that is a discussion for another thread....

SheikhDjibouti wrote:

vhtje wrote:

...if 1.4 billion people in China are very aware of Shenzen Airlines, that might be a lot more than the 750 million Europeans who are aware of Swiss and KLM. It should make no difference where the people are. But it may account for what look like odd rankings in this survey: I presume in preparing this list, Brand Finance have used some formula based around population reach each airlines' home countries, and of each airlines' destinations served, among other factors.

There are so many factors in the real world.
If 1.4billion people in China know of Shenzen Airlines, but only 3% of that population can afford to purchase a ticket (or have any actual need to leave their remote village), then that is beaten by 750 million Europeans, some 25% of whom might well fly somewhere in the next 12 mths, which in turn could be beaten by 360 million Americans some of whom fly almost as often as they visit Pizza Hut.
An airline like SouthWest doesn't need global recognition in order to sell millions of flights in it's geographically limited home market. That makes it's brand valuable in pure $$$, which I believe is the underlying purpose of this (dubious) survey.

If it simply came down to brand recognition from the widest number of people across the globe, regardless of whether they were ever likely to purchase a flight in the next 12 mths, then BA would be right up there, along with Air France and most of the legacy airlines. Hell, there are probably still plenty of people who would vote for Pan Am!

But that is a discussion for another thread....

While it may well be a discussion for another thread, the very first attempt to gain insight into brand valuation was called “The Landor Image Power Survey” which ranked the world’s top 500 brands, from #1 to #500. I am fairly certain it was the first attempt to do this. The very first bit of learning was that “top of mind recall” or “brand recognition” was unimportant vs brand relevance and differentiation. TWA had great top of mind recall but wasn’t seen as different, Rolls Royce had decent “top of mind” scores but was NOT very relevant (different, absolutely) but the price made the brand relevant to few.
For a brand to carry a high dollar value it had to have both, but also be held in high esteem and well understood. To sight an obvious example: Apple would most likely score very high on all four, nailing an actual dollar worth to Apple however is extraordinarily difficult. It would be very high, but HOW HIGH???
I think size doesn’t matter much. AA is the biggest by most measures but probably wouldn’t score as high as Singapore in being Different, Relevant, Esteemed and Well Understood.
But companies and consumer products do want that hard number. Clearly we all will pay a premium for a brand we know to be different and better. I for one would never use any other ketchup other than Heinz, and I’d pay much more for it (within reason) over private label.

Just to join the bandwagon - this survey is absolute crap, paid for by someone close to the US3, as we call them here on a.net

Just to consider the name "United" - who can associate anything with that? There was British United Airlines, and maybe many others with similar use of the "united" word, but throughout the non-USA world, "United" is almost meaningless

"American Airlines" is for most a synonym of "american airlines" - it is not the name of an airline

"Delta" - well, are there more a.net freaks or mathematicians in this world? Or followers of the Greek alphabet? At least, in ATC-speak, "Delta" is quite prominent

If the Americans really need a US airline at the top of this list, then it is quite simple - PanAm. That has world-wide recognition, and is still referred to in these days!

IMHO, the real ones include Pan Am, BOAC, Alitalia, Aeroflot, Lufthansa, Air France (and now Emirates). These airlines featured in Hollywood films, in TV adverts, and are in many of our subconscious, especially those of us of a certain age!

My most recent favourite airline - VietJet! Never knew of their existence until a trip to Vietnam in 2013. How well is it know outside of Vietnam, and outside of a.net? Their air hostess uniforms are great, the cabin crew look great, they are full of enthusiasm and good humour, and they make every flight a pleasure, even the shortest ones!

steveinbc wrote:

BartSimpson wrote:

steveinbc wrote:

... Interesting that all the UK airlines have a significantly higher brand rating than the continental European ones. So maybe the Brexit doom and gloomsters haven't affected the airlines yet!!

Maybe I'm misreading your comment but:
UK: ranks 8, 19,49 vs
EU: ranks 10,17, 18, 33, 38, 46, 47

Huh?

Hi Bart
I was reading the Brand Rating column where UK airlines show AAA and mainland European show AA. Just an observation to be mischievous and not to be taken too seriously
Thanks
Steve

Try reading the % change column instead.

Just like every other ranking survey thread on here, everybody thinks that they are right and the data is wrong. Give it a rest already. It doesn't affect your life, so why let it bug you? There are more important things in life than to worry about rankings. Take it easy.

