Articles

ACM granted clearance for lottery merger after Phase II investigation

ACM granted clearance for lottery merger after Phase II investigation

ACM granted clearance for lottery merger after Phase II investigation

05.01.2016 NL law

On 8 December 2015, the Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets ("ACM") granted clearance to the merger between Stichting Exploitatie Nederlandse Staatsloterij ("SENS") and  Stichting Nationale Sporttotalisator ("SNS") after a Phase II investigation.

 SENS and SNS are two Dutch companies offering games of chance (lotteries and lottos). According to the ACM, the companies were not, or almost not, effectively competing with each other on the offline market, and for that reason, it cleared the merger. Post-merger, there will be two parties left on the highly regulated market for lotteries and lottos, both having a market share of approximately fifty percent.

In its Phase I decision of 18 August 2015, the ACM concluded that the concentration could lead to a significant impediment to effective competition on the Dutch market or part thereof. The ACM came to this preliminary conclusion because it considered likely that SENS and SNS were in competition with each other, and even were near competitors. For this reason, a license was required for the concentration, which could be requested in a Phase II procedure.

In the Phase II investigation, the ACM came to a different conclusion. The ACM described that competition in the games of chance market is limited by strict regulations, with specific licenses for every market segment. As a consequence, every license-holder on the market is operating in its own market segment, with its own range of games and target audience, and there are limited incentives to compete with other segments. According to the ACM, due to these strict regulations, the games of chance market is very differentiated, and could not be compared to other markets. 

The ACM's investigation, involving economic experts, distributors and potential competitors, confirmed that competition between the merging parties is very limited and end customers do not easily switch from one party to the other in case of a change of conditions for one of them. For these reasons, the ACM concluded that the merger would not have significant unilateral effects on the offline market. The ACM considered coordinated effects unlikely as well, as the parties are, on the basis of the regulations, active in different market segments with differentiated products. This would make coordination very difficult.

The ACM also assessed what the consequence of the merger would be on the potentially-to-be-legalized online gambling market. The ACM found it possible that the merged entity would be able to leverage its name and reputation on the offline market upon entering the online market. Nevertheless, experiences in other countries led to the conclusion that this effect would be limited, even more so as there will be numerous international competitors and offline gamblers strongly differ from online gamblers.

For these reasons, the ACM concluded that the envisaged merger will not have a significant effect on competition on both the lotteries and lottos market, and the potential online market. Therefore, the merger was cleared.

This article was published in the Competition Law Newsletter of January 2016. Other articles in this newsletter:

Team

Related news

03.08.2022 EU law
Gotta catch ‘em all? Upward referral of ‘killer acquisitions’ upheld

Short Reads - Companies involved in intended or completed M&A transactions falling below EU and national merger notification thresholds should beware that their deals may still catch the European Commission’s eye. The General Court has upheld the Commission’s decision to accept a national referral request regarding Illumina’s acquisition of Grail: a transaction not triggering any of the notification thresholds within the EEA.

Read more

06.07.2022 NL law
Highest Dutch court: the postman may still ring twice?

Short Reads - The Dutch Minister of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy was wrong to unblock the ACM’s prohibited merger between postal operators PostNL and Sandd on grounds of public interest. According to the Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal (CBb), the Minister cannot substitute the ACM’s assessment for its own when considering public interest reasons. Since the Minister did do so in this particular case, the CBb annulled the Minister’s merger clearance.

Read more

28.07.2022 NL law
Purely commercial interest also a legitimate interest? Council of State leaves the question unanswered.

Short Reads - On 27 July 2022, the Council of State confirmed that the Dutch Data Protection Authority wrongly imposed a €575,000 fine on VoetbalTV. But the Council did not answer the question whether the AP rightly or wrongly believes that a purely commercial interest cannot be a legitimate interest within the meaning of the General Data Protection Regulation.

Read more

06.07.2022 NL law
Foreign Subsidies Regulation crosses the finish line

Short Reads - On 30 June 2022, the European Parliament and the European Council reached agreement on the final text of the Foreign Subsidies Regulation. Adding to the regulatory burdens, this Regulation creates a notification obligation for companies that receive subsidies from non-EU governments in transactions or public procurement procedures. 

Read more

28.07.2022 NL law
Zuiver commercieel belang ook gerechtvaardigd belang: Raad van State laat zich er niet over uit

Short Reads - Op 27 juli 2022 heeft de Raad van State bevestigd dat de Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens onterecht een boete van € 575.000 aan VoetbalTV heeft opgelegd. De hoop bestond dat de Afdeling antwoord zou geven op de vraag of de AP terecht of onterecht meent dat een zuiver commercieel belang géén gerechtvaardigd belang kan zijn in de zin van de Algemene Verordening Gegevensbescherming. Het antwoord op deze vraag blijft echter uit.  

Read more

06.07.2022 NL law
Take note(s): Qualcomm’s EUR 1 billion dominance abuse fine quashed

Short Reads - The General Court annulled the Commission’s EUR 1 billion fine imposed on Qualcomm for abuse of dominance on the LTE chipsets market. In addition to finding fault with the Commission’s foreclosure analysis of Qualcomm’s alleged exclusivity payments, the General Court found that the Commission’s procedural irregularities alone would have sufficed to set the Commission’s decision aside.

Read more