2013 brand use study

151
2013 Brand Use Study REVISED DEC 2012 Published by One Thomas Circle NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20005 Conducted by

Upload: others

Post on 08-Dec-2021

2 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

2013 Brand Use Study

REVISED DEC 2012

Published by

One Thomas Circle NW, Suite 600

Washington, DC 20005

Conducted by

© 2012 Hanley Wood

i

2013 Brand Use Study

Contents

Purpose ..................................................................1 Method...................................................................2 Data Interpretation.................................................3 About Readex ........................................................4 Top 3 Brands Explanation.....................................5

Summary Results

Key to Tables -- 148 Number of Residential Units Built -- 149 Average Sale Price -- 150 Willingness to Try New Brands -- 151 Reasons for Willingness to Try New Brands -- 152 Final Brand Decision Maker -- 153 Change in Role of Dealer/Distributor -- 154 Geographic Distribution -- 155 PRODUCT CATEGORIES

Bath Accessories 6 156 Bath Fixtures 8 161 Bathroom Ventilation/Fans 10 166 Cabinets: Semi-Custom And Custom 12 171 Cabinets: Stock 14 176 Carpet 16 181 Caulks/Sealants 18 186 Central Vacuums 20 191 Ceramic Tile 22 196 Closet/Organization Systems 24 201 Decking: Composite/PVC 26 206 Decorative Mouldings & Columns: Exterior 28 211 Decorative Mouldings/Trim/Columns: Interior 30 216 Dishwashers 32 223 Doors: Entry 34 228 Doors: Garage 36 233 Doors: Interior Passage 38 238 Doors: Patio 40 243 Electrical Systems/Load Centers 42 252 Elevators: Residential 44 257

© 2012 Hanley Wood

ii

2013 Brand Use Study

Summary Results (starting page)

Engineered I-Joists 46 262 Exterior Foundation Waterproofing (Construction Phase) 48 267 Exterior Trim 50 272 Exterior Wall Sheathing 52 277 Faucets 54 282 Fireplaces/Wood Stoves 56 287 Flooring: Laminate 58 292 Flooring: Vinyl 60 297 Flooring: Wood 62 302 Garage Door Openers 64 307 Generators: Portable 66 312 Generators: Stationary 68 317 Housewrap 70 322 HVAC 72 327 Insulation 74 332 Laundry Appliances 76 337 Lighting 78 342 Lighting Controls/Switches 80 347 Locksets/Hardware 82 352 Manufactured Stone 84 357 Oriented Strand Board 86 362 Paints 88 367 Radiant Barrier Sheathing 90 372 Range Hoods 92 377 Ranges/Cooktops 94 382 Refrigerators 96 387 Ridge Vent Systems 98 392 Roofing: Asphalt/Fiberglass Shingles 100 397 Roofing: Clay/Concrete/Synthetic Tiles 102 402 Roofing: Metal 104 407 Roofing: Photovoltaic 106 412 Shower Doors/Surrounds 108 417 Siding: Brick & Brick Veneer 110 422 Siding: EIFS/Stucco 112 427 Siding: Engineered Wood 114 432 Siding: Fiber Cement 116 437 Siding: Insulated 118 442 Siding: Vinyl 120 447

© 2012 Hanley Wood

iii

2013 Brand Use Study

Summary Results (starting page)

Stains/Varnishes 122 452 Surfacing: Laminate 124 457 Surfacing: Quartz 126 462 Surfacing: Solid Surfaces 128 467 Trucks: Pickup 130 472 Underlayment 132 477 Wallboard 134 482 Water Heaters 136 487 Whirlpool Baths 138 492 Windows: Skylights/Roof 140 497 Windows: Vinyl 142 502 Windows: Wood & Clad-Wood 144 510

Appendix Sample Composition .......................................................A1 Mailing Series .................................................................A2 Caution ............................................................................A3 Survey Correspondence...................................................A4 Survey Questionnaire (Main Study)..............................A12 Survey Questionnaire (Supplemental Study) ................A45

Brand Index

© 2012 Hanley Wood

1

2013 Brand Use Study

Purpose The findings cited in this report are based on a survey sponsored by Hanley Wood on behalf of their publication, Builder. The purpose of this research project was to provide the editors and advertisers with a profile of the brands used by builders. Specific areas of inquiry included:

• the number and average sale price of residential units respondents� firms were involved with building in 2012

• respondents� familiarity with, use of, and opinions about brands in 70 product categories

• importance of factors in influencing brand selection within each product category

© 2012 Hanley Wood

2

2013 Brand Use Study

Method The survey sample of 11,700 was selected in systematic fashion by Hanley Wood and Readex from domestic recipients of Builder classified as �builder, builder-developer, or general contractor,� including those who receive Builder as a benefit of NAHB membership, but excluding those classified as �do not promote.� The sample represented 73,998 print subscribers at the time of selection. To help reduce respondent burden, thirteen versions of a 4-page questionnaire (8.5� x 11.0� pages) were designed jointly by Builder and Readex, with different brand categories on each. Data was collected via mail survey from August 2 to September 24, 2012. The survey was closed for tabulation with 2,854 usable responses�a 24% response rate. The margin of error for percentages based on all 2,854 usable responses is ±1.8% at the 95% confidence level. The margin of error for percentages based on the total answering for each product category asked about in this study is roughly 6.5 percentage points. The margin of error for percentages based on smaller sample sizes�census regions, for example�will be larger. A supplemental online study was done to re-capture data for Engineered I-Joists, Exterior Trim, Exterior Wall Sheathing, and Faucets due to missing brands in the main study. The data reported in those categories is from the online effort. (Please refer to the Appendix for more details of the method.)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

3

2013 Brand Use Study

Data Interpretation Mean A mean is the arithmetic average of a distribution (i.e., a set of values). Because it is arithmetically calculated, it can be multiplied by the population represented to estimate a total projected volume. For example, if 100 survey respondents (representing 10,000 people in the population) reported mean expenditures of $100 each, total expenditures for that population are estimated as 10,000 x $100 = 1,000,000. Means are very much influenced by extremely large or extremely small values in the distribution (e.g., one millionaire can substantially raise an estimate of average income). Means for grouped data are calculated using the midpoint of each range. The lowest-valued group is represented by its largest value; the highest-valued group by its lowest.

