natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
the price charged for the airport services corresponds to the market price, or
Ebapiisavate andmete tõttu oleks praktikas väga raske hinnata keskmist ajavahemikku, mille jooksul kliente pärast AMSi kampaaniat säilitatakse”.
it can be demonstrated through an ex ante analysis, namely an analysis based on the data which would have been available at the moment the measures in question were decided, that the airport/airline arrangement could be expected to lead to a positive incremental profit contribution for the airport [100].
31. jaanuari 2014. aasta uuringus tehakse rahavoogude meetodi praktilise kohaldamise ettepanek.
In addition, according to the 2014 Aviation Guidelines, ‘when assessing airport/airline arrangements, the Commission will also take into account the extent to which the arrangements under assessment can be considered part of the implementation of an overall strategy of the airport expected to lead to profitability at least in the long term.’ [101].
Selle meetodi puhul väljendatakse turundusteenuste lepingute ja lennujaamateenuste lepingute tulusid, mis kestavad pärast turundusteenuste lepingu lõppemist, jääkväärtusena ning see arvutatakse lepingu lõppemise kuupäeval.
As concerns the first approach mentioned at recital 398 (comparison of the price charged for airport services with the market price), the Commission has strong doubts that an appropriate benchmark can be defined so as to establish the market value of the services provided by airports.
Jääkväärtus arvutatakse lennujaama lisakasumist (millest on maha arvatud AMSi maksed) lennujaamateenuste lepingu viimasel aastal, korrigeerituna nii, et selles võetakse arvesse Euroopa lennutranspordi kasvumäära ja tõenäosustegurit, mis on mõeldud peegeldama lennujaamateenuste lepingu ja turundusteenuste lepingu suutlikkust tuua lennujaamale kasumit pärast nende lepingute lõppemist.
At present the Commission considers ex ante incremental profitability analysis to be the most relevant criterion for the assessment of arrangements concluded by airports with individual airlines [102].
Sama meetodit, jääkväärtuse arvutamist on 2014. aasta turumajanduse tingimustes tegutseva ettevõtja põhimõtte hindamise aruandes soovitanud ka Itaalia (vt põhjendus 471).
It is worth noting in this sense that in general the application of the MEOP in reference to an average price observed on comparable markets may be reliable to the extent a market price may be identified or deducted from other market indicators.
31. jaanuari 2014. aasta uuringu kohaselt oleneb pikaajaliste tulude loomise suutlikkus eri teguritest, „sealhulgas paremast nähtavusest ja tugevamast kaubamärgist ning ka võrgu välismõjudest ja korduvreisijatest”, kuigi nende tegurite kohta pole üksikasju esitatud.
Indeed, the structure of costs and revenues tend to differ quite significantly from one airport to another.
Uuringus aga ei esitata selle teguri kohta tõsiselt võetavaid tõendeid, ei kvalitatiivseid ega kvantitatiivseid.
Those costs and revenues depend on the development of the airport, the state of the airport infrastructure, the number or aid carriers operating at the airport, the airport's capacity, the regulatory framework at national level, which may be different from one Member State to another, as well as the deficits and obligations incurred by the airport in the past.
Ka ei tugineta ühelegi Ryanairi tegevusega, lennutranspordi turuga ega lennujaamateenustega seotud asjaolule, millega seda 30 % määra põhjendada.
Moreover, the liberalisation of the air transport market complicates any purely comparative analysis.
Uuringus ei seostata ühelgi viisil seda määra ja möödaminnes nimetatud tegureid (nähtavus, tugev kaubamärk, võrgu välismõjud ja korduvreisijad), mis peaksid pikendama lennujaamateenuste lepingu ja turundusteenuste lepingust saadavat tulu nii, et see püsiks ka pärast lepingute lõppemist.
As can be seen in this case, commercial practices between airports and airlines are not always based exclusively on a published schedule of charges.
Viimaks, analüüsides, millises ulatuses võiksid need teenused mõjutada põhjenduses 444 nimetatud tegureid, ei tugine uuring ühelgi viisil AMSiga sõlmitud mitme turundusteenuste lepingu konkreetsele sisule.
Rather, these commercial relations are very varied.
Lisaks ei tõendata selles mis tahes tõenäosuse olemasolu, et lennujaamateenuste lepingu ja turundusteenuste lepingu lõppemisel püsivad kõnealuste lepingutega nende kehtivuse viimasel aastal lennujaama käitajale loodud tulud ka tulevikus.
They include sharing risks with regard to passenger traffic and any related commercial and financial liability, standard incentive schemes and adapting the spread of risks during the term of the agreements.
