CEAT, the tyre brand manufactured in Sri Lanka by CEAT Kelani Holdings, has been ranked the most valuable consumer brand in the country’s ‘Motor’ segment in the 2021 Brand Finance rankings, and has moved up five places in the overall list.
The world’s leading brand valuation consultancy assigned CEAT a Brand Value of Rs 2,024 million for 2021, up a remarkable 46 per cent over 2020, and an overall Brand Value Rank of 48 among the 100 most valuable brands in the country which include the largest banks, telecommunications services providers and retail giants.
Sri Lanka’s highest-selling pneumatic tyre brand by far, CEAT also received an ‘AAA-’ Brand Rating from Brand Finance. This is the second best rating awarded to consumer brands in Sri Lanka this year.
Commenting on this achievement, CEAT Kelani Holdings Managing Director Mr Ravi Dadlani said: “We dedicate this recognition to the massive effort put in at every level of the Company to adapt very quickly, not only to the new working environment created by the pandemic, but to respond to domestic market needs consequent to the temporary import restrictions imposed on certain sizes of tyres. CEAT rose to the occasion with flying colours, and the business as well as the value of the brand have grown as a result. We are therefore proud to be ranked among the ‘Movers and Shakers’ in this year’s Brand Finance rankings.”
According to Brand Finance, the Brand Value is computed on the basis of separate values assigned for Brand Strength, Business Performance and External Changes.
It is described as a specific asset valuation which calculates the value of the transferable element of the brand, generally comprising the value of the trademarks and associated intellectual property. 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. It 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 brand owner would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.
0 comments: