Evaluating the merger
The relevant market
Product market
8. As intimated above, Clidet is a newly formed entity, which has never traded.
9. Investec is a specialist-banking group providing a diverse range of financial service products & services to a niche client base. Its
activities include investment banking, treasury & specialised finance, private client activities and asset management. It appears
that Investec does not provide any services or products that compete with the target firms. The parties contended that none of these
activities are relevant for purposes of the present transaction.
10. Mr Forbes & Mr Davids do not conduct any other activity hence they do not control any other firm.
11. FIP is involved in the manufacturing of powder coatings to customers in the building, white goods & consumer products markets.
12. FP is engaged in the manufacturing & marketing of black & white Masterbatch under licence from Ferro Corporation of the USA
(“Ferro Corporation”). It is also the sole distributor in SA of polymer additives & speciality chemicals supplied
by Ferro Corporation.
13. FE is engaged in the marketing & production of ceramic & enamel products, automotive glass pastes, flat glass decorative products
& ceramic transfer papers also manufactured under licence from Ferro Corporation.
14. It is clear from the above that no overlaps exist insofar as the activities of the merging parties are concerned. Investec, Forbes
and Davids do not conduct any activities competing with those of the target firms. The parties submitted that the products in the
Ferro Group could be broadly divided into three categories, i.e., specialty powder coatings (FIP), plastics (FP) and industrial coatings
(FE).
Geographic market
15. The merging parties submitted that the Ferro Group operates throughout South Africa, that is, in Gauteng, Free State, Natal and
the Cape.
Impact on competition
16. In its investigation, the Commission found that no overlaps exist in the products or services provided by the merging parties.
As a result, we consider it unnecessary to analyse the relevant market any further. The merging parties contended that this transaction
would not result in any increase in market concentration. There also appears to be no significant barriers to entry in the market
in which the target firms operate. In addition, no vertical integration issues arise from the proposed transaction.
17. We are persuaded that this transaction is unlikely to result in the substantial lessening or prevention of competition in any
relevant market/s.
Public interest issues
18. The transaction does not raise any public interest issues. The merging parties intimated that the transaction would not have any
impact on employment whatsoever.
Conclusion
19. We accordingly endorse the Commission’s recommendation that this transaction is unlikely to result in the substantial lessening
or prevention of competition. Hence the proposed transaction is approved without conditions.
___________ 24 August 2004
David Lewis Date
Concurring: Norman Manoim and Thandi Orleyn
For the merging parties:
Natalie Browne (Cliffe Dekker Inc)
For the Commission:
Khathija Ramathula (Mergers & Acquisitions)
SAFLII:
|
Terms of Use
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACT/2004/53.html