Case No COMP/M.2565 - PPC / WIND / JV. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 28/11/2001



Similar documents
Case No COMP/M GE CAPITAL / HELLER FINANCIAL. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 23/10/2001

Case No COMP/JV.25 - SONY / TIME WARNER / CDNOW. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 21/12/1999

Case No COMP/JV.31 - HMI INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS / ARNOLDO MONDADORI EDITORE. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M CGU / NORWICH UNION. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 13/04/2000

Case No COMP/M INVENSYS / BAAN. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 07/07/2000

Case No COMP/M CELESTICA / MSL. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 18/12/2003

Case No COMP/M GE / ABB STRUCTURED FINANCE. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 05/11/2002

Case No COMP/M ANGLO AMERICAN / KUMBA RESOURCES. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 03/12/2003

Case No COMP/M KPNQWEST / EBONE / GTS. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 16/01/2002

Case No IV/M Bell Cable Media / Cable & Wireless / Videotron. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M TELECOM ITALIA / AOL GERMAN ACCESS BUSINESS. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

In electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32011M6389

Case No COMP/M AIB / FDC / JV. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 11/01/2008

Case No COMP/M TELEFONICA/ HANSENET TELEKOMMUNIKATION. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

&DVH 1R,90 '(876&+( 3267 '$1=$61('//2<' 5(*8/$7,21((&1R 0(5*(5352&('85( Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 01/07/1999

Case No COMP/M AVIVA/ FRIENDS LIFE/ TENET. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 13/03/2015

Case No COMP/M CANADA LIFE/ IRISH LIFE

Case No COMP/M VOLKSWAGEN/ FLEET INVESTMENTS/ LEASEPLAN CORPORATION JV. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M SECURITAS/ RELIANCE SECURITY SERVICES/ RELIANCE SECURITY SERVICES SCOTLAND. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No IV/M HERMES / SAMPO / FGB - FCIC. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 19/05/1998

Case No COMP/M IBM ITALIA / BUSINESS SOLUTIONS / JV. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M IBM / RATIONAL. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 20/02/2003

Case No COMP/M BNP PARIBAS/ FORTIS COMMERCIAL FINANCE HOLDING. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY/ QATAR HOLDING/ GBT

Case No COMP/M ATOS ORIGIN / SIEMENS IT SOLUTIONS & SERVICES. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M SANTANDER / ALLIANCE LEICESTER. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 15/09/2008

Case No COMP/M UTC / INITIAL ESG. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 25/06/2007

Case No COMP/M CENTRICA/ BORD GAIS ENERGY

Case No COMP/M IBM / COGNOS. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 24/01/2008

Case No COMP/M CVC / CHARTERHOUSE / PHL / AA / SAGA. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M FINMECCANICA / BAES AVIONICS & COMMUNICATIONS. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M SAP / BUSINESS OBJECTS. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 27/11/2007

COMP/M AON CORPORATION/ HEWITT ASSOCIATES

Case No COMP/M BENQ / SIEMENS MOBILE. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 07/09/2005

Case No COMP/M XEROX/ AFFILIATED COMPUTER SERVICES. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

In electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32013M6454

Case No COMP/M ROSNEFT / MORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL OIL MERCHANTING UNIT. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M CVC / ANI PRINTING INKS. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 28/10/2004

Case No COMP/M ACE / CICA. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 11/03/2008

Case No COMP/M EQT / SCANDIC. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 25/04/2007

Case No COMP/M PROVIDENCE / CARLYLE / UPC SWEDEN. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 02/06/2006

COMP/M AVAYA/ NORTEL ENTERPRISE SOLUTIONS

In electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32014M7334

Case No COMP/M APPLE/ BEATS. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 25/07/2014

Case No COMP/M BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY / MUNICH RE / GAUM. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M NORDIC CAPITAL / TIETOENATOR. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 06/05/2008

Case No COMP/M SECURITAS/ NISCAYAH GROUP. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 02/08/2011

In electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32011M6217

Case No IV/M Bertelsmann / CLT. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 07/10/1996

Case No COMP/M EATON CORPORATION/ COOPER INDUSTRIES

Case No COMP/M.6215 Sun Capital / Polestar UK Print Limited. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 7(3) Date: 15.4.

Case No COMP/M.4763 Cerberus/ Torex

Case No IV/M CCIE / GTE. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date:

Case No COMP/M AHOLD/ FLEVO

Case No COMP/M JOHNSON CONTROLS / ROBERT BOSCH / DELPHI SLI. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M HP / COMPAQ. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 31/01/2002

Case No COMP/M.5721 Otto/Primondo Assets. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 7 (3) Date:

Case No COMP/M CARPHONE WAREHOUSE / TISCALI UK. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 29/06/2009

Case No COMP/M IBM/ INF BUSINESS OF DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M MERLIN / TUSSAUDS. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 26/04/2007

Case No COMP/M IBM ITALIA / UBIS. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 19/06/2013

Factsheet on the Scope of EU merger control

Case No COMP/M DASSAULT SYSTEMES/ IBM DS PLM Software business. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M ADVENT INTERNATIONAL/ BAIN CAPITAL INVESTORS/ NETS HOLDING

EU MERGER CONTROL 4 NOVEMBRE 2005 NOËLLE LENOIR PRESIDENTE DE L'INSTITUT DE L'EUROPE DAN ROSKIS

Case No COMP/M REXAM (PLM) / AMERICAN NATIONAL CAN. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(2) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 19/07/2000

Case No IV/M Marconi / Finmeccanica. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 05/09/1994

Case No COMP/M IMS HEALTH/ CEGEDIM BUSINESS

Case M AEGEAN/ OLYMPIC II. Only the English text is available and authentic. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Cable Television Networks in Europe. Dr. N.A.N.M. Eijk Institute for Information Law, University of Amsterdam

Liechtenstein. Heinz Frommelt. Sele Frommelt & Partners Attorneys at Law Ltd

Case No IV/M LA ROCHE / SYNTEX. REGULATION (EEC)No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date:

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES DIRECTORATE-GENERAL COMPETITION COMPANY NAME ADDRESS

Case No COMP/M The Post Office/TPG/SPPL. Only the English text is available and authentic. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE

In electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32014M7196

COMP/M VEOLIA TRANSPORT / TRENITALIA / JV

The EU Merger Regulation. An overview of the European merger control rules. slaughter and may. March 2015

EDISON S POSITION ON THE CESR/ERGEG CONSULTATION ON MARKET ABUSE INTO ELECTRICITY AND GAS SECTOR

BEREC Opinion on Phase II investigation pursuant to Article 7 (3) of Directive 2002/21/EC as amended by Directive 2009/140/EC:

Case No COMP/M TOWERS PERRIN/ WATSON WYATT. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE

Case No COMP/M SAS / SPANAIR. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 05/03/2002

In electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32014M7185

: N Manoim (Presiding Member); M Holden (Tribunal Member) and Y Carrim (Tribunal Member) Reasons

Case No COMP/M NORTHROP GRUMMAN / TRW. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 16/10/2002

The Right Hon Jack Straw MP Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Downing Street UK London SW1A 2AL

DECISIONS. (Only the Italian text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (2010/12/EU)

Case No COMP/M PROCTER & GAMBLE / WELLA. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(2) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 30/07/2003

Case No COMP/M MICROSOFT/ YAHOO! SEARCH BUSINESS. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 18/02/2010

Case No COMP/M AKZO NOBEL / ICI. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(2) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 13/12/2007

TAP AG Regulatory Compliance Programme

JANUARY 2008 CO-OPERATIVE JOINT VENTURES

100% 39% 16% Evergreen Solar. Good Energies GmbH Berlin

Official Journal of the European Union COMMISSION

Case No COMP/M NESTLE / GERBER. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 27/07/2007

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL

Case No COMP/M FERROVIAL / QUEBEC / GIC / BAA. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 23/05/2006

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION. of (Text with EEA relevance)

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES DIRECTORATE-GENERAL COMPETITION NEW ENTRANT NAME ADDRESS

Case No IV/M MARSH McLENNAN / SEDGWICK. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE. Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 23/10/1998

Transcription:

EN Case No COMP/M.2565 - PPC / WIND / JV Only the English text is available and authentic. REGULATION (EEC) No 4064/89 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 6(1)(b) NON-OPPOSITION Date: 28/11/2001 Also available in the CELEX database Document No 301M2565 Office for Official Publications of the European Communities L-2985 Luxembourg

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 28/11/2001 SG (2001) D/292436-292437 In the published version of this decision, some information has been omitted pursuant to Article 17(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 concerning non-disclosure of business secrets and other confidential information. The omissions are shown thus [ ]. Where possible the information omitted has been replaced by ranges of figures or a general description. PUBLIC VERSION MERGER PROCEDURE ARTICLE 6(1)(b) DECISION To the notifying parties Dear Sir/Madam, Subject: Case No COMP/M.2565 PPC/Wind/JV Notification of 26 October 2001 pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation No 4064/89 1 1. On 26.10.2001, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration by which the undertakings Public Power Corporation SA ( PPC - Greece) and Wind Telecomunicazioni SpA ( Wind - Italy) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of a newly created joint venture, the Dutch-based holding company NHV ( NHV ). 2. The Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of the Merger Regulation and does not raise serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market. II. THE PARTIES AND THE OPERATION 3. PPC, the national electrical utility in Greece, is present in the Greek markets for generation, transmission and distribution of electricity. It also operates a number of lignite mines in Greece. PPC is wholly owned by the Greek State, although an initial public offering is expected in the near future. 4. In turn Wind is a full-function joint venture currently controlled by the Italian Enel SpA ( Enel ) and the telecommunications operator France Télécom SA ( FT ) 2. Wind provides a full range of fixed and mobile telecommunications services in Italy. 1 OJ L 395, 30.12.1989 p. 1; corrigendum OJ L 257 of 21.9.1990, p. 13; Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1310/97 (OJ L 180, 9. 7. 1997, p. 1, corrigendum OJ L 40, 13.2.1998, p. 17), hereafter the Merger Regulation. Rue de la Loi 200, B-1049 Bruxelles/Wetstraat 200, B-1049 Brussel - Belgium Telephone: exchange 299.11.11 Telex: COMEU B 21877. Telegraphic address: COMEUR Brussels.

5. With the proposed transaction PPC, through its 100% subsidiary PPC Telecommunications SA ( PPCT ), and Wind will set up a Dutch-based holding company (NHV) jointly controlled by both parents. NHV that will be active in the Greek telecommunications markets through a vehicle company, Evergy SA ( Evergy), which holds a telecommunications licence (Local Multi-point Distribution System or LMDS licence) and is currently participated by PPC. Evergy will provide a broad range of telecommunications services, i.e. fixed telephony, business data communications, Internet access services and sale of transmission capacity. III. THE CONCENTRATION Joint control 6. As provided for by the Framework and Shareholders Agreement, Wind will hold 50% plus one share of NVH and PPC will have a stake of 50% minus one share in the joint venture. Following the planned transaction, NVH will acquire, with the financial contributions of the parents, 100% of Evergy, being its sole shareholder and having control over the whole of it. As already mentioned, Evergy is currently participated by PPC and will be the vehicle company through which the parents will be present in the Greek telecommunications markets. In this context and for the purposes of the present case, it will be referred to as the joint venture. 7. The adoption of strategic business decisions in Evergy will require the agreement of the two parent companies, PPC and Wind being therefore granted veto rights and having the possibility to exercise, both of them, a decisive influence vis-à-vis the commercial behaviour of the company concerned. 8. The appointment of Evergy s management will be equally distributed between PPC and Wind, with the two companies having consultation rights in relation to the respective nominees. It will be for PPC to appoint the chairman and vice-chairman of the Board, with Wind having management control rights. 9. In the light of the above it can be concluded that Evergy will be jointly controlled by the parent companies. Full functionality 10. The joint venture will be provided with all the tools which are necessary for the performance, on a lasting basis, of the functions of an autonomous economic entity, i.e. day-to-day management, finance, staff and assets. 11. In the framework of the resources to be contributed by the parent companies, (a). the telecommunications licences to be granted to PPCT (network and voice telephony licenses) in the near future will be transferred to Evergy, which holds as well a LMDS license for the exploitation of a fixed wireless telecommunications network and the provision of the corresponding services; 2 See cases IV/JV.2 Enel/FT/DT and COMP/M.2129 Enel/FT/Wind. 2

