natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It also considers that, for the purposes of applying the market economy investor principle, certain European airports are substitutable for Angoulême airport because of their similarities.
Stoga smatra da, za potrebe primjene načela ulagača u tržišnom gospodarstvu, određene europske zračne luke, zbog svoje sličnosti, mogu zamijeniti Zračnu luku Angoulême.
In this regard, Ryanair submits a comparative study which concludes that the airport charges levied by […], […], […] and […] airports, which are comparable to Angoulême airport, are on average lower than the charges at Angoulême airport.
U tom pogledu, Ryanair je proveo usporednu studiju sa zaključkom da su naknade Zračnih luka […], […], […] i […], usporedive s naknadama Zračne luke Angoulême, prosječno manje od onih Zračne luke Angoulême.
Airports comparable to Angoulême airport
Zračne luke usporedive sa Zračnom lukom Angoulême
Airport characteristics compared
Usporedna obilježja zračnih luka
Population of the airport town
Broj stanovnika povezanog grada
Distance to the town (kilometres)
Udaljenost od grada (u km)
Largest city within 150 km (population)
Najveći grad u krugu od 150 km (broj stanovnika)
Closest large airport (passengers in 2009)
Najbliža velika zračna luka (broj putnika u 2009.)
(3 300 000)
(3,3 milijuna)
(1 800 000)
(1,8 milijuna)
(7 700 000)
(7,7 milijuna)
(2 800 000)
(2,8 milijuna)
(19 000 000)
(19 milijuna)
Ryanair also states that the choices made by Angoulême airport after it had closed the route to London Stansted were such as to establish that the airport considered that a scheduled commercial service to the United Kingdom operated by a low-cost carrier was a credible solution.
Ryanair tvrdi i da su izbori Zračne luke Angoulême nakon što je ukinuta linija sa Zračnom lukom London Stansted bili takvi da se moglo utvrditi da je Zračna luka smatrala da je redovna komercijalna usluga, kojom bi upravljao niskotarifni prijevoznik u smjeru Ujedinjene Kraljevine, vjerodostojno rješenje.
In this connection, it refers to the agreement concluded with SNC-Lavalin, which had a mandate to introduce an aggressive development scenario.
U tom se pogledu poziva na Ugovor sklopljen s društvom SNC-Lavalin ovlaštenim za provođenje scenarija agresivnog razvoja.
Moreover, Ryanair argues that a guaranteed level of passengers, such as the one it committed itself to, would limit the economic risk taken by an airport.
Nadalje, Ryanair smatra da je cilj zajamčene razine putnika, poput one na koju se obvezao Ryanair, bio ograničiti gospodarski rizik Zračne luke.
As a result, the guarantee justifies a lower level of profitability than would be required by a private investor without the benefit of that clause.
Stoga je tim jamstvom opravdana manja razina profitabilnosti od razine koju bi zahtijevao privatni ulagač koji ne primjenjuje tu klauzulu.
Ryanair also notes that the ‘single till’ approach explains why an airport seeks to maximise its revenues by reducing the level of its airport charges.
Ryanair navodi i da je pristupom poznatim kao „jedna blagajna” objašnjeno zašto Zračna luka želi svoje prihode povećati smanjivanjem razine troškova zračne luke.
Ryanair therefore challenges the assessment that a negative price cannot be a market price.
Stoga Ryanair osporava ocjenu prema kojoj negativna cijena ne može biti tržišna cijena.
It believes that a negative airport charge may be consistent with the market economy investor principle if the expected level of non-aeronautical revenues is sufficiently high.
Smatra da negativna razina naknade zračne luke može biti u skladu s načelom ulagača u tržišnom gospodarstvu ako je predviđena razina nezrakoplovnih prihoda dovoljno visoka.
In this case, Ryanair takes the view that a private investor could reasonably assume that the non-aeronautical revenues, which were zero, would develop as a result of the traffic that it could generate.
U tom slučaju, Ryanair smatra da je privatni ulagač mogao razumno pretpostaviti da će se nezrakoplovni prihodi, kojih nije bilo, razviti na temelju prometa koji je Ryanair mogao ostvariti.
It argues that this approach is bolstered by the specificity of the situation of Angoulême airport.
