But that’s not the question in the OP. I interpreted to be asking if there are product lines of an existing company that were split off to be manufactured and sold by another company, while the original company is still selling products under the same name. It’s a specific question.
am77494, is my interpretation of the question correct?
Some of us have been trying to answer that question. And the answer is yes - the practice is not uncommon, and it is not new.
What is rare is if the original company was still selling competing products under the same brand name/logo. For example, GE (as the General Electric Company) does not sell products which compete directly with those sold be GE Appliances/Haier, but they certainly sell other items carrying the same GE logo (“the meatball” to current and former employees). It is theoretically possible, but any company who licenses a trademark/logo without having some range of exclusive use of said trademark/logo needs to fire their attorney.
I don’t think this is all that common. So far, the examples are GE, Renault Trucks, and Rolls Royce, right? Maybe MSNBC?
There are some beer brands where the US version is made by a different company than the home version. I think Becks might qualify, but that might just be a “bottled under license” thing.
(eye twitch)
Trademark issues.
A refrigerator manufacturer may be able to copyright the instruction manual, but it can’t copyright the refrigerator itself.
Other examples:
Westinghouse Electronics is a Chinese owned company selling TVs and monitors while licensing the Westinghouse name and logo.
Philips lighting products were spun off into an independent publicly held company (Signify NV) but retains a license to the Philips name and logo.
Yes, I meant to add trademark issues as well but missed the edit window. When a company is bought all of their intellectual property (including TM and copyrights) become the property of the new owning unless otherwise specified in the contracts.
Mark Levenson for example doesn’t even own the right to use his own name since Harman purchased his audio company for use on Lexus automobiles.
Remember GoldStar?
The Goldstar brand was “put on the shelf” after they changed the LG meaning from Lucky Goldstar to Life’s Good. I would not be surprised to see them resurrect the brand sometime later after a enough time passes for people to have forgotten about the name change.
Sort of like GM no longer produces Trans-Am’s since Pontiac was shutdown, but they are using the name as part of a special edition Camaro.
As GMANCANADA said, this is extremely common. Listing them is simply tedious.
Here’s the first one I looked for from Wikipedia.
As of 2017 Q4, Stanley Black & Decker’s brand portfolio included:[15]
- STANLEY (formerly known as The Stanley Works , started as Stanley’s Bolt Manufactory , founded by Frederick Trent Stanley in 1843, and merging with the Stanley Rule and Level Company founded by Henry Stanley)
- Black+Decker
- Aero Scout
- Bostitch
- Craftsman
- DeWalt
- Facom, Mac Tools, Proto
- Inner Space
- Irwin
- Lenox
- Piranha
- Porter-Cable
- Sonitrol
- STANLEY Access Technologies
- STANLEY Engineered Fastening
- STANLEY Healthcare
- STANLEY Infrastructure
- STANLEY Security
- Vidmar
Former brands and subsidiaries
- Baldwin (sold to Spectrum Brands)
- Delta Machinery (sold to Chang Type Industrial)
- DeVilbiss Air Power (sold to MAT Holdings)
- Kwikset (sold to Spectrum Brands)
- Price Pfister (sold to Spectrum Brands)
- Weiser Lock[16] (sold to Spectrum Brands)
Now look up Spectrum Brands and see everything it owns.
Polaroid Corporation went bankrupt in 2001. a new “Polaroid” was formed after that, with explicitly no financial connections to the original company (despite the use of the name and logos). The branding was bought and sold several times after that, and the “new” Polaroid company disappeared. The “Polaroid” name is still used, but it’s now long removed from the original.
Also, a Dutch company started up in 2008 to make instant film usable in old Polaroid products .It uses the Polaroid name and logo, and is called Polaroid BV. I don’t think they have any connection to the other post-Polaroid companies using the name and logo still.
I don’t think any of these examples address the OP. It’s not about merging brands together. Take General Electric – they still make aircraft engines and medical equipment and it’s branded with the GE meatball. Haier also makes products branded with the GE meatball and Haier has nothing to do with GE.
These seem like good examples, assuming Westinghouse is still making other stuff (nuclear power plants, I guess?). Philips for sure.
Westinghouse Electric Company is the spinoff of Westinghouse’s nuclear business from the parent company. There are a few other licensing agreements (Westinghouse Lighting, Westinghouse Battery). The original Westinghouse changed its name to CBS in 1997 (now ViacomCBS). So similar to the RCA situation with multiple independent companies licensing the Westinghouse name, except that one of the companies is a direct spinoff from the original.
More examples from the GE-verse:
GE Transportation (locomotives) is now owned by Webtec but still uses the GE meatball.
GE Lighting, as previously mentioned, is now owned by Savant.
The old joke around GE in the 1980s was, “GE wants to be #2 in the computer business. The plan is to buy IBM and wait five years.”
Actually, Volvo may fall under that umbrella since the Car and Truck companies are separate entities, sharing a name and logo. The car company was sold off by AB Volvo to Ford, and is now owned by a Chinese conglomerate. AB Volvo continues to make heavy trucks, buses, and construction equipment.
Saab AB split off their car division in the 1990s and it floundered a bit before being licensed to a Chinese firm to produce cars. That ended in 2012-13 and the Saab car brand effectively died at that point. Saab AB continues to build planes, but there are no longer any new Saab cars.
An example that I’m very familiar with, because I worked on the brand at the time:
Aunt Jemima pancake syrups, pancake mixes, and frozen products (waffles, French toast) were all made by the Quaker Oats Company until 1996. At that point, Quaker Oats sold off their frozen food business to another company, Aurora Foods, which continued to make the frozen Aunt Jemima products under license, while Quaker still Aunt Jemima syrups and mixes.
24 years later, Quaker is now owned by Pepsico, and they still make Aunt Jemima syrups and mixes (though they announced, earlier this year, that they’ll be phasing out the brand name in the near future, due to its negative connotations). The frozen Aunt Jemima products have changed hands, as Aurora Foods was sold, but they, too, are still being marketed, now by Pinnacle Foods.
Redacted, ninja.
Singer hasn’t made Singer sewing machines since 1986. They sold off the sewing machine division, which was then spun into a separate company, which was later renamed Singer. The original Singer Corp. soldiered on, and was eventually sold and renamed SVP.
Ralston Purina had a weird breakup. The company originally made and sold cereals, pet food, and animal feed. There was a natural synergy there - the manufacturing processes are nearly identical, and a lot of the products were made in the same plants. Then the pet food division was sold to Nestle. The cereal and animal feed divisions were spun into separate companies, although in some cases, the products were still being made in the same plants. All three companies fought for the use of the checkerboard logo on their various products. The cereal division wound up selling off the Chex brand (and the use of the logo) to General Mills and the animal feed company and its logo went to Land O’ Lakes.
Slight hijack, I wonder if I could buy the brand cheap? I’ve spoken to a lot of people that just don’t care about the racial overtones of Aunt Jemima and would continue to buy the brand.
And now back to our regular thread. Please no comments except from kenobi_65 unless you want to start another thread about my racist proposal. 
This is why I have no brand loyalty. Because brands mean NOTHING. There is no longer any implicit understanding that if I buy a thing labeled BrandX that I can expect the quality that BrandX has always shown. I trust no company to buy a brand and leave it alone. Too many assholes with high opinions of themselves, thinking they can take a known and respected entity, change it, inevitably by substituting a component with a cheaper/lesser quality version and try to reap the same profits. They’re fooling no one.