Commission sends Statements of Objections to several companies concerning synthetic turf cartels

This article is brought to you in association with the European Commission.

The European Commission has informed several companies active in the synthetic turf sector of its preliminary view that they have breached EU antitrust rules by colluding to distort competition in synthetic turf for sports pitches in the Netherlands and Germany.

If the Commission’s preliminary view is confirmed, the companies’ behaviour would amount to two cartels affecting each country respectively, violating Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), which prohibits anticompetitive agreements and other restrictive business practices.

The sending of Statements of Objections does not prejudge the outcome of the investigations.

Statement of Objections concerning the Netherlands

The Commission has preliminary concerns that Dutch-based Oranjewoud, Dutch-based TenCate Grass, as well as Belgian-based Sports & Leisure Group, all producers and installers of synthetic turf, have been coordinating their commercial conduct to restrict competition in the synthetic turf sector in the Netherlands since 2019, when they established a recycling company in the Netherlands, GBN-AGR (as of December 2024, AGR).

GBN-AGR was a subsidiary of Oranjewoud, in which TenCate and Sports & Leisure Group acquired minority stakes. The Comission is concerned that the companies agreed not to compete with GBN-AGR in recycling, to exclusively use GBN-AGR’s recycling services and to fix GBN-AGR’s pricing in a way that avoids competition between them while disadvantaging third parties. The Commission is concerned that the companies did this in order to:

• secure a strong position for GBN‑AGR in the recycling market and monopolise that market over time by excluding competitors,
• maintain their strong position in the adjacent market for the installation and replacement of synthetic turf,
• exclude competitors on the upstream market for the supply of synthetic turf.

Additionally, the companies are suspected of having entered into a further agreement a year after establishing GBN-AGR, to marginalise the providers of sustainable disposal services that competed with GBN-ACR’s recycling services, thereby threatening the growth of GBN-AGR.

The Statement of Objections is also addressed to Domo Sports Grass Nederland, which was spun off from Sports & Leisure Group into a self‑standing installation business in May 2025.

Statement of Objections concerning Germany

The Commission has preliminary concerns that, between 2020 and 2023, Oranjewoud and Germany-based Sport Group colluded on the recycling of synthetic turf for sports. During that time, Oranjewoud explored options for the expansion of GBN-AGR into other Member States, including Germany, while Sport Group was working on a recycling solution and was in the process of setting up its dedicated subsidiary FormaTurf.

The Commission is concerned that, while discussing a potential cooperation for the German market, including a possible cross-acquisition of minority shareholdings in GBN-AGR and FormaTurf, which ultimately did not take place, Oranjewoud and Sport Group engaged in anticompetitive conduct.

In particular, the Commission is concerned that as part of these discussions, Oranjewoud and Sport Group exchanged confidential and strategic information, which covered current and future prices and production capacities. This was done without any safeguards in place that would limit the exchange to what could be considered necessary in the context of discussions pertaining to the companies’ envisaged cooperation or cross-acquisition. Further, the Commission is concerned that in a subsequent part of these discussions, the two companies fixed the main price element for the recycling of end-of-life synthetic turf in Germany, which is referred to in the industry as a ‘gate fee’.

Synthetic turf for sports pitches

Synthetic turf for sports pitches imitates the appearance of natural grass and is typically used for hockey and football pitches. Customers include municipalities and other public bodies, which will typically commission an installation or a replacement of a sports pitch through a tender process.

In tenders for replacements, an installer will not only source and lay out a new synthetic turf pitch, but will also remove and dispose of the removed turf. The cost of this disposal is an important parameter of competition in such tenders.

In recent years, the EU’s synthetic turf industry has been steadily moving away from highly polluting disposal methods – such as landfilling and incineration – towards recycling end-of-life pitches instead. The recycling of synthetic turf is a growing market and is making the industry more circular.

Background

In June 2023, the Commission carried out unannounced inspections at the premises of companies active in the synthetic turf industry in several Member States.

A Statement of Objections is a formal step in Commission’s investigations into suspected violations of EU antitrust rules. The Commission informs the parties concerned in writing of the objections raised against them. The parties can then examine the documents in the Commission’s investigation file, reply in writing and request an oral hearing to present their views on the case before representatives of the Commission and national competition authorities.

If the Commission concludes, after the parties have exercised their rights of defence, that there is sufficient evidence of an infringement, it can adopt a decision prohibiting the conduct and imposing a fine of up to 10% of a company’s annual worldwide turnover. The Commission may also impose on the company any remedies which are proportionate to bring the infringement effectively to an end.

There is no legal deadline for the Commission to complete antitrust inquiries into anticompetitive conduct. The duration of an antitrust investigation depends on a number of factors, including the complexity of the case, the extent to which the companies concerned cooperate with the Commission and the parties’ exercise of the rights of defence.

More information will be made available under the case numbers AT.40957 (the Netherlands) and AT.40956 (Germany) and in the public case register on the Commission’s competition website.