Skip to main content
Log in

Trademark families: Characteristics and market values

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Brand Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research shows that financial markets value trademarks. Often, a firm’s trademarks can be decomposed into groups of related trademarks (trademark families). This study identifies different types of trademark families and analyzes their respective effects on the market values of large, publicly listed firms. The results show that financial markets value only those trademarks that develop existing brands, while they do not value the creation of new trademarks. The implications of the results for corporate intellectual property and brand management are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aaker, D.A. (1990) Brand extensions: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Sloan Management Review 31 (4): 47–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aaker, D.A. (1991) Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aaker, D.A. and Keller, K.L. (1990) Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. Journal of Marketing 54 (1): 27–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ailawadi, K.L., Lehmann, D.R. and Neslin, S.A. (2003) Revenue premium as an outcome measure of brand equity. Journal of Marketing 67 (4): 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Marketing Association (1960) Marketing Definitions: A Glossary of Marketing Terms. Chicago, IL: AMA.

  • Balachander, S. and Ghose, S. (2003) Reciprocal spillover effects: A strategic benefit of brand extensions. Journal of Marketing 67 (1): 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barth, M.E., Clement, M.B., Foster, G. and Kasznik, R. (1998) Brand values and capital market valuation. Review of Accounting Studies 3 (1–2): 41–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, A. (2004) Licensed extensions – Stretching to communicate. Journal of Brand Management 12 (1): 31–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, J., De Vries, G., Schuman, J. and Sandner, P. (in press) Trademarks and venture capital valuation. Journal of Business Venturing, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.07.006.

  • Bosworth, D. and Rogers, M. (2001) Market value, R&D and intellectual property: An empirical analysis of large Australian firms. Economic Record 77 (239): 323–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breitenfeld, F. (1962) When is a family of trademarks effective. Trademark Reporter 52: 351–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burmann, C., Zeplin, S. and Riley, N. (2009) Key determinants of internal brand management success: An exploratory empirical analysis. Journal of Brand Management 16 (1): 264–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, J.P. (1998) Brand extension as informational leverage. Review of Economic Studies 65 (4): 655–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connolly, R.A. and Hirschey, M. (1988) Market value and patents: A Bayesian approach. Economics Letters 27 (1): 83–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dacin, A.P. and Smith, D.C. (1994) The effect of brand portfolio characteristics on consumer evaluations of brand extension. Journal of Marketing Research 31 (2): 229–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawar, N. and Anderson, P.F. (1994) The effects of order and direction on multiple brand extensions. Journal of Business Research 30 (2): 119–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Council (1993) Council Regulation No. 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community Trade Mark. Brussels, Belgium: Council of the European Union.

  • Farquhar, P.H. (1989) Managing brand equity. Marketing Research 1 (3): 24–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farquhar, P.H., Han, J.Y., Herr, P.M. and Ijiri, Y. (1992) Strategies for leveraging master brands. Marketing Research 4 (3): 32–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhalgh, C. and Rogers, M. (2006) The value of innovation: The interaction of competition, R&D and IP. Research Policy 35 (4): 562–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenhalgh, C. and Rogers, M. (2007) Trade Marks and Market Value in UK Firms: Evidence of Schumpeterian Competition through Innovation. Oxford: Oxford Intellectual Property Research Centre. Working Paper.

  • Greenhalgh, C. and Rogers, M. (2010) Innovation, Intellectual Property, and Economic Growth. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z. (1981) Market value, R&D and patents. Economic Letters 7 (2): 183–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B.H. (1993) The stock market’s valuation of R&D investment during the 1980’s. American Economic Review 83 (2): 259–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A. and Trajtenberg, M. (2005) Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of Economics 36 (1): 16–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B.H. and Oriani, R. (2006) Does the market value R&D investment by European firms? Evidence from a panel of manufacturing firms in France, Germany, and Italy. International Journal of Industrial Organization 24 (5): 971–993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krake, F.B. (2005) Successful brand management in SMEs: A new theory and practical hints. Journal of Product & Brand Management 14 (4): 228–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, V. and Jacobson, R. (1995) Stock market reactions to brand extension announcements: The effects of brand attitude and familiarity. Journal of Marketing 59 (1): 63–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lev, B. (2001) Intangibles Management, Measurement, and Reporting. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Megna, P. and Klock, M. (1993) The impact of intangible capital on Tobin’s q in the semiconductor industry. American Economic Review 83 (2): 265–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendonça, S., Pereira, T.S. and Godinho, M.M. (2004) Trademarks as an indicator of innovation and industrial change. Research Policy 33 (9): 1385–1404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, C.A. and Wernerfelt, B. (1992) Risk reduction and umbrella branding. The Journal of Business 65 (1): 31–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noble, J. (2006) Branding: From a commercial perspective. Journal of Brand Management 13 (3): 206–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) (2009) What is a community trade mark (CTM)? http://oami.europa.eu/ows/rw/pages/CTM/communityTradeMark/communityTradeMark.en.do, accessed 13 June 2013.

  • Petty, R.D. (2010) Naming names: Part three – Safeguarding brand equity in the United States by developing a family of trademarks. Journal of Brand Management 17 (8): 561–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, V.R., Agarwal, M.K. and Dahlhoff, D. (2004) How is manifest branding strategy related to the intangible value of a corporation? Journal of Marketing 68 (4): 126–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, S.K., Holak, S.L. and Bhat, S. (1994) To extend or not to extend: Success determinants of line extensions. Journal of Marketing Research 31 (2): 243–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S.A. (1983) Accounting and economics. Accounting Review 58 (2): 375–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandner, P. (2009) The identification of trademark filing strategies: Creating, hedging, modernizing, and extending brands. The Trademark Reporter 99 (5): 1–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandner, P. and Block, J. (2011) The market value of R&D, patents, and trademarks. Research Policy 40 (7): 969–985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shine, B.C., Park, J. and Wyer Jr. R.S. (2007) Brand synergy effects in multiple brand extensions. Journal of Marketing Research 44 (4): 663–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, C.J. and Sullivan., M.W. (1993) The measurement and determinants of brand equity: A financial approach. Marketing Science 12 (1): 28–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D.C. and Park, C.W. (1992) The effects of brand extensions on market share and advertising efficiency. Journal of Marketing Research 29 (3): 296–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, R.K., Shervani, T.A. and Fahey, L. (1998) Market-based assets and shareholder value: A framework for analysis. Journal of Marketing 62 (1): 2–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tauber, E.M. (1988) Brand leverage: Strategy for growth in a cost-control world. Journal of Advertising Research 28 (4): 26–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Völckner, F. and Sattler, H. (2006) Drivers of brand extension success. Journal of Marketing 70 (2): 18–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B. (1988) Umbrella branding as a signal of new product quality: An example of signalling by posting a bond. RAND Journal of Economics 19 (3): 458–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Dietmar Harhoff for his valuable support. We would also like to thank Georg von Graevenitz for his discussions on several issues concerning this work. This work would not have been possible without data provided by the OHIM in Alicante, Spain. The contributions of the participants in the SFB/TR 15 workshop and research seminar at the University of Munich have also been helpful in the production of this manuscript. All authors contributed equally. Funding of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft through the project ‘Governance und die Effizienz ökonomischer Systeme’ (SFB TR 15) and of the European Science Foundation through the project ‘Science and Technology Research in the Knowledge-Based Economy’ is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joern H Block.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Block, J., Fisch, C. & Sandner, P. Trademark families: Characteristics and market values. J Brand Manag 21, 150–170 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2013.27

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2013.27

Keywords

Navigation