Mars' mulled deal for Kellanova should withstand regulatory scrutiny
By Abigail Summerville
Aug 7 (Reuters) -Mars' contemplated acquisition of U.S. snack maker Kellanova KHC.O stands a good chance of getting past global antitrust regulators, legal experts say, even as it touches on a sensitive area of government oversight -- how much consumers pay for food.
Reuters reported on Sunday that privately held Mars was looking to acquire Kellanova, which has a market value including debt of $31 billion. The tie-up would come as other deals in the food sector, such as grocery store operator Kroger's KR.N $25 billion proposed acquisition of Albertsons ACI.N, grapple with lawsuits from regulators over the impact they would have on prices following a bout of inflation.
These concerns are acute in the packaged food sector, which lower-income families have traditionally relied on because fresh food can be more expensive. The industry has hit shoppers with higher prices in the last two years, citing higher costs that started with the COVID-19 pandemic and were exacerbated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
If U.S. regulators do decide to challenge the deal, they may struggle to convince antitrust judges that uniting Mars, maker of Snickers, M&M's, Pop-Tarts and Rice Krispies Treats, with Kellanova, producer of Pringles, Cheez-It, Pop-Tarts and Eggo frozen waffles, would raise prices or harm competition in the market, according to interviews with and notes from six antitrust lawyers and industry analysts.
This is because of the limited overlap between their offerings.
Mars' portfolio, whichincludes Twix, Bounty and Milky Way, centers on candy and sweets, such as chocolate. The company is also the world's largest pet food maker and a major operator of veterinary health centers.
Kellanova, which split from WK Kellogg Co KLG.N last October, is rooted in a salty snacks business in the U.S. and around the world, and selling cereal outside of North America. WK Kellogg was left with the North American cereal business of Kellogg, the original parent company.
Salty snacks generate about 49% of Kellanova's annual sales, according to data provider Numerator. Mars' snacking division, which comprises chocolate, candy, gum and bars, accounts for around 38% of its annual sales, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Combined, Mars and Kellanova would account for roughly 12% of the U.S. snacking and candy industry, according to market share data from NielsenIQ. This would still leave the market with fierce competition, as PepsiCo PEP.O, Kraft Heinz KHC.O, Mondelez MDLZ.O, Hershey HSY.N, General Mills GIS.N and other big players fight for consumer dollars.
"Even when we broaden out the overlap to be total snacks together, we don't see a Mars-Kellanova deal setting off many alarm bells in the Department of Justice or Federal Trade Commission," JPMorgan analysts wrote in a note this week, referring to the two principal U.S. antitrust regulators.
Mars and Kellanova declined to comment. Spokespeople for the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC)also declined to comment.
Internationally, the deal would be subject to regulatory reviews in the countries where the companies operate. Mars would also likely argue to regulators in those countries its product overlap with Kellanova is limited, the experts said.
LENGTHY REVIEW LIKELY
Gerald Stein, an antitrust partner at law firm Davis Wright Tremaine, cautioned that Mars and Kellanova should still brace themselves for lengthy regulatory review. One recent example in the food sector is Campbell Soup's CPB.N $2.33 billion acquisition of Sovos, maker of the Rao's Homemade pasta sauce.
Campbell Soup and Sovos planned to complete the deal in December but pushed the close back to March because of a protracted review by the FTC studying the overlap in their offerings.
"The lines aren't as clearly drawn as with cars, BMWs versus Kias, where you have luxury versus non-luxury products. For snack foods, it is a hard demographic to parse out," said Stein.
Another caveat, antitrust experts say, is hostility that antitrust regulators have occasionally shown for big companies merging even when their markets are fragmented and teeming with competition. They point to antitrust challenges against the proposed tie-up between handbag makers Tapestry TPR.N and Capri CPRI.N and mattress maker Tempur Sealy's proposedacquisition of Mattress Firm as recent examples.
"There is significant risk that just because these companies are so large and leaders in their segments, they will attract regulatory scrutiny," said Seth Bloom, a former general counsel of the U.S. Senate antitrust subcommittee who now runs his own advisory firm.
Reporting by Abigail Summerville in New York
Editing by Anirban Sen and David Gregorio
Gerelateerde activa
Laatste nieuws
Disclaimer: De entiteiten van de XM Group bieden diensten en toegang tot ons online handelsplatform op basis van uitsluitend-uitvoering, waardoor een persoon de beschikbare content op of via de website kan bekijken en/of gebruiken, zonder dat dit is bedoeld voor wijziging of uitbreiding. Dergelijk(e) toegang en gebruik vallen onder: (i) de algemene voorwaarden; (ii) risicowaarschuwingen; en de (iii) volledige disclaimer. Dergelijke content wordt daarom alleen aangeboden als algemene informatie. Wees u er daarnaast vooral van bewust dat de inhoud op ons online handelsplatform geen verzoek of aanbieding omvat om transacties op de financiële markten uit te voeren. Het beleggen op welke financiële markt dan ook vormt een aanzienlijk risico voor uw vermogen.
Alle materialen die op ons online handelsplatform worden gepubliceerd zijn bedoeld voor educatieve/informatieve doeleinden en omvatten geen – en moeten niet worden beschouwd als het bevatten van – financieel, vermogensbelastings- of handelsadvies en aanbevelingen, of een overzicht van onze handelsprijzen, of een aanbod of aanvraag van een transactie in financiële instrumenten of ongevraagde financiële promoties voor u.
Alle content van derden, alsmede content die is voorbereid door XM, zoals opinies, nieuws, onderzoeken, analyses, prijzen en andere informatie of koppelingen naar externe websites op deze website worden aangeboden op een 'zoals-ze-zijn'-basis, als algemene marktcommentaren, en vormen geen beleggingsadvies. Voor zover dat content wordt beschouwd als beleggingsonderzoek, moet u zich ervan bewust zijn en accepteren dat de content niet bedoeld was en niet is voorbereid in overeenstemming met de wettelijke vereisten die zijn opgesteld om de onafhankelijkheid van beleggingsonderzoek te bevorderen en als zodanig onder de geldende wetgeving en richtlijnen moet worden beschouwd als marketingcommunicatie. Zorg ervoor dat u onze Mededeling over niet-onafhankelijk beleggingsonderzoek en risicowaarschuwing in verband met de voorgaande informatie doorneemt en begrijpt; die kunt u hier lezen.
