-Jason Voiovich, firstname.lastname@example.org
Follow Jason on Twitter: @jasonvoiovich
Follow Jason on Pinterest: www.pinterest.com/jasonvoiovich
As a parent, it’s tempting to read the story of Jay-Z and Beyonce “trademarking” their child and wish we could turn back time and convince them both to use birth control. However, when we put aside some initial discomfort, we can see that the trademark makes business sense. Because what is the point of a trademark? To protect something of value. As the spawn of nearly a billion dollars of marketing muscle, protecting the Blue Ivy™ brand is a wise investment.
- Interesting Questions:
I am using an “Income Approach” brand valuation methodology, which relies on physical and tangible assets. Obviously however, brands have tremendous “intangible value.” The question we would need to ask is this: With an average entertainer salary earning roughly $46,000 annually according to SimplyHired.com, how much of this additional value is dependent on the “brand” and not necessarily musical talent? (I think the method is a pretty good proxy for celebs. Dead celebs like Whitney Houston and Michael Jackson? That might be a different story.)
With much less than half of their income derived from their music, should we even call Jay-Z a “rapper” or Beyonce a “singer”? (Probably not.)
On the other hand, is the “music” the crux of the value of the brand itself? (Probably yes.)
Did I just perpetuate the creepiness by assigning brand value to a little girl? (I was afraid of that…)
Does she make a case for the cutest kid ever? (Yep. She’s a doll.)
For More Fun:
Why else might the two pop icons want to protect their little girl? Read up on the legal angle.
Visit Interbrand for more information and case studies on brand valuation.
Want to be a rock star? Most live near the poverty line. http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-Entertainers