Seem to have fallen down a minor rabbit hole with this company, there is:
The above company's credits go from the 1970s through to the 1980s, on the Companies House website there are two companies called this:
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01002860 (1971-1979 name then changed)
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01400692 (1978 to present)
The first one became:
So Octopus Books Limited could potentially be two different companies, shall we split the credits depending on year given in book? Or just amend bio to 1971. I suspect the first link is definitely related to companies listed on Bookogs, there is a chance the second one may not be.
They seem to use the same imprint of Octopus Books (unless I'm mistaken) so it might just be publishing shenanigans:
Other ones linked are:
https://books.discogs.com/credit/24946-octopus-publishing-group (starts c1990, replacing the plc?)
https://books.discogs.com/credit/30658-octopus-publishing-group-limited (started 1998 but has one credit from 1988 and one from 1990)
I thought someone was going to mention this mess after I recently added a Credit for Hamlyn Octopus. It has lots of tentacles!
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01400692 was previously known as Elcope Limited from 1978-1979. I assume that https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01002860 is a different company altogether. If this correct, then it is probably going to be near impossible to determine the correct attributions for the current submissions unless there is an image that states the address.
https://books.discogs.com/credit/278883-octopus-books was generated by https://books.discogs.com/book/278877-balloon-pop-outlaw-black which is for an American publisher: http://www.octopusbooks.net/about Nothing to do with the British publisher. Most of the attributions don't belong there.
https://books.discogs.com/credit/278883-octopus-books I have completed the profile for this Credit which was generated for a Portland, Oregon poetry press. I have moved the incorrect books to a new 2nd variation: https://books.discogs.com/credit/728242-octopus-books-2
Therefore, I believe all of the other variations relate to the same company:
https://books.discogs.com/credit/593834-the-octopus-group-limited the one attribution credits Spring Books as an imprint. According to this eBay thread: https://community.ebay.com/t5/Archive-Booksellers/Spring-Books-London-really/td-p/17555753 Spring Books was an imprint of Hamlyn.
According to the Wikipedia article on Hamlyn: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamlyn_(publishers) "Paul Hamlyn bought Hamlyn publishing back in 1986 and added it to the holdings of his new company, Octopus Books. Octopus was sold in 1987 to Reed International. Hamlyn's children's division was sold to the Egmont Group in 1998. Hachette Livre bought Octopus in 2001.
The three company register links that you referenced:
seem to be various stages of the same company.
There are also other Credits in the DB that I believe are related to the same company:
The Octopus website states: "Conran was founded by Sir Terence Conran and Paul Hamlyn to publish cutting-edge books of the very highest quality in both content and design, and today the core philosophy remains unchanged." https://www.octopusbooks.co.uk/imprint/octopus/conran/page/conran/
I hope you can follow all of that!
I knew I would get something wrong:
https://books.discogs.com/credit/713665-octopus-publishing-group-plc the one attribution credits Spring Books as an imprint. According to this eBay thread: https://community.ebay.com/t5/Archive-Booksellers/Spring-Books-London-really/td-p/17555753 Spring Books was an imprint of Hamlyn.
I notice that the Wikipedia link that ends in a bracket is problematic as the closing bracket is converted to standard text and then the link is corrupted. There doesn't seem to be a way to avoid this problem.
Thanks for the update on those!
The confusing issue is still the two Octopus Books Limited, did any of the info you found mention a 1978 takeover? Just seems odd to start a company of the same name that year.
I can't find any information that far back. Maybe the business was sold or it could have been restructured or just a division sold off.
Maybe a corporate lawyer with access to the company archives might be able to unravel that mystery.