Primark, Magnum, Castrol… who’s next? Why Britain’s top brands are being sold or split by their owners

You could get the idea that corporate Britain is under siege.

Recent asset sales, or spin-offs, by companies such as BP, GSK, Reckitt Benckiser, and Whitbread have seen brands such as Castrol, Calgon, Sensodyne, Aquafresh, Air Wick, Night Nurse, Magnum and Ben & Jerry’s ice cream and Costa Coffee all acquired by new owners.

And more famous names could be about to change hands.

Associated British Foods is said to be considering a demerger for fast-fashion group Primark and America’s McCormick has tabled a bid for Unilever’s food business, which includes Knorr and Hellmann’s.

There is already talk that McCormick is more interested in Unilever’s sauces and spices brands than Marmite and some of its other famous products, with the result that some brand names could be quickly sold on by the new owner, if any deal goes through.

What’s going on?

Local impact, global trend

In some ways, this is business as normal. In 2025 Britvic was bought by Carlsberg. WH Smith was sold to Modella Capital and the historic retail company broken up.

Russell & Bromley, the high end shoe store, is also at risk of a break-up that would see the online brand separated from the physical stores.

On the one hand you could see all this as positive. Foreign investors like British brands and City bankers are kept busy on the deals, which means they make bonuses on which they pay tax.

The downside is the feeling that all of the UK is for sale at the right price or indeed too cheaply, and that investors based here simply don’t properly value assets that are plainly attractive.

A sluggish UK economy and a weak pound hardly helps the takeover targets fend off bids.

Russ Mould, the City sage at AJ Bell, says it’s not just us.

“This is part of a global trend. Kellogg broke itself into two in 2023 when Kellanova took on the snack brands such as Pringles and Pop-Tarts and WK Kellogg took responsibility for the cereals business.

“Kraft-Heinz briefly considered a break-up last year, in a move that would have undone a mega-merger from 2015.

“Keurig Dr Pepper is in the process of splitting into two, as well following its multi-billion-dollar purchase of the JDE Peet’s coffee business last year, with result that its drinks and coffee businesses will be hived off into separate companies.”

Why do companies sell up or break themselves apart?

The main reason for these deals is often as simple as a flagging share price. The companies need a boost most easily achieved by getting rid of part of a company so that they have cash to reward sceptical investors.

Another reason is soaring borrowing costs. For at least a decade, businesses could borrow at basically zero interest rates.

That has all changed and many companies that loaded up on debt during those years now need to pay them down, perhaps with a sale of a business they’d rather keep.

In times of wider caution, of global turmoil, investors prefer to see a sale rather than some “transformational” deal that may be risky.

Not to be overlooked is the role of “activist” investors such as Elliott Partners.

These are either corporate sharks preying on the vulnerable or a necessary part of the market which keeps CEOs honest when they are under performing, depending on your view.

Veteran market observer David Buik says: “It is fair to say that Elliott Partners is probably the leading light as a key activist investor, bringing influence to bear on companies which are perceived not to be offering shareholder value, cost efficiency and growth plans. It seems that in 2018 Paul Polman the then CEO of Unilever set down his stall to deliver shareholder value, in the wake of the company acquiring 61 companies over the past 33 years. Alan Jupe, who succeeded Polman organised the sale of its Ice Cream Division – Magnum for €7.8bn. Unilever share price from 2023 up until the Iran war had risen by 33%, but has been hammered in the past month to virtually no gain. However, strip the war out and it proved a good deal.”

Activist investors: a necessary evil?

One banker who asked not to be named admits he has tired of the activists.

He says: “The spin-ofs and sell-offs are too much. Because I think the primary reason for them being done is to placate activist shareholders. Most people are looking for some diversification in a portfolio, but activists can be a royal pain in the a**e for boards and company law means their protestations can be incredibly expensive and distracting to try and see off.”

Michael Brown of market broker Pepperstone says of the activists: “While they do tend to get a bit of a bad rep, it seems pretty clear that they are providing the nudge, or something firmer, to company boards in encouraging them to streamline their operations and stick to what they do best.

“BP is probably the best example of this, with Elliott (and new CEO Meg O’Neill) encouraging the company to get back to its oil and gas roots, and abandon this costly foray that we’ve seen into renewables.

“In the case of Primark/ABF, that logic does apply, with ABF potentially seeking to re-focus on its core food and agri business, which it’s quite obvious has very little by way of synergies with the fashion arm. That said, as we saw during the pandemic, ABF is a bit of a ‘special case’ given that its conglomerate approach to things actually provides the firm with useful diversification.”

Primark says it will consider the situation and report back to the market later.

Who is next to face the heat?

Brown adds: “Looking ahead, I’d guess that the most obvious contender to go down this path next would be the London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG). They tick a couple of the important boxes on this front, with activist Elliott having a significant stake, and with the company being a diverse operation encompassing the exchange, data, and Eikon platform.

“Elliott seem to be focused on returning cash to shareholders for now, largely via buybacks, but it’s not hard to imagine how focus could well shift away from that towards splitting the business into two, or more, divisions in order to improve shareholder returns.”

Private equity in general does not have the best reputation among the general public. But it has its uses, sometimes taking struggling companies off the stock market so they can sort themselves out away from the daily pressure of share prices.

At the end of 2024, JP Jenkins worked with THG Group when they looked to demerge the company’s Ingenuity division, which focuses on ecommerce solutions. The spin out is now listed on JP Jenkins and trades under a matched bargain facility.

THG founder Matt Moulding said: “Ingenuity has just completed its first year as a private company following the demerger from THG. We put the business through some chunky changes in 2025. A lot of the decisions were difficult, uncomfortable, and not always obvious at the time — but they were possible because we could step away from the glare of the LSE.”

Following the spin-off, the valuation of THG Ingenuity trebled over the course of 2025. Such manoeuvrings might become more common.

For companies that stay on the stock market there remains the strong chance that overseas buyers with billions to spend are eyeing them, or part of their business, with intention. Whether that turns out to be good for the UK, good for jobs and good for the economy, remains an open question.