Hosken Consolidated Investments Ltd and Fabvest Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd (12/LM/Mar05) [2005] ZACT 34 (30 May 2005)

60 Reportability
Competition Law

Brief Summary

Competition Law — Merger Approval — Proposed merger between Hosken Consolidated Investments Ltd and Fabvest Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd — HCI to acquire 90% of Fabvest’s issued share capital — No significant competition concerns identified post-merger — Tribunal approved merger under section 16(2)(a) of the Competition Act, determining that the transaction would not substantially lessen competition in the gaming industry, as the parties operate in separate product markets for casinos and limited pay-out machines.

COMPETITION TRIBUNAL
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
                                                                                                Case No.: 12/LM/Mar05
In the large merger between:
Hosken Consolidated Investments Ltd                                Primary Acquiring Firm
and
Fabvest Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd                                       Primary Target Firm
                                                  REASONS FOR DECISION
Approval
[1]   The Competition Tribunal issued a Merger Clearance Certificate on 16 May 2005  
approving   the   proposed   merger   between   the   abovementioned   parties   in   terms   of  
section 16(2)(a). The reasons for the approval of the merger appear below.
The Parties
[2]   The primary acquiring firm is Hosken Consolidated Investments Ltd (“HCI”), a  
public   investment   holding   company   listed   on   the   JSE.   Its   largest   shareholder   is  
SACTWU   which   holds   45.3%   of   the   issued   share   capital   in   HCI.   None   of   its  
shareholders   either   directly   or   indirectly   controls   HCI.   HCI   has   a   number   of  
subsidiaries some of which are relevant for purposes of this transaction. 1  Flaghigh  
Investments (Pty) Ltd (“Flaghigh”), Tangney Investments (Pty) Ltd and Nactu (Pty)  
Ltd (“Nactu”) collectively hold 32.06% of the issued share capital in Tsogo Investment  
Holdings (“TIH”). 2
[3]  The primary target firm is Fabvest Investment Holdings Ltd (“Fabvest”), which is  
controlled by the Fabcos Trust (“Fabcos Trust”) (as to 90.125%). Fabvest currently  
controls  (directly   or  indirectly) 3  Fabcos   Investment   Holdings   (“FIH”)  (as  to  75%) 4, 
Censor SA (of which 95% of the issued share capital is held by FIH 5), Anchor Yeast  
(Pty) Ltd (of which 95% is held by Censor SA), Established Investments (Pty) Ltd (of 
1  Refer to HCI Group Structure, page 164 of the record. 
2  Other   relevant   subsidiaries   include   Global   Payment   Technologies   (Pty)   Ltd   (“Global   Payment”)

(96%);  Vukani  Gaming Corporation  (Pty) Ltd (“VGC”)  (96%);  and Vukani Gaming  Mpumalanga,  
Western Cape, Eastern Cape, and Kwazulu­Natal (“KZN”). (See page 2 of the Commission’s Report). 
3  For all the info as to what Fabvest controls, see page 47­49 of the record. See further Fabcos group  
structure, page 259 of the record. 
4  Subject to change to a 50% share, once the approval of the Johnnic / Fabcos transaction is approved  
by the National Gambling Board (“NGB”). 
5  According to the parties, FIH’s interests in Censor SA will be transferred to Fabvest pursuant to the  
Johnnic/Fabcos transaction.

which 55% is held by Fabvest 6).  FIH holds 38% non­controlling stake in TIH. 7
[4]   Below is an organogram which outlines the Fabcos shareholdings:
       90.1%
55%                                      75%
  25% (50%)
  
100% 100% 38%
100% 51%
100%
[5]   The structure of TIH’s subsidiaries is as follows:
51% 49%
100% 100%
60% 100% 100%        100%       100%
6  The   merging   parties   pointed   out   that   Fabvest’s   interests   in   Established   Investments   would   be  
excluded from the proposed acquisition. 
7  The   remaining   shares   in   TIH   are   held   by:   Flaghigh,   Nactu   &   Tangney   (32%) ;   Nafcoc  
Investment Holding Co. (Pty) Ltd (25%); African Renaissance (4.7%); and Patrice Motsepe  
(0.3%). 
Fabcos Trust
Fabvest Investment Holdings  
Ltd
Fabcos Investment Holdings  
Ltd
Johnnic Holdings LtdEstablished Investments  
(Pty)  Ltd
National Cereal Holdings  
(Pty)  Ltd
Censor SA Tsogo Investment  
Holding Company 
Fabfoods(100%) ­  
Dormant
Fabtravel (100%) ­  
Dormant
Fabao Investments  
(75%) ­ Dormant
Future Break (44%) – In  
liquidation
National Cereal Investment  
(Pty) Ltd
Tsogo Sun Holdings  
(Pty) Ltd
Premier Foods Ltd
Tsogo Investment  
Holding Company 
SAB Miller (Southern  
Sun)
Tsogo Sun Holdings (Pty)  
Ltd 
Tsogo Sun Gaming Southern Sun Hotels
Suncoast Casino &  
Entertainment
World
The Ridge Casino &  
Entertainment Resort
Hemingway’s Casino &  
Hotel Montecasino
Emnotweni Casino
2

