Tag: Competition

The Commission charged that Agrium, Inc.’s $2.65 billion proposed acquisition of UAP Holding Corporation would substantially lessen competition in the market for the retail sale of bulk fertilizer and, in some cases, related services by farm stores, in several local markets in Michigan and Maryland. The Commission’s order requires the divestiture of seven farm stores, five UAP stores in Michigan, and two Agrium locations on the eastern shore of Maryland.

The Commission challenged Fresenius Medical Care’s proposed purchase of an exclusive sublicense for the manufacture and supply of the drug Venofer to US dialysis clinics from Daiichi Sankyo Company. Venofer is an intravenously administered iron sucrose preparation used primarily to treat iron-deficiency anemia in dialysis patients with chronic kidney disease. The agreement would have given Fresenius, the largest operator of dialysis clinics in the country, the ability to artificially inflate its internal costs for Venofer, and effectively increase Medicare reimbursement payments for all buyers of the drug. In order to settle these concerns about anticompetitive self-dealing, the Commission issued a consent order restricting Fresenius from reporting internally inflated Venofer prices by mandating that the current market price for the drug be used in reporting the average selling price to Medicare.

The Commission challenged Pernod Ricard SA’s proposed $9 billion acquisition of V&S Vin & Spirit as harmful to competition among suppliers of “super-premium” vodka. The proposed deal would have merged the two leading brands, Absolut and Stolichnaya, and allowed Pernod to raise prices profitably on both brands. Additionally, the complaint alleges that the markets for cognac, domestic cordials, coffee liqueur, and popular gin would be subject to anticompetitive effects because sensitive pricing and promotion information for Beam Global Brands, a competitor in these product markets, would be available to Pernod after the acquisition as a result of Beam’s joint venture with V&S. The Commission settled the charges by requiring Pernod to divest its distribution interests in Stolichnaya Vodka, and to erect a firewall to prevent the sharing of any competitively sensitive information from Beam Global Brands with Pernod employees.