CCI denies its claims against Parle Products Private Limited.

CCI confirms the order dated June 7, 2022, Hiveloop Technology Pvt.High Group/Informant) Pearl Products Private Limited (pearl) regarding Pearl’s anti-competitive practices. Informant (Known as Udaan) has been forced to buy from the open market rather than obtain supply from Parle itself, and Parle has abused its dominant position in the Indian glucose biscuit market by refusing to sign a contract with Hiveloop. claimed to be

Parle is the maker of one of the world’s best-selling biscuits, ‘Parle-G’, and a leading manufacturer of biscuits and confectionery in India. The Hiveloop is used by all Stock Keeping Units (SKUs) pearls are in high consumer demand in the market, so Pearl G is generally part of the ‘must-have’ inventory for distributors and retailers. Retailers had used Udaan’s platform to demand more such products, but Parle’s refusal to supply led to a refusal to trade under Section 3(4)(d) of the Act. , constitutes a clear case of abuse of control under Article 4(2). Law. The source also said Udaan retailers said 115 of the 235 vendors he could buy on Udaan’s platform were his Parle distributors. As such, Udaan is forced to source Pearl’s products from the open market.

CCI is not without market power, with information available in the public domain showing that Parle has about 27% market share in the overall biscuit category. As to the violation of section 3(4) of the Act, as alleged by the informant, CCI held that the informant was free to obtain the products from the open market and that Parle did not bar distributors from trading. expressed his opinion. with the informant. CCI also found that even though it was assumed that Parle placed aggressive vertical restrictions on one of his distributors to keep him from dealing with the informant, no retailer or end-consumer would be affected. I said it doesn’t seem like it.

Finally, CCI found no abuse as the informant failed to establish a violation in relation to a Section 4 claim. Furthermore, CCI believes that narrow market scrutiny based on the segmentation provided by informants may not be justified by the facts and circumstances of the case and therefore does not warrant any further assessment of superiority. I decided.

Accordingly, CCI has presented a prima facie case that the informant failed on behalf of Parle to demonstrate exclusivity practices that may have hindered the development of a competing supply chain for Parle’s products. Violation of Sections 3(4) and 4 of the Act.

CCI Approves Amazon Asia-Pacific’s Acquisition of Prione Shares

CCI has approved Amazon’s merger proposal under Section 31(1) of the Act by means of a vide order dated September 3, 2022.

The proposed combination envisioned the acquisition of 76% of Prione’s share capital by Amazon Asia-Pacific. Pursuant to the proposed combination, Amazon Asia-Pacific and Amazon Eurasia are Prione and Cloudtail India Pvt. Ltd. (Cloudtail) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Prione. The Notifying Party has submitted that Cloudtail will terminate its B2C business in India in order for Amazon Asia Pacific and Amazon Eurasia to acquire 100% shares of Prione and indirectly 100% shares of Cloudtail. did. However, this will occur after the date of CCI approval. It also posts that Cloudtail will cease his B2B business after the closing date and will make limited his B2B sales within 6 months from the closing date to dispose of any remaining inventory on Cloudtail’s books. . Additionally, Couldtail will cease all online B2B and B2C operations within 45 days of receiving CCI approval.

CCI investigated whether the proposed combination would increase the market power of the Amazon group as a whole, ultimately triggering the AAEC in India. CCI observed that approximately one-fifth of total Amazon marketplace GMS was generated through Cloudtail sales in fiscal 2020-21. However, CCI pointed out that the proposed combination is unlikely to raise competition concerns in his B2B sales space, as the volume of sales in the B2B space by Cloudtail is not significant. CCI further pointed out that the subsidiary and his Cloudtail activities show a vertical interface. However, Cloudtail will cease operations, so there will be no foreclosure concerns in the market. Similarly, Amazon subsidiaries and Prione also demonstrate vertical interfaces. However, based on the value and nature of the services Prione provides to such non-subsidiary entities, CCI noted that this vertical interface is unlikely to result in foreclosure to third parties. CCI also considered an application submitted by the All India Merchants Confederation (CAIT) under section 33 of the Act. The filing argued that Amazon’s outright acquisition of Cloudtail would undermine platform neutrality. Cloudtail will receive further support from Amazon in terms of subsidized/no fees, in addition to other resources such as access to Amazon’s data and funds. Additionally, CCI spoke of blatant misrepresentations Amazon has made in the past when it comes to securing non-preferential treatment for sellers, and therefore said Amazon’s stance on the Cantail shutdown cannot be taken at face value. was given.

CCI warned that if someone conceals/suppresses and/or misrepresents information, it has the power to take action under Sections 44 and 45 of the Act. With submissions made by Amazon Asia Pacific, CCI determined that the issue of preference was not relevant to the evaluation of the proposed combinations.

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *