The name recognition, which has gotten a huge boost lately, is for Carvin. It doesn't make sense to keep some as Carvin and rebrand others as Kiesel if they are essentially all the same. Saying that the "extra" options makes something a Kiesel as opposed to a Carvin seems odd. I know the explanation floating around WAS that they are all Carvins, except special options are entitled to be called Kiesel as well, but the split in corporations and the most recent press statements seem to clearly indicate that is not how the brand(s) are going to be handled going forward. Also, using your logic why continue using the brand name "Jackson" after Grover left, or why call them "Dean" after Zelinsky left, or "Fender" after Leo sold out...? @Celticelk: I think that is a wry and perceptive point you make, and very likely to be true.