Supermarket Newsletter – No. 34 –
ACM PUBLISHES COOP/PLUS MERGER DECISION
In the supermarket newsletter of December 22, 2021 we informed you that ACM had announced that it approved the merger of Coop and Plus on the condition that supermarkets must be sold in 12 market areas, namely the shops in Harmelen, Hollandscheveld, Rolde, Ruurlo, Stolwijk, Terborg, Wehl, Groot -Ammers, Wekerom, Ravenstein, Uddel and Vlieland. Seven of these supermarkets are operated by franchisees.
On January 6, ACM published its full decision , in which it explains why it has approved the merger. It is remarkable that ACM considers that online sales have increased, but that it still believes that these sales should not be included in its assessment. In this context, ACM points out that no provider has a full national network and that Plus and Coop have a limited market share (8%) in the online market in relation to, for example, Albert Heijn (50%) and Picnic and Jumbo (20%). .
In its decision, ACM also considers that the viability, marketability and competitiveness of the 12 supermarkets to be divested would be sufficiently safeguarded in the remedy proposal of Coop en Plus that ACM accepted.
This would appear, among other things, from the obligations of Coop and Plus contained therein, which – in short – amount to the fact that they must do everything they can to ensure that the supermarkets to be transferred retain their value and remain viable and competitive. An independent trustee is appointed to oversee the above. In the event that the parties fail to sell the supermarkets within the set (undisclosed) timeframes, a sales trustee will be appointed and authorized to transfer the supermarkets.
It is definitely recommended that the entrepreneurs involved seek the assistance of experts, so that they can properly assess the opportunities and risks of the above process. The decision may also offer opportunities for entrepreneurs of other formats to expand.
As a specialist in (supermarket) franchise and market leader, Ludwig & Van Dam has ample
experience in guiding such projects.
For more information:
Jeroen Strong Alex Dolphin
Email: Sterk@ludwigvandam.nl Email: dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Do you want to respond? Then email to info@ludwigvandamadvocaten.nl
Other messages
Does a franchisee have to accept a new model franchise agreement?
On 31 March 2017, the District Court of Rotterdam, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2017:2457, ruled in interlocutory proceedings on the question whether franchisor Bram Ladage had complied with the franchise agreement with its franchisee.
Mandatory (market-based) purchase prices for franchisees
To what extent can a franchisor change agreements about the (market) purchase prices of the goods that the franchisees are obliged to purchase?
Director’s liability of a franchisee after failing to rely on an unsound prognosis.
On 11 July 2017, the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch made a decision on whether the franchisor could successfully sue the director of a BV for non-compliance with the
Liability accountant for prepared prognosis?
In a judgment of the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch of 11 July 2017, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2017:3153, it was discussed that franchisees accused the franchisor's accountant of being liable
How far does the bank’s duty of care extend?
Some time ago the question was raised in case law what the position of the bank is in the triangular relationship franchisor – bank – franchisee.
Burden of proof reversal in forecasting as misleading advertising?
In an interlocutory judgment of 15 June 2017, the District Court of Zeeland-West-Brabant, ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2017:3833, ruled on a claim for (among other things) suspension of the non-compete clause.