長江實業 Rating of Cheung Kong Property HoldingsBack
地產及物業發展調查提問方式
Wordings of "Real Estate and Property Development" question
跟住我會讀出一D本地地產商既名字,請你同樣用0 - 100分評價佢地係企業社會責任方面既表現,0分代表表現極差,100分代表表現極佳,50分代表一半半,你會俾幾多分xxx呢?
I would mention a few local real estate companies. Please rate how they have performed in terms of corporate social responsibility using 0 to 100 marks. 0 indicates extremely poor performance, 100 indicates extremely good performance and 50 indicates half-half. How would you rate XXX?
調查日期 Date of survey |
樣本人數 Total Sample |
評分 Rating |
標準誤差 Standard Error |
評分人數 Number of Raters |
認知率 Recognition Rate |
21-24/1/2019 | 519 | 47.9 | 1.0 | 443 | 81.3% |
18-19/4/2018 | 503 | 50.3 | 1.1 | 435 | 86.5% |
16-18/10/2017 | 546 | 49.8 | 1.0 | 490 | 89.8% |
16-18/5/2017 | 521 | 54.4 | 1.1 | 438 | 84.0% |
20-21/2/2017 | 503 | 49.9 | 1.1 | 420 | 83.5% |
21-22/11/2016 | 512 | 50.6 | 1.1 | 426 | 83.3% |
19-22/8/2016 | 564 | 49.8 | 1.0 | 453 | 80.4% |
24-25/5/2016 | 506 | 50.6 | 1.1 | 414 | 81.8% |
25-26/2/2016 | 513 | 53.7 | 1.1 | 402 | 78.3% |
27-30/11/2015 | 524 | 53.5 | 1.1 | 410 | 78.2% |
21-24/8/2015 | 502 | 47.7 | 1.1 | 428 | 85.2% |
11-13/5/2015 | 519 | 55.3 | 1.0 | 431 | 83.0% |
11-12/2/2015 | 504 | 50.6 | 1.0 | 421 | 83.5% |
17-18/11/2014 | 511 | 47.3 | 1.1 | 421 | 82.4% |
7-9/8/2014 | 501 | 43.4 | 1.1 | 421 | 84.1% |
12-13/5/2014 | 529 | 49.0 | 1.0 | 476 | 89.9% |
7-11/2/2014 | 500 | 51.3 | 1.1 | 419 | 83.7% |
12-18/11/2013 | 501 | 44.8 | 1.1 | 419 | 83.6% |
8-15/8/2013 | 515 | 50.2 | 1.1 | 465 | 90.3% |
10-14/5/2013 | 516 | 44.7 | 1.0 | 451 | 87.4% |
18-19/2/2013 | 510 | 46.6 | 1.0 | 423 | 82.9% |
16-19/11/2012 | 514 | 50.9 | 1.1 | 440 | 85.5% |
14-15/8/2012 | 509 | 50.7 | 1.1 | 451 | 88.6% |
15-16/5/2012 | 508 | 49.2 | 1.2 | 410 | 80.8% |
20-21/2/2012 | 506 | 40.6 | 1.1 | 423 | 83.6% |
15-17/11/2011 | 520 | 47.6 | 1.1 | 423 | 81.3% |
15-29/8/2011 | 517 | 48.5 | 1.1 | 419 | 81.0% |
25-31/5/2011 | 527 | 45.7 | 1.1 | 444 | 84.2% |
18-19/2/2011 | 526 | 47.7 | 1.1 | 426 | 81.1% |
12-26/11/2010 | 518 | 50.1 | 1.1 | 447 | 86.3% |
10-12/8/2010 | 510 | 57.9 | 1.0 | 447 | 87.7% |
7-10/5/2010 | 560 | 53.0 | 1.0 | 509 | 90.9% |
4-8/2/2010 | 535 | 56.1 | 0.9 | 469 | 87.6% |
19/11-2/12/2009 | 530 | 50.8 | 1.0 | 471 | 88.8% |
18-27/8/2009 | 506 | 56.4 | 1.0 | 458 | 90.4% |
11-12/5/2009 | 557 | 58.2 | 0.9 | 480 | 86.1% |
10/2/2009 | 572 | 56.8 | 0.9 | 484 | 84.6% |
17-23/12/2008 | 519 | 56.5 | 0.9 | 405 | 78.0% |
25/8/2008 | 544 | 58.7 | 1.0 | 459 | 84.4% |
20-21/5/2008 | 505 | 59.0 | 1.0 | 435 | 86.2% |
19-20/3/2008 | 514 | 59.3 | 1.0 | 438 | 85.2% |
* The mobile sample was not included when survey results were released. The figures in the table above have been updated to reflect the results based on the combined landline and mobile sample.