Median A median is the value that lies at the middle of a distribution: that is, 50% of the values are above it and 50% are below. It represents the �typical� response, and is not influenced by extreme values. For most distributions, the median will be either roughly equal to, or significantly smaller than the mean. Medians for grouped data are calculated by locating the group which contains the 50th percentile, then interpolating between the lower and upper bounds to estimate the precise value. Only the values listed above the statistics on a data table are used in the calculations.

© 2012 Hanley Wood

4

2013 Brand Use Study

About Readex Readex Research is a nationally recognized independent research company located in Stillwater, Minnesota. Its roots are in survey research for the magazine publishing industry, but specialization in conducting high-quality survey research (by mail and/or the Internet) has brought clients from many other markets, including associations, corporate marketers and communicators, and government agencies. Since its founding in 1947, Readex has completed thousands of surveys for a lengthy and diverse list of clients. As a full-service survey research supplier, Readex provides in-house processing of all phases of each project (traditional mailing, broadcast emailing, and data processing) to ensure complete control over project quality and schedule. Analytical capabilities include a range of multivariate statistics and modeling techniques, in addition to the more traditional stub-and-banner tabulations. This survey was conducted and this report was prepared by Readex in accordance with accepted research standards and practices.

© 2012 Hanley Wood

5

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 Brands The following pages present a graphic summary of brand-related results in alphabetical order by product category. Only the top three brands have been included in the charts for each question, based strictly on the percentage indicating each brand (or the average rating provided for each) regardless of sampling error. Results for all brands and all questions are listed in the Results section of this report.

Bases for Results The bases for the percentages vary depending on the number who indicated their firms used each category in the past 2 years for the charts showing brand familiarity, brands used in the past 2 years, and brands used the most. Multiple responses were allowed for each. Results for the quality ratings are based on those giving a rating for each brand. Quality ratings based on fewer than 30 responses are considered statistically unstable and have been asterisked in the Results section of this report. They have also been omitted from the summary charts.

Survey Questions The specific survey questions related to these charts were as follows:

For each product listed below and for that product specifically …

A. Which brands have you HEARD OF?

B. Which brands has your firm USED IN THE PAST 2 YEARS (including brands you

subcontracted with others to install)?

C. Which brand(s) does your firm USE THE MOST?

D. How would you rate the QUALITY of each brand you are familiar with?

For the brand(s) of [CATEGORY] you use most, how important are the following factors in

influencing your brand selection?

© 2012 Hanley Wood

6

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 BATH ACCESSORIES

Brand Familiarity

95%

93%

88%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kohler

American Standard

Delta Matching Bath Accessories

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

83%

64%

64%

64%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kohler

American Standard

Moen

Delta Matching Bath Accessories

Brands Specified/Used the Most

35%

28%

26%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kohler

Delta Matching Bath Accessories

Moen

Quality Rating

6.08

5.83

5.81

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Kohler

Baldwin

Moen

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

7

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.64

6.08

6.06

5.79

5.78

4.66

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

8

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 BATH FIXTURES

Brand Familiarity

95%

92%

73%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kohler

American Standard

Jacuzzi

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

83%

68%

40%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kohler

American Standard

Jacuzzi

Brands Specified/Used the Most

34%

24%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kohler

American Standard

Toto

Quality Rating

6.20

6.01

5.77

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Kohler

Toto

Hansgrohe

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

9

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.65

6.12

6.11

5.86

5.85

4.97

4.60

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

10

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 BATHROOM VENTILATION/FANS

Brand Familiarity

87%

76%

59%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

NuTone

Broan

Panasonic

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

71%

61%

32%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

NuTone

Broan

Panasonic

Brands Specified/Used the Most

31%

29%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

NuTone

Broan

Panasonic

Quality Rating

6.00

5.75

5.73

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Panasonic

NuTone

Delta Breez

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

11

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.59

6.00

5.96

5.93

5.54

4.78

4.59

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

12

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 CABINETS: SEMI-CUSTOM AND CUSTOM

Brand Familiarity

71%

33%

33%

33%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

KraftMaid

Wood-Mode

Quaker Maid

Wellborn

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

34%

9%

9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

KraftMaid

Wood-Mode

Wellborn

Brands Specified/Used the Most

11%

3%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

KraftMaid

Wellborn

Wood-Mode

Quality Rating

5.59

5.45

5.38

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Wood-Mode

Quaker Maid

KraftMaid

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

13

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.52

6.12

6.04

5.84

5.83

5.42

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

14

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 CABINETS: STOCK

Brand Familiarity

77%

69%

66%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

KraftMaid

Merillat

Aristokraft

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

27%

24%

21%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

KraftMaid

Merillat

Armstrong

Brands Specified/Used the Most

12%

10%

7%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

KraftMaid

Merillat

Aristokraft

Armstrong

Quality Rating

5.28

5.09

5.07

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Decora

Wellborn

KraftMaid

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

15

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.43

6.12

5.87

5.59

5.40

5.21

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

16

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 CARPET

Brand Familiarity

80%

71%

15%

15%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Mohawk

Shaw

Beaulieu

Dalton Paradise Carpet

Shaheen

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

57%

54%

4%

4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Mohawk

Shaw

Beaulieu

Dalton Paradise Carpet

Brands Specified/Used the Most

32%

29%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Shaw

Mohawk

Shaheen

Quality Rating

5.77

5.70

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Shaw

Mohawk

(no others based on 30+)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

17

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.28

6.10

6.09

5.71

5.36

5.04

4.18

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

ease of installation

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

18

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 CAULKS/SEALANTS

Brand Familiarity

82%

78%

74%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

DAP (Phenoseal)

