IN THE COMPETITION TRIBUNAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
CASE NO.: CASE NO: 48/LM/APR08
In the merger between:
Mainstreet 646 (Pty) Ltd Primary Acquiring Firms
and
Alstom SA (Pty) Ltd Primary Target Firm
______________________________________________________________________
Panel : D Lewis (Presiding Member), N Manoim (Tribunal Member), and
Y Carrim (Tribunal Member)
Heard on : 26 June 2008 and 24 July 2008
Order issued on : 24 July 2008
Reasons issued on : 10 September 2008
REASONS FOR DECISION
APPROVAL
[1] On 24 July 2008 the Tribunal unconditionally approved the merger between the
aforementioned parties. The reasons for this decision follow:
THE MERGING PARTIES
[2] The primary acquiring firm is a consortium, Main Street 464, which comprises of
Actis Investment Holdings 71 Limited (“Actis Investment”) which is ultimately controlled
by Actis Capital LLP (“Actis”); and Old Mutual Life Assurance Company (South Africa)
Limited (“Old Mutual”) which is controlled by Old Mutual plc; Management; as well as
1
BEE entities. The respective shareholdings in Mainstreet are set out later in this
decision.
[3] The primary target firm is Alstom SA (Proprietary) Limited (“Alstom SA”) which is
not controlled by any firm. Alstom SA’s major shareholders are Alstom NV – 11.58%,
Areva – 11.58%, and Management - 37%.1
ACTIVITIES OF THE PARTIES
[4] Mainstreet is a newly formed company which has not been active in any
services. Actis is a private equity business which manages capital to create
opportunities for the companies and stakeholders in which they have invested. Old
Mutual is in the business of providing financial services, with a variety of financial
products and services.
[5] Actis and Old Mutual are both shareholders in and exercise joint control over
Savcio Holdings (Pty) Limited (“Savcio”), a company which is active in repair and
maintenance of electrical equipment, including repair of traction motors used by the
locomotive industry, in which they together hold 40% stake. Alstom SA is active in the
manufacturing, trading and contracting in the electrical engineering industry, also
including repair of traction motors.
COMPETITION ISSUES ARISING FROM THE HEARINGS
[6] When this transaction was initially notified Mainstreet sought to acquire control
over all the business of Alstom SA, excluding only Alstom Power. At the time the
merging parties advised the Commission that between them Old Mutual and Actis
controlled Mainstreet. They also advised the Commission that the two also held a stake
in Savcio.2
[7] The respective shareholdings in Savcio are as follows:
Ethos (through Private Equity Fund 4) – 25%
1 Refer to Annexure A for the diagram detailing Alstom’s shareholding structure.
2 At least according to the Commission this is what the merging parties told them. See transcript of the
hearing dated 26 June 2008 page 1.
2
Actis (through Actis Africa Fund 2) – 25%
Old Mutual – 15%
AKA Capital (Proprietary) Limited (“AKA”) – 13%
Sphere Holdings (“Sphere”) – 13%
Management – 9%
[8] The shareholdings in Mainstreet are as follows:
Actis (through Actis Investment) - 35%
Old Mutual - 20%
Kagiso Venture Limited as nominee of Kagiso Trust Investments (Pty) Ltd - 9.5%
Tiso Electrical (Pty) Ltd - 9.5%
Andries Tshabalala - 4.0%
Sibilant Investments (Pty) Ltd - 4.5%
Management - 17.5%.
[9] The Commission was concerned about the fact that Actis and Old Mutual might
between them be able to control both firms and this raised competition issues given the
overlaps between the activities of Savcio and Alstom SA in the market for the repair of
traction motors used in the locomotive industry. The merging parties however, later
changed their position and advised the Commission that Old Mutual and Actis had no
voting agreements between them and could not be regarded as controlling either Savcio
where on aggregate they held 40%, nor Mainstreet, despite the fact that their aggregate
holding in the latter amounted to 55%. Hence, they argued that Savcio and Mainstreet
would, post merger, continue to compete with each other.
