The article mentioned that the German factory bought by Harry's also manufactured the blades for Bevel. It doesn't say how the takeover affects this, though.
I guess it would make sense to not continue building a competitor's product, but on the other hand there might have been contracts in place before the takeover. I found it confusing that this rather interesting point wasn't invetigated. Perhaps I missed it?
Much more has been invested in purchasing this factory than had been in the rest of the company. This would be the wrong place to impose a strategy tax.
I guess it would make sense to not continue building a competitor's product, but on the other hand there might have been contracts in place before the takeover. I found it confusing that this rather interesting point wasn't invetigated. Perhaps I missed it?