Tucker1 wrote:

Just like every other ranking survey thread on here, everybody thinks that they are right and the data is wrong. Give it a rest already. It doesn't affect your life, so why let it bug you? There are more important things in life than to worry about rankings. Take it easy.

Thanks for the platitudes. I guess you are the life and soul of all parties you go to, and are the one who has to explain sarcasm to your colleagues!

What are your 3 favourite world-renowned airlines that you have used first hand?

sassiciai wrote:

Just to join the bandwagon - this survey is absolute crap, paid for by someone close to the US3, as we call them here on a.net

Just to consider the name "United" - who can associate anything with that? There was British United Airlines, and maybe many others with similar use of the "united" word, but throughout the non-USA world, "United" is almost meaningless

"American Airlines" is for most a synonym of "american airlines" - it is not the name of an airline

"Delta" - well, are there more a.net freaks or mathematicians in this world? Or followers of the Greek alphabet? At least, in ATC-speak, "Delta" is quite prominent

If the Americans really need a US airline at the top of this list, then it is quite simple - PanAm. That has world-wide recognition, and is still referred to in these days!

IMHO, the real ones include Pan Am, BOAC, Alitalia, Aeroflot, Lufthansa, Air France (and now Emirates). These airlines featured in Hollywood films, in TV adverts, and are in many of our subconscious, especially those of us of a certain age!

My most recent favourite airline - VietJet! Never knew of their existence until a trip to Vietnam in 2013. How well is it know outside of Vietnam, and outside of a.net? Their air hostess uniforms are great, the cabin crew look great, they are full of enthusiasm and good humour, and they make every flight a pleasure, even the shortest ones!

Very interesting take on the ranking with spice of humor
Enjoyed it

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

This is how they calculate brand value, based on their latest report:

Brand Finance calculates the values of the brands in its league tables using the Royalty Relief approach – a brand valuation method compliant with the industry standards set in ISO 10668.

This involves estimating the likely future revenues that are attributable to a brand by calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for its use, to arrive at a ‘brand value’ understood as a net economic benefit that a licensor would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.

The steps in this process are as follows:
1 Calculate brand strength using a balanced scorecard of metrics assessing Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and Business Performance. Brand strength is expressed as a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score on a scale of 0 to 100.
2 Determine royalty range for each industry, reflecting the importance of brand to purchasing decisions. In luxury, the maximum percentage is high, in extractive industry, where goods are often commoditised, it is lower. This is done by reviewing comparable licensing agreements sourced from Brand Finance’s extensive database.
3 Calculate royalty rate. The BSI score is applied to the royalty range to arrive at a royalty rate. For example, if the royalty range in a sector is 0-5% and a brand has a BSI score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given sector will be 4%.
4 Determine brand-specific revenues by estimating a proportion of parent company revenues attributable to a brand.
5 Determine forecast revenues using a function of historic revenues, equity analyst forecasts, and economic growth rates.
6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to derive brand revenues.
7 Brand revenues are discounted post-tax to a net present value which equals the brand value.

http://brandirectory.com/Brand-Finance- ... t-2018.pdf

If you can make sense of that, bravo!

Where's VC10er when you need him???

sassiciai wrote:

Tucker1 wrote:

Just like every other ranking survey thread on here, everybody thinks that they are right and the data is wrong. Give it a rest already. It doesn't affect your life, so why let it bug you? There are more important things in life than to worry about rankings. Take it easy.

Thanks for the platitudes. I guess you are the life and soul of all parties you go to, and are the one who has to explain sarcasm to your colleagues!

What are your 3 favourite world-renowned airlines that you have used first hand?

Just saying it's not life or death. I was interested in seeing the rankings, but the negativity is kind of a downer. I do enjoy flying Sun Country and Delta though.

Tucker1 wrote:

sassiciai wrote:

Tucker1 wrote:

Just like every other ranking survey thread on here, everybody thinks that they are right and the data is wrong. Give it a rest already. It doesn't affect your life, so why let it bug you? There are more important things in life than to worry about rankings. Take it easy.

Thanks for the platitudes. I guess you are the life and soul of all parties you go to, and are the one who has to explain sarcasm to your colleagues!

What are your 3 favourite world-renowned airlines that you have used first hand?

Just saying it's not life or death. I was interested in seeing the rankings, but the negativity is kind of a downer. I do enjoy flying Sun Country and Delta though.