GE Silicones, Sealants, Adhesives

Gorilla Glue

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

66%

64%

47%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

DAP (Phenoseal)

GE Silicones, Sealants, Adhesives

Gorilla Glue

Brands Specified/Used the Most

35%

32%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

DAP (Phenoseal)

GE Silicones, Sealants, Adhesives

Macco/Liquid Nails

Quality Rating

6.00

5.94

5.91

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Geocel

OSI Sealants

GE Silicones, Sealants, Adhesives

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

19

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.65

6.22

6.08

5.35

5.01

4.10

4.09

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

green/sustainable features

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

20

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 CENTRAL VACUUMS

Brand Familiarity

54%

47%

47%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

NuTone

Hoover

Eureka

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

20%

18%

6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Beam

NuTone

Hoover

Brands Specified/Used the Most

11%

9%

2%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Beam

NuTone

Hoover

H-P Products VACUFLO

Quality Rating

5.89

5.50

5.22

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Beam

NuTone

Hoover

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

21

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.29

6.05

5.74

5.59

5.47

5.03

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

22

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 CERAMIC TILE

Brand Familiarity

71%

68%

54%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Armstrong

Dal-Tile

American Olean

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

56%

30%

29%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Dal-Tile

Armstrong

American Olean

Brands Specified/Used the Most

29%

12%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Dal-Tile

Armstrong

Florida Tile

Quality Rating

5.90

5.74

5.68

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Dal-Tile

Interceramic

Florida Tile

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

23

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.40

6.27

5.82

5.68

5.34

5.11

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

24

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 CLOSET/ORGANIZATION SYSTEMS

Brand Familiarity

81%

75%

68%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Rubbermaid

California Closets

Closet Maid

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

34%

30%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Closet Maid

Rubbermaid

California Closets

Brands Specified/Used the Most

19%

14%

6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Closet Maid

Rubbermaid

California Closets

Quality Rating

5.56

5.50

5.43

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Rubbermaid

California Closets

Closet Maid

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

25

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.39

5.97

5.91

5.71

5.28

4.77

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

26

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 DECKING: COMPOSITE/PVC

Brand Familiarity

79%

70%

61%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Trex

CertainTeed

AZEK Decks

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

50%

31%

28%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Trex

CertainTeed

AZEK Decks

Brands Specified/Used the Most

22%

13%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Trex

AZEK Decks

CertainTeed

Quality Rating

5.88

5.65

5.64

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

AZEK Decks

Trex

CertainTeed

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

27

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.55

6.19

6.13

6.09

5.73

5.08

4.60

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

28

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 DECORATIVE MOULDINGS & COLUMNS:

EXTERIOR

Brand Familiarity

58%

47%

28%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

Fypon

Permacast (HB&G)

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

29%

27%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

Fypon

Permacast (HB&G)

Brands Specified/Used the Most

15%

10%

9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Fypon

CertainTeed

Permacast (HB&G)

Quality Rating

5.84

5.81

5.76

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Fypon

CertainTeed

Permacast (HB&G)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

29

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.56

6.25

6.15

6.07

5.43

4.94

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

30

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 DECORATIVE MOULDINGS/TRIM/COLUMNS:

INTERIOR

Brand Familiarity

46%

32%

28%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Fypon

Flex Trim

Permacast (HB&G)

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

24%

17%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Fypon

Flex Trim

Permacast (HB&G)

Brands Specified/Used the Most

10%

6%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Fypon

Permacast (HB&G)

Flex Trim

Quality Rating

6.00

5.94

5.72

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Permacast (HB&G)

Fypon

Flex Trim

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

31

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.46

6.24

6.14

5.98

5.48

4.94

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

32

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 DISHWASHERS

Brand Familiarity

92%

91%

89%

89%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

KitchenAid

Maytag

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

58%

47%

40%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

KitchenAid

Brands Specified/Used the Most

31%

20%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

KitchenAid

Quality Rating

5.92

5.73

5.61

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Bosch

Viking

Miele

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

33

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.57

6.03

5.85

5.79

5.44

4.95

4.27

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

34

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 DOORS: ENTRY

Brand Familiarity

81%

80%

73%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Pella

JELD-WEN

Therma-Tru

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

45%

44%

32%

32%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Therma-Tru

JELD-WEN

Masonite

Pella

Brands Specified/Used the Most

30%

16%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Therma-Tru

JELD-WEN

Masonite

Quality Rating

5.82

5.69

5.42

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Pella

Therma-Tru

JELD-WEN

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

35

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.59

6.08

5.97

5.86

5.63

5.21

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

36

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 DOORS: GARAGE

Brand Familiarity

67%

55%

48%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Overhead Door

Wayne-Dalton

Clopay

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

37%

25%

20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Overhead Door

Wayne-Dalton

Clopay

Brands Specified/Used the Most

20%

16%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Overhead Door

Wayne-Dalton

Clopay

Quality Rating

5.82

5.77

5.60

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Overhead Door

C.H.I. Overhead Doors

Wayne-Dalton

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

37

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.52

6.12

5.92

5.59

5.55

5.26

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

ease of installation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

38

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 DOORS: INTERIOR PASSAGE

Brand Familiarity

65%

62%

36%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Masonite

JELD-WEN

Simpson

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

40%

27%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Masonite

JELD-WEN

Simpson

Brands Specified/Used the Most

21%

12%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Masonite

JELD-WEN

Simpson

Quality Rating

5.73

5.58

5.56

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Simpson

Masonite

JELD-WEN

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

39

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.38

5.99

5.95

5.90

5.45

5.10

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

40

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 DOORS: PATIO

Brand Familiarity

83%

76%

73%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Andersen

Pella

JELD-WEN

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

42%

30%

26%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Andersen

Pella

JELD-WEN

Brands Specified/Used the Most

22%

15%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Andersen

Pella

JELD-WEN

Quality Rating

6.13

6.11

5.97

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Andersen

Marvin

Pella

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

41

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.52

6.28

5.99

5.92

5.83

5.38

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

42

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS/LOAD CENTERS

Brand Familiarity

89%

75%

68%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Square D by Schneider Electric

