Office Supplies Surprise: Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Approves Office Depot-OfficeMax Merger

Advertisement

McDermottLogo_2c_rgb

On Friday, November 1, 2013 the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ended a seven-month investigation of the proposed merger between Office Depot Inc. and OfficeMax Inc., allowing the transaction to move forward.

Advertisement

The merger between the second and third largest office supply superstores (OSS) is not the first time the FTC has been interested in OSS transactions.  In 1997, the FTC successfully blocked a proposed merger between the two largest OSS in FTC v. Staples, Inc., 970 F.Supp. 1066 (D.D.C. 1997).  The FTC’s seemingly contradictory positions can be discerned, however, by the changes in the competitive landscape for OSS.

As acknowledged in the FTC’s statement concerning the proposed merger, OSS now compete with online retailers and mass merchants far more than in 1997.  In fact, in Staples, the court determined that while mass merchants, wholesale clubs and mail order firms sold office supplies, prices at OSS were primarily affected by the presence of another OSS in the geographic market.  Because of this determination, the FTC was successful in arguing that the relevant product market was the sale of consumable office supplies just through OSS.

Advertisement

Now, OSS compete rigorously with the growing number and size of online retailers and mass merchants. As the FTC found, OSS “closely monitor” and “respond competitively” to non-OSS retailers.  Indeed, the FTC noted that OSS are responding to such competition not only through staples of competition such as price matching and price-checking, but also through innovation, such as “offering in-store pickup for online purchases and using in-store internet kiosks to order products online.”

Advertisement

The rapidly changing landscape in the consumable office supplies market is highlighted by two contrasting outcomes sixteen years apart.  It highlights the importance of staying abreast of how changes in market dynamics and modernizing competition law may affect regulators’ view of potential transactions.  As exemplified in this case, such knowledge can lead to a successful evaluation of a transaction that was previously thought to be impossible.

Article by:

Karl Herrmann

of:
McDermott Will & Emery

Advertisement


Published by

National Law Forum

A group of in-house attorneys developed the National Law Review on-line edition to create an easy to use resource to capture legal trends and news as they first start to emerge. We were looking for a better way to organize, vet and easily retrieve all the updates that were being sent to us on a daily basis.In the process, we’ve become one of the highest volume business law websites in the U.S. Today, the National Law Review’s seasoned editors screen and classify breaking news and analysis authored by recognized legal professionals and our own journalists. There is no log in to access the database and new articles are added hourly. The National Law Review revolutionized legal publication in 1888 and this cutting-edge tradition continues today.