Posts

Antitrust watchdog CADE says acquisition of assets is not simple, requires more time for analysis

02/01/2024


The approval—or not—of the acquisition of Marfrig’s beef assets by Minerva Foods should take longer than the companies had previously expected. The companies submitted the deal to the Administrative Council for Economic Defense (CADE) on September 27, 2023, when an obstacle to approval was the incomplete composition of the tribunal. But even after the appointment and installation of four new members, the antitrust regulator’s General Superintendence (SG) considered the operation was not simple and, therefore, required more time study it.

The deal includes the acquisition of part of Marfrig Global Foods and Marfrig Chile’s beef and sheep business, encompassing slaughtering and deboning plants, plus a distribution center. The assets are located in Brazil, Argentina, and Chile.

The deal doesn’t mean Marfrig’s exit from the animal slaughtering segment, as the company will maintain other plants. Both companies told CADE that, for Marfrig, the deal is in line with the strategy of focusing on the production of branded meat and high value-added products. As for Minerva, the acquisition is “a strategic opportunity to complement its operations,” with a focus on savings through scale and efficiency gains.

When the companies announced the R$7.5 billion deal to the antitrust watchdog, they described it as a summarized concentration act, a format intended for operations that are considered to be simple, whose deadline in this case is 30 days. As the General Superintendence turned it into an ordinary act, the process can take up to 240 days. In addition, the new deadline considers January 22nd as the starting date, when the General Superintendence asked the companies for new information regarding the operation.

The 240-day period is set out in the legislation. When contacted, CADE explained that the General Superintendence usually works within a 90-day deadline, a shorter period it tries to meet. Still, it is much longer than what Minerva and Marfrig expected when they submitted the deal.

In an order released in December, the General Superintendence said, given that in at least one of the markets involved in the operation (cattle slaughter in Rondônia), the deal could give Minerva a dominant position (with a market share exceeding 20%), it’s not possible to classify it as a summarized procedure.

Additional evidence was also requested. Only after that will the superintendence release an opinion on the case.

Based on the decision, if the deal is approved without restrictions, there will be a 15-day period for third parties or members to question the opinion and then move the deal to CADE’s tribunal. If the superintendence rejects or approves it with restrictions, the case will necessarily be submitted to the tribunal. If the superintendence approves it and there are no manifestations within 15 days, the deal will receive final approval.

The Brazilian Agriculture Confederation (CNA) requested to participate as a third party interested in the process. The entity says it intends to ensure that ranchers established in the areas of meatpacking plants will not be harmed from market power in the future.

CNA said it sent the antitrust watchdog a technical note in which describing the impacts of market concentration in recent years in the sector. According to CNA, the acquisition of Marfrig’s meatpacking operations by Minerva could increase market concentration in some states.

Last week, more than 100 letters were sent by CADE to members of markets that could be affected by the deal. The markets in question involve the sale of fresh beef and lamb in the domestic market; cattle slaughter and its by-products in the domestic market, rawhide in the domestic market; and beef processing activities.

Marfrig and Minerva declined to comment.

*Por Beatriz Olivon — Brasília

Source: Valor International

https://valorinternational.globo.com/

Association of service providers complains at CADE, Anatel against Telefônica, TIM, Claro about sale of Oi Móvel, at CADE, Anatel

07/26/2022


The Brazilian Association of Competitive Telecommunications Service Providers (TelComp) will file this week a formal complaint with antitrust regulator CADE and telecoms regulator Anatel against Telefónica’s subsidiary in Brazil (Telefônica Brasil, owner of Vivo), Telecom Italia’s TIM, and América Móvil’s Claro about the sale of Oi Móvel.

Telefônica, TIM, and Claro appealed to the courts this month because they disagreed with the values imposed by Anatel for the offer of wholesale products to competitors. For data traffic, the regulator stipulated R$2.6 per gigabyte (GB). But the telcos’ proposals range from R$16 to R$48 per GB.

These offers are the compensation that the regulators imposed on the three telcos to give their approval to Oi Móvel’s purchase. They are remedies, or conditional measures, to ensure competition in the market with the elimination of a competitor.

The incumbents decided to challenge the prices in the approval phase. They asked Anatel to reexamine the case. In court, they obtained injunctions that suspended the obligation to submit offers.

TelComp “condemns the attitude of operators with significant market power that, before the closing of the acquisition of control of Oi Móvel, made a public commitment to society to fully comply with the remedies imposed by Anatel and CADE promptly.”

The entity will ask the courts for its inclusion in the case as a third interested party, Luiz Henrique Barbosa, head of TelComp, told Valor. Claro’s case is in the 1st Federal Civil Court of the Judiciary Section of the Federal District (Brasília); those of Vivo and TIM are in secrecy.

Mr. Barbosa pointed out that the telcos’ retail price is at R$2.8 per GB. “The price Anatel has set is not detached from reality, nor is it a subsidy to competitors. It is not below cost. If they [the three telcos] say this, it is because they are practicing predatory pricing.”

Anatel and CADE officials are studying measures, including undoing the sale if the telcos do not accept the fixed prices. “If it is not possible to undo the operation, they can be fined,” said Mr. Barbosa.

*By Ivone Santana — São Paulo