Mergers & Acquisitions Mergers & Acquisitions

Comment: McGraw-Hill-Cengage merger defense in New Zealand offers insight into other jurisdictions

By Curtis Eichelberger and James Panichi
  • 28 Feb 2020 12:21
  • 28 Feb 2020 13:06
McGraw-Hill and Cengage have told the New Zealand antitrust agency reviewing their proposed merger that officials there had failed to take into account how second-hand and pirated books affect competition in the textbook market. Although every jurisdiction is unique, the companies’ defense of their deal in New Zealand provides insights into

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to MLex or register for a free trial.

James Panichi

Senior Editor, Asia Pacific


James, an Australian journalist with over 25 years’ experience in print and electronic media, helps to oversee MLex’s coverage of regulatory risk in Asia, with special attention to Australia and New Zealand. In 2016, James was appointed as MLex’s managing editor for continental Europe, overseeing the Brussels bureau’s coverage of EU regulatory affairs and managing a team of 16 journalists in Brussels and Geneva. Previously James worked for the European Voice newspaper, before joining the European operation of US political website Politico as an investigative reporter specializing in governance, transparency and lobbying.

Discover MLex

Stay on top of global regulatory developments

Latest News