汽车品牌排名有多靠谱？

    读到这里，大家可能会想，这份研究到底是谁做的，这个名次是根据什么排出来的。给出这份排行榜的是明略行咨询公司（Millward Brown），它是总部位于伦敦的广告业巨头WPP集团的子公司。这家公司自称与全球90%的顶尖汽车品牌都有战略和绩效方面的合作。至于做这份排行榜的数据是怎么来的，首先它们来自明略行对全球100多万名消费者的采访，其次来自对每家公司的财务和业务业绩的分析。

    出于好玩，我决定把明略行的这张排行榜与另外两张排行榜进行一下对比。第一个对比对象是伦敦的品牌金融公司（Brand Finance）给出的排行榜，这家公司自称是“全球领先的品牌评价咨询公司”。我其实并不理解它的排行榜是怎样排出来的，暂且引述该公司的如下原文：“该方法使用了一种折现现金流法，根据一个适当的折现率，对未来的商标使用费进行折现，以得出一个商标及其相关知识产权的净现值，也就是它的品牌价值。”

    方法虽然不同，结果却差不多。在品牌金融公司的排行榜上，丰田依然占据头名，但是宝马却跌至第三位，亚军被大众公司（Volkswagen）摘走。我比较惊讶的是，本田公司作为一个不仅生产汽车，也能生产高性能摩托车、摩托艇、喷气式飞机和割草机的品牌，它的排名居然排在已经在美国苦苦挣扎了多年的三菱（Mitsubishi）的后面。和整个欧洲车市一样不景气的标志汽车（Peugeot）在品牌金融公司这份排行榜上的排名竟然稳居雪佛兰（Chevrolet）和奥迪之前。不过看到下面这个更不靠谱的排序，我或许就不会再觉得惊讶了——最近一度破产的通用汽车（General Motors）居然排在了梅塞德斯-奔驰的母公司戴姆勒（Daimler）的前面。

    我的疑惑越来越多，于是我决定向可能是最知名的一份品牌地位调查报告寻找答案。这项调查是由国际品牌公司（Interbrand）执行的，它的总部也是在伦敦，而且它也毫不谦虚地称自己是“全球领先的品牌咨询公司”。它给出的排名基于三个要素：财务业绩，品牌在采购流程中的重要性，以及数学计算。这份排行榜选取了每个品牌的10个属性，按照百分制进行打分。听起来似乎很多数字都是用来粉饰主观看法的，不过没关系。

    在国际品牌公司给出的“全球汽车百强排行榜”上，丰田再次拔得头筹，宝马再次名列第三，不过这次是梅塞德斯-奔驰摘得亚军。但是本田战胜了大众升至第四，全行业利润最高的保时捷（Porsche）则排在了福特（Ford）和现代的后头。

    我被这些公司的各种算法搞得一头雾水，最后只得求助一个我熟悉的、也是长期受到信任的信息来源——《消费者报告》（Consumer Reports）。在对1764名成年人进行电话采访后，《消费者报告》给出了它的“2013年最佳汽车品牌感知度调查”，从安全性、质量、价值、性能、设计、技术/创新、友好性/环保七个方面反映了美国消费者对各大汽车品牌的感知度。《消费者报告》给每个品牌都打了分，但同时也警告读者，感知度与现实并不是一回事。“感知度是一个被动的指标”，而且“每个产品线的表现都有一定的差异，不是每款车型都代表了一个品牌的最高水平。”

    在《消费者报告》的调查中，丰田仍然名列第一，这应该没有什么好奇怪的了。本田名列季军，福特排在第二位，雪佛兰排在第四位。沃尔沃（Volvo）的产品线虽然稍显过时，而且销售表现也半死不活，但是仍然排到了第六名的位置，这也从一个侧面说明了受访者对于汽车安全性的重视。这份调查里也有一些奇怪的地方，比如《消费者报告》的试驾员在试驾了道奇（Dodge）的车型后给出了差评，但是在这份调查里，道奇的排名却越过了雷克萨斯和斯巴鲁，同时林肯（Lincoln）和克莱斯勒（Chrysler）也排在了Smart的后头，尽管Smart在美国的销量一落千丈。

