Case No COMP/M.7009 – HOLCIM / CEMEX WEST REGULATION
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EN This text is made available for information purposes only. A summary of this decision is published in all EU languages in the Official Journal of the European Union. Case No COMP/M.7009 – HOLCIM / CEMEX WEST Only the EN text is authentic. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 8 (1) Date: 5/6/2014 EN EN EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 5.6.2014 C(2014) 3649 final PUBLIC VERSION COMMISSION DECISION of 5.6.2014 addressed to: Holcim Beteiligungs GmbH (Deutschland) declaring a concentration to be compatible with the internal market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement (Case M.7009 – Holcim / Cemex West) (Text with EEA relevance) (Only the English version is authentic) EN 2 EN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. The Parties ............................................................................................................... 7 1.1. Holcim ..................................................................................................................... 7 1.2. Cemex West............................................................................................................. 7 2. The operation and the concentration ......................................................................... 7 3. Union dimension...................................................................................................... 9 4. procedure ............................................................................................................... 10 5. Overview of the cement industry............................................................................ 11 6. Grey cement........................................................................................................... 13 6.1. Relevant product market......................................................................................... 13 6.1.1. Previous decisional practice ................................................................................... 13 6.1.2. The Notifying Party's arguments ............................................................................ 14 6.1.3. The Commission’s assessment ............................................................................... 15 6.1.3.1. White versus grey cement....................................................................................... 15 6.1.3.2. Classes ................................................................................................................... 15 6.1.3.3. Bagged versus bulk ................................................................................................ 16 6.1.4. Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 17 6.2. Relevant geographic market ................................................................................... 17 6.2.1. Previous decisional practice ................................................................................... 17 6.2.2. The Notifying Party's arguments ............................................................................ 17 6.2.3. The Commission’s assessment ............................................................................... 18 6.2.3.1. Appropriate radius of the circles............................................................................. 18 6.2.3.2. Role of national borders ......................................................................................... 20 6.2.4. Conclusion on the geographic market definition..................................................... 21 6.3. The competitive landscape ..................................................................................... 22 6.3.1. The Parties' activities.............................................................................................. 22 6.3.2. Other suppliers and their production facilities......................................................... 23 6.4. Market shares and market structure ........................................................................ 25 6.5. Competitive assessment - non-coordinated effects.................................................. 26 6.5.1. Analytical framework............................................................................................. 26 6.5.2. The Notifying Party's arguments ............................................................................ 26 6.5.3. The Commission's assessment................................................................................ 29 6.5.3.1. Assessment within the 150 km and 250 km clusters around the Cemex West plants 29 6.5.3.2. Assessment within the 150 km and 250 km clusters around Holcim's northern German plants ........................................................................................................ 32 EN 3 EN 6.5.3.3. Assessment within the 150 km and 250 clusters around Holcim's Obourg plant in Belgium ................................................................................................................. 33 6.5.4. Conclusion on non-coordinated effects................................................................... 34 6.6. Competitive assessment - Coordinated effects ........................................................ 34 6.6.1. Framework of assessment....................................................................................... 34 6.6.2. The Notifying Party's arguments ............................................................................ 36 6.6.3. The Commission's assessment................................................................................ 38 6.6.3.1. Assessment of a potential strengthening of coordination......................................... 39 (a) Assessment of potential current coordination.......................................................... 39 (i) Relevance of past coordination............................................................................... 39 (ii) Evidence of potential current coordination ............................................................. 41 (1) The Commission's margin analysis......................................................................... 42 (2) Further investigative elements ................................................................................ 49 (iii) Possible facilitating factors of potential current coordination.................................. 50 (1) Reaching terms of coordination.............................................................................. 50 (2) Monitoring deviations - Transparency .................................................................... 52 (3) Deterrence mechanism ........................................................................................... 55 (4) Reactions of outsiders and market entry ................................................................. 59 (iv) Conclusion on potential current coordination.......................................................... 60 (b) Assessment of merger-specific changes.................................................................. 60 (i) General findings on merger-specific changes.......................................................... 61 (ii) Specific evidence from Holcim internal documents ................................................ 65 (iii) Conclusion on merger-specific changes.................................................................. 68 (c) Conclusions on potential strengthening of current coordination .............................. 68 6.6.3.2. Assessment of a potential creation of coordination ................................................. 68 6.6.4. Conclusions on coordinated effects ........................................................................ 69 6.7. Competitive assessment – coordinated and non-coordinated effects – possible [Holcim plant]* capacity reduction......................................................................... 69 6.7.1. Background............................................................................................................ 69 6.7.2. Framework of assessment....................................................................................... 70 6.7.3. The Notifying Party's arguments ............................................................................ 71 6.7.4. The Commission's assessment................................................................................ 72 6.7.5. Conclusion on [Holcim plant]* capacity reduction ................................................. 72 6.8. Conclusion on grey cement .................................................................................... 72 7. Cementitious Materials........................................................................................... 73 7.1. Relevant product market definition......................................................................... 73 EN 4 EN 7.1.1. Introduction to cementitious materials.................................................................... 73 7.1.2. Previous decisional practice ................................................................................... 74 7.1.3. The Notifying Party's arguments ............................................................................ 75 7.1.4. The Commission’s assessment ............................................................................... 75 7.2. Relevant geographic market definition ................................................................... 76 7.2.1. Previous decisional practice ................................................................................... 76 7.2.2. The