Samamoodi ei tõendata selles, et Euroopa lennutranspordi turu kasvumäär on kasulik näitaja lennujaamateenuste lepingu ja turundusteenuste lepingu mõju mõõtmiseks kõnealuse lennujaama puhul.
Consequently, one transaction cannot easily be compared with another based on a turnaround price or price per passenger.
Seega oleks äärmiselt ebatõenäoline, et otsustades, kas sõlmida leping või mitte, võtaks turumajanduse tingimustes tegutsev arukas ettevõtja arvesse Ryanairi ja Itaalia soovitatud meetodil arvutatud jääkväärtust.
In the course of the investigation Ryanair has claimed that in order to exclude an economic advantage that would not be obtained under normal market conditions the charges in the agreements with the airlines operating at Alghero airport have to be compared with charges paid by Ryanair at similar airports over an appropriate timeframe.
31. jaanuari 2014. aasta uuringust nähtub niisiis, et rahavoogude meetod viiks üksnes väga ebakindlate ja ebausaldusväärsete tulemusteni, nagu ka kapitaliseerimismeetod.
[…] Airports have been selected by Ryanair as the most relevant comparators for the purposes of this analysis [103].
Pealegi on turundusteenused selgelt suunatud isikutele, kes tõenäoliselt kasutavad turundusteenuste lepinguga hõlmatud liini.
[…] is ultimately owned by […], which is in turn owned by various local authorities from the […] area.
Kui seda liini pärast lennujaamateenuste lepingu lõppemist ei uuendata, on ebatõenäoline, et turundusteenustel on pärast lõppkuupäeva ka edaspidi soodne mõju lennujaama reisiliiklusele.
Ryanair noted that […]'s annual reports do not provide any indication of State funding, and that the airport has made profits every year since at least […].
Lennujaama käitajal on väga raske hinnata tõenäosust, kas lennuettevõtja jätkab liini käitamist pärast ajavahemikku, mille jooksul ta on lennujaamateenuste lepingus kohustunud seda tegema.
Ryanair's operations at […] Airport started in […].
Eelkõige on odavlennufirmad näidanud, et mis puutub liinide avamisse ja sulgemisse, reageerivad nad väga valmilt turutingimustele, mis enamasti muutuvad väga kiiresti.
The airport has consistently been privately owned, which in Ryanair's view would suggest that the airport can be used as a comparator in the application of the MEO test.
Näiteks praegusel juhul teatas Itaalia, et Germanwings otsustas lõpetada lennud Alghero lennujaamast vaid ühe tegutsemisaasta järel ning seega ei kestnud tema leping ettevõtjaga So.Ge.A.AL kogu oma kehtivusaja (lennuettevõtja oli sõlminud lennujaamaga kolmeaastase lepingu), sest ta ei suutnud kulude tasa teenimiseks saavutada piisavalt suuri liiklusmahte.
According to Ryanair, the results from comparing the data on charges paid by Ryanair at Alghero airport with charges at comparable airports are mixed.
Samuti nähtub juhtumi toimikus olevatest dokumentidest, et Ryanair oli oma reisid Alghero lennujaamast vähemalt ühel korral (2009) ümber hinnanud.
If it is assumed that no municipal tax is returned to the region, the charges payable by Ryanair at Alghero airport are, on average, lower than those at comparators on both a per-passenger and a per-aircraft basis.
Seega ei arvaks turumajanduse tingimustes tegutsev arukas ettevõtja vaadeldava tehingu tegemisel, et lennuettevõtja jätkab kõnealuse liini käitamist ka pärast lepingu lõppemist.
However, if it is assumed that a proportion of the municipal tax — specifically, 66 %, based on information provided by Ryanair — is returned to the region, average charges paid by Ryanair at Alghero airport are higher than at those paid at […] Airport, although still lower than those paid at […] Airport.
Viimaks, aga sama olulisena märgib komisjon, et seda jääkväärtuse arvesse võtmise meetodit, mida Itaalia kasutas 2006. ja 2010. aasta lepingute kasumlikkuse eelanalüüsi tagantjärele koostamisel, ei kohaldanud Itaalia teiste lennujaamas tegutsevate lennuettevõtjatega sõlmitud lepingute kasumlikkuse kaalumisel, kuigi neil on lennujaama käitajaga sõlmitud turunduslepingud.
Ryanair suggests that this could be partly explained by the lower GDP in Sardinia, compared with the GDP in […] and […].
Itaalia sellekohased väited tuginevad asjaolule, et muude lennuettevõtjate kui Ryanairi veebisaitide võimalike külastajate arv on märgatavalt väiksem kui saidi ryanair.com külastajate arv.
