natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
NNV'er af de forventede pengestrømme fra 2010-aftalen med Meridiana for perioden 2010-2013 (tusind EUR)
Therefore, for the 2006 and 2010 ASAs, traffic projections have been based on the business plans drawn up by So.Ge.A.AL at the closest point in time prior to the 2006 and 2010 ASAs being signed (namely, traffic projections are based on So.Ge.A.AL's 2004 and 2009 business plans).
[150-200]
Given that So.Ge.A.AL's business plans do not cover the entire period of its contractual agreements with the airlines, in order to extend the profitability analysis over the entire life of the Ryanair agreements, forecasts of air traffic (rotations) and passenger departures have been developed for the years not covered by the business plans in two steps.
[400-450]
First, the number of Ryanair turnarounds was forecast by updating the number of turnarounds for the last year contained in the business plan, assuming an annual growth in turnarounds of 19 %.
[950-1100]
Second, the number of departing passengers for the remaining period was derived from the annual seat capacity, implied by the number of turnarounds, assuming a load factor of 82 %, i.e. Ryanair's network wide average load factor at the time the agreements were signed.
Trafikprognoserne for Germanwings er baseret på målet for ATM'er, der er fastsat i 2007-aftalen og understøtter So.Ge.A.AL's forventninger til merindtægter og -omkostninger på det tidspunkt, hvor aftalen blev indgået.
Non aeronautical revenues
Forøgede luftfartsrelaterede indtægter blev baseret på de offentliggjorte lufthavnsafgifter og 2007-aftalen kombineret med trafikprognoserne.
The assumptions for non-aeronautical revenues have been based on the business plans drawn up by So.Ge.A.AL at the closest point of signing each ASA, as set out in Table 9:
Forøgede omkostninger blev baseret på de gennemsnitlige enhedsafgifter og trafikprognoser og omfatter et engangsbeløb på […] EUR i det første år samt resultatbaserede gebyrer (i analysen antages det, at Germanwings ville have opfyldt passagermålene).
Table 9
Ved beregningen af NNV, jf. tabel 17, er regressionsanalysen baseret på omkostningsdata fra tiden forud for undertegnelsen af aftalen, dvs. 1998-2006.
Assumptions on expected non-aeronautical revenue
Tabel 17
Non-aeronautical revenue per departing passenger
NNV'er af de forventede pengestrømme fra 2007-aftalen med Germanwings (tusind EUR)
Source
[130-150]
1,96–2,38
[20-30]
2000 business plan
[5-10]
2,17–2,38
NNV [126] (i aftalens løbetid)
4,31–4,64
Vurdering
2004 business plan
Kommissionen er enig i, at det er en fornuftig fremgangsmåde, Italien har valgt til at anslå antallet af passagerer og på det grundlag beregne de forventede merindtægter fra luftfartsvirksomhed og andre aktiviteter.
6,02–6,47
Det samme gælder med hensyn til beregningen af meromkostninger, som omfatter markedsføringsbetalinger.
2009 business plan
Kommissionen mener dog, at regressionsanalysen bør baseres på data, som ville have været til rådighed for So.Ge.A.AL på det tidspunkt, hvor aftalerne blev indgået, og bør derfor kun foretages i den periode, der ligger før undertegnelsen af disse aftaler, nemlig i den foreliggende sag 1998-2006 for aftalerne med Germanwings og Volare og 1998-2009 for aftalerne med Alitalia og Meridiana.
For the period of each ASA not covered by the respective business plans, the last available forecast of non-aeronautical revenues per departing passenger has been carried forward in each year until the end of the agreement.
