20. Amazon. Brand is worth $18.6 billion.

19. Nokia. $19b.

18. Oracle. $22.1b.

17. Louis Vitton. $23.6b.

16. Gillette. $24.9b.

15. Hewlett-Packard. $26.1b.

14. Cisco. $27.2b.

13. Disney. $27.4b.

12. BMW. $29.1b.

11. Mercedes-Benz. $30.1b.

10. Toyota. $30.3b.

9. Samsung. $32.9b.

8. Intel. $39.4b.

7. McDonald's. $40.1b.

6. GE. $43.7b.

5. Microsoft. $57.9b.

4. Google. $69.7b.

3. IBM. $75.5b.

2. Apple. $76.6b.

1. Coca Cola. $77.8b.

Source: Interbrand.

See also: 12 well-known dead brands

Facebook is new to the top 100 at #69, worth $5.4 billion.

After reading this I instantly got interest in Pets.com... I remember the ads, but didn't know what happend. Here's what former Pets.com CEO said 10 years later:

Here is the real story behind Pets.com.

We did sell dog food for 1/2 price for 2 weeks only as a customer acquisition tool --- and because the 8 other pets sites funded were doing the same. We also had an auto order feature. We did NOT go out of business because we were selling pet food for below cost. We stocked and sold over 15,000 skus of pet related items--of which less than 600 hundred were pet food. Our average order was close to $37 -- only 50% of order had any food item in them.

Here is what the world looked like in 2000....there were no plug and play solutions for ecommerce/warehouse management and customer service that could scale...which means that we had to employ 40+ engineers Cloud computing did not exist, which means that we had to have a server farm and several IT people to insure that the site did not go down. There were less than 250 Million worldwide Internet consumers in 2000- now there are 5 Billion. Amazon has reported a loss of nearly $900M in 1999...because guess what, ecommerce is a business of scale. And, the Internet bubble had burst...which meant that NO ONE was getting funded. Pets.com need a total of $260M of funding to get to breakeven. Sounds nuts now, but that was considered acceptable now. We had raised a total of $180M...and we knew that it would be hard if not impossible to raise the capital to get to break-even.

The financial market was in a tailspin and the management of Pets.com believed that the company should be shut down to return money to shareholders...not run to bankruptcy. Please note that at least 1100 Internet companies, including Webvan with losses of over $1.5B, chose to file bankruptcy.

Why can't I help but think that all of that "brand recognition" was spoiled by the SV Piggy Bank? $260M to break even? Are you sure it's because "NO ONE" is getting funded?

Yes, once clearer minds prevailed, much saner approached like Wag.com and even Amazon have succeeded where Pets.com failed.

Hmm. Three autos, clustered in the middle.