(b). the joint venture will have exclusive access to the fibre backbone network to be built up by PPC alongside its existing electricity grid. Such a network will be illuminated by Evergy and used for the provision of telecommunications services in downstream markets. Furthermore it can be concluded from the Backbone Agreement entered into by the parent companies, that exclusivity will be also granted as to the use, by Evergy, of PPC s rights of way for the deployment of certain telecommunications facilities. 12. In the light of the above considerations it can be deemed that Evergy will constitute a full function entity on a lasting basis. III. COMMUNITY DIMENSION 13. The undertakings concerned have a combined aggregate world-wide turnover of more than EUR 5 billion 3. Each of PPC and Wind have a Community-wide turnover in excess of EUR 250 million, but they do not achieve more than two-thirds of their aggregate Community-wide turnover within one and the same Member State. The notified operation therefore has a Community dimension. IV. COMPETITIVE ASSESSMENT Markets involved in the concentration 14. According to the notifying parties, the relevant product markets concerned by the present operation would be (i) the fixed telephony services; (ii) the business data communications; (iii) the Internet access services and (iv) the sale of transmission capacity. 15. With regard to the geographic scope of the markets identified above, the parties consider it to be national, and when doing so they refer to the Commission s previous practice according to which the factors to be taken into account would be (a) the extent/coverage of the network, as well as the customers that can be reached and whose demands may be met economically; (b) the legal and regulatory framework. 16. In respect of the exact definition of the various markets involved in the concentration, it must be noted that for the purposes of the present transaction the exact scope of the various markets involved in the concentration can be left open, since the concrete way of delimiting the product and geographic relevant markets will not affect the competitive assessment of the proposed operation. Affected markets and context of the operation 17. With regard to the horizontal dimension of the case, according to the information provided by the parties the planned transaction will not give rise to any horizontally affected market within the meaning of section 6 of Form CO, since neither PPC nor Wind or Enel are present in any of the markets concerned by the proposed transaction. 3 Turnover calculated in accordance with Article 5(1) of the Merger Regulation and the Commission Notice on the calculation of turnover (OJ C66, 2.3.1998, p25). To the extent that figures include turnover for the period before 1.1.1999, they are calculated on the basis of average ECU exchange rates and translated into EUR on a one-for-one basis. 3