I modsætning til 2000-, 2002- og 2003-aftalerne med Ryanair, for hvilke Kommissionen havde accepteret, at der ikke kan foretages nogen meningsfuld regression på grundlag af forudgående omkostningsdata, og at der derfor blev benyttet omkostningsdata for perioden 1998-2008 som indikator for, hvad en fornuftig markedsøkonomisk aktør ville have forventet på det tidspunkt, hvor disse aftaler blev indgået (se betragtning 491), er der hvad angår 2007-aftalen med Germanwings og 2010-aftalen med Meridiana flere datapunkter til rådighed til udførelse af regressionen på grundlag af forudgående omkostningsdata, som So.Ge.A.AL ville have haft til rådighed på det tidspunkt, hvor selskabet indgik de pågældende aftaler.
For example, in the 2000 business plan, the last year for which a forecast is available is 2006.
Kommissionen bemærker endvidere, at en lignende fremgangsmåde blev accepteret af Italien for analysen af 2006-aftalerne med Ryanair, der blev indgået før undertegnelsen af aftalen fra 2007 med Germanwings.
According to the business plan, in 2006 non-aeronautical revenues per departing passenger were EUR 2,38.
Desuden noterer Kommissionen sig Italiens holdning om ikke at overveje en »slutværdi« for at tage hensyn til fordele efter udløbet af de aftaler, So.Ge.A.AL har indgået med Alitalia Meridiana, Volare og Germanwings.
For each remaining year of the 2006 ASA, the same level of non-aeronautical revenues per departing passenger has been assumed.
Denne holdning er i overensstemmelse med Kommissionens argumentation, jf. betragtning 445-450.
Incremental costs
Endelig noterer Kommissionen sig, at det i markedsføringsaftalen med Meridiana (gældende i perioden mellem juni 2010 og oktober 2010) var fastsat, at aftalen kunne forlænges til at dække årene 2011 og 2012, hvis det antal passagerer, luftfartsselskabet befordrede, oversteg de relevante minimumstærskler.
In the absence of information about the expected incremental costs associated with serving Ryanair at the time each of the ASAs was signed, incremental costs were estimated by Italy based on the relationship between the airport's operating costs and passenger numbers.
Italien forklarede, at So.Ge.A.AL på tidspunktet for undertegnelsen af aftalerne forventede, at Meridiana ville skabe passagertrafik på det krævede minimumsniveau, og at Meridiana derfor ville forny markedsførings- (og dermed administrationsaftalen) med So.Ge.A.AL på lignende vilkår.
A regression approach was followed to identify how operating costs vary as passenger numbers change, in order to estimate the incremental costs that could have been reasonably expected by So.Ge.A.AL at the time of signing the ASAs with Ryanair.
Kommissionen kan ikke godtage dette argument.
In the first step, regression analysis was carried out to identify the impact of a change in the airport's passenger numbers on the airport's operating costs.
For det første indeholdt handlingaftalen med Meridiana ikke nogen udtrykkelig bestemmelse om aftalens eventuelle fornyelse.
In the second step, the estimate of the additional operating costs as a result of the Ryanair agreements was derived from the results in the first step combined with forecasts of the number of Ryanair passengers.
En sådan bestemmelse blev kun inkluderet i markedsføringsaftalen.
The following components of costs were considered:
Kommissionen mener ikke, at So.Ge.A.AL. i april 2010, da handlingaftalen blev undertegnet, kunne påberåbe sig en forlængelse af en af aftalerne på lignende vilkår, idet en sådan fornyelse er hypotetisk.
incremental staff costs
Kommissionen finder derfor, at rentabilitetsanalysen kun bør tage højde for den oprindelige varighed af den etårige aftale.
incremental costs of goods and services, security, inventories and materials
Samtidig noterer Kommissionen sig Italiens fremgangsmåde med at begrunde So.Ge.A.AL's forventninger i forbindelse med fornyelse af handlingaftalen blot på grundlag af muligheden for en forlængelse af markedsførings- (snarere end handling-)aftalen.
payments towards new route incentives, marketing, and/or success fees to Ryanair or AMS
Kommissionen mener, at den fremgangsmåde gør det vanskeligt at acceptere det argument, Ryanair og AMS har fremsat i løbet af undersøgelsen om, at aftalerne om markedsføring og lufthavnstjenester let kan adskilles.
concession costs
Kommissionen har rekonstrueret analysen ud fra overvejelserne i betragtning 525-532.
