Opinion of the Advisory Committee on concentrations given at its 131 st  meeting on  22 April 2005  concerning a draft decision relating to Case COMP/M.3178 — Berteslmann/Springer/JV
Date: 2006-03-02
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: advisory committee (EU), audiovisual industry, economic concentration, merger control, press

C 52/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.3.2006

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on concentrations given at its 131st meeting on 22 April 2005
concerning a draft decision relating to Case COMP/M.3178 — Berteslmann/Springer/JV

(2006/C 52/02)

1. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified operation constitutes a concen-
tration within the meaning of the Merger Regulation No 139/04 and that it has a Community dimen-
sion as defined by that Regulation.

2. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, for the purposes of product market defini-
tion, rotogravure printing of high volume printing orders is distinct from heatset web offset printing.
A minority abstains.

3. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there is a relevant product market for roto-

gravure printing of magazines. A minority abstains.

4. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that it can be left open whether the printing of

catalogues and advertisements in rotogravure is regarded as one single product market.

5. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the relevant geographic market for rotogra-

vure printing of magazines is limited to Germany.

6. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the relevant geographic market for rotogra-
vure printing of catalogues can be defined as Germany plus the neighbouring countries (France,
Belgium, Netherlands, Luxemburg, Switzerland, Austria, Czech Republic, Poland and Denmark) as well
as Italy and Slovakia.

7. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the relevant geographic market for rotogra-
vure printing of advertisement can be defined as Germany plus the neighbouring countries (France,
Belgium, Netherlands, Luxemburg, Switzerland, Austria, Czech Republic, Poland and Denmark) as well
as Italy and Slovakia.

8. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the proposed concentration does not signif-
icantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it, in particular as
a result of the creation or strengthening of a dominant position

a) in the market for rotogravure printing of magazines in Germany.

b) in the market for rotogravure printing of catalogues in Germany plus the neighbouring countries
(France, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxemburg, Switzerland, Austria, Czech Republic, Poland and
Denmark) as well as Italy and Slovakia.

c) in the market for rotogravure printing of advertisements in Germany plus the neighbouring coun-
tries (France, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxemburg, Switzerland, Austria, Czech Republic, Poland and
Denmark) as well as Italy and Slovakia.

A minority of Member States disagrees with 8 a).

9. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the proposed concentration does not signif-
icantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it, in particular as
a result of the creation or strengthening of a dominant position

a) in any other relevant geographic market for rotogravure printing of magazines.

b) in any other relevant geographic market for rotogravure printing of catalogues.

c) in any other relevant geographic market for rotogravure printing of advertisements.

10. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the proposed concentration does not have
as an object or effect the coordination of the competitive behaviour of Bertelsmann and Springer in
the magazine publishing markets and does therefore not restrict competition within the meaning of
Article 2(4) of the Merger Regulation and Article 81 of the Treaty.

11. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the proposed concentration does not signif-
icantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it, in particular as
a result of the creation or strengthening of a dominant position, within the meaning of Article 2(2) of
the Merger Regulation and that the proposed concentration is therefore to be declared compatible
with the Common Market and with the EEA Agreement.

12. The Advisory Committee asks the Commission to take into account all the other points raised during

the discussion.