Why do some firm acquisitions give rise to a single brand name, and why, following others, all

brands involved subsist? How do the demand cross effects, the brand equity of the rivals and

the strategic variable of competition influence this decision? The current paper addresses these

issues. It is shown that keeping all names involved is always profitable, but adopting a common

one may not be. However, the latter is the best choice whenever the new brand's expected

value is higher than the average reputation of the pre-acquisition ones. When the rival's

reputation is strong, this brand dilemma becomes less accute