The transaction
[6]   The proposed transaction entails HCI acquiring 90% of the issued share capital  
of   Fabvest   from   the   Fabcos   Trust.   The   remaining   10%   will   be   acquired   through  
section 440K of the Companies Act. 8 Post­merger, it is envisaged that HCI will own  
and control 100% of the issued share capital of Fabvest. This will further entitle HCI  
to indirectly control TIH. 9 It is through this transaction that HCI acquires the gambling  
and hotel activities of Fabvest. 10 
Rationale for the transaction
[7]   HCI labels the present deal / investment in the hotel and casino industries as a  
lucrative one as South Africa continues to grow as a tourist destination of choice. HCI  
sees   the   deal   as  a  continuation   of   its  strategy   to  increase  its  stake  in  the  Tsogo  
group. Fabcos Trust seeks to dispose of its stake in Fabcos to realise its investment  
in the hotel and casino industry (Tsogo group) so that it might concentrate on its core  
investment in Premier Foods and its subsidiaries. 11 
Activities of the parties
[8]     HCI  is   an   investment   holding   company   which   has   interests   ­   through   its  
subsidiaries ­ in 4 sectors, out of which  only gambling  seems relevant for purposes of  
our   analysis.   HCI   is   involved   in   the   gambling   market   through   limited   pay­out  
machines (“LPM’s”) and casinos. As already pointed out, HCI has a 96% interest in  
Vukani, a route operator of LPM’s. Vukani is currently operating in Mpumalanga and  
Western Cape provinces. We are told that although Vukani has also been awarded  
licences to operate these LMP’s in Kwazulu­Natal (“KZN”) and the Eastern Cape, it  
has as yet not commenced operations in these 2 provinces. Again, HCI has a 32%  
non­controlling stake in TIH, which owns 51% of, and controls, Tsogo Sun Holdings  
(“TSH”). TSH (which owns a 100% shareholding in Tsogo Sun Gaming and Southern  
Sun Hotels) holds 5 casino licences in SA,   viz., Suncoast Casino & Entertainment

Sun Hotels) holds 5 casino licences in SA,   viz., Suncoast Casino & Entertainment  
World; the Ridge Casino & Entertainment Resort (Witbank); Hemingway’s Casino &  
8  This is known as compulsory minority “take­out”.  Its salient features are:  (1) The acquirer makes  
general   offer   for   100%   of   target   shares;   (2)  If   at   least   90%   acceptance   of   offer   by   all  
shareholders is achieved, remaining minorities can be compelled to sell (after six weeks); and  
(3) No court approval is required.
9  As consideration for the acquisition of the shares in Fabvest, HCI shall pay the purchase price and  
transfer 15 500 000 shares in its capital (approximately 13% of the issued share capital) to Newco, a  
vehicle created specifically for this purpose, the shareholders of which shall be the same as the current  
shareholders   of   Fabvest   (Page   89   of   the   Record   and   also   the   4   steps   outlined   in   the  
Commission’s report, page 4).  
10  HCI   will   gain   indirect   control   of   TSH,   which   operates   5   casinos   throughout   South   Africa.  
Therefore, by acquiring indirect control of TSH, HCI will also acquire the hotel interests of TSH listed  
on page 29 of the record.  (See the merging parties’ attorneys’ e­mail sent to the Tribunal on  
11 May 2005, as well as pages 2­3 of the transcript of 16 May 2005).
11  The Fabcos Trust has already sold its 50% shares in FIH to Johnnic in a transaction approved by the  
Tribunal   on   23   February   2005   (Case   no.:   01/LM/Jan05) .   We   were   told   that   the   Johnnic   /  
Fabcos transaction was still awaiting approval of the National Gambling Board (“NGB”), which  
may happen in mid­June 2005.       
3

Hotel   (East   London);   Montecasino   (Fourways   –   JHB);   and   Emnotweni   Casino  
(Nelspruit); and Suncoast Casino & Entertainment (Durban) (60%). 12 
[9]     FIH  was formed in 1997 to steer the commercial affairs of the Fabcos Trust. It  
was   incorporated   in   1995   as   a   special   purpose   vehicle   specifically   formed   for  
purposes of acquiring shares and obtaining ownership stakes in corporate entities for  
the benefit and on behalf of the Fabcos members. The parties indicated that it was  
intended, after the establishment of Fabvest in 1997, that FIH would be ring­fenced 
to hold only the Fabcos Trust’s casino interests. 
[10]     TIH  is described as a  a broad based BEE entity whose shareholding benefits  
organized black owned businesses, labour movements and women groups. TIH has  
a joint venture company, Tsogo Sun with the SAB Miller. Both TIH and SAB Miller  
own a 51% and 49% shares in Tsogo Sun respectively. 
[11]     Tsogo   Sun   Gaming   is   a   casino   operating   entity.   It   has   5   casino   licenses  
operating in various geographic areas as described above.  
Product overlap
[12]   It is evident from the above that the only product overlap between the parties  
relates to their respective interests in the gaming industry. As already articulated, HCI  
and   Fabvest   have   a   common   interest   in   the   casino   market   through   their   indirect  
shareholding   in   TIH.   However,   HCI   is   also   involved   in   the   provision   of   LPM’s.  
According   to   the   Commission,   the   National   Gambling   Act     ­   which   regulates   the  
South African gambling market (with the NGB being a statutorily established body to  
serve as the watchdog to oversee gambling activities in SA) – differentiates between  
casinos and LPM’s, and therefore separates the activities of casinos and LPM’s. Both  
the   Commission   and   the   merging   parties   contended   that   casinos   and   LPM’s