The Commission agrees that a benchmarking of airport charges cannot be excluded outright as a possible approach to assess the presence of aid to airlines.
Siiski märgib komisjon, et kuni 2006. aastani on So.Ge.A.AL allkirjastanud turunduslepingud Ryanairi, mitte AMSiga.
However, the identification of a benchmark requires that a sufficient number of comparable airports providing comparable services under normal market conditions can be selected.
Ei ole arvestatud, et pärast ettevõtja So.Ge.A.AL ja Ryanairi vahel 2002. ja 2003. aastal sõlmitud turunduslepingute lõppemist saaks jääkväärtust võtta arvesse seoses tulevaste tuludega.
According to paragraph 54 of the 2014 Aviation Guidelines, an appropriate benchmark among airports whose managers behave as MEO has to be identified on the basis of available and relevant market prices.
Kokkuvõtteks on põhjenduste 428–449 alusel selge, et ainus tulu, mida turumajanduse tingimustes tegutsev arukas ettevõtja turundusteenuste lepingust ootaks ja mida ta selle lepingu ja lennujaamateenuste lepingu sõlmimise või sõlmimata jätmise üle otsustades kvantifitseeriks, oleks see, et turundusteenustel oleks soodne mõju kõnealuste lepingutega hõlmatud liine kasutavate reisijate arvule nende liinide käitamisperioodi jooksul, nagu lepingutes sätestatud.
This benchmark should take into account indicators such as traffic volumes, type of traffic, the importance of freight and the relative importance of revenue stemming from the non-aeronautical activities of the airport, type and level of airport services provided, proximity of the airport to a large city, number of inhabitants in the catchment area of the airport, prosperity of the surrounding area (GDP per capita), and the different geographical areas from which passengers could be attracted.
Komisjon arvab, et mis tahes muud tulud on liiga ebakindlad, et neid kvantifitseerida ja arvesse võtta.
In that respect the Commission notes that, even if some airports are privately owned or managed without social or regional considerations, the prices charged by these airports might be strongly influenced by the prices charged by other publicly subsidized airport managers as these latter prices are taken into account by airlines during their negotiations with the privately owned or managed airports.
Lisakulude ja -tulude hindamine
In this case, the Commission notes that Ryanair itself considered that as Alghero airport is located on an island, with not many large cities or airports in proximity, it is difficult to find comparators with nearly identical characteristics.
Pidades silmas põhjendustes 398–450 toodud kaalutlusi, peab komisjon turumajanduse tingimustes tegutseva ettevõtja põhimõtte kohaldamiseks i) analüüsima iga lennujaamateenuste lepingut koos turunduslepingutega, kui neid on, sealhulgas ka juhul, kui kõnealune leping sõlmiti AMSiga, ja ii) määrama kindlaks lisakulud ja -tulud, mida saanuks iga ühistehingu puhul põhjendatult eeldada, võttes arvesse turunduslepingute mõju eeldatavatele täituvusteguritele.
Ryanair further noted that the mixed results of the benchmarking exercise could be explained by the difference in GDP in Sardinia, compared with the GDP in the areas where potential comparator airports are located.
Lepingud Ryanairiga
Finally, the Commission notes that even if reliable comparators were available, a benchmarking exercise would in any event not have been possible in the present case.
Ettevõtja So.Ge.A.AL ja Ryanairi vahel sõlmitud lennujaamateenuste lepingud on esitatud tabelis 7:
Indeed, the arrangements under investigation include airport services and marketing agreements which lay down different ‘prices’, namely different airport charges, handling charges and the marketing fees.
Tabel 7
Some of those charges depend on the number of passengers, some on the number of turnarounds, whilst others are fixed.
Ettevõtja So.Ge.A.AL ja Ryanairi vahel sõlmitud lennujaamateenuste lepingud
Therefore each of those agreements imply complex financial flows between the airport manager and the airlines (and their subsidiaries) operating at the airport, namely airport charges, handling fees and marketing fees.
Leping
Therefore the Commission considers that a comparison between the airport charges charged by So.Ge.A.AL to the airlines operating at Alghero airport with the airport charges payable at comparator airports would not provide any useful indication for the purpose of applying the MEOP.
(allkirjastamise kuupäev)
In order for such a benchmarking exercise to produce reliable results, it would be necessary that at least comparable arrangements are found at the comparator airports, which should include in particular similar marketing payments and handling fees.
Lepingu kohaldamise aeg
Given the specificity and complexity of the arrangements at stake, the Commission considers that such benchmarking exercise cannot be carried out, notably also given that the prices charged for handling services and marketing services are rarely made public and would therefore not be readily available for the purpose of such exercise.