Siemens

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

63%

60%

29%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Square D by Schneider Electric

Siemens

Brands Specified/Used the Most

38%

23%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Square D by Schneider Electric

GE Appliances

Siemens

Quality Rating

6.08

5.84

5.41

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Square D by Schneider Electric

Siemens

GE Appliances

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

43

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.51

6.28

6.11

5.89

5.77

5.01

4.42

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

44

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 ELEVATORS: RESIDENTIAL

Brand Familiarity

44%

33%

26%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Otis at home

ThyssenKrupp Access

Inclinator

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

9%

7%

4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Otis at home

ThyssenKrupp Access

Inclinator

Brands Specified/Used the Most

3%

2%

1%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Otis at home

ThyssenKrupp Access

Inclinator

LEV

Quality Rating

5.71

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Otis at home

(no others based on 30+)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

45

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.07

5.95

5.78

5.67

5.44

5.34

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

46

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 ENGINEERED I-JOISTS

Brand Familiarity

85%

75%

75%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Georgia Pacific

Boise Cascade

Trus Joist (Weyerhaeuser)

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

48%

44%

33%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Georgia Pacific

Trus Joist (Weyerhaeuser)

LP

Brands Specified/Used the Most

20%

16%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Trus Joist (Weyerhaeuser)

Georgia Pacific

LP

Quality Rating

5.99

5.84

5.74

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Georgia Pacific

Trus Joist (Weyerhaeuser)

Boise Cascade

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

47

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.69

6.35

6.32

6.31

5.49

5.36

4.73

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

ease of installation

strength of mfr's brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

48

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 EXTERIOR FOUNDATION WATERPROOFING

(CONSTRUCTION PHASE)

Brand Familiarity

40%

22%

22%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Tuff-N-Dri

Polywall

House Guard 2001

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

22%

8%

7%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Tuff-N-Dri

House Guard 2001

Mar-Flex

Polywall

Brands Specified/Used the Most

15%

4%

4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Tuff-N-Dri

Polywall

Rub-R-Wall

Quality Rating

5.64

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Tuff-N-Dri

(no others based on 30+)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

49

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.61

6.40

6.12

6.11

5.52

5.02

4.80

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

50

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 EXTERIOR TRIM

Brand Familiarity

83%

79%

65%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

HardieTrim (James Hardie)

CertainTeed

AZEK Trimboards

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

58%

45%

39%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

HardieTrim (James Hardie)

CertainTeed

AZEK Trimboards

Brands Specified/Used the Most

30%

15%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

HardieTrim (James Hardie)

AZEK Trimboards

CertainTeed

Quality Rating

5.92

5.87

5.75

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

HardieTrim (James Hardie)

CertainTeed

AZEK Trimboards

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

51

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.66

6.35

6.34

6.25

5.53

5.21

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

ease of installation

strength of mfr's brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

52

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 EXTERIOR WALL SHEATHING

Brand Familiarity

73%

66%

63%

63%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Dow Styrofoam

Owens Corning

Georgia-Pacific (DensGlass Gold)

Weyerhaeuser

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

41%

36%

35%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Dow Styrofoam

Owens Corning

US Gypsum

Brands Specified/Used the Most

15%

13%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Dow Styrofoam

Owens Corning

Georgia-Pacific (DensGlass Gold)

Quality Rating

6.02

5.94

5.89

5.89

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Owens Corning

Weyerhaeuser

US Gypsum

Dow Styrofoam

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

53

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.62

6.28

6.28

6.25

5.49

5.30

4.75

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

strength of mfr's brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

54

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 FAUCETS

Brand Familiarity

94%

92%

90%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Delta

Kohler

American Standard

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

70%

69%

68%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kohler

Delta

Moen

Brands Specified/Used the Most

31%

30%

28%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Moen

Delta

Kohler

Quality Rating

6.27

6.11

5.87

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Kohler

Moen

Grohe

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

55

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.70

6.50

6.26

6.13

5.94

5.41

4.63

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr's brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

