ArdorComm Media Group

Contact Us
logo
Menu
logo
ArdorComm ArdorComm ArdorComm

market competition

Zomato and Swiggy Deny Antitrust Violations Amidst CCI Investigation Claims

Leave a Comment / By / Media Entertainment & Art Community

In response to recent media reports suggesting antitrust violations, food delivery giants Zomato and Swiggy denied any wrongdoing, labeling the claims “misleading.” The reports indicated that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) had initiated an investigation into the business practices of both companies. In a statement to the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE), Zomato clarified that while the CCI began a preliminary inquiry in April 2022, no final findings or penalties had been issued. According to Zomato, the investigation followed a CCI “Prima Facie Order” from April 2022 that raised concerns regarding platform practices, such as preferential listings of restaurant partners and price parity requirements across platforms. Zomato’s Company Secretary, Sandhya Sethia, emphasized that these practices are in compliance with the Competition Act of 2002 and do not disrupt market competition. Swiggy echoed a similar sentiment, calling the media reports “misleading” and clarifying that the CCI’s inquiry is still in a preliminary stage. Swiggy, which filed details of the investigation in its September 2024 DRHP (Draft Red Herring Prospectus), emphasized that no conclusions have been drawn. The CCI’s Director General is still examining aspects of Swiggy’s operations, including business conduct, and Swiggy expects to submit further responses before a final decision is made. Both companies reaffirmed their dedication to transparency and regulatory compliance. Zomato assured stakeholders that there have been “no further reportable events” since the preliminary inquiry began, while Swiggy pointed out that the investigative process has yet to yield any determinations or actionable orders. This scrutiny follows a 2022 complaint by the National Restaurant Association of India, which alleged that Zomato and Swiggy’s practices restricted competition by requiring price parity from restaurants, impacting both restaurant margins and competitive market conditions. As Swiggy nears the close of its $1.4 billion IPO bids, both companies await further developments from the CCI’s review. Source: Business Standard Photo Credit: Business Standard

McKesson to Acquire Controlling Interest in Florida Cancer Specialists’ Management Services for $2.49 Billion

Leave a Comment / By / Human Resource Community

McKesson Corp. has announced its agreement to acquire a controlling stake in Community Oncology Revitalization Enterprise Ventures LLC (Core Ventures) for $2.49 billion in cash. Core Ventures, a business and administrative services organization established by Florida Cancer Specialists & Research Institute (FCS), supports nearly 100 FCS clinics across Florida. The transaction will give McKesson approximately 70% ownership, with FCS physicians retaining a minority interest. Core Ventures offers operational and advisory services that align practice locations, ancillary services, and patient care across FCS. The acquisition will integrate Core Ventures into McKesson’s Oncology platform, with financials reported under the US Pharmaceutical segment. FCS, which operates with more than 250 physicians and 280 advanced practice providers, will remain independently owned but will join McKesson’s US Oncology Network, enhancing community-based cancer care. “This acquisition strengthens our ability to deliver advanced treatments and enhance care experiences while reducing costs,” said Brian Tyler, CEO of McKesson. “Our collaboration with FCS and Core Ventures aligns with our commitment to improving patient outcomes and expanding access to quality care.” FCS CEO Nathan Walcker echoed the sentiment: “This partnership with McKesson and joining The US Oncology Network is a significant step for FCS. It enhances our mission to deliver patient-centered cancer care and bring cutting-edge medicine into communities across Florida.” The deal is subject to regulatory clearances and standard closing conditions. Source: hcinnovationgroup

US Federal Trade Commission Opposes Tapestry’s Acquisition of Capri Holdings: Here’s Why

Leave a Comment / By / Human Resource Community
News on HR

The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has taken a firm stance against Tapestry Inc.’s proposed $8.5 billion acquisition of Capri Holdings Ltd., the parent company of Michael Kors. This marks a notable move in antitrust enforcement within the fashion accessories sector, raising concerns about market competition and consumer welfare under the Biden administration. Key Points: FTC’s Concerns: The FTC’s opposition to the merger stems from concerns about its potential impact on prices within the affordable luxury segment. The agency worries that the deal could reduce competition for affordable handbags, resulting in adverse effects on consumers and workers. Additionally, the consolidation of Tapestry and Capri could lead to reduced wages and employee benefits, affecting approximately 33,000 workers worldwide. FTC’s Legal Action: The FTC filed complaints in both its in-house and federal courts after a unanimous decision to block the deal. This legal action represents the FTC’s first lawsuit in the fashion accessories sector, highlighting the significance of its intervention. Company Responses: Tapestry’s CEO, Joanne Crevoiserat, contested the FTC’s assessment, emphasizing the company’s commitment to competitive wages and benefits. Capri Holdings also disagreed with the FTC’s decision, asserting that prevailing market realities indicate minimal impact on competition. Both companies vowed to defend the case vigorously in court and reiterated their commitment to completing the acquisition. Tapestry’s Acquisition Motives: Tapestry’s pursuit of Capri Holdings aims to establish a US-based fashion conglomerate specializing in accessible luxury. The merger seeks to leverage Coach’s strengths in China and Michael Kors’ presence in Europe to enhance geographic reach and revenue growth. Despite challenges in turning around Michael Kors’ declining sales, Tapestry remains optimistic about the deal’s potential benefits. Market Implications: If the merger proceeds, the combined Tapestry and Capri entity would become the second-largest personal luxury goods company in the US, rivaling industry giants like LVMH. However, the FTC’s opposition underscores broader concerns about market consolidation and its impact on competition and consumer choice. The FTC’s legal action against Tapestry’s acquisition of Capri Holdings reflects growing scrutiny of mergers and acquisitions in the fashion industry, signaling a proactive approach to antitrust enforcement under the Biden administration.

Centre Raises Threshold for Merger and Acquisition Vetting by Competition Commission of India

Leave a Comment / By / Human Resource Community

The Corporate Affairs Ministry has announced revisions to the thresholds for mergers and acquisitions (M&As), altering the criteria for exemption from Competition Commission of India (CCI) approval. Under the new regulations, companies are not obligated to notify the CCI if the target entity’s assets, including subsidiaries, amount to less than Rs 450 crore, with a turnover below Rs 1,250 crore. This represents an increase from the previous thresholds of Rs 350 crore for assets and Rs 1,000 crore for turnover. The Ministry has concurrently revised the ‘de-minimis’ or small target exemption threshold, which absolves certain M&As from CCI scrutiny. This exemption now applies to transactions where the asset value in India does not exceed Rs 350 crore or the revenue from India does not exceed Rs 1,000 crore. Vaibhav Choukse, partner and head of competition law at JSA Advocates and Solicitors, hailed the move as a significant step towards facilitating M&As in India, aligning with the government’s agenda of promoting ease of doing business. He noted the 150% increase in the existing thresholds under Section 5 of the Competition Act and the adjustment of De Minimis thresholds. Amit Agarwal, partner at Nangia & Co LLP, echoed Choukse’s sentiments, emphasizing the positive impact of the revisions on the ease of doing business and the M&A landscape in India. However, analysts caution that raising exemption limits may present challenges, particularly for startups in their initial years, which may not meet the asset or revenue criteria but could contribute substantially to acquiring companies post-deal. The example of Facebook’s acquisition of WhatsApp in 2014, which escaped CCI scrutiny due to threshold limitations, highlights the potential implications for competition in relevant markets. While the revisions aim to streamline M&A processes and foster business growth, they also underscore the need for vigilant oversight to ensure healthy competition and market dynamics are preserved, particularly in the digital sphere where transformative deals can have far-reaching consequences.