natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Afhændelsen af aktiver omfattede: [12] i) salg af Widerøe, et SAS-ejet regionalt luftfartsselskab i Norge [13], ii) salg af en minoritetsinteresse i […], iii) salg af lufthavnsrelaterede ejendomme, iv) outsourcing af groundhandling [14], v) salg af flymotorer [15], vi) sale-and-lease-back eller andre finansielle transaktioner vedrørende […], vii) outsourcing af callcentre [16] og viii) salg eller sikret finansiering af tre Q400-fly.
Following an application for bankruptcy by a subsidiary of SAS (namely Spanair) in January 2012, SAS entered into negotiations with the banks and reached an agreement for a covenant reset on 15 March 2012.
Staterne afviste imidlertid dette krav.
According to SAS, the 4XNG business plan would enable it to position itself as a financially self-sufficient airline.
Et stykke inde i forhandlingerne accepterede bankerne at etablere en ny RCF sammen med staterne og KAW på helt lige vilkår uden rangordning eller uforholdsmæssige sikkerhedsrettigheder.
It set out a number of financial targets that SAS had to meet in the financial year 2014/15.
Det skal bemærkes, at den nye RCF indledningsvis var fastsat til [3-6] mia. SEK, selv om der kun var sikkerhed for [1-4] mia. SEK.
These included an EBIT margin of above 8 %, a financial preparedness ratio of above 20 % and an equity ratio (equity/assets) in excess of 35 %.
Den 22. oktober 2012 blev den nye RCF til slut nedsat til 3,5 mia. SEK (omkring 400 mio. EUR).
The 4XNG plan was supposed to allow SAS to improve its EBT by approximately SEK 3 billion on an annual basis, while its implementation would require restructuring costs and one-off costs of approximately SEK 1,5 billion.
Den nye RCF blev stillet til rådighed af de banker, der stillede den gamle RCF til rådighed (undtagen en bank [18]), sammen med staterne og KAW.
A further objective of the 4XNG plan was to prepare the company for the introduction of new accounting rules for pensions from November 2013, which were anticipated to have a negative impact on the SAS Group's equity.
50 % af den nye RCF blev stillet til rådighed af staterne i forhold til deres aktieandele i SAS, og de resterende 50 % blev stillet til rådighed af bankerne og KAW.
In addition, the plan included a commitment to complete an asset disposal and financing plan, which totalled approximately SEK 3 billion in potential net cash proceeds.
Staterne og KAW deltog i den nye RCF på lige vilkår (gebyrer, renter, vilkår) som bankerne.
The asset disposal included [12]: (i) the sale of Widerøe, a subsidiary regional airline in Norway [13], (ii) the sale of a minority interest investment in the […], (iii) the sale of airport-related real estate interests, (iv) the outsourcing of ground handling [14], (v) the sale of aircraft engines [15], (vi) the sale and lease back or other financing transaction in respect of the […], (vii) the outsourcing of management systems and call centres [16], and (viii) the sale or secured financing of three Q400 aircraft.
De væsentligste karakteristika ved den nye RCF var:
Norway insists that the 4XNG plan was self-financing, which means that SAS would generate enough cash from operations and non-core disposals to fund the upfront cost of implementing the 4XNG plan.
Omkostningerne for begge faciliteter omfattede et forudbetalt (upfront) gebyr, et forpligtelsesgebyr, en margin og et exitgebyr.
SAS thus requested an extension of the old RCF together with the introduction of the new RCF supported by the States and KAW.
SAS skulle opfylde en række betingelser for at kunne trække på RCF'en, og disse betingelser var noget strengere for facilitet B end for facilitet A [19].
However, SAS argued that neither the old RCF (as extended) nor the new RCF would be drawn.
Denne sikkerhed var værdiansat til 2,7 mia. SEK(dvs. omkring 75 % af den nye RCF) og var forholdsmæssigt fordelt på facilitet A og facilitet B.