56

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 FIREPLACES/WOOD STOVES

Brand Familiarity

66%

66%

52%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Heatilator

Heat & Glo

Majestic

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

39%

32%

22%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Heatilator

Heat & Glo

Majestic

Brands Specified/Used the Most

19%

15%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Heatilator

Heat & Glo

Majestic

Quality Rating

5.81

5.80

5.73

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Vermont Castings

Heatilator

Heat & Glo

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

57

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.43

6.27

6.16

5.79

5.74

5.11

4.39

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

58

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 FLOORING: LAMINATE

Brand Familiarity

90%

76%

69%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Armstrong

Pergo

Mohawk

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

52%

34%

33%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Armstrong

Shaw

Mohawk

Brands Specified/Used the Most

28%

21%

16%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Armstrong

Shaw

Mohawk

Quality Rating

5.90

5.72

5.72

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Shaw

Armstrong

Mohawk

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

59

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.50

6.25

6.05

5.92

5.59

5.04

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

60

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 FLOORING: VINYL

Brand Familiarity

82%

60%

58%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Armstrong

Mannington

Congoleum

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

46%

28%

20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Armstrong

Mannington

Congoleum

Brands Specified/Used the Most

28%

14%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Armstrong

Mannington

Congoleum

Quality Rating

6.06

5.99

5.81

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Armstrong

Mannington

Congoleum

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

61

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.54

6.29

6.01

6.00

5.69

5.18

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

62

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 FLOORING: WOOD

Brand Familiarity

83%

79%

77%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Armstrong

Lumber Liquidators

Bruce

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

42%

41%

39%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Armstrong

Bruce

Mohawk

Brands Specified/Used the Most

19%

17%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Shaw

Mohawk

Bruce

Quality Rating

5.72

5.60

5.47

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Anderson

Shaw

Mohawk

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

63

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.64

6.18

5.92

5.68

5.37

4.82

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

64

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 GARAGE DOOR OPENERS

Brand Familiarity

73%

73%

64%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

LiftMaster

Genie

Craftsmen

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

50%

29%

28%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

LiftMaster

Overhead Door

Genie

Brands Specified/Used the Most

31%

17%

10%

10%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

LiftMaster

Overhead Door

Genie

Wayne-Dalton

Quality Rating

6.24

6.10

5.66

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

LiftMaster

Overhead Door

Chamberlain

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

65

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.58

6.43

6.14

5.83

5.76

5.38

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

66

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 GENERATORS: PORTABLE

Brand Familiarity

69%

68%

60%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

American Honda

Briggs & Stratton

Coleman

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

26%

24%

19%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

American Honda

Briggs & Stratton

Generac

Brands Specified/Used the Most

18%

15%

8%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

American Honda

Briggs & Stratton

Generac

Quality Rating

6.42

6.17

5.88

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

American Honda

Cummins Onan

Generac

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

67

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.64

6.39

5.90

5.86

5.78

5.38

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

ease of installation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

68

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 GENERATORS: STATIONARY

Brand Familiarity

70%

62%

49%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kohler

Generac

Cummins Onan

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

30%

25%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Generac

Kohler

Cummins Onan

Brands Specified/Used the Most

18%

10%

4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Generac

Kohler

Cummins Onan

Quality Rating

5.81

5.80

5.78

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Cummins Onan

Kohler

Generac

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

69

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.46

6.32

5.63

5.56

5.37

4.89

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

70

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 HOUSEWRAP

Brand Familiarity

91%

50%

47%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Tyvek (DuPont)

Typar (Fiberweb)

CertaWrap (CertainTeed)

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

79%

25%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Tyvek (DuPont)

Typar (Fiberweb)

CertaWrap (CertainTeed)

Brands Specified/Used the Most

54%

9%

5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Tyvek (DuPont)

Typar (Fiberweb)

PinkWrap (Owens Corning)

Quality Rating

6.25

5.65

5.55

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Tyvek (DuPont)

Typar (Fiberweb)

Weathermate (DOW)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

71

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.58

5.98

5.97

5.75

5.36

4.83

4.69

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

green/sustainable features

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

72

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 HVAC

Brand Familiarity

82%

78%

76%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Carrier

Lennox

Trane

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

46%

37%

27%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Carrier

Trane

Lennox

Brands Specified/Used the Most

20%

15%

9%

9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Carrier

Trane

Goodman

Rheem

Quality Rating

5.92

5.85

5.75

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Trane

Carrier

Mitsubishi Electronics

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

73

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.66

6.57

5.99

5.74

5.38

5.30

5.11

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

ease of installation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

74

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 INSULATION

Brand Familiarity

85%

75%

66%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Owens Corning

CertainTeed

Johns Manville

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

58%

41%

33%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Owens Corning

CertainTeed

Johns Manville

Brands Specified/Used the Most

34%

13%

10%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Owens Corning

CertainTeed

Johns Manville

Quality Rating

6.06

5.86

5.80

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Icynene

Owens Corning

Dow

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

75

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.57

5.98

5.91

5.76

5.48

5.21

5.11

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

green/sustainable features

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

76

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 LAUNDRY APPLIANCES

Brand Familiarity

91%

89%

89%

89%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Maytag

Whirlpool

Kenmore (Sears)

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

62%

54%

36%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Bosch

Brands Specified/Used the Most

34%

24%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Kenmore (Sears)

Quality Rating

5.64

5.58

5.48

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Bosch

Miele

Thermador

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

77

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.45

6.17

6.06

5.96

5.54

5.28

4.69

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

78

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 LIGHTING

Brand Familiarity

77%

53%

49%

49%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Halo

Kichler

Progress

Thomas

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

55%

34%

32%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Halo

Progress

Kichler

Brands Specified/Used the Most

28%

20%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Halo

Progress

Kichler

Quality Rating

5.63

5.62

5.51

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Halo

Kichler

Juno

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

79

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.37

6.10

5.97

5.84

5.63

5.16

4.66

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

80

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 LIGHTING CONTROLS/SWITCHES

Brand Familiarity

80%

65%

62%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Leviton

General Electric

Lutron

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

68%

44%

36%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Leviton

Lutron

General Electric

Brands Specified/Used the Most

41%

22%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Leviton

Lutron

General Electric

Quality Rating

5.91

5.88

5.48

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Leviton

Lutron

Johnson Controls

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

81

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.35

6.04

5.99

5.70

5.52

5.13

4.70

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

82

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 LOCKSETS/HARDWARE

Brand Familiarity

90%

86%

70%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kwikset

Schlage

Baldwin

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

69%

65%

32%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Schlage

Kwikset

Baldwin

Brands Specified/Used the Most

40%

35%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Schlage

Kwikset

Baldwin

Quality Rating

6.01

5.92

5.84

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Baldwin

Emtek

Schlage

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

83

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.45

6.29

6.12

5.85

5.83

5.22

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

84

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 MANUFACTURED STONE

Brand Familiarity

53%

52%

45%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Cultured Stone

Eldorado Stone

Coronado Stone

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

28%

26%

20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Eldorado Stone

Cultured Stone

Coronado Stone

Brands Specified/Used the Most

15%

14%

10%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Eldorado Stone

Cultured Stone

Coronado Stone

Quality Rating

5.85

5.77

5.75

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Eldorado Stone

Belgard (Oldcastle)

