The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has released a statement of issues raising preliminary competition concerns about Bingo’s proposed acquisition of Dial-a-Dump.
Bingo and Dial-a-Dump supply building and demolition (B&D) waste collection and processing services in the Greater Sydney area. Bingo and Dial-a-Dump are also future competitors for non-putrescible, or dry, landfill services when Bingo’s Patons Lane facility becomes operational in 2019.
“Post-acquisition, Bingo would be the largest B&D waste collector and processor and own a substantial amount of dry landfill capacity in Sydney. We are concerned about the effect of the proposed acquisition in relation to processing, landfill and collections,” ACCC Chair Rod Sims stated.
“Our preliminary view is that the acquisition would remove Bingo’s most substantial competitor for B&D waste processing, particularly in the Eastern Suburbs and inner Sydney. Although alternative facilities exist, our current view is that many are not viable alternatives as they either will not accept third party mixed B&D waste, charge significantly more for heavy loads, or are too far away to constrain Bingo from increasing prices.”
“The acquisition would remove future competition between Bingo’s and Dial-a-Dump’s dry landfills, which may lead to higher gate fees than would be likely without the acquisition. Competition between Sydney landfills is likely to become more important after the introduction of the Queensland landfill levy, which will make transporting waste to Queensland more expensive,” Mr Sims stated.
The three levels of the supply chain—collection, processing, and landfill—are also closely linked. Collectors rely on access to processing facilities at competitive rates to compete for customers, and processors rely on access to landfill. The ACCC is investigating these vertical integration issues.
The ACCC invites submissions from interested parties on the statement of issues by December 13, 2018. The ACCC’s final decision is scheduled for February 21, 2019.
Featured News
Federal Judge Orders Google to Open Android App Store Amid Antitrust Pressure
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Federal Judge Greenlights FTC’s Antitrust Lawsuit Against Amazon, Tosses Some State Claims
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Supreme Court Rejects Uber and Lyft’s Appeal in California Gig Worker Suits
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Supreme Court Sidesteps 5-Hour Energy Pricing Case, Allowing Antitrust Claims to Proceed
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Tempur Sealy and Mattress Firm Argue FTC Proceedings Are Unconstitutional in New Suit
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh