Response to Issues Statement
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ME/6927/21 ANTICIPATED MERGER OF CARGOTEC CORPORATION AND KONECRANES PLC RESPONSE TO ISSUES STATEMENT 19 August 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE A. INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................... 1 B. KEY MARKET DYNAMICS OF THE INDUSTRY ..................................................................................... 2 2. GLOBAL MARKETS ..................................................................................................................................... 2 (a) A lack of presence in all jurisdictions by some suppliers does not point to a narrower geographic market ............................................................................................................................ 2 (b) No need for pre-existing regional servicing capabilities .................................................................. 3 (c) No need for an established regional track record ............................................................................. 4 (d) No significant differences in regulatory, safety and environmental standards ................................. 4 3. CUSTOMER CONSOLIDATION AND GROWTH OF CHINESE COMPETITION .................................. 5 (a) Consolidation of shipping services industry ..................................................................................... 5 (b) Access to cheaper inputs – preferential cost base which significantly constrains competition ....................................................................................................................................... 9 (i) Steel subsidies ................................................................................................................... 9 (ii) Transport costs ................................................................................................................ 10 (c) Key losses and no-bid decisions ..................................................................................................... 10 4. DISTRIBUTORS HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN MOBILE EQUIPMENT ........................................ 11 (a) Distributors facilitate entry of new competitors ............................................................................. 12 (b) Distributors exert a strong competitive constraint in mobile equipment sales ............................... 13 5. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................. 13 C. THEORIES OF HARM: NO HORIZONTAL UNILATERIAL EFFECTS ................................................. 14 6. NO COMPETITION CONCERNS IN THE SUPPLY OF CRANES ........................................................... 14 (a) Competitive dynamics in the supply of cranes in the UK .............................................................. 14 (i) Chinese (and other) suppliers are already established in the UK, and further entry is likely ................................................................................................................... 14 (ii) The cranes purchasing processes drive competitive outcomes ........................................ 15 (iii) Internal documents substantiate strong competition from Chinese and other suppliers .......................................................................................................................... 15 (b) RTGs .............................................................................................................................................. 16 (i) Post-transaction the Merged Entity will continue to face several competitors including ZPMC and Liebherr ........................................................................................ 16 (ii) The Parties cannot be considered as close alternatives for UK customers and are not the “two of the main four suppliers of RTG” in the UK ........................................... 17 (iii) The tendering sales process drives competitive outcomes .............................................. 18 (iv) Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 18 (c) ASC ................................................................................................................................................ 19 (i) Post-transaction the Merged Entity will continue to face several competitors including ZPMC and Kuenz ............................................................................................ 19 (ii) The tendering market drives competitive outcomes ........................................................ 20 (iii) Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 20 7. NO COMPETITION CONCERNS IN THE SUPPLY OF MOBILE EQUIPMENT ................................... 21 (a) Competitive dynamics in the supply of MEQ in the UK ................................................................ 21 Legal -64580628/1 158334-0004 -i- (i) Chinese (and other) suppliers are already established in the UK, and further entry is likely ................................................................................................................... 21 (ii) The MEQ purchasing processes drive competitive outcomes ......................................... 21 (iii) Internal documents substantiate Chinese entry in MEQ .................................................. 22 (b) Reach stackers ................................................................................................................................ 23 (i) The Merged Entity will not be “by far” the largest suppliers of reach stackers in the UK and Europe (nor globally) as a result of prevailing competitive dynamics ......... 23 (ii) Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 24 (c) FLTs ............................................................................................................................................... 24 (i) The Merged Entity will not be “by far” the largest suppliers of FLT in the UK and Europe (nor globally) as a result of prevailing competitive dynamics ...................... 24 (ii) Negotiated purchasing of equipment drives competitive outcomes ................................ 27 (iii) Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 27 (d) ECH ................................................................................................................................................ 27 (i) The Parties are not clearly the largest suppliers of ECH on a European and UK basis ................................................................................................................................. 27 (ii) Negotiated purchasing of equipment drives competitive outcomes ................................ 28 (iii) Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 28 8. NO COMPETITION CONCERNS IN THE SUPPLY OF HORIZONTAL TRANSPORT EQUIPMENT ................................................................................................................................................ 29 (a) Competitive dynamics in the supply of HTE ................................................................................. 29 (i) Chinese (and other) suppliers are already established in the UK, and further entry is likely ................................................................................................................... 29 (b) A-TTs ............................................................................................................................................. 30 (c) Straddle carriers and shuttle carriers .............................................................................................. 31 (i) The tendering sales process drives competitive outcomes – the Parties’ position in straddle and shuttle carriers is more nuanced .............................................................. 31 (ii) Competitive market structure will be maintained post-Merger ....................................... 32 (iii) Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 33 D. THEORIES OF HARM: NO VERTICAL EFFECTS ................................................................................... 34 9. NO INPUT FORECLOSURE OF CRANE SUPPLIERS ............................................................................. 34 (a) Background on spreaders and the Parties’ activities ...................................................................... 34 (b) Market definition ............................................................................................................................ 34 (c) No ability to foreclose rival suppliers of RTGs, ASCs or MHCs ................................................... 35 (d) No incentive to foreclose rival suppliers of RTGs, ASCs or MHCs .............................................. 36 (e) Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 37 10. NO CUSTOMER FORECLOSURE OF MEQ SUPPLIERS ........................................................................ 37 (a) No ability or incentive to