Abstract
Whilst the US.authorities have expressly concluded that anti-trust should rarely, if at all, interfere in the taking place of conglomerate mergers, the European Commission (EC) has, in contrast, become increasingly concerned with the 'conglomerate effects' of mergers, in a number of its relatively recent decisions. This paper discusses the potential anti-competitive effects that can result from such mergers, and then subsequently focuses on two key E.C. decisions - GE/Honeywell and Tetra Laval/Sidel for the main analysis, with relevant comparison between E.C. and U.S. perspectives.

Outline
Abstract
Anti-Competitive Effects Resulting From Conglomerate Mergers
The GE/Honeywell Saga
Tetra Laval/Sidel
Conclusion

From the Paper
"The issue of 'efficiencies' represented a major point of divergence in the EC and US attitudes towards the potential effects of the merger and was a theme which ran through the core of many of the individual points and arguments made. Efficiency is considered to be the "ultimate goal" of US ant-trust policy , with the purpose of the Sherman Act and other competition laws being to "protect competition, not competitors" . The EC's decision in GE/Honeywell was thus heavily criticised for, as far as the US authorities perceived it, actually blocking the merger because it would give rise to efficiencies, such as lower capital costs and cheaper prices, which Honeywell's rivals would be unable to compete with."

Tags:General, Electric, Honeywell, Tetra, Pak, Laval, Sidel, market, dominant, leverage, monopoly

Abstract
In this article, the writer discusses that comparing and contrasting the growth of the news divisions owned by the media conglomerates Time Warner and News Corp indicates that this growth has been directed and controlled as part of a dangerous agenda to develop a global media empire dominated by capitalist media conglomerates.

From the Paper
"In the United States, Time Warner's ownership of CNN and News Corp's ownership of Fox News has had a detrimental effect on the current presidential campaign process, for they broadcast biased news and political campaign coverage favorable to conservative candidates."

Tags:news, media, conglomerates

Abstract
This paper discusses the government's continuous deregulation of the telecommunications industry, which was intended to result in increased competition, however the exact opposite was in fact achieved. The writer of this paper discusses the growing trend by large media conglomerates that are continuously consuming their competition. As a result, the mega-media companies cited in this paper, produce and/or distribute the majority of television shows, radio programs, movies and print publications. This paper examines the makeup of several large media conglomerates such as AOL-Time Warner, which was formed in 2000 for $160 billion and the Walt Disney Company, which includes several television production companies and cable networks and more than 100 million subscribers. The writer of this paper detail the impact and control these companies have on today's media. The writer contends and explains how these particular monopolies control the traditional ideas of the free press. This paper also delves into the FCC's recently relaxed media ownership rules that allows large media conglomerates to grow even larger, resulting in a great deal of protest.

From the Paper
"The FCC recently relaxed media ownership rules that allowed large media conglomerates to grow even larger. Thus, they set off a great deal of protest. Americans did not appreciate the fact that a small group of powerful corporations are given more control of the most important element of our democracy: our access to information. They are right to feel this way. The media monopoly allows a small amount of companies power over media outlets (independent and corporate alike, including on the Web). This is far too much power for them to possess, but this is the future face of media consolidation."

Tags:media, business, corporation, aol, time, warner, walt, disney, televsion, goverment, deregulation, fcc

Abstract
This paper examines how the mergers which have created giant communications conglomerates led by moguls such as Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch affect consumers both negatively and positively. It analyzes how the primary positive effects are the technological advances made, while the major negative effect is the commercialization of products, including entertainment, news and information. It also looks at how the incredible amounts of money involved in acquiring and operating huge communications media organizations make it inevitable that the decisions made by the leaders of those organizations are based on little but economic pros and cons.

From the Paper
"The argument of the moguls and their representatives, of course, is that the developing technology (made possible in part by the wealth of the conglomerates in support of research and development) allows for greater consumer choice in terms of channels and content. Some of the arguments the moguls make, however, are preposterous. For example, America Online Chairman Steve Case and Time Warner Chairman Gerald Levin, in testimony before the Federal Communications Commission on the merger of AOL and Time-Warner, "extoll[ed] the virtues of their merger as one that will 'take the Internet to the next level' and 'increase consumer choice in communications service and content'" (Connell, 2000, p. 1). The fact is, however, that the rapid expansion of mergers related to the Internet have created logjams in which service is terrible, particularly in DSL lines."

Tags:commercialization, entertainment, news, turner, murdoch

Abstract
Impact on consumer choice and quality of product of huge media conglomerates. Argues that the growth of power of media moguls is a threat to consumer freedom, and to the well-being of a democratic society. Effect on entertaining, news, and a democratic society. Role of advertising. Profits. Discusses media mergers. Moguls Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch.

From the Paper
"The mergers which have created giant communications conglomerates led by moguls such as Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch affect consumers both negatively and positively. The primary positive effects are the technological advances made, while the major negative effect is the commercialization of products, including entertainment, news and information. The incredible amounts of money involved in acquiring and operating huge communications media organizations make it inevitable that the decisions made by the leaders of those organizations will be based on little but economic pros and cons. This means that the aim of the giant communications organization is to sell advertising, which means in turn that the primary consideration is the number of viewers, listeners, readers, including their age and spending capacity. When profits are considered above all..."

Tags:Consumer, Mergers

Abstract
This paper discusses the effects of media conglomeration. The writer presents the case that this type of intensive ownership has a negative impact on the media industry. Legal issues are outlined. Suggestions are made for government involvement in order to regulate ownership.