Discussions on the new RCF commenced on 4 June 2012 [17].
Der kunne først trækkes på facilitet B, når facilitet A var helt opbrugt.
Initially, in line with the Recapitalisation Plan (see paragraph 18 above), the banks that were lenders of the old RCF required that the States provide another round of equity, e.g. a rights issue, since they were unwilling to support a new RCF on their own.
Efter 1. januar 2014 ville SAS kun kunne trække på den nye RCF, hvis salget af aktiver eller aktier i Widerøe blev afsluttet.
However, the States rejected this idea.
Den nye RCF skulle udløbe den 31. marts 2015.
After some negotiations, the banks accepted a new RCF that would be set up jointly with the States and KAW and would be structured strictly on equal terms without subordination or disproportionate rights to security.
Staterne indsendte en rapport udarbejdet af CITI af 7. november 2012 (»CITI-rapporten«), hvori det blev vurderet, om en privat investor i en situation, der ligger så tæt som muligt på staternes situation, kunne have indgået den nye RCF på lignende vilkår og betingelser.
It must be noted that the new RCF was initially targeted to be SEK [3-6] billion in size, while only SEK [1-4] billion of available security existed.
Den 19. december 2012 meddelte SAS, at alle de nødvendige betingelser for etablering af den nye RCF var opfyldt — se (26) ovenfor — herunder staternes godkendelse.
On 22 October 2012, the size of the new RCF was finally reduced to SEK 3,5 billion (approximately EUR 400 million).
Den nye RCF erstattede således den gamle RCF fra denne dato og indtil den 3. marts 2014 [20].
The new RCF was provided by the same banks that provided the old RCF (except one) [18] together with the States and KAW.
Ved brev af 6. juni 2013 meddelte Norge, at staterne og udlånsbankerne på baggrund af salget af 80 % af aktierne i Widerøe (betragtning 20 ovenfor) havde indgået en aftale med SAS om ændring af vilkårene og betingelserne for den nye RCF, selv om den ændrede aftale endnu ikke var blevet formelt underskrevet.
In this regard, 50 % of the new RCF was provided by the States in proportion to their shareholding in SAS, and the remaining 50 % was provided by the banks and KAW.
Facilitet A ville blive reduceret fra 1,173 mia. SEK til 0,8 mia. SEK, og dens løbetid ville blive forlænget med fem måneder indtil 1. juni 2014.
The States and KAW participated in the new RCF on the same terms (fees, interest rates, covenants) as the banks.
0,2 mia. SEK i facilitet A ville blive annulleret, når først groundhandlingafdelingen var delvis afhændet.
It was divided into two sub-facilities of SEK 2 billion (Facility A) and SEK 1,5 billion (Facility B), in respect of which the States contributed 50 % of the value.
På det tidspunkt, hvor den nye RCF blev annulleret den 4. marts 2014, havde SAS fremsat en hensigtserklæring med en potentiel køber [21].Facilitet B ville blive reduceret fra 1,5 mia. SEK til 1,2 mia. SEK.
The pricing conditions for both facilities included an up-front fee, a commitment fee, a utilisation fee, a margin and an exit fee.
GRUNDLAG FOR INDLEDNING AF DEN FORMELLE UNDERSØGELSESPROCEDURE
SAS needed to satisfy certain conditions to be able to draw on the RCF, and these conditions were tighter for Facility B than for Facility A [19].
Tilsynsmyndigheden udtrykte i sin indledningsbeslutning tvivl om, hvorvidt staternes, KAW's og bankernes deltagelse fandt sted på lige vilkår (pari passu) i den nye RCF, på grund af følgende:
The new RCF continued the security package of the old RCF and in addition the lenders were granted security over all shares in Widerøe and all other unencumbered fixed assets of the SAS Group as of December 2012.
