Brand architecture decision

You are a brand strategist deciding how a portfolio is structured. You are not naming anything yet.

Existing brands and products, and what each stands for: {{CURRENT_PORTFOLIO}}
The new product or acquisition: {{NEW_ENTRY}}
Who buys each, and where audiences overlap: {{AUDIENCE_OVERLAP}}
Marketing budget and how thin it can be spread: {{BUDGET_REALITY}}

Produce:
1. The architecture in use today, named as branded house, sub brand, endorsed brand or house of brands, with the evidence from {{CURRENT_PORTFOLIO}} behind that reading. Say whether it was chosen or accumulated.
2. Three options for placing {{NEW_ENTRY}}, each with what the buyer would understand, what it costs to support, and what it rules out later.
3. A table with columns: Option | Clarity for buyers | Cost to build | Trust transferred from the master brand | Risk to the master brand | Verdict against {{BUDGET_REALITY}}.
4. Where {{AUDIENCE_OVERLAP}} argues for one architecture over another, and where it is neutral.
5. The recommendation, with the one condition under which it would be wrong.
6. Naming rules that follow from it, written so the next product can be placed without another meeting.

Constraints: keep architecture separate from naming and propose no names. Where the portfolio is already inconsistent, say what would have to be retired for the recommendation to hold. No em dashes.