Cultured Stone

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

85

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.38

6.13

6.08

5.75

5.56

5.26

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

86

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 ORIENTED STRAND BOARD

Brand Familiarity

82%

49%

48%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Georgia-Pacific

Advantech (Huber Engineered Woods)

LP OSB

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

56%

32%

27%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Georgia-Pacific

Advantech (Huber Engineered Woods)

LP OSB

Brands Specified/Used the Most

36%

22%

16%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Georgia-Pacific

Advantech (Huber Engineered Woods)

LP OSB

Quality Rating

6.31

5.77

5.66

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Advantech (Huber Engineered Woods)

Georgia-Pacific

LP TechShield

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

87

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.49

6.17

6.00

5.94

5.68

5.22

4.80

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

88

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 PAINTS

Brand Familiarity

94%

85%

84%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Sherwin-Williams

Benjamin Moore

Behr Paint Corporation

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

78%

48%

43%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Sherwin-Williams

Benjamin Moore

Kilz (Masterchem Industries)

Brands Specified/Used the Most

46%

22%

12%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Sherwin-Williams

Benjamin Moore

Behr Paint Corporation

Kilz (Masterchem Industries)

Quality Rating

5.92

5.89

5.82

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Benjamin Moore

Kilz (Masterchem Industries)

Sherwin-Williams

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

89

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.64

6.19

5.95

5.54

5.32

4.82

4.38

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

90

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 RADIANT BARRIER SHEATHING

Brand Familiarity

63%

54%

40%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Georgia-Pacific

DuPont

LP

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

40%

28%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Georgia-Pacific

DuPont

LP

Brands Specified/Used the Most

24%

13%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Georgia-Pacific

DuPont

LP

Quality Rating

5.89

5.86

5.44

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

DuPont

Georgia-Pacific

LP

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

91

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.51

6.24

6.09

5.83

5.48

4.95

4.64

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

92

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 RANGE HOODS

Brand Familiarity

80%

74%

70%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Jenn-Air

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

50%

31%

28%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Broan

Brands Specified/Used the Most

24%

13%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Broan

Quality Rating

6.10

5.98

5.92

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Wolf Appliance, Inc

Viking

Bosch

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

93

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.46

6.11

5.99

5.99

5.62

4.98

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

94

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 RANGES/COOKTOPS

Brand Familiarity

82%

73%

71%

71%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Kenmore (Sears)

Frigidaire

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

53%

32%

26%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Jenn-Air

Brands Specified/Used the Most

31%

14%

10%

10%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Kenmore (Sears)

Viking

Quality Rating

6.20

6.00

5.92

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Wolf Appliance, Inc

Thermador

Viking

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

95

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.48

6.17

6.12

6.07

5.76

5.15

4.45

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

96

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 REFRIGERATORS

Brand Familiarity

83%

76%

73%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Frigidaire

Whirlpool

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

53%

35%

31%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Frigidaire

Brands Specified/Used the Most

35%

17%

12%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Kenmore (Sears)

Frigidaire

Quality Rating

6.15

5.97

5.67

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Sub-Zero

Viking

Thermador

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

97

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.51

6.25

6.10

5.93

5.74

5.16

4.51

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

98

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 RIDGE VENT SYSTEMS

Brand Familiarity

67%

55%

53%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Owens Corning

GAF Cobra

Ridgeline Ridge Vent System

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

42%

31%

27%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Owens Corning

GAF Cobra

Ridgeline Ridge Vent System

Brands Specified/Used the Most

20%

16%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Owens Corning

GAF Cobra

Ridgeline Ridge Vent System

Quality Rating

5.61

5.55

5.45

5.45

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Owens Corning

Ridgeline Ridge Vent System

Air Vent

GAF Cobra

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

99

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.54

6.10

6.05

5.97

5.30

4.42

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

100

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 ROOFING: ASPHALT/FIBERGLASS SHINGLES

Brand Familiarity

85%

81%

77%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

GAF (including Timberline)

Owens Corning

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

59%

58%

49%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GAF (including Timberline)

CertainTeed

Owens Corning

Brands Specified/Used the Most

31%

26%

20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

GAF (including Timberline)

CertainTeed

Owens Corning

Quality Rating

5.88

5.79

5.63

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

GAF (including Timberline)

Owens Corning

CertainTeed

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

101

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.59

6.35

6.14

5.88

5.74

5.02

4.35

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

102

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 ROOFING: CLAY/CONCRETE/SYNTHETIC TILES

Brand Familiarity

35%

31%

21%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

GAF TruSlate

Boral Roofing LLC

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

11%

6%

4%

4%

4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

GAF TruSlate

Eagle

Boral Roofing LLC

EMCO

Brands Specified/Used the Most

6%

3%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

Eagle

GAF TruSlate

Quality Rating

6.06

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

CertainTeed

(no others based on 30+)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

103

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.44

6.26

6.03

6.03

5.78

5.34

4.94

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

104

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 ROOFING: METAL

Brand Familiarity

27%

21%

16%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

American Building Components (ABC)

Alcan

Metal Sales Manufacturing

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

13%

9%

6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

American Building Components (ABC)

Metal Sales Manufacturing

Alcan

Brands Specified/Used the Most

7%

7%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

American Building Components (ABC)

