Most consumers will pay 25% more for products from their favorite brands, a new survey finds. That single figure gives marketing leaders a concrete benchmark for what brand equity is worth at the point of purchase — and a reason to defend brand investment when procurement asks for cuts.

The finding lands at a moment when CMOs face sustained pressure on pricing. Private-label share has grown across categories, promotional intensity has increased in several retail channels, and finance teams routinely challenge whether brand spending translates into margin. A willingness among most consumers to absorb a 25% premium for preferred brands is direct evidence that preference, once built, carries measurable financial value.

What does the 25% figure actually tell CMOs?

The number describes willingness, not behavior in every transaction. Consumers who report they will pay more for a favorite brand are signaling attachment strong enough to survive a meaningful price gap. For a marketing leader, that gap represents the ceiling of pricing power a well-liked brand can exercise before switching begins.

The practical uses are straightforward:

• Pricing strategy. Brands with high preference scores have documented headroom before price-driven churn becomes the dominant risk.
• Budget defense. The survey gives CMOs an external data point when arguing that brand-building spend protects margin, not just awareness.
• Segmentation. "Most" consumers is a strong majority claim, but the remainder still shop on price — meaning value-tier and promotional strategies still matter for the full portfolio.

How should brands act on this?

The finding rewards brands that have invested consistently in preference. It does not reward those that cut brand spend to protect short-term margins and then attempt price increases. Preference is built over years of product quality, consistent positioning and reliable experience; the 25% premium is the return on that accumulated work, not a lever a brand can pull at will.

For portfolio strategists, the data suggests a two-track approach. Core brands with demonstrable loyalty can hold or raise prices with less promotional support. Weaker or challenger brands should compete on value until preference metrics justify premium positioning.

What are the limits of the finding?

Surveys measure stated intent. Real-world willingness to pay varies by category, competitive set and macroeconomic conditions, and inflationary periods tend to compress stated premiums. Marketing leaders should treat the 25% figure as a directional benchmark and validate it against their own price-elasticity and churn data before acting.

The core lesson stands regardless: consumer preference, measured and nurtured, converts directly into pricing power. In a planning cycle dominated by efficiency metrics, that is a number worth putting in front of the board.