GOVERNMENT: Confusion in Trustbusting

• Share

Businessmen are often confused by the contradictory actions of the U.S. trustbusters. Last week they had even more reason for confusion. The Federal Trade Commission ruled last month that a merger would not tend automatically to create a monopoly even though it gave 45.6% of the household steel-wool market to one company, Brillo Manufacturing Co. But last week the Justice Department sued to break a deal that would give 21% of the detergent market to Lever Bros. Co.

The U.S. wants Lever to give up its right to make All, a detergent that Lever acquired from Monsanto a year ago. Lever argued that adding All's 5% of the U.S. market to other Lever detergents (Surf, Breeze, Wisk, etc.), which hold 16%, bolstered Lever in its battle against giant Procter & Gamble, which has 55% of all U.S. detergent sales. But the trustbusters held that All should not have been sold to any of the soap industry's Big Three—Procter & Gamble, Colgate-Palmolive or Lever. Said Justice Department Antitrust Chief Victor Hansen: "We aim to protect competition, not the competitor; to support the process, no matter who gets hurt or who benefits."

No one doubted that Lever would be hurt as a competitor if the U.S. wins its case. But many businessmen wondered just how a Government victory would help protect competition.