2000. aasta lennujaamateenuste leping
Neither has Ryanair provided such data for the two comparators.
(22. juuni 2000)
In any event, even if it would be assumed that a benchmarking exercise could be carried out with similar arrangements in force at comparable airports, which would lead the Commission to conclude that the ‘prices’ in question are equivalent or even superior to the ‘market price’, the Commission could not conclude on this basis that the arrangements under investigation are market-conform if it would turn out that at the moment the arrangements in question were entered into by the airport manager, the later could have reasonably expected that they would result in incremental costs in excess of incremental revenues.
22. juuni 2000 – 21. juuni 2010
Indeed, a MEO would not have had any interest in offering its goods or services at ‘market price’ if this was expected to result in incremental losses.
2002. aasta lennujaamateenuste leping
Therefore the Commission considers that the airline arrangements at airports put forward by Ryanair as allegedly relevant comparators cannot constitute an appropriate benchmark to establish the market price for services provided by So.Ge.A.AL to the different airlines at Alghero airport.
(25. jaanuar 2002)
In the absence of an identifiable market benchmark, the Commission considers that the ex ante incremental profitability analysis is the relevant criterion for the assessment of arrangements concluded by the airport with individual airlines.
1. jaanuar 2002 – 31. detsember 2012
In this analysis, all the relevant incremental revenues and costs associated with the transaction must be taken into account.
2003. aasta lennujaamateenuste leping
The various elements (discounts to airport charges, marketing grants, other financial incentives) must not be assessed separately.
september 2003)
Indeed, as stated in the Charleroi judgment: ‘It is […] necessary, when applying the private investor test, to envisage the commercial transaction as a whole in order to determine whether the public entity and the entity which is controlled by it, taken together, have acted as rational operators in a market economy.
september 2003 – 1. september 2014
The Commission must, when assessing the measures at issue, examine all the relevant features of the measures and their context […]’ [104].
2006. aasta lennujaamateenuste leping
The expected incremental revenues must include in particular the revenues from airport charges, taking into account the discounts as well as the traffic expected to be generated by the agreement, and the non-aeronautical revenues expected to be generated by the additional traffic.
(3. aprill 2006)
The expected incremental costs must include in particular all the incremental operating and investment costs that would not be incurred absent the agreement such as incremental personnel, equipment and investment costs induced by the presence of the airline at the airport as well as the costs of the marketing grants and other financial incentives.
1. jaanuar 2006 – 31. detsember 2010
On the contrary, costs which the airport would have to incur anyway independently from the arrangement with the airline should not be taken into account in the MEOP assessment.
2010. aasta lennujaamateenuste leping
The Commission also notes in this context that price differentiation (including marketing support and other incentives) is a standard business practice.
(20. oktoober 2010)
There can be various reasons for not offering the same conditions to all airlines.
1. jaanuar 2010 – 31. detsember 2013
In particular, it can be rational to offer specific financial incentives (including in the form of marketing grants) and specific discounts to the published airport charges to airlines that bring a high number of passengers to the airport.
Ükski nendest äriplaanidest ei kuulu aga ettevõtja So.Ge.A.AL ja Alghero lennujaamas tegutsevate lennuettevõtjate või AMSi vahel sõlmitud konkreetse lepingu juurde.
Those favourable conditions can be objectively justified by the expected additional traffic, in view of the non-aeronautical revenues brought about by that additional traffic [105] and also because, even if the margin per passenger generated by the airport charges paid by the airline is reduced by the discounts and financial incentives, this margin may be significant in absolute terms in light of the numbers of passengers at stake.
Lisaks ei hõlma need ettevõtja So.Ge.A.AL ja nende lennuettevõtjate vahel sõlmitud lepingute kogu ajavahemikku.
For the purposes of assessing whether such discounts and financial incentives confer an economic advantage, it must be determined whether, when the airport manager took the decision to offer them, it could reasonably expect this decision to be profitable, or in other words, to lead to a higher profit (or lower losses) than would be achieved in the counterfactual situation.
Nagu eespool osutatud, koostas Itaalia Ryanairiga sõlmitud lepingute kohta tagantjärele kasumlikkuse eelanalüüsid nende lisakulude ja -tulude põhjal, mille tekkimist turumajanduse tingimustes ja So.Ge.A.AL nimel tegutsev ettevõtja võinuks põhjendatult eeldada iga kõnealuse lepingu sõlmimisel uuritava ajavahemiku jooksul, st aastatel 2000–2010, nagu tabelis 8 on kokku võetud.
Besides, the Commission notes that the agreements concluded by So.Ge.A.AL with the airlines operating at the airport were part of the long term strategy of the airport.
