Know-How Exchange : Branding

It probably depends on whether there's high value in the acquired companies' brand names. If there is, it would be a shame to throw away all that equity ... especially after you've paid for it.

So why do you want to convince people that it's important to change the names? Is there some synergy you think you'll get by just having one name? Is it worth more than keeping the names of the companies you've acquired?

The way to convince people is with a well-thought-out explanation of the economic benefit. Be sure it's valid, then show them what it's going to be worth on the bottom line to change the names. Don't forget to include the cost of the name changes too.

As an aside, this may be a situation where outside expertise (in branding, positioning, and re-positioning) would be worth a lot more than it will cost. Let me know if you want to discuss.

I always look at what's in it for them first.. no matter what you're selling... and right now you're selling the-buy-in to what you say is important.

Why is it so important?

How does it TRULY benefit the company - where's the payoff or ROI?

In my experience - this is the best way to get buy in - what's the end result for doing it... and how does it benefit the company... the more details and supporting data you can provide, the better response you will get.
-
Remember to talk directly to the intended decision makers - and not in broad strokes.

I hope that helps

Alan

Agree with mgoodman. Whose brand has more equity to the ultimate user, corp or franchise?

If 'corp' has higher equity, there's a tonne of examples:
FedEx/Kinko's may provide recent national 'name' change