Approval of Acquisition of PUMA SE by Ancat Holding GmbH

COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA Combination Registration No. C-2026/04/1414 9th June 2026

Notice under Section 6(2) of the Competition Act, 2002 given by Ancat Holding GmbH

CORAM: Ms. Ravneet Kaur Chairperson

Mr. Anil Agrawal Member

Ms. Sweta Kakkad Member

Mr. Deepak Anurag Member

Order under Section 31(1) of the Competition Act, 2002

1. On 24th April 2026, the Competition Commission of India (Commission) received a Notice under Section 6(2) of the Competition Act, 2002 (Act) given by Ancat Holding GmbH (Ancat/Acquirer) in relation to its acquisition of the issued and outstanding share capital of PUMA SE (Puma/Target). The Notice was filed pursuant to a share purchase agreement dated 26th January 2026 (SPA) entered between ANTA Sports Products Limited (ANTA) and Artémis SAS (Seller).

2. In terms of Regulation 14 of the Competition Commission of India (Combinations) Regulations, 2024 (Combination Regulations), vide letter dated 6th May 2026 (RFI), the Acquirer was required to provide certain information/document(s). The Acquirer filed the response to RFI on 19th May 2026 after seeking extension of time.

3. Ancat is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of ANTA, a company listed on the Main Board of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and accordingly forms part of ANTA group. While Ancat is an acquisition vehicle and does not carry on any business activities, whether in India or outside, as submitted, ANTA is engaged in the research and development, design, manufacturing, marketing and sales of sports products including footwear, apparel and accessories. Globally, ANTA, together with its subsidiaries, holds a brand portfolio which includes ANTA, FILA, Descente, Kolon Sport, Jack Wolfskin, and Maia Active.

4. PUMA is listed on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange and belongs to the PUMA group. PUMA is a global sportswear and athletic footwear company engaged in the design, development, marketing and sale of a broad range of sports and sports lifestyle products, including footwear, apparel and accessories, directly and through its group entities.

5. ANTA group currently holds approx. 2.9 percent of the shareholding and voting rights of PUMA. The proposed combination involves the acquisition by Ancat of 29.06 percent of the issued and outstanding share capital of PUMA by way of a secondary share purchase from the Seller and is to be implemented on the basis of the SPA (Proposed Combination). However, it is also envisaged that the ANTA group will reduce its stake in PUMA prior to closing of the Proposed Combination such that, following closing, its direct and indirect shareholding in PUMA will remain below 30 percent.

6. For the purposes of identifying horizontal overlaps and/or vertical complementary linkages requiring competition assessment, the Commission considered the activities/presence of affiliates of ultimate controlling persons (UCPs) of ANTA group (ANTA group entities) and that of Puma in India. As submitted, ANTA has an indirect subsidiary, Avid Sports Singapore Pte. Ltd. (Avid Sports) that sells: (a) ANTA branded products; and (b) certain Wilson and Salomon branded products of one of ANTA’s affiliates i.e., Amer Sports, Inc. (Amer Sports), to certain Indian distributors. Further, Amer Sports is also present directly in India through export sales to distributors in India. Thus, ANTA group entities are present in India in the wholesale sports goods market. Puma on the other hand is present in India in both the wholesale and retail sports goods market.

7. The Commission accordingly identified wholesale/B2B sales of sports goods as an area of horizontal overlap. The Commission further observed that sports goods is a broad area and can be segmented further into various segments viz., sports apparel, sports footwear and sports equipment/accessories. Basis the presence of the ANTA group entities and Puma for CY 2024/FY 2024-25, the overlaps can be narrowed down to sports equipment/accessories while Puma’s presence can be noted across all the aforesaid segments of sports goods viz., sports apparel, sports footwear and sports equipment/accessories. Accordingly, for holistic assessment, the Commission examined the Proposed Combination for likelihood of appreciable adverse effect on competition (AAEC) in the overlapping segment of sports equipment/accessories and also considered the overall competition landscape of sports apparel and sports footwear segments. The Commission further considered the plausible vertical linkage between the presence of ANTA group entities in the wholesale/B2B segment and presence of Puma in retail segment. The Commission observed that for assessment of horizontal overlaps/vertical linkages, these sub-segments appear to be relevant frames of reference, and the question of further segmentation or exact delineation of relevant market(s) can be left open.

8. The Commission noted the information in respect of market size and estimates of market shares submitted by the Acquirer in terms of volume/value for each of the segment of sports goods and observed that while the estimates may not be an exact representation of standing of various players due to the plausible differences in nature of sports goods or differences in product positioning/pricing by different players, these estimates may be used as a comparative construct to understand relative positioning of players and the overall competition landscape of the relevant segment. The Commission observed that for the overlapping segment of sports equipment/accessories, the Proposed Combination is not likely to cause a significant change in concentration and that the market is characterized by presence of at least three other significant competitors viz., Nike, Adidas and Decathlon which appear to be in a position to impose competitive constraints on the Acquirer post the Proposed Combination. As regards the non-overlapping segments, the market landscape again suggests significant constraints from Adidas and Nike in the segment of sports apparel and from Adidas, Nike and Sketchers in the segment of sports footwear. Considering the same, the Proposed Combination is not likely to cause AAEC in any of the aforesaid segments of sports goods in India. Further, the aforesaid assessment indicates that the plausible vertical linkages considering the presence of ANTA group entities in the wholesale level and Puma at retail level are not likely to confer the ability/incentive to the Acquirer to engage in foreclosure strategies.

9. Considering the material on record, including the details provided in the Notice and the assessment of the Proposed Combination based on the factors stated in Section 20(4) of the Act, the Commission is of the opinion that the Proposed Combination is not likely to have AAEC in India. Therefore, the Commission approves the Proposed Combination under Section 31(1) of the Act.

10. The order may be revoked if, at any time, the information provided by the Acquirer is found to be incorrect.

11. The information provided by the Acquirer shall be treated as confidential in terms of and subject to provisions of Section 57 of the Act.

12. The Secretary is directed to communicate to the Acquirer accordingly.