Tsebo Outsourcing Group (Pty) Ltd and Equality Food Services (Pty) Ltd (106/LM/Dec06) [2007] ZACT 35 (11 May 2007)

70 Reportability
Competition Law

Brief Summary

Competition Law — Merger Approval — Tsebo Outsourcing Group (Pty) Ltd acquiring 100% of Equality Food Services (Pty) Ltd — Tribunal finding no substantial prevention or lessening of competition in the national market for catering services — Approval granted without conditions due to absence of significant public interest issues.

COMPETITION TRIBUNAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
       
             Case No: 106/LM/Dec06
In the matter between:
Tsebo Outsourcing Group (Pty) Ltd                                                     Acquiring Firm
And
Equality Food Services (Pty) Ltd                                                           Target Firm
Panel : Y Carrim (Presiding Member), N Manoim (Tribunal
Member) and  M Mokuena (Tribunal Member)
Heard on : 07 February 2007
Order issued on : 07February 2006
Reasons issued on : 11 May 2007
Reasons for Decision
APPROVAL
1]On   7   February   2007   the   Tribunal   approved   the   merger   between   Tsebo  
Outsourcing Group (Pty) Ltd (“Tsebo”) and Equality Food Services (Pty) Ltd  
(“Equality”). The reasons for approval follow below.
THE TRANSACTION
2]Tsebo is acquiring 100% of the issued share capital in Equality. Post merger,  
Equality will be a wholly owned subsidiary of Tsebo. 
3]Tsebo   is   controlled   by   Ethos   Private   Equity   Fund   IV   through   a   53.8%  
shareholding. Ethos Private Equity Fund IV is ultimately controlled by Ethos  
Investment   Holding   Ltd.   Tsebo   has   three   operating   divisions,   being   Food  
Services   which   operates   under   the   brand   name   Fedics   and   Facilities  
1

Management   Services   which   conducts   its   business   through   Drake   &   Scull  
FMSA   and   Invalu   which   focuses   on   procurement   of   Food   &   Beverage  
commodities. 
 
4]The shareholders of Equality are:
Gregg Lacon­Allin  68%
Khumo Bathong Strategic Investments (Pty) Ltd 16%
Bheki Gumede 8.5%
Frank Davidson 8.5%
  
5]Equality  is mainly focussed on providing  catering services to the mining  
sector and Fedic’s regards this transaction as an opportunity to enhance  
its current service offering. The transaction offers Equality an opportunity  
to enhance its BEE status.  
THE RELEVANT MARKET
6]Both   parties   are   active   in   the   food   services   sector   where   they   provide  
catering services.
 
7]Fedics,  the food  and auxiliary   services division   of  Tsebo  provides  catering  
services   to   a   broad   spectrum   of   customers   ranging   from   corporations   to  
educational and healthcare institutions, including industrial, construction and  
mining nationally.
8]Although   Equality   provides   catering   and   related   services   to   the   mining  
industry, collieries, tertiary institutions, schools, hospitals and recreation clubs  
nationally,  the bulk of its services, for historic reasons, are provided to the  
mining industry.
9]For   purposes   of   this   transaction   the   relevant   market   is   regarded   as   the  
national market for the provision of catering services. 
2

Impact on Competition
10]Catering   contracts   are   generally   awarded   via   a   tender   process   with   the  
duration  of   contracts  ranging   from  2  to  5  years.   According   to  the  merging  
parties   the   number   of   bidders   tendering   for   a   contract   range   from  
approximately 15 to as much as 100 companies, depending on the type of  
contract being offered.  Fedics and Equality have not bid against each other  
for any  contract  in  the  past  year.  Post   the  transaction  the  merging  parties  
market share will be approximately 12%. 
11]Strong countervailing power exist since clients who offer these contracts are  
large companies who have the ability to offer these services in­house, but  
choose   not   to   in   order   to   focus   on   their   core   business.   According   to   the  
merging parties almost half of all catering services are still provided in­house.  
The   competitive   constraint   is   thus   derived   from   the   ability   of   clients   to  
substitute outsourced catering services for in­house services. 
12]Barriers to entry are low as there are no legal, technical or economic barriers  
to hinder a new competitor from entering. In the past five years 5 new firms  
have entered this market. 1
 
13]Based on the above, we agree with the Commission that the transaction is  
unlikely to substantially prevent or lessen competition in the relevant market.
CONCLUSION
14]There are no significant public interest issues and we accordingly approve  
the transaction without conditions.
____________________                           11 May 2007
Y Carrim                          Date
1  According to the Commission Mr. Hoerau of Sodexho claimed that the proposed transaction  
would raise entry barriers for the smaller players. However, upon further investigation the  
Commission found this not to be the case.
3

N Manoim and M Mokuena concurring.
Tribunal Researcher:  R Badenhorst
For the merging parties: K de Kock (Webber Wentzel Bowens)
For the Commission: E Ramohlola (Mergers & Acquisitions)
4