Ryanair smatra da je taj pristup opravdan posebnom situacijom u kojoj se nalazi Zračna luka Angoulême.
It judges that a market economy investor should regard infrastructure costs and fixed operating costs as sunk costs.
Ryanair tvrdi da bi ulagač u tržišnom gospodarstvu trebao infrastrukturne i fiksne operativne troškove smatrati nepovratnima.
That is all the more so in this case since Angoulême airport was likely to suffer from competition with the TGV high-speed train.
To se u ovom slučaju još više primjenjuje jer je Zračnoj luci Angoulême mogao konkurirati vlak velikih brzina TGV.
Moreover, Ryanair maintains that if the closure of the airport had been another option, the market value of the assets net of closure costs would not have been significant.
Nadalje, Ryanair smatra da, kad bi zatvaranje Zračne luke bila jedna od mogućnosti, neto tržišna vrijednost imovine troškova zatvaranja ne bi bila znatna.
These sunk costs should therefore be ignored.
Prema mišljenju društva Ryanair, ti bi nepovratni troškovi trebali biti zanemareni.
Furthermore, bearing in mind that Ryanair undertook to guarantee a minimum level of traffic, failing which it could face penalties, it considers that any commercial offer represents an improvement on the situation of an airport with the characteristics of Angoulême airport.
Usto, uzevši u obzir da se obvezao osigurati najmanju razinu prometa pod prijetnjom sankcija, Ryanair smatra da sve komercijalne ponude predstavljaju poboljšanje situacije zračne luke koja ima obilježja kao i Zračna luka Angoulême.
The only condition is that its marginal revenues should be higher than its marginal costs, which would differentiate the situation of Angoulême airport from that analysed by the Court of Justice in the Chronopost judgment.
Jedini je uvjet da su granični prihodi viši od graničnih troškova, po čemu bi se situacija Zračne luke Angoulême razlikovala od situacije koju je Sud analizirao u presudi Chronopost.
Consequently, Ryanair states that, in this case, a private investor in a market economy would not necessarily seek a return on investment in the case of existing infrastructure.
Prema tome, Ryanair tvrdi da, u ovom slučaju, privatni ulagač u tržišnom gospodarstvu ne bi nužno tražio povrat ulaganja s obzirom na to da je riječ o već postojećoj infrastrukturi.
According to Ryanair, nor would such an investor require the contracting airline to participate in covering the operating costs incurred before the agreement was concluded.
Prema mišljenju društva Ryanair, takav ulagač ne bi ni od zračnog prijevoznika suugovaratelja zahtijevao da sudjeluje u pokrivanju operativnih troškova nastalih prije ugovora.
Lastly, Ryanair states that the decisions taken by Angoulême airport were not specifically addressed to it.
Naposljetku, Ryanair tvrdi da se odluke koje je donijela Zračna luka Angoulême nisu odnosile posebno na Ryanair.
Such is the case, first of all, with the decisions to adapt Angoulême airport.
To je prije svega slučaj s odlukama čija je svrha prilagoditi Zračnu luku Angoulême.
Most of these investments were carried out before it arrived.
Tako su ulaganja bila uglavnom provedena prije njegova dolaska.
In the same way, it stresses that in many cases the recruitment contracts for members of staff were concluded or extended after it had left.
Na isti način, Ryanair naglašava da su u brojnim slučajevima ugovori o zapošljavanju članova osoblja bili sklopljeni ili produljeni nakon njegova odlaska.
Those decisions therefore formed part of the wider plan to position Angoulême airport in the low-cost carrier market.
Te su se odluke odnosile na projekt koji je, u širem smislu, obuhvaćao pozicioniranje Zračne luke Angoulême na tržištu niskotarifnih zračnih prijevoznika.
The decisions taken subsequently by SMAC once Ryanair had left, such as the choice of the scenario pursued by SNC-Lavalin, are evidence of this.
Tome svjedoče i odluke koje je SMAC donio nakon odlaska društva Ryanair, poput scenarija koji je nastavilo društvo SNC-Lavalin.
Lastly, Ryanair emphasises that Article 3 of the Airport Services Agreement stipulated that the operating conditions granted to it could be granted to any other airline.
Naposljetku, Ryanair naglašava da je člankom 3. Ugovora o uslugama zračne luke propisano da su se uvjeti poslovanja koji su se primjenjivali na njega mogli primjenjivati na bilo kojeg drugog prijevoznika.
It states that the level of airport charges was in any event published by Angoulême airport.
Uostalom, Ryanair tvrdi da je razinu naknada zračne luke objavila Zračna luka Angoulême.
Comments relating to the payments to AMS
Napomene o isplatama društvu AMS
Ryanair disagrees with the Commission’s preliminary assessment of the payments to AMS as costs to the airport since this approach disregards the value of AMS’s services to the airport.
Ryanair osporava prethodnu ocjenu Komisije prema kojoj isplate društvu AMS predstavljaju troškove Zračne luke, s obzirom na to da tim pristupom nije uzeta u obzir vrijednost usluga koje je AMS pružio Zračnoj luci.
Ryanair further believes that, for the purposes of the market economy operator analysis, the purchase of valuable marketing services at market rates should be considered separately from a related airport-airline contractual arrangement.
Osim toga, Ryanair smatra da za potrebe analize subjekta u tržišnom gospodarstvu, treba razlikovati kupnju marketinških usluga po tržišnim cijenama i dotični Ugovor između Zračne luke i zračnog prijevoznika.
In support, Ryanair submits an analysis of benchmarking prices charged by AMS against prices for comparable services offered by other travel websites.
Kako bi potkrijepio svoju argumentaciju, Ryanair je iznio analizu u kojoj su uspoređene cijene društva AMS i cijene usporedivih usluga na drugim web-mjestima o putovanjima.
The analysis concludes that prices charged by AMS were either lower than the average or within the mid-range of prices charged by comparator websites.
Nakon te analize zaključeno je da su cijene društva AMS bile manje od prosjeka ili da u rasponu cijena utvrđenih na referentnom web-mjestu cijene društva AMS zauzimaju središnju poziciju.
According to Ryanair, this shows that AMS’s prices are in line with market prices and the decision by a public airport to purchase AMS’s services is consistent with the market economy operator test.
Prema mišljenju društva Ryanair, to pokazuje da su cijene društva AMS u skladu s tržišnim cijenama i da je odluka javne zračne luke da kupi usluge tog društva u skladu s kriterijem subjekta u tržišnom gospodarstvu.
Ryanair further provides evidence of the services that are provided to the airports under AMS contracts, with the aim of showing the value of these services to the airports.
Osim toga, Ryanair navodi elemente kako bi dokazao postojanje usluga pruženih zračnim lukama u okviru Ugovora s društvom AMS u svrhu dokazivanja vrijednosti tih usluga za zračne luke.
According to Ryanair, should the Commission, despite its opposition to such an approach, insist on including AMS agreements and Ryanair’s airport services agreements in a single market economy operator test, the value of AMS services to the airport should not be disregarded.
Prema mišljenju društva Ryanair, ako bi, unatoč njegovu protivljenju takvom pristupu, Komisija ustrajala na tome da se ti Ugovori društva AMS i Ugovori o uslugama zračne luke društva Ryanair podvrgnu samo jednom kriteriju subjekta u tržišnom natjecanju, ne bi se trebala podcijeniti vrijednost usluga koje je AMS pružio zračnim lukama.
In addition, Ryanair refers to the conclusions of various reports confirming that it has a strong pan-European brand capable of attracting a premium for its advertising services.
Osim toga, Ryanair se poziva na zaključke raznih izvješća kojima se potvrđuje da on raspolaže jakom paneuropskom markom koja može ostvariti premiju za svoje promidžbene usluge.
Ryanair also submitted a report prepared by Oxera, its economic adviser, concerning the principles that it believes should apply to a market-economy operator profitability test encompassing both the air services agreements concluded between Ryanair and airports and the marketing agreements concluded between AMS and the same airports.
Ryanair je podnio i izvješće svojeg gospodarskog savjetnika Oxera o načelima koja bi se trebala primijeniti na kriterij profitabilnosti subjekta u tržišnom gospodarstvu kojim su istodobno pokriveni Ugovori o uslugama zračne luke sklopljeni između društva Ryanair i zračnih luka te Ugovori o marketinškim uslugama između društva AMS i tih istih zračnih luka.