    那么，我从这些排行榜上明白了什么道理呢？首先，尽管我也喜欢各种排行榜（甚至我自己都排过几个），但我们应该以批判的眼光来看待排行榜。其次，对于按数据进行的排名来说，如果它的基础逻辑有问题，那么这种排名很难说有什么价值。第三，老百姓的眼光一般要强于武断的评价。另外，在读完所有这些分析和调查之后，我还是不明白丰田到底哪里特殊和与众不同。（财富中文网）

    译者：朴成奎

    By now you're wondering who conducted this study and how the rankings were determined. It was pulled together by marketing consultant Millward Brown, part of advertising giant WPP and based in London, which claims to work with 90% of the world's leading brands on strategy and performance. As for those precise-appearing numbers on which the ratings were somehow derived, they came first from interviews with more than one million consumers globally and, second, from an analysis of the financial and business results of each company.

    Just for fun, I decided to compare those Millward Brown findings with two other brand ratings. First up was another London-based shop, Brand Finance, which calls itself the "world's leading brand valuation consultancy." I don't really understand how it compiled its own ratings, but here is its verbatim description: "The methodology uses a discounted cash flow technique to discount estimated future royalties, at an appropriate discount rate, to arrive at a net present value of the trademark and associated intellectual property: the brand value."

    Different strokes, similar results: Toyota also claimed the top of the car-brand heap in Brand Finance's global ranking, but BMW slipped to third place, overtaken by up-and-coming Volkswagen. I was surprised to find that Honda, whose brand adorns high-performing motorcycles, outboards, jet airplanes, and lawn mowers in addition to cars, was ranked behind Mitsubishi, whose vehicles have been struggling in the U.S for years. And Peugeot, which has cratered along with the European car market, had a solid lead on Chevrolet and Audi in the Brand Finance rankings. But perhaps I shouldn't be surprised after being faced with the following glaring inconsistency: Recently bankrupt General Motors (GM, Fortune 500) came out ahead of Mercedes-Benz's corporate parent, Daimler.

    My confusion growing, I sought clarification from perhaps the best known brand stature survey, the one conducted by Interbrand. Yet another London-based outfit, Interbrand also describes itself in superlatives as the "world's leading brand consultancy." It bases its rankings on three factors: financial performance, the brand's importance in the purchase process, and a mathematical calculation. This third rating is derived by grading the brand on 10 individual attributes on a scale of one to 100. Sounds like a lot of numbers are being used to dress up subjective opinions, but never mind.

    On Interbrand's list of the Top 100 global brands, Toyota completed a trifecta by again gaining the top car slot, and BMW once again finished third, this time behind Mercedes. But Honda climbed back into fourth place over VW, and Porsche, possessor of the richest profit margins in the business, fell behind Ford (F, Fortune 500) and Hyundai.

    My head spinning from all these global brand mathematics, I finally retreated to a familiar and long-trusted source: Consumer Reports. After phone interviews with 1,764 adults, CRdeveloped its 2013 Best Car Brand Perception Survey to reflect how U.S consumers view a car brand in seven categories: safety, quality, value, performance, design/style, technology/innovation, and friendly/green. CR assignedc a score to each brand -- at the same time warning readers that perception is not the same thing as reality: "Perception is often a trailing indicator," and "every product line has a spectrum of performance -- not every model represents the brand's best efforts."

    It won't be much of a surprise to learn that Toyota was still number one with CR's survey subjects, and Honda was number three, but Ford claimed the second spot and Chevrolet was now fourth. Revealing the importance of safety to the CR respondents, Volvo placed sixth despite its outdated product line and moribund sales performance. And there were other oddities as well: Dodge, which CR's own test drivers have dismissed as clunky and substandard, finished ahead of Lexus and Subaru, while Lincoln and Chrysler came in behind Smart, which has been a resounding flop in the U.S.

    What lessons, if any, did I learn from this exercise? One, while I love lists and rankings (and have even composed a few of my own), they should be viewed with a skeptical eye; two, numerical ratings have little value if the logic on which they are based is skewed; and three, common sense is often a better guide than arbitrary evaluations. Besides, after all this analysis, I still don't know what about Toyota is special and different.