Federal Trade Commission.
Proposed consent agreement.
The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged violations of federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or practices or unfair methods of competition. The attached Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the draft complaint that accompanies the consent agreement and the terms of the consent order—embodied in the consent agreement—that would settle these allegations.
Comments must be received on or before January 22, 2002.
Comments filed in paper form should be directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary, Room 159-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580. Comments filed in electronic form should be directed to: email@example.com, as prescribed below.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nick Koberstein, FTC, Bureau of Competition, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326-2743.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and section 2.34 of the Commission's rules of practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given that the above-captioned consent agreement containing a consent order to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days. The following Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement, and the allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of the consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC Home Page (for December 21, 2001), on the World Wide Web, at “http://www.ftc.gov/os/2001/12/index.htm. A paper copy can be obtained from the FTC Public Reference Room, Room 130-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580, either in person or by calling (202) 326-2222.
Public comments are invited, and may be filed with the Commission in either paper or electronic form. Comments filed in paper form should be directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary, Room 159-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580. If a comment contains nonpublic information, it must be filed in paper form, and the first page of the document must be clearly labeled “confidential.” Comments that do not contain any nonpublic information may instead be filed in electronic form (in ASCII format, WordPerfect, or Microsoft Word) as part of or as an attachment to email messages directed to the following email box: firstname.lastname@example.org. Such comments will be considered by the Commission and will be available for inspection and copying at its principal office in accordance with section 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of the Commission's rules of practice, 16 CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)).
Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Orders To Aid Public Comment
The Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”) has accepted, subject to final approval, an Agreement Containing Consent Orders (“Consent Agreement”) from INA-Holding Schaeffler KG (“INA”) and FAG Kugelfischer Georg Schäfer AG (“FAG”), which is designed to remedy the anticompetitive effects resulting from INA's acquisition of FAG. Under the terms of the Consent Agreement, INA and FAG will be required to divest FAG's cartridge ball screw support bearing (“CBSSB”) business. FAG's CBSSB business will be divested to Aktiebolaget SKF (“SKF”), and will take place no later than twenty (20) business days from the date on which INA begins its acquisition of FAG.
The proposed Consent Agreement has been placed on the public record for thirty (30) days for receipt of comments by interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After thirty (30) days, the Commission will again review the proposed Consent Agreement and the comments received, and will decide whether it should withdraw from the proposed Consent Agreement or make final the Decision and Order.
Pursuant to a cash tender offer announced on September 13, 2001, INA proposes to acquire all of the outstanding shares of FAG. The total value of the transaction is approximately $650 million. The Commission's Complaint alleges that the proposed acquisition, if consummated, would violate section 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 18, and section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 45, in the worldwide market for the research, development, manufacture and sale of CBSSBs.
FAG and INA are the only two suppliers of CBSSBs in the world. CBSSBs are critical components in many industrial machine tools, and are utilized by machine tool original equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”) around the world. Machine tools are machines that are used in the production of other equipment, and include grinding machines, milling machines, and laser drilling and cutting systems. Machine tool OEMs utilize CBSSBs to reduce the friction associated with the rotation of a rolling screw. This rotation is used to control linear motion for accurate positioning, and is vital to the proper functioning of certain machine tools. Although other types of bearings can be used to accomplish this purpose, CBSSBs are easier, less expensive, and less time intensive to use than the potential alternatives. CBSSBs also allow end users of machine tools to replace the bearings easily, quickly and without incurring substantial cost. Moreover, once a machine tool is designed with CBSSBs, the process of switching to an alternative type of bearing would require a costly and time consuming redesign of the tool. For these reasons, it is highly unlikely that OEMs, or end users, would switch from CBSSBs to alternative technologies even if CBSSB prices increased significantly.
The global market for CBSSBs is highly concentrated. If the proposed acquisition is consummated, the combined firm would monopolize the worldwide market for CBSSBs. Prior to the acquisition, INA and FAG frequently competed against each other for CBSSB business, and this competition benefitted CBSSB customers. By eliminating competition between the two competitors in this highly concentrated market, the proposed acquisition would allow the combined firm to exercise market power unilaterally, thereby increasing the likelihood that purchasers of CBSSBs would be forced to pay higher prices and that innovation, service levels, and product quality in this market would decrease.
There are significant impediments to new entry into the CBSSB market. A new entrant into the CBSSB market would need to undertake the difficult, expensive and time-consuming process of researching and developing a line of CBSSB products, acquiring the necessary production assets, and developing the expertise needed to Start Printed Page 67256successfully design, manufacture, and market these products. It would take a new entrant over two years to accomplish these steps and achieve a significant market impact. Additionally, new entry into the CBSSB market is unlikely to occur because the costs of entering the market and producing CBSSBs are high relative to the limited sales opportunities available to new entrants.
