Post by account_disabled on Mar 12, 2024 8:58:29 GMT
Those who invest in acquisitions of companies or parts of them through shareholdings expect that these will repay their investment with interest. In doing this, each operator in this market has evaluation methods that allow him to look for investments where there is a real prospect of profit. In past decades it was the name of the brand (or the brands it owned) that established part of the value and security on the investment and companies were also purchased on the basis of this precious element. This practice has changed in the last 10 years.
This is highlighted by the 'Brand Britain' study by Markables , which reports how in 2005 the India Mobile Number Data value of the brand , in company acquisitions, accounted for 25% of the total value of the company. Already in 2014 this value had dropped to 13% of the total value of the company. At the same time, in the same period, another factor has grown significantly, "the value of the relationship with the customer", which stands from 12% to 24%. According to Chrisof Binder , managing partner of Markables, “with the tools we have today in marketing it is easier to increase the value of the relationship with customers. Today, investors reward companies that invest in relationships with buyers more than in brand value .
I wanted to ask one of the leading Italian finance (and digital) experts, Francesco Carlà , how he interprets the increase in the value of relationships to the detriment of the brand: “My idea on the topic is simple: the strength of the brand also lies in its relationships with consumers. Direct, digital (simulated) and symbolic. Brands only have to decide how to invest, with which media and in which forms, part of the margins of their business. This is the most important thing to decide and measure.” Why this shift in value from the brand to the relationship with the customer? Investors have understood that in the coming years people will buy based on the relationships and support that companies are able to guarantee to their customers. As Marshall McLuan theorized, the medium is the message, because it favors the development of a mindset . Today we have different media that allow us to dialogue with people and brands.
This is highlighted by the 'Brand Britain' study by Markables , which reports how in 2005 the India Mobile Number Data value of the brand , in company acquisitions, accounted for 25% of the total value of the company. Already in 2014 this value had dropped to 13% of the total value of the company. At the same time, in the same period, another factor has grown significantly, "the value of the relationship with the customer", which stands from 12% to 24%. According to Chrisof Binder , managing partner of Markables, “with the tools we have today in marketing it is easier to increase the value of the relationship with customers. Today, investors reward companies that invest in relationships with buyers more than in brand value .
I wanted to ask one of the leading Italian finance (and digital) experts, Francesco Carlà , how he interprets the increase in the value of relationships to the detriment of the brand: “My idea on the topic is simple: the strength of the brand also lies in its relationships with consumers. Direct, digital (simulated) and symbolic. Brands only have to decide how to invest, with which media and in which forms, part of the margins of their business. This is the most important thing to decide and measure.” Why this shift in value from the brand to the relationship with the customer? Investors have understood that in the coming years people will buy based on the relationships and support that companies are able to guarantee to their customers. As Marshall McLuan theorized, the medium is the message, because it favors the development of a mindset . Today we have different media that allow us to dialogue with people and brands.