866-997-4948(US-Canada Toll Free)

Brand Leaders - UK - December 2016

Published By :

Mintel

Published Date : Dec 2016

Category :

Lifestyle

No. of Pages : N/A

Perceptions of the biggest brands in FMCG sectors tend to be fairly secure and steady, suggesting that consumers have a mindset about familiar brands that rarely wavers. However, in other more dynamic markets there is less of a bias towards heritage brands, allowing new entrants to compete with established brands almost immediately. The increasing influence of technology in consumer lifestyles could further cause a shift in the brands most likely to be considered leaders.

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*

GOOGLE
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

List of Table

NA

Make an enquiry before buying this Report

Please fill the enquiry form below.

  • Full Name *
  • Your Email *
  • Job Title *
  • Company *
  • Phone No. * (Pls. Affix Country Code)
  • Message
  • Security Code *