I am disappointed with the the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore’s (the Watchdog) finding that NTUC Enterprise’s proposed acquisition of food centre operator Kopitiam would not lead to a substantial lessening of competition. Giving the green light to this acquisition would see NTUC Enterprise buying all of Kopitiam Investment and its subsidiaries, which span 80 outlets island wide. With this in mind, this acquisition would make NTUC Enterprise the largest and dominant operator of food courts in Singapore. How can the Watchdog then conclude that this would not be anti competitive?

The whole premise of the Watchdog is to ensure that consumers get the best deal possible. In other words, prevent monopolies that could lead to reduced choices in the market. Robust competition ensures that prices are kept affordable and that businesses do not get complacent or arrogant. In permitting this acquisition by NTUC Enterprise, the Watchdog is in effect helping to create such a monopoly that it is tasked with preventing in the first place. Will permitting this acquisition affect its reputation as an effective Watchdog? Would its credibility and legitimacy as an independent and objective watchdog be tarnished?

The Watchdog has said in its findings that “in assessing the sale of cooked food to consumers in hawker centres, coffee shops and food courts within a 500m radius of the parties’ premises,  it found that NTUC sold such food only in a very limited number of stalls in these locations. Why is the bench mark 500m? That is hardly far! As it is, don’t we already have too many stalls for too few people? How did the Watchdog conclude that this would still be “sufficient competition”? What studies and data did they use and apply?

Secondly, the Watchdog has concluded that even post merger there would still be at least five other established competing operators. In my opinion, this misses the point. The question should be whether or not the merger would lead to a reduction of competition and not whether or not there are still competitors remaining? In other words, will the merger make it more difficult for the remaining five to effectively compete?

The Watchdog also concluded that the merged entity from the proposed acquisition would not have the ability or incentive to shut out competitors and to mandate purchases through central kitchens and supply chain networks. I wonder what is the basis of such a conclusion. The number of consumers remain the same and one competitor has been taken down. Surely that would increase NTUC’s bargaining power by decreasing its competitors’ abilities to compete?

Just by size alone, it would be able to stifle competition. Thing about it. The larger the enterprise, the more able it is to be able to get cheaper raw materials and the like. The larger an entity is, the more it can force its pricing on the consumer. Isn’t that common sense?

On a plain reading of what’s been reported on the news, I don’t find the findings of the Watchdog compelling or persuasive in the least.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Foreign Service Scholarship Awards ceremony presents scholarships to seven recipients

Seven scholarship recipients received their scholarships from Minister of Foreign Affairs Vivian Balakrishnan at…

首次有港示威者中枪 警一哥称警员感生命受威胁“开枪合法合理”

昨日(1日)时逢中国国庆70周年,香港再次发起全城大游行,在黄大仙、屯门、沙田等多个区域可见示威者与警方以汽油弹和催泪弹交战,场面火爆,多处更着火焚烧,此外,港警在清场过程施放实弹,一名18岁少年遭击中,成为香港示威4个月以来首位被真枪实弹击中的受害者。 据悉,当时少年正在新界西的荃湾与镇暴警察发生冲突,示威者原本要包围“香港中国旅行社”的荃湾分社 ,该旅行社属于中资旅行社,但却遭到港警驱离清场,双方沿着街道巷弄近战冲突。 根据香港大学学生会的视频画面,伤者当时与警方对峙,而且接近警方,试图挥动铁棍殴打警方,而警方却近距离向他开枪,伤者中枪后倒地,胸口流血不止。当时,伤者倒地后,意识依然清醒,并对着围拢过来提供救助的目击者大喊,“送我去医院,胸口很痛”,并还能说出自己的名字曾志健,身旁的记者见状也劝伤者勿激动,胸口正在流血。 数名警察在事件发生后,为伤者提供医护协助。事后警方称,伤者年龄18岁,左肩受伤,送院的时候“神志清醒”。 而根据《香港01》记者的现场报道,当时约莫下午4点,听到一声巨响后,发现有一名示威者倒地挣扎,血液不断从衣服渗出,他表示,当时伤者仅记得自己中枪,好痛,但并不清楚中枪位置。而记者在确认情况后,向在场警员求救,救护也在伤者倒地后5分钟到场。 据现场所见,伤者左胸位置出血,救护人员在叫他时,他仍有反应,但气息逐渐减弱,在下午4点半左右,转送马甲列玛嘉烈医。 消息指,该名少年被射中肺部,幸未伤及心脏、大动脉,但有子弹弹头留在体内,要接驳人工肺呼吸,现时经手术已成功取出。 至今早(2日)医管局证实少年情况稳定,目前他仍留医深切治疗部。 港警:开枪属“合法、合理”,因感自身及同事声明受到威胁 对此,香港警方在傍晚7点左右通过视频公告,证实枪击事件。至于港警务处处长卢伟聪则在稍后凌晨召开记者会,指该名警员是在是在别无选择下开枪,属“合法、合理” ,因感自身及同事生命受到威胁。…

WP’s Jamus Lim declares and appreciates gifts given to him by the public

In a Facebook post earlier today (13 Aug), newly elected Sengkang GRC…

网民自发众筹 赠全新电动滑板车予外卖小哥

早前,一名Food Panda外卖递送员在送外卖时,在义顺被陆路交通管理局执法人员拦截,执法人员指他的电动滑板车违规超重而被没收。 几名巨轮滑板车论坛(BWSS)的会员见到此新闻,对外卖小哥遭遇感到同情,担心他失去电动滑板车可能影响工作遂发动群众募资,为外卖小哥集资买一辆全新的滑板车。 购买符合陆交局规格的电动滑板车 其中一名会员Swen Eihhaus在两日前号召热心人士一起集资,在上述论坛获得热烈响应,数名成员即开始讨论需提供何种价码、款式,有者甚至愿意出让自己的二手电动滑板车。 Swen Eihhaus也联系上外卖小哥,了解他正面临财务困难,急需继续送外卖工作,为此决定为外卖小哥众筹一辆符合陆路交通局标准的电动滑板车。 就在隔日,Einhaus为论坛会员更新资讯,指出已成功购置Fiido品牌的电动滑板车,据称是不愿具名善心人士所赞助,以及几名论坛成员协助安装电池和车灯。 至于Einhaus自身募捐的440元也悉数赠给外卖小哥,补偿他的收入损失。他们也在昨晚成功移交全新电动滑板车给外卖小哥。