Is that the Sun Country that flies to twice as many world-wide destinations as TK and EK combined? Or is it the other one, that struggles for recognition in, er , Sun Country? (where's that, when it's at home?)

The other one, that's the one that really makes the difference, right?

sassiciai wrote:

Tucker1 wrote:

sassiciai wrote:

Thanks for the platitudes. I guess you are the life and soul of all parties you go to, and are the one who has to explain sarcasm to your colleagues!

What are your 3 favourite world-renowned airlines that you have used first hand?

Just saying it's not life or death. I was interested in seeing the rankings, but the negativity is kind of a downer. I do enjoy flying Sun Country and Delta though.

Is that the Sun Country that flies to twice as many world-wide destinations as TK and EK combined? Or is it the other one, that struggles for recognition in, er , Sun Country? (where's that, when it's at home?)

The other one, that's the one that really makes the difference, right?

I find Sun Country a great airline to fly with, worldwide or not. They do a great job. Again, just lighten up, everything will be okey dokey.

If you want a quiet, calm life, then don't enter threads where people express opinions, where you claim not to have one! Maybe enjoy Sun Country, but stay away from "world-wide" threads, OK!

Tucker1 wrote:

Just like every other ranking survey thread on here, everybody thinks that they are right and the data is wrong.

...probably because they have sufficient life/business experience to know just how easily "data" can be manipulated to show essentially whatever is desired, by whoever is paying for that data to be presented.

joeycapps wrote:

Idk... I have met quite a few people here in the US that don't know what B6 is. I find it hard to believe that those same people would know what Hainan is, just as I'm sure someone in Russia isn't a very likely TrueBlue member...

But I could be wrong. Companies like this get paid a LOT of money to come up with these lists.

Wait... they get paid a lot of money.... to come up with... these lists.
Hm.

B6 is Jet Blue's IATA Designation. Ask them about JET BLUE and you'll get a different answer.

sassiciai wrote:

Just to join the bandwagon - this survey is absolute crap, paid for by someone close to the US3, as we call them here on a.net...

Now it is a crap because US3 took first three spots???

Let me break it down for you.
1) Every privately manged aviation rating is a paid crap, this includes safety, cabin, service quality just to name a few.
2) Every government managed aviation metric is an outdated irrelevant/incomplete crap which doesn't tell the whole story but enables everyone to tell a story.

Isn't UK the epicenter for all this data collection and crunching?
When the real aviation(like making wings/engines) leaves UK, production of such ratings/white papers/brand management will be the bread and butter.

Maybe the data is flawed, maybe it isnt, it is just a survey, not the end all to be all. Is there much difference on the list between brand value and airline size?

Why is it surprising the US3 top the list? They are massively larger than the other brands. This isnt a brand value per passenger flown. This is raw brand value. Doesn't seem so far off.

steveinbc wrote:

Thanks for the info. I'm not a market analyst but I just have to stir the pot a little. Interesting that all the UK airlines have a significantly higher brand rating than the continental European ones. So maybe the Brexit doom and gloomsters haven't affected the airlines yet!!

Unfortunately, many believe the MSM and buy into the hysteria.

It's the United Kingdom!!...there is a reason why we kept the pound . I remember years ago before the EURO there was talk that the UK would leave the EU one day. With that said, I think Brexit will be cancelled at some point.

Big well done to the US3! The US airline industry is the best and they do everything right I say that coming from Europe

steveinbc wrote:

Thanks for the info. I'm not a market analyst but I just have to stir the pot a little. Interesting that all the UK airlines have a significantly higher brand rating than the continental European ones. So maybe the Brexit doom and gloomsters haven't affected the airlines yet!!

Difference in culture imho.

airzona11 wrote:

Why is it surprising the US3 top the list? They are massively larger than the other brands. This isnt a brand value per passenger flown. This is raw brand value. Doesn't seem so far off.

I wonder if the state of competition means anything here too? BA almost has a monopoly at LHR, Emirates is dominating in Dubai and competition in the US is pretty low at the moment. Looking down the list, many of the lesser airlines face a lot more competition in their home airports than the highest ranking ones.

But ultimately, this is just a ranking of what a bunch of businessmen would want to pay for the different brands. It says nothing about the actual performance or quality of the airlines.

SCQ83 wrote:

Juneyao Airlines more valuable than Swiss? I would like to try what those “analysts” smoked.

No kidding!