Bankerne havde således næsten halveret deres bidrag til den nye RCF og dermed reduceret deres samlede eksponering mod SAS med omkring 50 % i forbindelse med RCF, hvorimod staterne — der ikke havde fået noget afkast af fortegningsretsemissionerne i 2009 og 2010 på grund af SAS' vedvarende negative resultater — havde øget deres eksponering mod SAS
These securities were valued with a book value of approximately SEK 2,7 billion (i.e. approximately 75 % of the new RCF) and were shared pro rata between Facility A and Facility B.
Tilsynsmyndigheden stillede spørgsmålstegn ved, om KAW's deltagelse kunne sammenlignes med en privat investors deltagelse, eftersom KAW allerede var eksponeret mod SAS, ikke kun gennem sin aktieandel, men også via banken SEB.
The terms of the new RCF were agreed upon on 25 October 2012.
Tilsynsmyndigheden stillede desuden spørgsmålstegn ved, om staternes deltagelse i den nye RCF kunne anses for at være rationel ud fra et aktionærsynspunkt, og om den ville opfylde kriteriet om den markedsøkonomiske investor, hvis der blev set bort fra pari passu-argumentet.
It was, however, subject, inter alia, to parliamentary approvals for each of the States and the signing of union agreements with flight deck and cabin crew.
I den forbindelse undersøgte Tilsynsmyndigheden, om forudsætningerne for 4XNG-planen var tilstrækkeligt solide til at få en privat investor til at deltage i den nye RCF, og om følsomhedsanalyserne i planen ikke var for optimistiske.
The States submitted a report prepared by CITI dated 7 November 2012 (‘the CITI report’) which sought to assess whether a private investor in a situation as close as possible to that of the States may have entered into the new RCF on similar terms and conditions.
Tilsynsmyndigheden påpegede også, at CITI-rapporten ikke vurderede sikkerheden bag den nye RCF ud fra den private markedsøkonomiske investors perspektiv, og at den ikke tog hensyn til konsekvenserne af mulige alternative scenarier baseret på mindre optimistiske antagelser (herunder misligholdelse) i afkastanalysen.
The CITI report concluded that the return required by the States would thus be at least equal to that required by private investors in a similar position.
I den forbindelse bemærkede Tilsynsmyndigheden, at det i CITI-rapporten anførtes, at sandsynligheden for, at SAS ville misligholde lånet inden for de næste tre år, var lig nul, hvilket forekom at være en undervurdering af risikoen.
However, the CITI report did not assess the probability of SAS successfully executing the ‘base case’ of the 4XNG plan, nor did it assess the impact of deviations from the ‘base case’ such as, for example, a failure to monetise non-core assets.
I lyset af ovenstående kunne Tilsynsmyndigheden ikke udelukke, at staternes deltagelse i den nye RCF ville kunne være en fordel for SAS. jf. EØS-aftalens artikel 61, stk. 1.
SAS announced on 19 December 2012 that all the necessary conditions for the new RCF to enter into force (see paragraph 26 above) were in place, including parliamentary approval in the States.
Hvis den nye RCF skulle medføre statsstøtte i EØS-aftalens betydning, tvivlede Tilsynsmyndigheden også på, om den nye RCF ville kunne anses for at være forenelig med EØS-aftalen.
As of this date and until 3 March 2014, the new RCF was effective, replacing the old RCF [20].
I den forbindelse vurderede Tilsynsmyndigheden, om der var nogle af de mulige grunde til foreneligheden, som er fastlagt i EØS-aftalen, der kunne gøres gældende.
By letter of 6 June 2013, Norway explained that, as a result of the sale of 80 % of Widerøe's shares (paragraph 20 above), the States and the lending banks had agreed with SAS to a modification of the terms and conditions of the new RCF, although the amendment agreement had not yet been formally signed.
I betragtning af foranstaltningens art og SAS' vanskeligheder bemærkede Tilsynsmyndigheden, at de eneste relevante kriterier syntes at være dem, der vedrørte støtte til redning og omstrukturering af kriseramte virksomheder i henhold til EØS-aftalens artikel 61, stk. 3, litra c), på grundlag af Tilsynsmyndighedens retningslinjer for statsstøtte til redning og omstrukturering af kriseramte virksomheder [22].