Metal Sales Manufacturing

Alcan

Quality Rating

5.78

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

American Building Components (ABC)

(no others based on 30+)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

105

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.24

5.99

5.95

5.95

5.64

5.14

4.44

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

106

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 ROOFING: PHOTOVOLTAIC

Brand Familiarity

18%

13%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

BP Solar

Sun Power

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

7%

3%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

BP Solar

Sun Power

Brands Specified/Used the Most

3%

1%

1%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

Akeena

Sun Power

BP Solar

Quality Rating

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

(none based on 30+)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

107

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.14

5.81

5.79

5.70

5.19

4.81

4.30

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

ease of installation

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

108

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 SHOWER DOORS/SURROUNDS

Brand Familiarity

67%

65%

47%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

American Standard

Kohler

Sterling

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

40%

37%

26%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

American Standard

Kohler

Sterling

Brands Specified/Used the Most

21%

18%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kohler

American Standard

Sterling

Quality Rating

6.07

5.88

5.70

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Kohler

Jacuzzi

Alumax

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

109

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.54

6.13

6.12

6.06

5.55

4.88

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

ease of installation

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

110

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 SIDING: BRICK & BRICK VENEER

Brand Familiarity

42%

33%

32%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Eldorado Stone

Acme Brick

Boral

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

21%

18%

17%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Eldorado Stone

Acme Brick

Boral

Brands Specified/Used the Most

13%

9%

6%

6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Eldorado Stone

Acme Brick

Belden

Boral

Quality Rating

6.02

5.96

5.91

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Boral

Eldorado Stone

Acme Brick

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

111

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.53

6.28

6.00

5.98

5.73

5.22

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

112

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 SIDING: EIFS/STUCCO

Brand Familiarity

76%

27%

25%

25%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Dryvit

STO

Senergy

Simplex (Finestone)

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

26%

8%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Dryvit

STO

Senergy

Brands Specified/Used the Most

12%

3%

2%

2%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Dryvit

Senergy

Parex/La Habra

Simplex (Finestone)

STO

Quality Rating

5.35

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Dryvit

(no others based on 30+)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

113

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.40

6.11

5.81

5.67

5.50

4.73

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

114

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 SIDING: ENGINEERED WOOD

Brand Familiarity

47%

23%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

LP SmartSide

Collins/TruWood

AraucoPly

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

22%

6%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

LP SmartSide

Collins/TruWood

AraucoPly

Brands Specified/Used the Most

13%

3%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

LP SmartSide

Collins/TruWood

AraucoPly

Quality Rating

5.48

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

LP SmartSide

(no others based on 30+)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

115

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.43

6.23

6.00

5.75

5.65

4.86

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

116

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 SIDING: FIBER CEMENT

Brand Familiarity

79%

64%

46%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

HardiePlank (James Hardie)

CertainTeed

Artisan (James Hardie)

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

60%

33%

24%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

HardiePlank (James Hardie)

CertainTeed

Artisan (James Hardie)

Brands Specified/Used the Most

38%

14%

10%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

HardiePlank (James Hardie)

CertainTeed

Artisan (James Hardie)

Quality Rating

6.01

5.83

5.65

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

HardiePlank (James Hardie)

Artisan (James Hardie)

CertainTeed

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

117

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.56

6.41

6.13

5.84

5.79

4.93

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

ease of installation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

118

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 SIDING: INSULATED

Brand Familiarity

57%

23%

20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

CedarMax (Heartland)

Mastic Home Exteriors by Ply Gem

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

30%

6%

5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

CedarMax (Heartland)

Mastic Home Exteriors by Ply Gem

Brands Specified/Used the Most

17%

3%

2%

2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

CedarMax (Heartland)

Mastic Home Exteriors by Ply Gem

CraneBoard

Quality Rating

5.87

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

CertainTeed

(no others based on 30+)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

119

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.45

6.26

5.94

5.93

5.75

5.05

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

120

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 SIDING: VINYL

Brand Familiarity

64%

45%

28%

28%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

Georgia-Pacific Siding

Alside

Norandex

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

35%

14%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

Georgia-Pacific Siding

Alside

Brands Specified/Used the Most

19%

5%

4%

4%

4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

CertainTeed

Alside

Georgia-Pacific Siding

Norandex

Rollex

Quality Rating

5.88

5.50

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

CertainTeed

Georgia-Pacific Siding

(no others based on 30+)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

121

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.46

6.32

6.10

6.00

5.79

5.10

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

122

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 STAINS/VARNISHES

Brand Familiarity

83%

72%

65%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Sherwin-Williams

Olympic

Valspar

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

54%

37%

35%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Sherwin-Williams

Olympic

Thompson�s/Minwax

Brands Specified/Used the Most

34%

12%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Sherwin-Williams

Thompson�s/Minwax

Olympic

Quality Rating

6.03

5.96

5.92

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Sikkens

Sherwin-Williams

Samuel Cabot

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

123

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.60

6.15

6.08

6.00

5.69

5.07

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

124

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 SURFACING: LAMINATE

Brand Familiarity

79%

78%

34%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Formica

Wilsonart

Nevamar

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

58%

56%

9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Wilsonart

Formica

Pionite

Brands Specified/Used the Most

29%

25%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Wilsonart

Formica

Pionite

Quality Rating

6.29

6.22

5.81

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Formica

Wilsonart

Pionite

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

125

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.55

6.23

6.18

5.89

5.60

4.95

4.78

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

126

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 SURFACING: QUARTZ

Brand Familiarity

63%

50%

42%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Silestone

Cambria

Zodiaq (DuPont)

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

25%

19%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Silestone

Cambria

Ceasarstone

Brands Specified/Used the Most

8%

7%

3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Cambria

Silestone

*

*VT Stone Surfaces; Ceasarstone; Legacy; Zodiaq (DuPont)

