Siemens Aktiengesellschaft and Flender Holding GMBH (50/LM/Jun05) [2005] ZACT 53 (12 August 2005)
- Citation
- [2005] ZACT 53
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- N Manoim, Y Carrim, T Orleyn
- Case number
- 50/LM/Jun05
More details
- Court
- Competition Tribunal
- Panel
- N Manoim, Y Carrim, T Orleyn
- Case number
- 50/LM/Jun05
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Tribunal found that there were no significant horizontal overlaps between Siemens and Flender in South Africa, as they supply different components in the power transmission market. Vertically, while the merged entity would be able to offer complete drive solutions, the market is highly competitive, with contracts awarded through a tender and bid process, resulting in variable market shares. Customers have significant countervailing power due to their ability to specify system design and choose among competing bids. The merged entity would face competition from established integrated suppliers such as ABB, SEW, Bearing Man, and Alstom. The Tribunal concluded that the merger would not substantially prevent or lessen competition in any identified market, and there were no public interest concerns that would alter this view.
Court disposition
Merger unconditionally approved.
Orders
- The merger between Siemens Aktiengesellschaft and Flender Holding GMBH is approved without conditions.
02
Material facts
Parties
Siemens Aktiengesellschaft
Applicant Counsel: V KoovejeeFlender Holding GMBH
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Large Merger Review / Merger Clearance Reasons
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the proposed merger between Siemens Aktiengesellschaft and Flender Holding GMBH would substantially prevent or lessen competition in the relevant markets.
- 02
Whether there are any public interest concerns arising from the merger.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Siemens AG argued that acquiring Flender Holding would allow it to expand its interests from electrical power transmission equipment to mechanical power transmission equipment, enabling Siemens to offer more complete drive solutions to customers. The parties submitted that there were no overlaps in their activities in South Africa, as Siemens supplies electrical power transmission equipment and Flender supplies mechanical power transmission equipment. They asserted that the transaction would not negatively affect competition due to the presence of strong competitors and the tender-based nature of the market.
- Respondent
- The Competition Commission contended that there were no horizontal overlaps between the parties, as they bid for different product components in the drive solutions market. The Commission identified vertical issues but concluded that the merged entity would face significant competition from alternative suppliers and strong internationally based competitors. The Commission also noted that customers exercise significant countervailing power and that the merged entity would be a new entrant competing against other fully integrated firms.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Competition Act, 89 of 1998
A merger may not be approved if it substantially prevents or lessens competition in any relevant market, unless there are efficiency or public interest justifications.
- 02
Competition Commission's Report
Assessment of both horizontal and vertical effects is required to determine the impact of a merger on competition.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Tribunal found that there were no significant horizontal overlaps between Siemens and Flender in South Africa, as they supply different components in the power transmission market. Vertically, while the merged entity would be able to offer complete drive solutions, the market is highly competitive, with contracts awarded through a tender and bid process, resulting in variable market shares. Customers have significant countervailing power due to their ability to specify system design and choose among competing bids. The merged entity would face competition from established integrated suppliers such as ABB, SEW, Bearing Man, and Alstom. The Tribunal concluded that the merger would not substantially prevent or lessen competition in any identified market, and there were no public interest concerns that would alter this view.
Obiter and limits
- The Tribunal noted that the trend towards one-stop-shop suppliers in the industry is driven by customer preferences for maintenance and price advantages.
- The Tribunal observed that the market for drive solutions is characterized by strong international competition and customer-driven specifications.
Court disposition
Merger unconditionally approved.
- The merger between Siemens Aktiengesellschaft and Flender Holding GMBH is approved without conditions.
Source and reliance status
Competition Tribunal
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Competition Tribunal
Judgment
COMPETITION TRIBUNAL
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH
AFRICA
Case no: 50/LM/Jun05
In The Large Merger Between:
Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Acquiring Firm
And
Flender Holding GMBH Target Firm
Reasons for Decision
Approval
On 20 July 2005, the Competition Tribunal issued a Merger Clearance Certificate approving the transaction between Siemens Aktiengesellschaft and Flender Holding GMBH. The reasons for this decision follow.
The Transaction
The primary acquiring firm is Siemens Aktiengesellschaft (âSiemens AGâ).1 Siemens has several subsidiaries around the world. In South Africa, Siemens conducts its business through Siemens Limited South Africa (âSiemens SAâ). Siemens SA has the following subsidiaries in South Africa: Siemens Telecommunications (Pty) Ltd, Siemens Real Estate Management (Pty) Ltd, Siemens Demag Delavel Turbomachinery (Pty) Ltd and Siemed Services (Pty) Ltd. Siemens AG and Siemens SA will be collectively referred to as âSiemensâ.
