Coffeemaker :: The total survey results of 2016 by the integrated assestment

The total survey results of 2016 by the integrated assestment in category

Kitchen appliances and crockery / Coffeemaker

Integrated, “absolute” ratings is calculated by survey results of 3 respondent groups.

	Consumers (40%)
	Experts (40%)
	Celebrities (20%)

The Favorites of the Year is determined by the Consumers (non-indifferent public), Experts (authoritative specialists of this market industry) and Celebrities Jury (known public figures and celebrities).

In forming of the integrated ratings, the following weight is assumed:

Absolute rank = (average yearly rank of Consumers × 0.4) + (rank of Experts × 0.4) + (rank of Celebrities × 0.2).

1.	3	De’Longhi	5

2.	1	Philips	4.78

3.	2	Bosch	3.47

4.	5	Tefal	2.30

5.	6	Moulinex	2.08

6.	4	Kenwood	1.95

7.	8	Krups	1.80

8.	18	Saturn	1.54

9.	13	Vitek	1.26

10.	14	Zelmer (БСХ Бош та Сіменс. Побутова техніка)	1.23

11.	19	Redmond	0.93

12.	10	Gaggia	0.874

13.	9	Siemens	0.872

14.	25	Bork	0.835

15.	12	Electrolux	0.819

16.	7	Rowenta	0.766

17.		Aurora	0.686

18.	16	Tassimo (Монделіс Україна)	0.670

19.	23	Magio	0.575

20.	15	Scarlett	0.411

21.	11	Delfa	0.334

22.		Clatronic	0.278

22.	24	Polaris	0.278

24.		Binatone	0.148

25.	21	Russell Hobbs	0.111

26.	~	Steba	0.095

–.	20	Mystery	0

–.	25	Ufesa	0

The trade mark which has taken 1st place in this rating — is the best and most successful Ukrainian mark of 2016 in the “Coffeemaker” category!

Using this rating is only possible with obligatory link to the source.

This rating was built as a result of the study of social preferences in 2016, under the “Favorites of Success” Contest in Ukraine and it’s the free information. In case of full or partial republishing of the information drawn from this rating, it is obligatory to mention the name of the “Favorites of Success” Contest in printed publications, or put an active hyperlink to this page in the electronic media.

Advanced reporting booklet about the study, including demographics of the respondents, by regional breakdown, information roll-call of ad hoc judges etc, can also be obtained from managers of the contest.