JOHNSTON PRESS/TRINITY MIRROR NEWSPAPER INQUIRY

1. Whether regional and local weekly newspapers, paid-for and free, together constitute a distinct economic market in meeting the demands of (a) readers and (b) advertisers.

2A. Alternatively, whether in meeting the demands of readers, regional and local weekly newspapers face competition from:

1. other regional and local newspapers, especially dailies;
2. other regional and local media, such as magazines, radio and television;
3. Internet web sites.

2B. And whether, in meeting the demands of advertisers, regional and local weekly newspapers face competition from:

1. other regional and local newspapers;
2. advertising-only publications, including specialist publications;
3. other printed media such as direct mail leaflets, directories;
4. other media, such as radio, television and the Internet.

3. Whether the geographical markets affected by the merger can be defined by reference to the distribution areas of the eight titles to be transferred.

4. Whether the merger would create or enhance any areas of regional concentration in the ownership of local newspapers, eg in Northamptonshire. If so, whether this would:

1. cause an unacceptable reduction in diversity of editorial opinion; and
2. create barriers to the entry of new publishers of local newspapers in the areas concerned.

5. The extent to which the merger would lead to a reduction in the amount of

editorial content and diversity of opinion in the eight Trinity Mirror titles, or in existing Johnston Press titles in the same areas, compared with what would otherwise be the case.

6. Having regard to the appropriate market definition, whether, as a consequence of the increase in concentration, the merger would result in a substantial lessening of competition, particularly in relation to advertising.
7. Alternatively, the extent to which

1. other existing advertising vehicles;
2. potential entry by other publishers of regional and local newspapers; and
3. potential entry by other advertising vehicles

would provide an effective competitive constraint on the behaviour of the merged entity in relation both to advertising rates and editorial content.

8. Whether the relative paucity of entry in recent years in the areas affected by the merger indicates that there is already little scope for entry into these markets.

9. Whether the merger (due to the associated increase in market concentration) would also result in a raising of entry barriers in the relevant markets, leading to a lessening of competition in the future.

10. The potential, following the merger, for higher cover prices (for paid-for titles) and/or higher advertising rates than would otherwise be the case for the titles operated by the merged entity, which would be to the detriment of readers and/or advertisers.
    
11. Whether the greater potential, following the merger and in the relevant local market areas, for cross-selling and ‘bundling’ of advertising packages between Johnston’s various local titles would lead to a loss of price transparency, higher costs for advertisers and harm to competition vis-à-vis existing competitors and new entrants.
12. Whether Trinity Mirror’s desire to exit the local markets in which the eight titles are distributed indicates a wish to avoid head-to-head competition with other leading publishers of local newspapers. If so, whether such a "live and let live" attitude is shared by other major publishers of regional and local newspapers, with possible implications for future competitive and entry strategies.

Possible Remedies

13. Whether, in the event of the Commission concluding that the merger would be against the public interest:

1. the proposed merger should be prohibited in its entirety; or
2. one or more of the individual titles should be excluded from the transfer.

14. The Commission would be ready to consider any alternative possible remedies that the parties might wish to put forward, on a hypothetical basis, to meet the potential concerns outlined in this letter.

Notes to Editors

1. The eight newspaper titles involved in the proposed transfer are: Peterborough Herald & Post, Derby Trader, The Trader (Alfreton, Eastwood, Ilkeston, Ripley), Harborough Herald & Post, Stamford Herald & Post, Northampton Herald & Post, East Northants Herald & Post series and the Brackley and Towcester Post series.
2. The reference was made by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry under the Fair Trading Act 1973 on 22 November 2001 (see DTI Press Release P/2001/652).
3. The Commission has been asked to report to the Secretary of State by 22 February 2002. The report will be published some weeks later by the DTI.
4. The inquiry is being carried out by a group of five members of the Commission: Professor Paul Geroski (inquiry chairman), Anthony Clothier, Dr Gill Owen, Linda Christmas and William Gibson.
5. Further information can be obtained from the Commission’s website at www.competition-commission.org.uk
6. Enquiries should be directed to Francis Royle, Press Officer, Tel: 020 7271 0242