3
[10] On the basis of these reassurances the Commission did not investigate whether
if there was control by Old Mutual and Actis over one or both of the businesses, what
the competitive effects might be.
[11] When we first heard the matter on 26 June we raised concerns that given the
size of their shareholdings in both companies, Old Mutual and Actis might for the
purposes of section 12(2)(g) be considered to control both Mainstreet and Savcio. If
this was the case the consequences for competition in the overlap markets had not
been explored. We asked the Commission to investigate this aspect further.
[12] As we noted earlier, the particular area of overlap of concern was in the market
for repair of traction motors used in the locomotive industry. The most significant
customer for these services, South African Rail Commuter Corporation Ltd (“Metrorail”)
advised the Commission that if the merger proceeded it would be left with a single
supplier other than Transnet. Although the merging parties subsequently persuaded the
customer representative, Mr Barnard, to change his submission on the basis of their
assurances that the two businesses would not be subject to the control of the same
shareholders, the Commission was not reassured.
[13] The merging parties prudently decided to restructure the transaction, the material
effect of which is that the traction motor repair business that belonged to Alstom will like
the power business now be excluded from the transaction and remain behind to be
owned by a dormant subsidiary of Alstom SA, known as Satinsky. 3
COMPETITION ANALYSIS
[14] With the transaction as restructured the overlaps between Mainstreet and Savcio
3 Refer to Annexure B for the Mainstreet/Alstom business post transaction diagram.
4
have been removed4. It is also common cause between the Commission and the
merging parties that there is no overlap in the activities of Mainstreet and Satinsky.
CONCLUSION
[15] In light of the above, we find that this merger will not result in any substantial
lessening or prevention of competition in any of the relevant markets. Accordingly, we
approve the merger without conditions.
[16] There are no public interest issues.
_______________ 10 September 2008
N Manoim Date
Tribunal Member
D Lewis and Y Carrim concur in the judgment of N Manoim
For the merging parties : Advocate Wilson instructed by Deneys Reitz
For the Commission : M. Mohlala and T Bonakele
(Mergers and Acquisitions)
Tribunal Researcher: L Xaba
ANNEXURE A
4
4
Although Mainstreet and Satinsky have some common shareholders, these shareholders hold minor
stakes and do not own equity in Savcio and hence the overlap of non-controlling minorities in non-
competing businesses raises no concerns.
5
CURRENT ALSTOM SHAREHOLDING
6
The effective shareholdings in
Alstom Electrical SA (Pty) Limited
are thus:
Alstom NV – 8.1%
Areva – 8.1%
RMB – 7%
Sibilant – 3%
Tiso – 20%
Kagiso – 25%
Management and Employee Trusts
– 28.8%
100%
Areva
11.58%
RMB
9.9%
Sibilant
4%
Tiso
7.15%
Kagiso
10.72%
Alstom
11.58%
Management
& Employee
Trusts
45.09%
ALSTOM
ELECTRICAL SA
(PTY) LTD
Business
Units Subsidiaries
Repair Services
business unit – not to
be transferred to Main
Street
Other business units –
to be transferred to
Main Street
Power Service SA
(Pty) Ltd – not to be
transferred to Main
Street
Alstom Transport
(Pty) Ltd
Alstom John
Thompson (Pty) Ltd –
businesses to be
transferred to Main
Street
70% 15% 15%
KAGISO
15%
TISO
15%
ALSTOM SA
(PTY) LTD
ANNEXURE B
MAIN STREET/ALSTOM BUSINESS POST-TRANSACTION
ANNEXURE C
REPAIR SERVICES POST TRANSACTION
7
Old Mutual
20%
Tiso
9.5%
Kagiso
9.5%
ACTIS
35%
Management
17%
Sibilant & A.
Tshabalala
8.5%
100%
100%
MAIN STREET 646
ALSTOM SA
NEW OPCO housing the
businesses transferred to
Main Street
8
SATINSKY 149 (PTY) LTD
housing the repair service
business which was not
transferred to Main Street
Areva
8.1%
RMB
7%
Sibilant
3%
Tiso
20%
Kagiso
25%
Alstom
8.1%
Management
28.8%