Exactly I am just disagreeing with your definition of brand, which I think is what were doing with the original essay as well.
Of course a company can structure itself fully aligned with its brand: I start Philip's Tyre Repair and the brand is 1:1 with the company and the premises. I don't see why being able to do that is important to enforce.
The point is, particularly with somewhere like Nike, that they have all sorts of things they need to do (advertise shoes; design shoes; make shoes; move shoes; sell shoes to retailers) that not all of it needs to be branded as Nike particularly. Only really the advertise shoes is the "brand".
It's like how Red Bull outsource basically everything except advertising. Someone else makes the drinks; someone else moves them; someone else sells them. They just maintain a really good brand with advertising, including innovative stuff like X-games.