Staff costs: So.Ge.A.AL's business plan of 2000 includes the costs of additional staff required as a result of the agreements with Ryanair up to 2006.
De heraf følgende NNV'er for disse aftaler på det tidspunkt, hvor de blev indgået, i perioden, hvor de skulle finde anvendelse, er angivet i tabel 18.
Therefore, for the purposes of the assessments of the 2000, 2002 and 2003 ASAs, incremental staff costs have been obtained from So.Ge.A.AL's 2000 business plan.
Tabel 18
The 2004 and the 2006 business plans however do not provide data on incremental costs.
NNV'er af aftalerne mellem So.Ge.A.AL og Air One/Alitalia, Meridiana, Volare og Germanwings
To derive estimates of staff costs that are incremental to the Ryanair agreements beyond 2006, statistical analysis was carried out based on data on the airport's aggregate staff costs, in order to determine the proportion of costs that varied with changes in passenger numbers [111].
NNV i aftalens løbetid (tusind EUR)
The estimate of the additional staff costs was then derived from the regression results combined with the estimated number of Ryanair passengers.
2007-2010
Other costs: Similarly, regression analysis has been carried out to estimate the incremental costs of goods and materials [112], services [113], security, inventories, as these costs were not mentioned in the business plans.
2010-2015
New route incentives, marketing and/or success fees payable to Ryanair have been included as a cost to the airport.
[12500-13000]
Incremental concession costs [114] have been based on per-unit costs at the airport level, multiplied by the traffic forecasts for Ryanair.
2010-2011
According to Italy, So.Ge.A.AL did not aim to recover the cost of the new passenger terminal from charges paid by Ryanair.
Da det forventede aktualiserede resultat er negativt for aftalerne med Meridiana og Germanwings, finder Kommissionen, at So.Ge.A.AL ikke havde handlet som en markedsøkonomisk aktør ved indgåelsen af disse aftaler.
In other words, the investment costs connected to the new terminal are not imputable to any of the Ryanair agreements and therefore are not part of the incremental costs.
Lufthavnsoperatøren kunne ikke have forventet i det mindste at dække meromkostningerne som følge af en af disse aftaler.
Marketing payments to AMS have been taken into account as costs to the airport.
Da So.Ge.A.AL således ikke handlede som en markedsøkonomisk aktør, gav selskabets beslutning om at indgå aftalerne på disse vilkår Germanwings og Meridiana en økonomisk fordel.
At the same time, a ‘terminal value’ was added as revenue to the airport to account for the benefits of the marketing service agreements and airport service agreements which in Italy's view last even after the expiry of the marketing service agreement.
Oversigten over meromkostninger og -indtægter, der kunne have været forventet på tidspunktet, hvor for aftalerne med Meridiana og Germanwings blev indgået, er opsummeret i tabel 19.
The ‘terminal value’ is calculated based on the same approach followed by Ryanair and detailed in recitals 443-446.
Tabel 19
Table 10 presents the NPV [115] of the cash flows which could have been expected from the Ryanair agreements based on the assumptions detailed in recitals 459 to 471.
Gradvist stigende rentabilitet af aftalerne med Germanwings og Meridiana
Table 10
Forventede passagerer
NPVs of the cash flows expected from the Ryanair agreements — 2014 MEOP report
Forventede luftfartsrelaterede merindtægter
NPV over the duration of the agreement (million EUR) [116]
Forventede ikkeluftfartsrelaterede merindtægter
22 June 2000 — 21 June 2010
Forventede meromkostninger
[4 – 8]
Omkostninger til markedsføringsstøtte
1 January 2002 — 31 December 2012
Forventet nominelt resultat
[3 – 6]
Derimod kunne aftalerne med Volare og Alitalia forventes at have ført til et positivt aktualiseret resultat.
1 September 2003 — 1 September 2014 [9 – 12] 2006 ASA (3 April 2006) 1 January 2006 — 31 December 2010
Ved indgåelsen af disse aftaler gav So.Ge.A.AL derfor ikke de pågældende luftfartsselskaber en økonomisk fordel.
[6 – 9]
Baseret på Italiens rentabilitetsanalyse af de aftaler, So.Ge.A.AL. indgik med Alitalia og Volare, finder Kommissionen det godtgjort, at det ville have været rationelt af en markedsøkonomisk aktør ledet af rentabilitetsudsigter at acceptere vilkårene i de pågældende aftaler på det tidspunkt, hvor de blev indgået.
1 January 2010 — 31 December 2013
Derfor indebærer disse aftaler ikke støtte til luftfartsselskaberne.
[9 – 12]
På grundlag af vurderingen i betragtning 525-536 konkluderer Kommissionen dog, at det ikke var rationelt for So.Ge.A.AL at indgå aftalerne med Meridiana og Germanwings.
The Commission takes note that for the purpose of the profitability analysis of the 2006 and 2010 ASAs, Italy considered a duration of 10 years for the 2006 ASA and nine years for the 2010 ASA, rather than the period during which the agreement was set to apply initially, namely five and four years respectively.
Hver af aftalerne indebærer en økonomisk fordel for det pågældende luftfartsselskab.
Italy did however also provide to the Commission the results of the profitability analysis when taking into account the initial duration of the 2006 and 2010 ASAs as strictly defined in those agreements.
Aftaler med bmibaby, Air Italy og Air Vallée
In defence of its position, Italy argued that at the time of signing each of the agreements with Ryanair, So.Ge.A.AL had reasonable expectations that these would be renewed on similar terms.
Som nævnt ovenfor sendte Italien ved skrivelse af 10. juni 2014 Kommissionen den forudgående analyse af rentabiliteten af de aftaler, So.Ge.A.AL indgik med de øvrige undersøgte luftfartsselskaber, dvs. bmibaby, Air Italy og Air Vallée.
In particular, based on the explicit provision in the 2006 ASA that the agreement could be extended for an additional five-year term until 1 January 2016, So.Ge.A.AL expected this agreement to be renewed on similar terms.
De relevante handlingaftaler, der blev indgået mellem So.Ge.A.AL og Air Italy, Air Vallée og bmibaby, er sammenfattet i tabel 20:
Similarly, the 2010 ASA was expected to cover the period between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2013, with the potential for the ASA to be extended for an additional five-year term until 31 December 2018.
Tabel 20
The Commission cannot accept this argument.
Handlingaftaler med bmibaby, Air Italy og Air Vallée
First, neither the 2006 nor the 2010 agreement lays down its automatic prolongation once the agreement has run its full duration.
Aftalens forventede varighed
The 2006 ASA rather lays down that So.Ge.A.AL undertakes, upon expiry of the term of the agreements, to renegotiate a suitable airport use service package with Ryanair for an additional five-year term, provided that certain conditions are met, notably the carrier meets its obligations in terms of marketing services in full and So.Ge.A.AL obtains the concession to operate the airport beyond 1 January 2011.
Handlingafgift pr. turnaround
The Commission considers that based on that provision alone, in 2006 So.Ge.A.AL could not have relied on an extension, not the least on similar terms, such extension being hypothetical and depending in particular on Ryanair's willingness to accept it.
1. juni 2008-31. december 2010
Indeed, the above-mentioned provision does not legally bind Ryanair to the conclusion of a new agreement with the airport manager, nor does it provide any certainty in respect of the observance by either party of the conditions in question, notably in view of the significant uncertainty surrounding the award of the comprehensive concession to the airport operator at that time.
9. august 2010-30. august 2010
The Commission considers that the 2010 ASA provides even less certainty as to its potential extension.
29. maj 2010-30. september 2010
Article 2 — ‘Term’ reads: ‘the agreement may be extended for an additional five-year period under the conditions and terms set forth herein, or as amended by the parties, provided that prior written consent can be reached by both parties at least six months prior to the expiry of the initial term. (…) Any subsequent renewal of this agreement shall be negotiated between the Parties, at least six months before the expiry of the additional term.’
Den metode, som Italien anvendte til at undersøge den øgede rentabilitet som følge af de aftaler, som blev indgået mellem So.Ge.A.AL og Air Italy, Air Vallée og bmibaby, er nærmere beskrevet i betragtning 542-545.
It is therefore evident that any extension of the agreement would have been subject to negotiations between the parties and could not therefore have been assumed by So.Ge.A.AL at the time the 2010 ASA was signed.
Forøgede luftfartsrelaterede indtægter omfatter indtægter fra landingsafgifter, bagagehåndteringsafgifter, passagerafgifter, håndtering af luftfartøjet og billettering.
Second, the Commission notes that there is evidence in the case file that in 2009 tensions between So.Ge.A.AL and Ryanair put the contractual relation with the carrier at risk.
Alle andre afgifter end handling var baseret på lufthavnens offentliggjorte afgiftsordning.
At that time Ryanair had conditioned the continuation of its operations at Alghero airport on the conclusion of a supplemental agreement.
Forøgede ikkeluftfartsrelaterede indtægter er anslået i overensstemmelse med den metode, der er beskrevet i betragtning 502.
In fact, it is apparent from the minutes of So.Ge.A.AL's Board of Directors of 7 July 2009, 9 September 2009 and 23 February 2010 provided by Italy that the decision of the airport manager to eventually sign the new ASA with Ryanair for a five-year period took into account the fact that the latter agreement did not lay down penalties for the early termination of the agreement.
Forventede meromkostninger omfatter udgifter til personale [127], handling, varer, tjenesteydelser og materiel samt en tildeling af So.Ge.A.AL's koncessionsomkostninger.
Ryanair had been forcefully asking for the conclusion of a supplemental agreement, which ‘will certainly result in the increase of the value of co-marketing contributions’.
Da de relevante aftaler indgået mellem So.Ge.A.AL og Air Vallée og bmibaby ikke vedrørte markedsføringstjenester, tages der i analysen ikke hensyn til betalinger for markedsføring.
Should such agreement not be signed immediately, the carrier would cease operation of all routes from Alghero airport [117];a document outlining the evolution of the arrangements with Ryanair and the current state of the relations with the airline, putting forward what in Ryanair's view would be the following steps, which included the cancellation or the reduction of the frequency of intra EU flights and their replacement with national routes was discussed [118];the Board inquired on the negotiating margin, if any, in respect of the contractual relation with Ryanair, ‘given that the shareholders had not given the Board a mandate to terminate the agreement with the carrier’ [119].(480) It also results from the minutes of So.Ge.A.AL's Shareholders Assembly of 26 October 2001 that the company considered the termination of the 2000 ASA before its expiry and that this generated long debates among the shareholders.
Der blev udført en regressionsanalyse på antallet af passagerer og omkostninger på lufthavnsniveau baseret på forudgående data, som ville have været til rådighed for So.Ge.A.AL på det tidspunkt, hvor de omtvistede aftaler blev indgået, dvs. 1998-2007 for aftalen med Air Italy og 1998-2009 for aftalerne med Air Vallée og bmibaby.
On this basis the Commission concludes that at the time the 2006 and 2010 Ryanair ASAs were concluded, So.Ge.A.AL could not have expected that those agreements are prolonged, or at least could not have expected that they are prolonged under the same contractual terms.
Tabel 21 indeholder en sammenfatning af den merfortjeneste, som forventes at tilfalde So.Ge.A.AL fra aftalen med Air Italy.
The Commission also notes that based on the information submitted by Italy, the agreement with another airline subject to the investigation, Germanwings, did not run its full duration and the carrier only operated from the airport in 2007.
