FTC v. Wild Oats

Here is the link to the PDF file that outlines the Federal Trade Commission case against the Whole Foods-Wild Oats merger.

From the complaint for a temporary restraining order (that was granted). Some of the file is redacted.
From the FTC complaint:


This merger, involving the two leading operators of premium natural and organic supermarkets, will increase prices and reduce quality and services in a number of geographic markets throughout the United States. Consumers spent a combined total of $6.5 billion in fiscal 2006 at Whole Foods and Wild Oats.

On February 21, 2007, Whole Foods and Wild Oats executed an agreement whereby Whole Foods proposes to acquire all of the voting securities of Wild Oats through WFMI Merger Co., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Whole Foods. The purchase will be effected through tender offer for all shares of Wild Oats common stock. The total cost of the acquisition is expected to be approximately $671 million in cash and assumed debt. The closing of the transaction is subject to clearance under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18a. The defendants have advised the Commission that, in the absence of a court order to the contrary, Defendant Whole Foods will be free to acquire all shares of Wild Oats common stock after 11:59 pm June 6, 2007. Defendant Whole Foods intends to then merge Wild Oats into Whole Foods; to close Wild Oats stores; and to operate the remainder as Whole Foods stores.
On June 5, 2007, following a three-month investigation, the Commission determined that it has reason to believe that the Acquisition would violate Section 7 of the Clayton Act and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act because the Acquisition may substantially lessen competition and/or tend to create a monopoly in the operation of premium natural and organic supermarkets across the United States.

TK: It seems a stretch to believe that Whole Foods' acquisition of Wild Oats would cause a "monopoly" in the operation of premium natural and organic supermarkets. At least, the resulting monopoly would likely be short-lived.