The primary target firm is Flender Holding GmbH (âFlender Holdingâ).2 Flender Holding has the following subsidiary in South Africa: Flender Power transmission (Pty) Ltd (âFlenderâ) which in turn has one subsidiary namely Flender Services (SA) (Pty) Ltd.
Siemens AG is acquiring all the issued capital in Flender Holding. According to the parties, the acquisition will enable Siemens AG to expand its interests from electrical power transmission equipment to mechanical power transmission equipment. This would enable Siemens to provide more complete drive solutions to its customers.3
The Merging partiesâ activities
Siemens is active worldwide in a range of businesses. However, in South Africa, Siemens is involved in information and communication, mobile telephony, information technology, medical solutions, transportation systems, building technologies, logistics and assembly systems, automation and drives, industrial services and solutions, components, power transmission and power distribution. 4
Worldwide, Flender produces mechanical power transmission equipment (such as gears, geared motors and couplings), inverters, generators and electrical motors. In South Africa, however, Flender focuses on the supply of mechanical geared motors and standard mechanical gears.
Impact on competition
Horizontal Assessment
In South Africa, both merging parties are involved in the broad market for power transmission. However Flender supplies mechanical power transmission equipment (including industrial gears and geared motors) and Siemens supplies electrical power transmission equipment5 (including motors and drives).6
According to the Commission, there are no overlaps in the activities of the merging parties, because although both Siemens and Flender participate in the provision of incomplete drive solutions, they bid for the supply of different product components.
â...Siemens will bid for the supply of drives and electric motors (components) or for a combination of both and [therefore will] compete with other motor and drive suppliers for the tender. Flender will bid for the supply of gears or geared motors (components) or drive application systems will compete against suppliers in these markets for the tenderâ¦â 7
Vertical Assessment
The transaction does give rise to certain vertical issues, as post merger the merged entity will compete for the provision of a complete drive solution that requires a combination of various components. Flender is a supplier of gears and drive application systems while Siemens supplies electric motors and drives. According to the Commission, these are all components that may be required for the production of the final drive solution.
The Commission identified the following upstream markets: supply of electric motors, gears, geared motors, drives and of industrial drive applications. The downstream market is the market for the provision of complete drive solutions.
The Commission examined the post merger market shares in the upstream markets and concluded that there would be no risk of reduced competition in any of the markets concerned because there are alternative sources of supply and the merged entity faced several strong internationally based competitors.8 In the downstream market for the provision of complete drive solutions, the Commission considered the characteristics and dynamics of the market and concluded inter alia that:
The various component markets are highly competitive;
Contracts for the supply of components at all market levels and for the construction of the final drive solution are based on a tender and bid process - market shares are therefore lumpy and vary depending on which bidder is rewarded the contract;
The specifications and design of the system rests with the customer who will decide on the best bid put forward - Customers therefore exercise significant countervailing power; Finally, the merged entity would be a new entrant and would be competing against other fully integrated competitors such as ABB, SEW, Bearing Man and Alstom.
Conclusion
Having considered the merging partiesâ submissions and the Competition Commissionâs report, we are satisfied that the transaction will not substantially prevent or lessen competition in any of the markets identified above. Furthermore there are no public interest concerns which would alter our view.
We agree with the Commissionâs recommendation that the transaction be unconditionally approved.
12 August 2005
N Manoim Date
Concurring: Y Carrim and T Orleyn
For the merging parties: V Koovejee (Deneys Reitz)
For the Commission: S Nunkoo (Mergers and Acquisitions)
1 Listed on the German Exchange, the Swiss Stock Exchange, the New York Stock Exchange and the London Stock Exchange. Its shareholding is widely held with no single entity controlling party.
2 Citigroup Incorporated owns more than 50% of the outstanding voting securities of Flender Holding.
3 During the hearing on 20 July 2005, the merging partiesâ attorney stated that: ââ¦there [was] a move towards a one-stop-shop supplierâ¦.[customers] would prefer obtaining all of the components from one supplier for various reason. These are maintenance issues as well as price. They are better able to obtain discounts from a supplier such as SEW that will be able to supply all of the components requiredâ¦â At page 3-4 of the transcript.
4 For a complete description of Siemensâs activities in South Africa, see Pages 3-4 of the Commission's Report.
5 For more detail on the difference between mechanical and electrical power transmission see Pages 71-74 of the record.
6 According to the merging parties, Flender does have minor activities in electrical power transmission equipment in Europe but is not active in this market in South Africa.
7 See page 8 of the Commission's Report.
8 See pages 9-13 of the Commissionâs Report.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.