A powerful brand not only increases customers' 'willingness to pay' but also improves stakeholders' 'willingness to sell.' This lowers costs across the business, as strong brands can attract top talent for lower salaries, secure better supplier terms, and reduce their cost of capital and debt due to a lower perceived risk.

To convince a skeptical CFO who dismissed brand spend, MasterCard's CMO Raja Rajamannar pointed to her expensive Cartier watch. He explained that the significant price premium she paid over a functional, cheaper watch was the tangible, financial definition of brand value. This personal, disarming example immediately reframed the conversation.

To convince a CEO of a brand's value, ask one simple question: 'Do we have pricing power?' This metric—the ability to raise prices at or above inflation without losing demand—cuts through marketing jargon. It is the most direct, tangible indicator of brand health that resonates with finance-focused leadership.

To prove brand's financial impact, connect it to the three core levers of Customer Lifetime Value (CLV). A strong brand lowers customer acquisition costs, increases retention, and supports higher margins through pricing power. Since aggregate CLV is tied to firm valuation, this makes brand's contribution tangible to a CFO.

Data shows that adding brand marketing to a performance-driven engine can increase median ROI by 90%. The persistent tension between brand and performance stems from short-termism and the allure of easily measured clicks, creating a false dichotomy between two essential functions.

While views and followers are useful signals, the key business indicator of a successful personal brand is its effect on core financial metrics. Specifically, a strong personal brand should lower the company's customer acquisition cost (CAC). This provides a tangible, high-level metric to gauge the brand's real-world business value.

To get buy-in from financial stakeholders, translate the 'soft' concept of brand love into hard metrics. Loved brands can command higher prices, maximize customer lifetime value, and reduce customer acquisition costs through organic advocacy, proving brand is a tangible asset.

Using Sprite as an example, Chris Burgrave shows how short-term budget cuts lead to a slow erosion of brand equity, eventual retailer delistings, and a massively expensive relaunch years later. The initial savings are dwarfed by the future investment required to regain lost ground, making consistent brand support more cost-effective.

Position marketing as the engine for future quarters' growth, while sales focuses on closing current-quarter deals. This reframes marketing's long-term investments (like brand building) as essential for sustainable revenue, justifying budgets that don't show immediate, direct ROI to a CFO.