Australia’s competition watchdog, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), has raised significant competition concerns regarding Singapore-based Olam Agri’s proposed acquisition of Namoi Cotton for A$144.9 million (S$130.8 million).
The acquisition bid has sparked an international bidding war between Olam Agri, an affiliate of Singapore’s Olam Group, and the Dutch commodity merchant Louis Dreyfus Company. Both firms aim to expand their presence in Australia, a key market for cotton production and processing.
Olam Agri, operating through its subsidiary Queensland Cotton, and Namoi Cotton are major players in the Australian cotton industry. Both companies provide a range of services including cotton ginning, cotton lint classing, logistics, and warehousing. They are also involved in the acquisition and marketing of cotton lint and cottonseed.
Stephen Ridgeway, a commissioner at the ACCC, expressed concerns about the potential reduction in competition if the acquisition proceeds. “The proposed acquisition would reduce the number of competing ginning suppliers in the Lower Namoi Valley from three to two, with Olam operating four of the five cotton gins if the acquisition proceeds,” Ridgeway stated.
Read more: The ACCC’s Ongoing Digital Platforms Services Inquiry: Regulatory Reform
This consolidation would leave only one alternative cotton gin in the Lower Namoi Valley region, operated by Australian Food and Fibre. The ACCC is worried that this reduction in competition could lead to higher prices for cotton growers in the region and could negatively impact the supply of cotton lint classing services across Australia.
The regulator emphasized the importance of maintaining a competitive market to prevent adverse effects on pricing and service quality for cotton producers. The concerns raised by the ACCC highlight the potential risks associated with the merger and its impact on the broader Australian cotton industry.
Source: Straits Times
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand