Question
October 4, 2001
B.Michael Verne
Federal Trade Commission
Bureau of Competition
Premerger Notification Office
Room 303
6th St and Pennsylvania Ave, N.W.
Washington, DC 20580
Re: Proposed Acquisition of Timberland
DearMichael:
Thankyou for taking the time to speak with (redacted) and me earlier today.This letter is to confirm our conversation.
(Redacted)described for you the transaction in which her client is to sell a number oftracts of timberland. Although it is possible that the subjecttimberland, taken as a whole, will have produced revenues in excess of $5million in the thirty six months preceding the acquisition, no parcel or groupof contiguous parcels included in the acquisition will have produced revenuesof that magnitude.
Thelanguage of 16 CFR 802.2(c)(2)(iii) suggests that, at least in some cases,revenues derived both from adjacent parcels and from those which are used inconjunction with one another may have to be considered in determining whetherthe property constitutes unproductive real property for purposes of the802.2(c) exemption. You advised that, in an acquisition oftimberland, it will suffice to aggregate revenues only from contiguous parcelsand that the PNO has not considered the "used in conjunction with"concept to be applicable in such a transaction.
Atyour convenience, please call me at (redacted) if you wish to discuss any ofthis further or to confirm that I have accurately reported our conversation.
Very truly yours,