UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
In the Matter of
Phillips Petroleum Company,
a corporation, Docket No. C-4058
and
Conoco Inc.,
a corporation.
COMPLAINT
Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Act, and by
virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission ("Commission"),
reason to believe that respondent Phillips Petroleum Company has entered into an agreement to merge
with Conoco Inc., all subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission, in violation of Section 5 of
Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 45, that such merger, if consummated,
would violate Section 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 18, and Section 5 of the Federal
Trade Commission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 45, and that a proceeding in respect thereof would
be in the public interest, hereby issues this complaint, stating its charges as follows.
I. RESPONDENTS
Phillips Petroleum Company
1. Respondent Phillips Petroleum Company ("Phillips") is a corporation organized, existing,
doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware, with its office
principal place of business at Phillips Building, Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74004.
2. Respondent Phillips is, and at all times relevant herein has been, engaged in, among
the bulk supply, terminaling and marketing of light petroleum products, the bulk supply of
propane, the gathering of natural gas and the fractionation of raw mix in the United
3. Respondent Phillips had total revenues of $47.7 billion in 2001.
SNIPPETS:
Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Act, and by
n 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 18, and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission
doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware, with its office and
the bulk supply, terminaling and marketing of light petroleum products, the bulk supply of
Respondent Conoco is, and at all times relevant herein has been, engaged in, among other
Respondents Phillips and Conoco plan a "merger of equals" in a transaction executed and
The major buyers of LPPs in Eastern Colorado include wholesalers,
Refineries produce LPPs and either deliver them into storage tanks or terminals on the
Jobbers delivering LPPs in Eastern Colorado have no effective alternative to using local
Jobbers cannot economically access refineries and pipelines located outside of Eastern
Bulk suppliers can identify and price differently to buyers located in densely populated
Phillips' owns a pipeline and Conoco owns a refinery that provide bulk supplies of LPPs into
The market, as measured by shipments or capacity, is highly concentrated with the HHI rising
There are substantial barriers to entering the relevant market in Eastern Colorado.
Building additional refineries locally or additional pipelines from refineries located
Jobbers delivering LPPs in Northern Utah have no effective alternative to using local
After the Merger, the combined firm could effectively coordinate to reduce supply, slow
LPP marketers in Spokane only can receive terminaling services from terminals located in
A section of the country in which to analyze the effect of the Merger is the area located in
A section of the country in which to analyze the effect of the Merger is the area of Southern
Permian Basin natural gas producers contract with natural gas gatherers to transport and/or
The Merger likely would reduce competition by allowing fractionation competitors to share
One relevant product market in which to assess the effect of the Merger is the bulk supply of
|