18. Furthermore although FT, one of Wind s parents, is active in one of the relevant markets, i.e. the Greek market for business data communications, through its subsidiary New Equant 4, that presence can be considered as de minimis, since New Equant s share in the above-mentioned market is [less that 5%]. Finally, it should be mentioned that FT s second presence in the Greek telecommunications sector, through the operator Panafon, is not related to any of the markets involved in the concentration, but to a different market, the mobile telephony services, its stake being certainly limited ([less than 5%] of the shareholding capital). 19. As to the vertical aspects of the operation, it transpires from the information provided by the notifying parties that there exist no technically affected markets within the meaning of the Merger Regulation, given that (a) PPC s business activities are not upstream or downstream of a product market where any other party to the concentration is active; (b) Wind and Enel are not present in the Greek telecoms sector and FT, although indirectly present (mobile telephony and data services, as already mentioned), has no presence in any product market which could be vertically linked to those product markets where any other party to the concentration may be present. 20. In the light of the above, the parties conclude that the proposed operation does not give rise to any horizontal or vertical overlap. 21. Furthermore they stress the fact that the transaction will take place within a particular context : the recent full liberalisation of the Greek telecommunications market, with the joint venture having a pro-competitive effect on the provision of the services constituting its business activities. 22. In that respect and with regard to the current situation of the fixed telephony sector in Greece, the parties indicate that although this market was opened de iure at the beginning of this year, there is a de facto monopoly, with the incumbent operator (OTE) controlling 100% of the market concerned. According to PPC and Wind, it is expected that operators currently providing data and mobile telephony services, as well as utilities, will become an alternative to OTE, entering the market and offering a wider choice to end users. 23. As to the Greek market for business data communications, the parties state that OTE s position is significantly strong, with a 90% market share. Consequently, although there are a certain growing number of players competing with the incumbent, the joint venture would face a quasi monopolistic environment. 24. In relation to the provision of Internet access services, it transpires from the information submitted by PPC and Wind that it is an incipient market in Greece, with a remarkable fragmentation as to the number of suppliers. In this context OTE s subsidiary (OTENET) would hold a relatively significant market share, but would not be the leading player. 25. With regard to the sale of transmission capacity, the parties indicate that this market is expected to grow substantially in the near future, this expansion being linked to the liberalisation of the fixed telephony services and the increase of Internet utilizationutilisation. The competitive environment would be very similar to that of the business data communications : OTE would currently control nearly the whole of the 4 See case COMP/M.2257 France Télécom/Equant. 4

market, a limited number of players competing with the incumbent. Furthermore, PPC and Wind indicate that there are a number of telecoms operators (for example mobile operators) and companies operating in sectors like water, gas, railways, oil, highways, etc., that have begun to deploy or plan to deploy (in some cases alongside their existing infrastructures) alternative networks that will be available to current and potential competitors of the joint venture. 26. In the light of all of these considerations, the parties state that the proposed operation will be of benefit to the customers, since Evergy will be the first competitor in the market for fixed telephony, whilst reinforcing the nascent level of liberalisation with regard to the remaining markets where the joint venture will be present. 27. The market investigation launched by the Commission has confirmed the assertions of the parties as to (i) the de facto monopolistic position of the incumbent in the Greek market for fixed telephony; (ii) OTE s dominance in the markets for business data communications and sale of transmission capacity; (iii) the existence of reasonable and viable alternatives (vis-à-vis both OTE and Evergy) in relation to the construction of fibre optic networks for the provision of services in the downstream markets where the joint venture will be present; and (iv) the potential benefits to the customers, who have expressed a positive view on the entry of a new player. Co-operative effects of the joint venture 28. According to the parties, the proposed operation does not lead to any competition concerns in terms of co-ordination aspects. Neither PPC nor Wind or Enel are or will be present in the Greek telecommunications sector. In addition, they will not compete in any downstream or upstream markets, or in any neighbouring market linked to the telecommunications market in Greece. PPC and Wind are present in different product and geographic markets. Furthermore, the markets where PPC and Enel operate are not sectors upstream, downstream or related to the joint venture s market. With regard to FT s presence in the Greek telecoms markets, the parties note that it would not lead to any competition concern since, as already mentioned, the share of its subsidiary New Equant in the market for data services accounts only for [less than 5%]. Moreover, the financial stake of the French operator in the mobile telephony provider Panafon is limited to [less than 5%] of the shareholding capital. 29. In the light of the above, it can be concluded that the present transaction will not lead to the creation or strengthening of a dominant position. From a structural standpoint, the operation does not give rise to any competition concern. The joint venture will be a new entrant in the recently liberalised Greek telecommunications market, with customers having a new choice vis-à-vis the incumbent operator and a few other existing players. 30. The present assessment is without prejudice to any other possible assessment under Article 81 of the EC Treaty, in particular as far as the agreements on the rights of use of the backbone are concerned. V. CONCLUSION 31. For the above reasons, the Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the common market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. 5

For the Commission (signed) Mario MONTI Member of the Commission 6