The Consent Agreement effectively remedies the acquisition's anticompetitive effects in the worldwide market for CBSSBs by requiring INA and FAG to divest FAG's CBSSB business. This business consists of, among other things, FAG's specialized tooling equipment, technical drawings, advertising and training materials, customer lists, and other assets used in the research, development, manufacturing, quality assurance, marketing, customer support and sale of CBSSBs (collectively “CBSSB Assets”). Pursuant to the Consent Agreement, INA and FAG are required to divest the CBSSB Assets to SKF within twenty (20) business days from the date on which INA begins its acquisition of FAG. If the Commission determines that SKF is not an acceptable buyer or that the manner of the divestiture is not acceptable, INA and FAG must rescind the sale to SKF within three (3) business days, and divest the CBSSB Assets to a Commission-approved buyer within three (3) months. If INA and FAG have not divested the CBSSB Assets within the time and in the manner required by the Consent Agreement, the Commission may appoint a trustee to divest these assets and any additional FAG machinery that the trustee deems appropriate, subject to Commission approval.
The Commission's goal in evaluating possible purchasers of divested assets is to maintain the competitive environment that existed prior to the acquisition. A proposed buyer of divested assets must not itself present competitive problems. The Commission is satisfied that SKF is a well-qualified acquirer of the divested assets. SKF is a publicly-traded Swedish corporation and the largest supplier of ball and roller bearings worldwide. SKF has been active in the bearings industry since 1907, and currently has production sites in 22 countries around the world and sales activities in almost every country in the world. SKF is also a current producer of ball screw support bearings, the product from which CBSSBs were originally derived. Thus, SKF has the necessary industry expertise to manufacture and sell CBSSBs, and its entry into the CBSSB market will effectively replace the competition being eliminated by INA's acquisition of FAG. Furthermore, SKF does not pose separate competitive issues as the acquirer of the divested assets.
The Consent Agreement includes a number of provisions that are designed to ensure that the divestiture of the CBSSB Assets is successful. The Consent Agreement requires that, for a period of six (6) months, INA and FAG provide SKF with personnel, assistance, and training at no cost to SKF. This provision will ensure that SKF is able to effectively manufacture and market CBSSBs of the same quality as those currently produced by FAG. Additionally, if requested by SKF, INA and FAG are required to provide transitional manufacturing services at variable cost to SKF for up to six (6) months. This will ensure that SKF is able to serve customers in the CBSSB market without delay. In order to further facilitate SKF's entry into the CBSSB market, the Consent Agreement also prohibits INA and FAG from using any catalog numbers currently used by FAG to identify its CBSSBs.
To preserve the competitive viability and independence of the CBSSB Assets pending divestiture, the Consent Agreement includes an Order to Maintain Assets. This Order contains a number of provisions designed to ensure that the viability, competitiveness, and marketability of the CBSSB Assets and other FAG machinery are not diminished. The Order to Maintain Assets also provides that the Commission may appoint one or more monitors to ensure that INA and FAG expeditiously comply with their obligations under the Consent Agreement.
In order to ensure that the Commission remains informed about the status of the pending divestiture, and about efforts being made to accomplish the divestiture, the Consent Agreement requires INA and FAG to file an initial status report with the Commission within ten (10) days of the date the Consent Agreement is executed, and additional reports every thirty (30) days thereafter until the Commission's Decision and Order becomes final. Once the Commission's Order becomes final, INA and FAG have sixty (60) days within which to submit a verified written report detailing the manner in which they have complied, or intend to comply, with the Commission's Order. This reporting requirement continues until INA and FAG have fully complied with the Commission's Order.
In addition to the divestiture outlined above, the Commission's Order also addresses potential competitive issues raised by a possible future joint venture between FAG and NTN Corporation of Japan (“NTN”), another large producer of bearings worldwide. Although no joint activities have taken place to date, a preliminary agreement between FAG and NTN indicates that a wide range of possible joint marketing, joint production and joint sales activities are contemplated by the joint venture between the two companies. INA has publicly asserted that it welcomes the alliance with NTN and is prepared to continue this cooperation with NTN after INA's acquisition of FAG. Given that this scenario creates the possibility of a future global three-firm alliance, and given that such joint venture activities may not otherwise trigger Hart-Scott-Rodino reporting requirements, the Commission's Order requires INA and FAG to provide prior notice to the Commission before entering into any such joint venture activities with NTN affecting North America. This requirement will give the Commission an opportunity to review such activities for potential competitive harm before they take place.
The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the Consent Agreement, and it is not intended to constitute an official interpretation of the Consent Agreement or to modify its terms in any way.Start Signature
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
[FR Doc. 01-31912 Filed 12-27-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P