Macquarie has offered to sell part of Energy Assets Group’s commercial gas-metering business to address competition concerns over its proposed acquisition of the UK utility infrastructure company.
The Competition and Markets Authority announced on 9 October that the disposal proposal could, in principle, address concerns raised during its initial merger investigation. The regulator will examine the proposed undertakings before deciding whether to accept them.
The offer concerns Energy Assets Group’s non-domestic gas-metering services for customers using non-smart meters, including traditional and advanced meters. A suitable purchaser would need to acquire the operation and be capable of maintaining it as a viable competitor.
Neither the sale nor the wider acquisition has been cleared or completed. The CMA’s announcement is an assessment of a proposed solution, rather than a final decision that the merger can proceed.
Macquarie Asset Management agreed in February 2026 to acquire Energy Assets Group, known as EAG, from Asterion Industrial Partners, EDF Invest and Swiss Life Asset Managers. The transaction requires regulatory approvals and satisfaction of other closing conditions.
The competition issue arises from the overlap between EAG and National Gas Metering, which is controlled by Macquarie. Both provide services connected with installing and maintaining commercial gas meters and obtaining the consumption data needed for billing.
In its Phase 1 investigation, the CMA found that the proposed combination would significantly increase concentration in a market already served by a small number of major competitors. The regulator described the combined market share as very high without assigning a percentage in its October announcement.
It identified Stark and SMS as the only other principal competitors and noted that Macquarie maintains a minority interest in Stark. Those market relationships influenced its concern about the competitive position that would follow the acquisition.
The proposed remedy is a structural one: removing the overlapping non-smart metering business from EAG and placing it under an owner able to compete independently. The identity and capabilities of any purchaser will therefore matter as much as the formal commitment to sell.
A viable disposal may require staff, customer relationships, operating systems and other resources needed to run the service. The CMA must consider whether the business would remain commercially sustainable and whether it could compete without inappropriate dependence on Macquarie.
For commercial energy customers, gas-metering arrangements underpin consumption records and accurate invoicing. Meter installation, maintenance and reading services may be less visible than energy supply contracts, but poor performance can create operational disruption and disputes over billing.
Competition between metering providers can influence prices, responsiveness and the options available to organisations selecting or changing a supplier. The CMA has identified a risk of reduced competition; it has not determined that specific price increases or service failures have already resulted from the uncompleted merger.
EAG’s wider business includes smart metering, data services and the installation and operation of last-mile utility connections. Macquarie said in February that EAG managed a portfolio of approximately 1.8 million advanced and smart meters and owned around 148,000 grid connections.
Those figures describe the broader company and should not be mistaken for the size of the operation offered for disposal. EAG was founded in Scotland in 2005 and employed approximately 600 people when the acquisition was announced.
The CMA will undertake a more detailed assessment of the proposed undertakings over a period expected to take up to 40 working days. That work includes seeking views from third parties and considering potential purchasers before it determines whether the remedy is sufficient.
If the regulator accepts the undertakings, the transaction could receive conditional clearance without progressing to an in-depth Phase 2 investigation. If the proposals are inadequate, the CMA can still refer the acquisition for further scrutiny.
The distinction matters for transaction planning. Buyers and sellers must account for the possibility that a proposed remedy will be modified or rejected and that obtaining a suitable purchaser may create additional operational and contractual requirements.
Macquarie’s offer establishes a possible route to approval, but the competition issues will not be considered resolved until the CMA reaches a final decision. The proposed divestment remains subject to scrutiny, and the acquired businesses continue to operate under the arrangements applicable before completion.
You must be logged in to post a comment.