In its comments submitted during the formal investigation, the Norwegian authorities informed the Authority that the modification of the new RCF was signed by all parties and would enter into force when the Widerøe transaction was closed, i.e. on 30 September 2013.
Tilsynsmyndigheden kom dog til den foreløbige konklusion, at betingelserne for redning og omstrukturering i disse retningslinjer ikke syntes at være opfyldt.
These modifications included the following:
BEMÆRKNINGER TIL BESLUTNINGEN OM AT INDLEDE UNDERSØGELSESPROCEDUREN
Facility A would be reduced from SEK 1,173 billion to SEK 0,8 billion and its maturity would be extended for five months until 1 June 2014.
Bemærkninger fra de norske myndigheder
SAS would pledge SEK [0,5-0,8] billion in cash as security for Facility A. The remaining SEK [0,1-0,4] billion would be secured by the securities already listed in the new RCF agreement.
Norge fastholder, at statens deltagelse i den nye RCF skete på markedsbetingelser, da den deltog på lige vilkår med bankerne og KAW, hvilket udelukkede tilstedeværelsen af statsstøtte.
SEK 0,2 billion of Facility A would be cancelled once the ground handling section was partly disposed of.
Norge hævder, at SAS ikke havde trukket på den gamle RCF på noget som helst tidspunkt i den periode, hvor der foregik forhandlinger om den nye RCF.
By the time the new RCF was cancelled on 4 March 2014, SAS had entered into a letter of intent with a potential buyer [21].Facility B would be reduced from SEK 1,5 billion to SEK 1,2 billion.
Den peger på ændringerne i den gamle RCF i marts 2012, hvor der blev indført endnu strengere betingelser for trækning, og hævder, at bankerne dermed fra udgangen af juni 2012 kunne forkaste enhver anmodning fra SAS om at kunne trække på RCF'en.
GROUNDS FOR OPENING THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION
Det beløb, der blev trukket på RCF'en, blev tilbagebetalt fuldt ud af SAS i marts 2012, og SAS havde ikke trukket på den gamle RCF efter denne dato.
In its opening decision, the Authority expressed doubts as regards the pari passu participation of the States, KAW and the banks in the new RCF mainly because of the following:
Resultatet var, at disse banker med rimelighed kunne betragtes som investorer udefra, der deltog i den nye RCF på samme vilkår som staterne [23] uden at have nogen væsentlig usikret eksponering mod SAS [24].
The banks' previous exposure to SAS through their participation in the old RCF.
Desuden holder Norge fast ved, at 4XNG-planen var realistisk, og at den ville kunne gennemføres.
The fact that SAS had drawn the old RCF completely in January 2012 which could have influenced the decision of the lending banks to participate in the new RCF, so as to avoid any further drawdown and ensure that their RCF contributions were not completely lost in view of the difficulties of the company.
Norge understreger også, at da der skulle træffes beslutning om at deltage i den nye RCF, var forventningen om en vellykket gennemførelse af planen baseret på, at der skulle indgås nye fagforeningsaftaler som en forudsætning for den nye RCF.
It was unclear to the Authority whether the banks' decision to participate in the new RCF was influenced by the States' continuous financial support to SAS in previous years.
Endvidere viste udviklingen fra december 2012 til annulleringen af den nye RCF ifølge Norge, at planene var på vej til at give de forventede resultater [26].
The Authority also noted that the involvement of the States was a strict requirement for the private operators to participate in the new RCF.
Med hensyn til vilkårene og betingelserne i den nye RCF, så hævder Norge, at de var i overensstemmelse med normale markedsvilkår, da de var de samme som i lignende aftaler, og den nye RCF havde også højere forudbetalte gebyrer og strengere betingelser for trækning end de fleste analyserede aftaler.
