Opinion ID: 305731
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: analysis of the issues

Text: 34 We are called on to determine whether the Commission was correct in holding that Kennecott was a most likely entrant into the coal business and, indeed, a more likely entrant than other forms, including the major oil and gas companies, railroads and utilities. We must also appraise the Commission's holding that the coal industry is presently a loose oligopoly which is moving at an accelerated rate toward a highly concentrated condition and is not, as Kennecott maintains, an industry which is competitively structured and likely to remain so in the future. 35 We must also consider the Commission's holding that there is a dearth of potential new entrants into the coal business and, further, whether the elimination of Kennecott had the effect of substantially lessening competition. 36 The remaining question of substance is whether the Commission erred in its conclusions as to the probable effects of the acquisition on competition and particularly in its conclusion that the special circumstances of the merging companies in relationship to the concentrated market may be substantially to lessen competition or to tend to create a monopoly.