My first thought was that this provides an interesting insight as to the cost that brands want you to pay for their name, as this metric would seem to provide a measure of "value" in terms of the actual skilled effort that a brand puts in for the money.
Then I realised that Richard Mille looked very poor "value" (by this measure alone, which is interesting, but has flaws due to outsourcing), and I realised they are not on the graph, so I guess they were omitted because of that?
Second thought was that AP seemed pretty bad.
Interesting article, I think the bottom left of the graph needs some more zooming in.
It also strikes me that the one cost missing is R & D. You can tie up millions creating new movements, but that is not represented on this metric.
D