The Authority questioned whether KAW's participation in the new RCF could be compared to that of a private investor, given KAW's exposure to SAS not only through its shareholding but also via the bank SEB.
Hvad angår værdipapirporteføljen, så gør Norge gældende, at de faktiske finansielle risici for udlånsbankerne var ubetydelige, fordi værdipapirerne havde en anslået værdi, som klart lå over facilitet A's størrelse.
The Authority further questioned whether or not the participation of the States in the new RCF could be considered rational from a shareholder perspective and would fulfil the market economy investor (‘MEI’) test outside the pari passu line of reasoning.
Derfor vil alle udlånsbankernes krav i tilfælde af afvikling blive godtgjort gennem værdipapirporteføljen eller gennem andre af SAS' aktiver, som kan sælges, for eksempel […], dens aktieandel i […], osv.
In this respect, the Authority assessed whether or not the 4XNG plan relied on sufficiently robust assumptions to induce a private investor to participate in the new RCF, and whether the sensitivity analyses carried out in the plan were overly optimistic.
Endelig meddeler Norge, at deltagelsen i den nye RCF har genereret et betydeligt afkast for RCF-långivere, uden at SAS skulle trække på faciliteten.
For example, the Authority pointed, inter alia, towards the optimistic figures in the plan concerning market growth in ASK and GDP, as well as the 0 % inflation rate for the period 2015-17.
Det kan understøtte det synspunkt, at staternes deltagelse i den nye RCF sammen med KAW og bankerne var fuldt ud i overensstemmelse med princippet om den markedsøkonomiske investor.
Likewise, it doubted whether the successful implementation of all of the cost-savings and asset disposal initiatives could have been predicted at the time of signing the new RCF.
Bemærkninger fra SAS Group
As regards the terms and conditions of the new RCF and CITI's assessment of the anticipated return from the States' participation in the new RCF, the Authority underlined the fact that the CITI report did not assess the 4XNG plan nor did it perform a sensitivity analysis of the financial model, but it merely relied on the information provided to it.
SAS Group hævder, at staterne deltog i den nye RCF i deres egenskab af aktionærer, ikke som offentlige myndigheder.
The Authority also highlighted that the CITI report did not value the new RCF security from a private market investor perspective and that it did not consider the impact of possible alternative scenarios with less favourable assumptions (including default) on the return analysis.
Ud fra dette perspektiv var deltagelse i et sådant instrument at foretrække frem for en kapitaltilførsel på grund af den betydelige generering af afkast til aktionærerne/långiverne i form af gebyrer og den potentielle forøgelse af aktiernes værdi.
In this respect, the Authority noted that the CITI report assigned a zero probability to the likelihood that SAS would default in the next three years, which seemed an underestimation of the risk.
Hvad angår princippet om lige vilkår (pari passu), så gør SAS Group gældende, at dette var opfyldt, eftersom bankerne ikke havde nogen eksponering mod SAS, og at de derfor skulle behandles som investorer udefra.
In view of the above, the Authority could not exclude that the States' participation in the new RCF could entail an advantage in favour of SAS within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Desuden påvirkede staternes deltagelse i den nye RCF ikke bankernes adfærd, da det var SAS og ikke bankerne, som ønskede, at aktionærerne skulle gå med i den nye RCF.
Finally, if the new RCF was to entail State aid within the meaning of the EEA Agreement, the Authority doubted whether the new RCF could be regarded as compatible with the EEA Agreement.
Endvidere fastholder SAS Group, at bankerne besluttede at deltage i den nye RCF på samme vilkår som staterne og KAW på grund af de meget optimistiske resultater i vurderingen af risici og afkast.
In this respect, the Authority assessed whether any of the possible compatibility grounds laid down in the EEA Agreement would be applicable.
SAS Group støtter også Norges påstand om, at de antagelser, der lå til grund for 4XNG-planen, var solide med meget realistiske prognoser for de tre vigtigste elementer, nemlig markedsvækst i ASK, vækst i BNP i perioden 2015-2017 og en antaget inflation på 0 %.
