Geographic market
The parties distribute these products throughout South Africa.
The Commission accepted the relevant markets as the national markets for the supply of HDPE; LDPE; LLDPE; PP; PVC and MEG.
At the hearing of this matter, we questioned whether there are indeed separate product markets or a single market for the supply of
distribution services in the chemical and plastic industries.
However, given the parties’ relatively insignificant market shares, the relevant product market does not require a definitive
answer.
Effect on competition
According to the market share information submitted, the parties enjoy the following market shares:
Prochem
Duravin
| Product |
% Market share |
| HDPE |
<1 |
| LDPE |
2 |
| LLDPE |
<3 |
| PP |
<1 |
| PVC |
<1 |
| MEG |
3 |
| Product |
% Market share |
| HDPE |
3 |
| LDPE |
2 |
| LLDPE |
<1 |
| PP |
<1 |
| PVC |
<2 |
| MEG |
7 |
|
Vertically integrated firms such as Sasol and Dow are dominant in these product markets, while the merging parties’ market shares
are relatively insignificant. As can be seen from the table above the parties’ post merger market shares do not exceed 10%
in any of these product markets.
Furthermore, the barriers to entry are insignificant. In fact, product knowledge and expertise are probably the most significant barriers.
In our opinion the transaction does not result in the removal of an effective competitor, since Prochem has historically held a significant
interest in Duravin, which has probably led to the parties differentiating their services and client base.
On the basis of the above the transaction does not give rise to competition concerns.
Public interest Issues
The transaction will not give rise to any loss of employment or other public interest concerns.
Conclusion
We conclude that the merger will not lead to a substantial lessening of competition and therefore unconditionally approve the transaction.
19 November 2002
N.M. Manoim
Date
Concurring: M. Holden, F. Fourie
For the merging parties: Cliffe Dekker Attorneys
For the Commission:
J. Mokwana, Legal Services Division, Competition Commission
SAFLII:
|
Terms of Use
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACT/2002/68.html