Quality Rating

5.91

5.74

5.69

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Cambria

Zodiaq (DuPont)

Silestone

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

127

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.41

6.24

5.99

5.50

5.48

4.92

4.35

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

ease of installation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

128

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 SURFACING: SOLID SURFACES

Brand Familiarity

75%

37%

26%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Corian (DuPont)

Gibraltar (Wilsonart)

Nevamar

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

35%

16%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Corian (DuPont)

Gibraltar (Wilsonart)

Surell (Formica)

Brands Specified/Used the Most

11%

6%

4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Corian (DuPont)

Gibraltar (Wilsonart)

Surell (Formica)

Quality Rating

5.90

5.42

5.29

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Corian (DuPont)

Surell (Formica)

Gibraltar (Wilsonart)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

129

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.47

6.25

5.99

5.83

5.61

5.06

4.37

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

130

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 TRUCKS: PICKUP

Brand Familiarity

80%

76%

72%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Ford

Chevrolet

Dodge

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

53%

41%

22%

22%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Ford

Chevrolet

Dodge

GMC

Brands Specified/Used the Most

35%

27%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Ford

Chevrolet

GMC

Quality Rating

5.95

5.69

5.68

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Ford

Chevrolet

GMC

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

131

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.68

6.29

5.98

5.88

5.43

4.76

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

availability of product through your dealer

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

ease of installation

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

132

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 UNDERLAYMENT

Brand Familiarity

74%

64%

63%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

DUROCK (USG)

CertainTeed

James Hardie

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

65%

44%

40%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

DUROCK (USG)

James Hardie

CertainTeed

Brands Specified/Used the Most

32%

22%

16%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

DUROCK (USG)

James Hardie

CertainTeed

Quality Rating

5.99

5.91

5.85

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

DUROCK (USG)

James Hardie

Georgia-Pacific (DensShield)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

133

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.63

6.31

6.28

6.14

5.61

4.93

4.50

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

134

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 WALLBOARD

Brand Familiarity

89%

59%

54%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

SHEETROCK (USG)

Gold Bond (National Gypsum)

CertainTeed

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

75%

39%

26%

26%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

SHEETROCK (USG)

Gold Bond (National Gypsum)

Georgia-Pacific (DensArmor)

CertainTeed

Brands Specified/Used the Most

52%

16%

10%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

SHEETROCK (USG)

Gold Bond (National Gypsum)

CertainTeed

Quality Rating

6.07

5.85

5.81

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

SHEETROCK (USG)

Georgia-Pacific (DensArmor)

Gold Bond (National Gypsum)

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

135

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.47

6.29

6.14

5.92

5.69

5.21

4.63

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

warranty

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

136

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 WATER HEATERS

Brand Familiarity

79%

78%

77%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Rheem

GE Appliances

Kenmore (Sears)

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

44%

42%

36%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

A.O. Smith

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Brands Specified/Used the Most

26%

18%

16%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

A.O. Smith

GE Appliances

Whirlpool

Quality Rating

6.00

5.78

5.77

5.77

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Rinnai

Bosch

A.O. Smith

Rheem

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

137

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.58

6.11

6.08

5.91

5.46

5.30

4.93

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

ease of installation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

138

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 WHIRLPOOL BATHS

Brand Familiarity

82%

80%

79%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

American Standard

Kohler

Jacuzzi

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

48%

37%

34%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kohler

American Standard

Jacuzzi

Brands Specified/Used the Most

24%

21%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Kohler

American Standard

Jacuzzi

Quality Rating

6.04

5.67

5.64

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Kohler

American Standard

Jacuzzi

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

139

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.47

6.32

6.12

6.05

5.78

5.49

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

ease of installation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

140

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 WINDOWS: SKYLIGHTS/ROOF

Brand Familiarity

71%

68%

51%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Andersen

Velux

Solatube

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

42%

32%

18%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Velux

Andersen

Solatube

Brands Specified/Used the Most

28%

17%

6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Velux

Andersen

Solatube

Quality Rating

6.29

6.10

5.66

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Velux

Andersen

Solatube

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

141

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.69

6.44

6.29

6.09

5.94

5.57

5.10

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

ease of installation

availability of product through your dealer

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

142

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 WINDOWS: VINYL

Brand Familiarity

79%

53%

45%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

JELD-WEN

CertainTeed

Hurd Windows and Doors

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

33%

19%

12%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

JELD-WEN

Silver Line (an Andersen Company)

CertainTeed

ThermaStar by Pella

Brands Specified/Used the Most

13%

9%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

JELD-WEN

Silver Line (an Andersen Company)

Milgard

Quality Rating

5.81

5.81

5.72

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Simonton

Milgard

ThermaStar by Pella

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

143

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.67

6.46

6.20

6.15

6.11

5.77

5.24

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

availability of product through your dealer

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

144

2013 Brand Use Study

Top 3 WINDOWS: WOOD & CLAD-WOOD

Brand Familiarity

83%

79%

72%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Andersen

Pella

JELD-WEN

% who heard of each

Brands Specified/Used in Past 2 Years

40%

31%

23%

23%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Andersen

Pella

Marvin

JELD-WEN

Brands Specified/Used the Most

26%

16%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Andersen

Pella

Marvin

Quality Rating

6.14

6.06

5.94

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

Andersen

Marvin

Pella

mean (1 = poor; 7 = excellent)

© 2012 Hanley Wood

145

2013 Brand Use Study

Importance of Factors Influencing Brand Selection

6.66

6.49

6.23

6.19

6.11

5.87

5.23

1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00

product performance

warranty

ease of installation

strength of mfr�s brand / reputation

availability of product through your dealer

strong relationship with the mfr / dealer

green/sustainable features

mean importance (1 = not at all; 7 = very)