The Braun brand includes shavers, epilators, and hair-removal products. Under the same brand name, there are also coffee makers, kettles, and irons. Both product ranges share the same logo, wordmark, and visual identity. And yet there isn't a single Instagram account that covers both product worlds. Why?
The answer isn't about marketing aesthetics. It's about something most companies regularly get wrong when deciding how to structure their social media channels.
Most companies considering a second or third social media account don't arrive at the idea through analysis. They arrive there by reflex. A new product line launches, and someone in product management wants a “dedicated” channel. A marketing team thinks the existing account is “too mixed” for a new, more premium segment. A launch is supposed to feel special, so it gets its own profile.
Each individual decision seems reasonable. The result is a company managing five half-dead accounts instead of one thriving one.
The default reflex: one account per product category
This reflex feels like careful segmentation, but in most cases, it's the opposite. Instagram, like any other platform, rewards concentration: an account with consistent posting, an active community, and a clear signal is more likely to be favored by the algorithm. Split the same reach across three accounts, and you don't get three times the impact. You usually get less than you had with one.
The network effect gets lost
Reach, followers, and social proof are distributed across multiple accounts. Each individual account sends weaker signals to the algorithm than one consolidated account.
Resource requirements multiply
Every additional account needs its own content pipeline, community management, and reporting. The workload grows linearly. The results usually don't.
The customer journey gets confusing
Someone already following the brand can miss an announcement because it appeared under another handle they didn't know existed.
Abandoned accounts emerge
The resources are barely sufficient for the first channel. The second and third are neglected after a few months and end up doing more damage to the brand than having no additional channel at all.
The answer to the puzzle: two companies, one name
The reason Braun shavers and Braun coffee makers never appear in the same feed isn't a marketing decision. It's a matter of corporate structure. In 2012, Procter & Gamble granted the De'Longhi Group a perpetual license to use the Braun brand name for small domestic appliances, including kitchen appliances and irons. Shaving and beauty remained with P&G. Since then, the two product worlds have been backed by two separate companies, legally, organizationally, and in terms of marketing, using the same brand name under the licensing agreement.
| Business | Owner | Audience & logic |
|---|---|---|
| Braun Shaving & Beauty | Procter & Gamble | Personal care, global P&G brand structure, high purchase frequency, low involvement |
| Braun Household (kitchen & home) | De'Longhi Group (licensed since 2012) | Separate marketing organization based in Neu-Isenburg, different buying situation, different product life cycle |
Source for the licensing agreement: Jones Day / PR Newswire, finalized in 2012. This supports the publicly documented ownership and licensing structure, not any conclusions about the companies' internal social media strategies.
This isn't an exception to the rule. It's confirmation of it. The accounts aren't separate because someone decided that coffee makers “deserve” their own feed. They're separate because there are actually two different companies, with different audiences, sales models, and marketing organizations. That's exactly the distinction most companies overlook when discussing whether to create another account.
Even within the brand: different accounts for different structures
It gets even more interesting when you look at Braun's presence on Instagram. In the German-speaking market and at the global brand level alone, several clearly separate accounts exist:
Follower and post counts checked directly on Instagram as of October 6, 2026. These figures are snapshots and will change over time.
What matters isn't that there are multiple accounts. What matters is why they're separate. Different levels intersect here: corporate, brand, market, and business unit. Braun Household Germany doesn't exist separately simply because coffee makers or kettles “deserve” their own feed. The account sits within a different organizational structure from P&G's shaving and beauty business.
That's the difference between purposeful channel architecture and simply multiplying accounts internally.
The 3 conditions under which a second account actually makes sense
The segmentation test
Is the audience genuinely different, rather than just the product? Different purchase motivation, price point, purchase frequency, or decision-making process. Braun Shaving and Braun kitchen appliances pass this test because they effectively address different buyers with different levels of involvement. The same applies to Unilever, where Axe, aimed at younger men with a humorous personality, and Dove, with its body-positivity positioning, are deliberately managed as distinct brand personalities.
The country and culture test
Do language, culture, regulation, or product offerings differ enough that simply translating the content isn't sufficient? Coca-Cola maintains a dedicated European account alongside its global account. The important distinction is that this kind of split follows a genuine difference between markets, not simply a product category within the same market.
The resource test
Can the new channel actually be run as a fully fledged account, with its own content pipeline, community management, and reporting, without weakening the existing account? If a team is already struggling with one channel, a second one isn't an additional offering for the audience. It's a second problem for the team.
What isn't a sufficient reason
“Our product has its own personality.”
An internal desire for independence isn't evidence of a genuinely different audience.
“Our competitor does it too.”
Copying someone else's channel structure without examining your own segmentation and resources means taking on the risk without understanding the reason behind it.
“We're launching something new soon.”
A hype account for a single launch almost always becomes abandoned once the initial launch excitement is over.
“The product team wants full control.”
Internal ownership preferences are an organizational issue, not customer logic.
An additional account doesn't automatically create more attention. First, it divides the attention you already have.
Governance: who makes the decision
Just like brand architecture as a whole, this decision shouldn't sit with an individual product line. It needs to be made by a central function before the account exists:
- The default is one account per brand, not one per product or product category.
- A new account needs a written rationale that passes all three tests, not just one.
- A central marketing or brand governance function approves new channels, not the individual product line.
- Every approved channel gets a resource commitment from day one, not just a new name.
An additional Instagram account isn't a marketing whim. It's a structural decision. It only makes sense when the audience is genuinely different, the market requires it, and there are enough resources to run a fully fledged second channel. Everything else fragments reach that took considerable effort to build in the first place.
Sources: De'Longhi (2012), press release on the Braun license, PR Newswire · De'Longhi Group (2012), Finalization of the Braun Transaction · Jones Day (2012), Procter & Gamble Sells Perpetual Licensing of Braun Brand to De'Longhi · Instagram profiles, own survey, as of October 6, 2026.
Published July 2026