HI, can any one please make a bullet points of my attachment.this is my part of the group project which i have to send to my peers. please make very informative but not too long.

thanks,

Running Head: MONSANTO AND BAYER Analyzing combination of Monsanto and Bayer in regards to antitrust laws Name: Zaheer Naqvi Analysis Bayer, a major German manufacturer of pharmaceuticals and chemicals and Monsanto, a US seed seller intends to merge to form the largest agro-industrial company in the World. A review by The Konkurrenz Group, former attorneys with the US. Department of Justice Antitrust Division, the merging would violate anti-trust rules in the following ways: It would result to further concentration in already concentrated industries for genetic traits, seed, and herbicides. This would mean that Bayer-Monsanto would dominate the market by owning 70% of it, therefore, engaging other farmers in unfair competition. This would lead to a possible restriction on research into seed traits and herbicides. It would result in 'too much power in the hands of too few companies' and an unacceptable market concentration that goes MONSANTO AND BAYER 2 against antitrust standards. Merging would give the company too much control over seed and fertilizer prices this would possibly result in fewer organic and non-GMO food options. This is because the merger would create a company that controls more than quarter the world's combined market. A particular concern is on seed development and sales in North America of cotton seeds, canola, soybeans, and corn (Que et al, 2010). The merging would increase Monsanto's market power which already is significant therefore increasing its dominance in herbicides and genetic traits for seeds. The two companies working independently are already big enough. Merging the two to form a single entity would mean them occupying all the market living limited or no room at all for other upcoming companies to develop. The merging would eliminate competition between Bayer and Monsanto leading to reduced pro-competitive research and development collaborations not forgetting elimination of head-to-head competition in agricultural biotechnology innovation. This would affect consumers by limiting their food choices and increasing food prices. The most significant risk on this merging is a limit on options; if a particular disease attacks a certain crop, it would mean every farmer would be affected. This could lead to starvation among humans as time is taken to seek alternatives which wouldn't be the case if the two functioned independently, therefore, producing alternatives. Arguments have been brought forward that the merger will not only break a rule but also make food systems more vulnerable. Bayer and Monsanto have been each other's chief competitors; working together means they will not have to compete against each other. With the merging to form one company, there wouldn't be a need to struggle for the available market since they will be having it all not forgetting the decrease in alternatives since the company will no longer have a competitor. It MONSANTO AND BAYER 3 would violate the Clayton Act, an amendment passed by US Congress in 1914, which gives clarification on matters about price fixing, unfair business practices, price discrimination and a court order that prevents Monsanto from reacquiring assets it had been previously ordered to divest to redress antitrust issues (Levitt, 2010). The merging of the two companies has not been well accommodated by a majority of people including shareholders of the two respective companies who find it unnecessary arguing that the two companies functioning individually are already strong enough and there is no point trying to make them bigger or stronger. A company needs a rival to keep them on toes to produce quality products. The merging of Bayer and Monsanto would see to it that this comes to an end which would result in a reduction in options for buyers. References Levitt, T. (2010). Revealed: how seed market is controlled by Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, Dow & DuPont. Ecologist: Setting the environmental agenda since 1970. Que, Q., Chilton, M. D. M., de Fontes, C. M., He, C., Nuccio, M., Zhu, T., ... & Shi, L. (2010). Trait stacking in transgenic crops: challenges and opportunities. GM crops, 1(4), 220229