the   Commission   and   the   merging   parties   contended   that   casinos   and   LPM’s  
constitutes separate product markets hence no product overlap exist between HCI  
and Fabvest with respect to LPM’s.
[13]   Insofar as the casino market is concerned, the Commission and the merging  
parties submitted that the post­merger market structure will remain unchanged as the  
transaction would only result in HCI acquiring shares in Fabvest to gain control of  
TIH. The Commission did not foresee any competition concerns arising post­merger  
– no matter how the geographic market is defined. 13    
Market shares
[14]     Below   is   a   table   (provided   by   the   parties)   reflecting   the   market   share   data  
relating to the gaming industry in which Tsogo Sun Gaming operates at provincial  
level.14
Gauteng 
12  Johnnic holds the balance of 40% in the Suncoast Casino & Entertainment.
13  The merging parties contended that as individual provinces have the power to create their own  
regulations,   no   two   provinces   operate   in   exactly   the   same   way   to   such   an   extent   that   the   SA’s  
geographic   market   for   casinos   can   be   viewed   as   9   separate,   independent   markets   sharing  
commonalities ­ page 101 of the record and pages 6­8 of the Commission’s Report).
14  According to the parties, the market shares are management’s best estimates based on gambling  
revenue figures from the NGB. 
4

Casino Licence holder Market shares (%)
Caesars Peermont Global 27
Carnival  City Casino Sun International 17
Emerald Casino resort London Clubs 5
Gold Reef City  Gold Reef 21
Montecasino Tsogo Sun 30
Mpumalanga
Casino Licence holder Market shares (%)
Champions Casino Tsogo Sun 41
Emnotweni Casinos Tsogo Sun 39
Graceland Hotel and Casino Peermont Global 20
Kwazulu­Natal
Casino Licence holder Market shares (%)
Golden Horse Casino Gold Reef 10
Monte Vista Casino and Resort Balele Leisure 4
Sibaya Casino and Entertainment Sun International 34
Suncoast   Casino   and  
Entertainment
Tsogo Sun 48
Tusk Umfolozi Casino Tusk 4
Eastern Cape
Casino Licence holder Market shares (%)
The Boardwalk and Wild Coast Sun  Sun International 79
Hemingway Casino Tsogo Sun 21
Competition Evaluation 
[15]   The parties contended that HCI already holds an investment interest in TIH and  
would merely be increasing its stake to an effective controlling interest through this  
deal.  They further argued that as there would  be no market overlap therefore the  
merger would not have impact on the gambling industry. They, however, admitted  
that barriers to entry are high as significant capital expenditure is required in order to  
establish the infrastructure and to acquire the equipment and machinery required for  
a new casino entrant to operate. Further to this, the Gambling Act and the various  
provincial gambling boards strictly regulate the casino industry. It was argued that  
because of this strict regulation countervailing power in this industry is very high. We  
were told that entry into the gaming industry was regulated through the old national  
Gambling   Act   33   of   1996,   which   provided   for   the   granting   of   a   maximum   of   40  
licences, distributed across each of the 9 new provinces. With the introduction of the  
New Gambling Act – it was argued – the Minister of Trade & Industry (“the Minister”)  
is empowered to determine the maximum number of licences awarded from time to

is empowered to determine the maximum number of licences awarded from time to  
time with due regard to the criteria set out in the legislation. 15 It appears the criteria  
require   the   Minister   to   balance   the   competing   considerations   of   a   competitive  
marketplace,   BEE,   and   the   incidence   and   consequences   of   over­stimulation   of  
gambling.   In   such   process,   the   Minister   may   also   consult   with   the   Competition  
15  See page 102­104 of the record.
5

Commission.16 The Commission contended that the proposed transaction would not  
result in any change in the current market structure. 
Conclusion
[16]  There were no public interest issues. In the Tribunal’s view, the transaction will  
not prevent or lessen competition substantially.
_____________                                                                                         30 May 2005
David Lewis                                                                                                    Date
Concurring:  Urmilla Bhoola and Medi Mokuena 
For the merging parties:   Robert   Appelbaum   and   Nina   Malan   (Sonneberg 
Hoffman Galombik Attorneys)  
For the Commission: Hardin Ratshisusu  (Mergers & Acquisitions Division)
16  For   instance,   section   54   of   the   new   Gambling   Act   requires   the   licensing   authority   –   when  
considering an application for a licence or the transfer of a licence – to consider whether approval of  
the application is likely to substantially effect competition in the gambling industry generally, or in  
respect of the proposed activity within that province or within SA (where applicable). 
6