Nende analüüside alusel võinuks So.Ge.A.AL põhjendatult eeldada, et Ryanairiga sõlmitud lepingud olid nende sõlmimise ajal lennujaamale kasumlikud.
It is evident from So.Ge.A.AL's business plans (see recitals 59-75) that it relied on low-costs airlines as major growth driver and that it was expected to reverse previous declines and return to viability once it was awarded the comprehensive concession for the management of Alghero airport.
Ettevõtja So.Ge.A.AL 2000. aasta äriplaanis on kasutatud tagantjärele koostatud analüüsi 2000., 2002. ja 2003. aasta lennujaamateenuste lepingu eeldatava kasumlikkuse kohta, samas kui 2006. ja 2010. aasta lennujaamateenuste lepingute tagantjärele koostatud analüüsides on kasutatud 2004. ja 2009. aasta äriplaane.
Therefore, the condition mentioned at recital 399 is satisfied by all contracts under assessment.
Ei ole aga olnud võimalik jõuda järeldusele, et iga Ryanairiga sõlmitud lepinguga seonduvad kõik lisatulud ja -kulud tulenevad ettevõtja So.Ge.A.AL äriplaanidest.
It results from all that precedes that for each agreement under investigation, if it can be established that at the time when it was concluded, a MEO guided by profitability prospects and acting in lieu of So.Ge.A.AL could have expected the future incremental costs to be generated by the agreement to be offset by future incremental revenues, then this agreement complies with the MEOP and does not constitute State aid.
Lisatulude ja -kulude nende kategooriate puhul, mida ei saanud äriplaanidega seostada, tugines Itaalia ettevõtja So.Ge.A.AL ja Ryanairi vahel sõlmitud lepingute lisatulusid käsitlevas analüüsis lennujaamateenuste lepingute ja turunduslepingute sätetele.
On the joint assessment of the ASAs with Ryanair and marketing agreements with AMS
Tabel 8
In the 2012 Decision, the Commission considered that for the purpose of application of the MEOP, the ASAs with Ryanair and the marketing services agreements with Ryanair and AMS and their financial consequences had to be assessed together as one single measure.
Ryanairi lepingute puhul eeldatud rahavoogude nüüdispuhasväärtused –turumajanduse tingimustes tegutseva ettevõtja põhimõtete hindamise 2014. aasta aruanne [108]
Ryanair did not dispute that the marketing agreements concluded directly between Ryanair and So.Ge.A.AL in 2002 and 2003 should be assessed together with the 2002 and 2003 ASAs.
NPV lepingu kestuse ajal (miljonit eurot) [109]
However, Ryanair rejected the preliminary conclusion of the Commission that Ryanair and AMS must be considered as a single entity and a given ASA entered into by So.Ge.A.AL and Ryanair, and a marketing service agreement entered into by So.Ge.A.AL and AMS at the same time should be assessed jointly for the purpose of assessment of the existence of an economic advantage.
2000. aasta lennujaamateenuste leping
According to Ryanair, the ASAs concluded with Ryanair and the marketing services agreements concluded with AMS would be separate and independent, they would relate to different services and would not be subject to any contractual or other link between them justifying their consideration as a single set of measures.
2002. aasta lennujaamateenuste leping
That view was supported by AMS.
Eeldused, mida võeti arvesse tagantjärele koostatud kasumlikkuse analüüsis, on üksikasjalikult esitatud põhjendustes 459–471.
In that sense, the Commission notes that there are several indications clearly pointing towards the fact that the agreements are to be evaluated as one single measure since they were concluded within the framework of a single transaction.
i.
First, the agreements were concluded by the same parties at the same time:
Lennundustulud
For the purpose of the application of State aid rules, AMS and Ryanair are considered to be a single undertaking, in the sense that AMS acts in the interest and under the control of Ryanair.
Itaalia võttis arvesse erinevaid lennundustulude kategooriaid, eelkõige sellistest tasudest saadud tulusid nagu maandumis-, maapealse käitluse tasud ja piletimüük.
For the present agreements, this can also be inferred from the fact that the respective marketing agreement states in its preamble that ‘AMS has the exclusive license to offer marketing services on the travel website www.ryanair.com, the website of the Irish low fares airline Ryanair.’
Kui saadaval olid lennujaamateenuste lepingutes sätestatud tasud, siis kasutati neid.
Therefore, if So.Ge.A.AL intended to promote a Ryanair destination and the surrounding regions, then this can only be done via AMS;
Lennujaamateenuste lepingutes määratlemata tasude puhul põhinesid eeldused Ryanairi esitatud arveandmetel.