Nettonutidsværdien af den ekstra fortjeneste, So.Ge.A.AL kunne have forventet fra aftalen med Air Italy, beløber sig til 99330 EUR [128].
Italy has in the course of the investigation clarified that the airline had decided to cease operations from the airport as it could not generate sufficient traffic to break even from a financial perspective.
Tabel 21
The Commission therefore concludes that for the purpose of the profitability analysis of the 2006 and 2010 ASAs, only the period laid down by the ASAs, namely five years for the 2006 ASA and four years for the 2010 ASA should be taken into account (the NPVs in Table 10 were calculated based on the initial duration of the agreements, as set out in the ASAs).
NNV'er af de forventede pengestrømme fra 2008-aftalen med Air Italy (EUR)
Besides, the Commission notes that the 2006 and the 2010 ASAs and marketing services agreements signed between So.Ge.A.AL, Ryanair and AMS, applied retrospectively, as follows:
[30000-40000]
the 2006 ASA and the marketing services agreement were signed on 3 April 2006, but applied retrospectively from 1 January 2006;
NNV [129] (i aftalens løbetid)
the 2010 ASA and the marketing services agreement were signed on 20 October 2010, but applied retrospectively from 1 January 2010.
Tabel 22 indeholder en sammenfatning af merfortjenesten, som forventes at tilfalde So.Ge.A.AL fra aftalerne med Air Vallée og bmibaby.
In other words, the agreements concluded in April 2006 and October 2010 simply formalised terms which were agreed before, ahead of the period during which these agreements applied retrospectively.
Nettonutidsværdierne af merfortjenesten, som So.Ge.A.AL kunne have forventet af aftalerne med Air Vallée og bmibaby, beløber sig til henholdsvis 3399 EUR og 25330 EUR [130].
On that basis the Commission considers that considering each agreement over its scheduled duration is in line with an ex ante approach and that therefore in the analysis of the profitability of the 2006 and 2010 agreements, the period for which the agreements applied retrospectively should not be excluded.
Ifølge Italien er overslagene over nettonutidsværdien relativt lave, fordi aftalerne mellem So.Ge.A.AL, Air Vallée og bmibaby kun forventedes at dække en periode på et år (eller mindre end et år).
However, based on the grounds detailed above, the Commission considers that the benefits a prudent MEO would expect from a marketing service agreement would be strictly limited to the term of operation of the carrier at the airport, as set out in the airport service agreement.
Tabel 22
On this basis the Commission considers that any ‘terminal value’ aiming to reflect future benefits of the marketing services beyond the term of application of those agreements should be left out from of the analysis.
NNV'er af de forventede pengestrømme fra aftalerne med Air Vallée og bmibaby (EUR)
The Commission also notes that Italy has not considered a ‘terminal value’ to account for benefits derived after expiry of the term of the agreements concluded by So.Ge.A.AL with Alitalia, Meridiana, Volare and Germanwings (see recital 528).
[3000-3500]
Furthermore, the Commission finds that the approach taken by Italy in estimating the passenger numbers, and calculating on that basis the expected incremental aeronautical and non-aeronautical revenues (without prejudice to the assessment in the previous recital concerning the ‘terminal value’), is sound.
[25000-26000]
Although the Commission considers that the assumptions concerning the traffic projections should normally be exclusively based on the route frequencies and passenger targets stipulated in the ASAs and the load factor that could have been reasonably expected by So.Ge.A.AL at the time each ASA with Ryanair was concluded, given that at the time the 2006 and 2010 ASAs where signed So.Ge.A.AL expected Ryanair traffic to exceed the minimum targets set out in the agreements, the Commission agrees that So.Ge.A.AL's expectations at the time the agreements were signed, as set out in the business plans, represent the most accurate source for inferring So.Ge.A.AL's forecasts of Ryanair traffic at the time of signing the 2006 and 2010 ASAs.