COVID-19 could cost the top hotel brands up to $14 billion (£11.4bn) in their brand value, according to new research.
Brand Finance has assessed the impact of the pandemic on enterprise value, compared to what it was at the beginning of this year.
It said Hilton remained the world’s most valuable brand and Mercure was the fastest growing in its top 50 rankings with a growth rate of 57%.
Premier Inn claimed the world’s strongest brand title, while Airbnb was the most valuable leisure and tourism brand, with a value of $10.5bn (£8.5bn).
However, Brand Finance said the pandemic would undoubtedly wreak havoc on hotels in the coming year and in terms of reputational damage, those that did not manage to avoid any association with the outbreak could suffer lasting harm.
While Hilton’s revenue will take a hit following Covid-19, Brand Finance said it was consistently boosting its reputation during the crisis using a range of measures.
These included lighting up its buildings in support of the NHS, donating free parking spots to healthcare professionals, and teaming up with American Express to donate a million overnight stays to frontline medical workers across the Unites States.
Brand Finance’s analysis shows the hotels sector is one of the most heavily impacted industries globally and could face a potential 20% loss in brand value.
Beyond hotels, the value of the 500 most valuable brands in the world could fall by an estimated $1trillion (£815.3bn) as a result of coronavirus.
Savio D’Souza, director, Brand Finance, said: “Unsurprisingly, the Covid-19 pandemic is going to hit the hotels sector hard as holidays are cancelled and people work from home.
“While Brand Finance has predicted that hotel brands could face an average 20% loss of brand value, the brands that will be less impacted will be properties with strong brands where social distancing protocols will be easier such as resorts and extended stay properties.
“Unsurprisingly, brands with a larger exposure to primary markets will be impacted more than secondary and tertiary markets as customers move their preference to properties within ‘drive-to’ markets.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here