From the Paper
"Media has become big business and recently that business has turned into heated debates about conglomerate ownership and its affect on the purity and credibility of the media itself. Within the last decade the media has become a business that is like every other business, in which the larger companies are rapidly vying over and bidding for the smaller ones. The winning bid takes the smaller company and absorbs it into their every growing business. The smaller companies "feed" the larger ones and give them more funding and power to continue the quest for additional mergers and take overs. As the conglomerate begins to grow others start referring to it as a giant and its power becomes something to contend with. Smaller groups cannot compete with the ever-growing conglomerate and soon it the only small companies that others can purchase are the ones the giant passes over. It becomes a snowball that simply grows as it rolls and the larger it gets the more easily it topples everything in its path."

Tags:television, magazine, newspaper, government, regulation, ownership, Hearst-Argyle, FTC

Abstract
This paper provides an extensive business analysis of Johnson & Johnson, a global conglomerate of over 250 companies. The paper explains that the company did $61.1 billion in business in 2007, broken down into three main segments; the largest segment is Pharmaceuticals, which accounted for $24.9 billion, or 41%, of revenue. The paper discusses the company's income trends, debt ratios, and shareholder equity return, noting that Johnson & Johnson has been able to maintain margins in line with, or slightly better than, the industry norms. In closing, the paper recommends that Johnson & Johnson should contain the growth in its selling, general and administration expenses; in tougher economic times, the company should hold the line on this type of expenses and plow their money into more productive areas, such as research and development. This paper contains illustrative data tables.

Outline:
Company Overview
Trend Analysis
Ratio Analysis
SWOT Analysis
Weaknesses
Opportunities
Threats
Recommendations
Works Cited
Annual Income Statement
Interim Income Statement
Annual Balance Sheet
Interim Balance Sheet
Annual Cash Flow Statement
Interim Cash Flow Statement
Valuation Ratio
Dividends
Growth Rates
Financial Strength
Profitability Ratios
Management Effectiveness
Efficiency

From the Paper
"As sales overall saw strong growth in 2007, so too did segment sales. Growth was strongest in the Consumer Healthcare segment, at 48.3%. This growth was from $9.77 billion to $14.5 billion. The strong growth in this segment was the primary reason for the robust growth in overall revenues. The growth driver in 2007 was the acquisition of Pfizer Consumer Healthcare, which accounted for 40.3% growth alone. The other segments also have been on a solid upward trajectory. Pharmaceuticals grew at 6.9%, driven by a handful of strong products, including two that reached the $1 billion sales mark for the first time. Medical Devices & Diagnostics achieved growth of 7.2% in 2007, marking a strong overall growth trend. It will be interesting to see how these segments have performed in 2008, given that the company's overall revenues have slumped."

Tags:pharmaceutical, giant, health, big, medical

Abstract
This paper takes an in-depth look at the Fortune Brands conglomerate, and how products that are seemingly unrelated, are actually manufactured and marketed successfully by the same company. This paper also discusses the various Fortune Brand products and how strategic business practices have made the Fortune Brand such a successful enterprise.

Table of Contents:
Fortune Brands' Business Makeup
Fortune's Product Offering
Fortune's Hardware Brand
Fortune's Wines and Spirits Brand
Fortune's Golf Equipment Brand
Fortune's Performance over the Last Three to Five Years
Executive Summary

From the Paper
"What do golf clubs, bathroom or kitchen faucets, cabinetry and other home building supplies, and a bottle of Maker's Mark Kentucky Bourbon have in common? On the surface, not much, but when one digs a little deeper, he or she will find that while these companies appear to be singular entities, they are in fact owned and operated by one conglomerate in Fortune Brands (trading under the stock symbol FO on the NYSE). Fortune Brands has banked on its acquisitions of this diversity across the board and is continuing this strategy of buying out brands that are leading their prospective categories in sales and customer loyalty. As Caminiti states, "Fortune's playbook contains only a few rules: Invest to grow strong consumer brands that hold either the number one or the number two position in their category; use cutting-edge technology to add innovation; leverage rigorous market research to stay in touch with customers; and finally, make acquisitions that add true value and not just heft to a category."

Tags:accounting, analysis, business, financial, performance, stock

Abstract
This paper examines how the conglomeratization of film studios has affected the way the Hollywood Blockbuster is marketed. It focuses on the movie "Jurassic Park" and asks how this might demonstrate the place of the film as part of a multimedia package, a film whose marketing campaign influences the content and mise-e-scene and transforms it into an advertisement for the vast range of tie-ins associated with it.

From the Paper
"The diversification of the film studio since the 1960s, has had a vast and obvious effect on the form of the Hollywood Blockbuster. Diversification not only decreases the financial risk of the movie for the studio, but also alters the role of the film and its relationship with the products associated with and used to promote it. Conglomeratisation, as a means of decreasing the risk of financial loss in a particular market for the conglomerate, has transformed the film into a multifaceted commodity. The film package and its components are used as avenues for obtaining greater profits. Universal Pictures and the film Jurassic Park demonstrate how ancillary markets, beyond the actual film product, together create an intricate multimedia commodity, which ideally serves financial rather than creative interests."

Tags:blockbuster, conglomeratization, distribution, jurassic, mechandise, park

From the Paper
"Background of the Deal
On April 12, 2000, the Dutch-based consumer goods conglomerate Unilever Inc. agreed to acquire Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc. for $326 million cash, based on a tender offer of $43.60 cash for each outstanding B & J share, a price which represents a 25% premium over the company's April 11 closing price of 34-15/16.
Among the terms of the deal are these:
* The South Burlington, Vermont-based company will operate as an independent entity from Unilever's current U.S. ice cream business, which includes the Breyer's, Good Humor and Klondike specialty brands.
* Ben & Jerry's also will continue to have its own independent ..."