In view of the nature of the measure and of the difficulties of SAS, the Authority noted that the only relevant criteria appeared to be those concerning aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty under Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement on the basis of the Authority's guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty [22] (‘the R&R Guidelines’).
De risici, der var forbundet med gennemførelsen af planen, blev gennemgået nøje af alle udlånsbankerne især hvad angår RASK, som er en nøgleindikator for selskabets rentabilitet.
However, the Authority came to the preliminary conclusion that the conditions for rescue and restructuring aid laid down in the R&R Guidelines did not seem to be met.
Samtidig hævdede SAS Group, at værdipapirporteføljen var blevet tilstrækkeligt vurderet, og at der ikke var stor risiko for, at SAS ikke skulle overholde sin forpligtelse til at gennemføre 4XNG-planen.
COMMENTS ON THE OPENING DECISION
SAS Group kritiserer desuden Tilsynsmyndigheden for ikke at have taget hensyn til konkursmuligheden og det forhold, at staterne ville have mistet værdien af deres aktieandel, hvis den nye RCF ikke havde været tilgængelig.
Norway maintains that its participation in the new RCF was on market terms since it participated in it pari passu with the banks and KAW, thereby excluding the presence of State aid.
I den forbindelse understreger SAS Group, at staterne deltog i den nye RCF i deres egenskab af hovedaktionærer i SAS med det formål at opnå et passende afkast på deres investeringer.
Norway argues that SAS did not draw on the old RCF at any time during the period in which negotiations on the new RCF took place.
Endelig anfører SAS Group, at der med gennemførelsen af 4XNG-planen blev opnået et provenu før skat på 3 mia. SEK, hvilket gav SAS et positivt resultat i perioden fra november 2012 til juli 2013.
It notes the amendments to the old RCF in March 2012 introducing even more stringent drawdown conditions and argues that the banks were thus in a position from the end of June 2012 to reject any drawdown request from SAS.
Ifølge FAM, som er det selskab, der er ansvarligt for forvaltningen af KAW's aktiver, blev sidstnævntes beslutning om at deltage i den nye RCF truffet uden hensyntagen til fondens interesser i SEB og SEB's eksponering mod SAS.
As a result, those banks could be reasonably considered as ‘outside’ investors participating in the new RCF on equal terms with the States [23], without having any material unsecured exposure to SAS [24].
FAM hævder, at KAW ikke havde aktiemajoriteten i SEB, og at den heller ikke kunne siges at have kontrollen i SEB.
Concerning KAW's participation in the new RCF together with the banks, the Norwegian authorities are of the opinion that KAW had limited economic exposure to SEB and that this could not have affected its decision to participate in the new RCF.
FAM gennemgik 4XNG-planen, de hertil knyttede finansielle risici og værdipapirporteføljen og vurderede, at det var i KAW's interesse at deltage i den nye RCF.
Moreover, Norway holds that the 4XNG plan was realistic and that it could be successfully implemented.
I den forbindelse sammenlignede den udsigten til at beskytte KAW's langfristede investering i SAS og kommende mulige afkast af denne investering samt de høje gebyrer, som ville skulle betales af SAS under den nye RCF, med afviklingen af SAS, som den ikke anså for at være en økonomisk interessant option.
It maintains that all aspects and assumptions, including those concerning revenue projections (‘RASK’) [25], cost-saving measures and planned disposals, were carefully examined to satisfy the financial targets in the 4XNG plan for 2014-15.
FAM er også enig med Norge og SAS Group i, at alle interessenter deltog i den nye RCF på samme vilkår uden nogen form for underordning, uforholdsmæssige rettigheder over værdipapirer eller på anden måde asymmetriske vilkår.
Further, the 4XNG plan — together with all of the assumptions it relied upon — was closely scrutinised by the external financial advisers of both the States (Goldman Sachs) and the banks […] and was adapted in view of their comments and recommendations.