Ryanair emphasises that this does not prejudice its position that AMS agreements and air services agreements should be subject to separate market-economy operator tests.
Ryanair naglašava da to nikako ne dovodi u pitanje njegovo stajalište prema kojem bi na ugovore društva AMS i ugovore o uslugama zračne luke trebala biti primijenjena odvojena načela u svrhu ocjene kriterija subjekta u tržišnom gospodarstvu.
The report states that AMS-associated income should be included on the revenue side for the purposes of a joint profitability analysis, whereas AMS expenditure should be included on the cost side.
U tom je izvješću navedeno da su prihodi koje je ostvario AMS trebali biti uključeni u prihode za potrebe zajedničke analize profitabilnosti, dok su troškovi društva AMS trebali biti pripisani troškovima.
In order to do so, the report proposes a cash-flow-based method by which expenditure on AMS would be treated as incremental operating expenditure.
Za te je potrebe u izvješću predložena metoda temeljena na toku novca kojim je predviđeno da se troškovi društva AMS smatraju dodatnim operativnim troškovima.
The report submits that marketing activities contribute to creating and enhancing brand value, which is likely to generate business and profits over the duration, but also beyond the expiry, of the marketing agreement.
U tom je izvješću izneseno da marketinške djelatnosti pridonose stvaranju i jačanju vrijednosti marke, što može donijeti poslovnu djelatnost i dobit ne samo tijekom trajanja ugovora o marketinškim uslugama nego i nakon njegova isteka.
This would be the case where, because of an agreement with Ryanair, other airlines are attracted to the airport, in turn attracting commercial operators and increasing the airport’s non-aeronautical revenues.
To je posebno slučaj kad, zbog ugovora s društvom Ryanair, u zračnoj luci počnu raditi drugi zračni prijevoznici koji privlače poslovne subjekte i tako povećavaju nezrakoplovne prihode zračne luke.
According to Ryanair, were the Commission to undertake a joint profitability analysis, these benefits should be taken into account by treating expenditure on AMS as incremental operating expenditure, with incremental profits calculated net of AMS payments.
Prema mišljenju društva Ryanair, kad bi Komisija provodila zajedničku analizu profitabilnosti, te bi se dobiti trebale uzeti u obzir tako da se troškovi društva AMS smatraju dodatnim operativnim troškovima, a dodatni bi se dobitci trebali obračunati nakon odbitaka plaćanja društvu AMS.
Ryanair considers in addition that a terminal value could be included in projected incremental profits at the end of the term of the air services agreement in order to capture the value accruing beyond the expiry of its term.
Osim toga, Ryanair smatra da je krajnja vrijednost mogla biti uključena u dodatne dobitke predviđene po isteku ugovora o uslugama zračne luke kako bi se u obzir uzela vrijednost ostvarena nakon isteka ugovora.
The terminal value could be adjusted by a conservative assumption about the probability of whether the agreement will be renewed with Ryanair or whether similar conditions will be agreed with other airlines.
Krajnja se vrijednost može prilagoditi na temelju konzervativne pretpostavke o vjerojatnosti obnove ugovora s društvom Ryanair ili na temelju pretpostavke da su slični uvjeti dogovoreni s drugim prijevoznicima.
Ryanair considers that this would allow an estimate of a lower bound for the benefits arising from the AMS and air services agreements jointly, taking into account the uncertainty of incremental profits beyond the expiry of the air services agreement.
Ryanair smatra da je moguće procijeniti i nižu granicu za zajedno ostvarene dobiti na temelju Ugovora sklopljenog s društvom AMS i Ugovora o uslugama zračne luke, uzimajući u obzir neizvjesni karakter dodatne dobiti nakon isteka Ugovora o uslugama zračne luke.
In support of this approach, the above report submits a summary of the results of studies on the effect of advertising on brand value.
Kako bi opravdao taj pristup, u prethodno navedenom izvješću iznesena je sinteza rezultata studija o utjecaju promidžbe na vrijednost marke.
These studies recognise that advertising can build brand value and improve customer loyalty.
Tim je studijama zaključeno da promidžba može ojačati vrijednost marke i dodatno osigurati vjernost klijenata.
In particular, according to the report, advertising on ryanair.com increases brand exposure for an airport.
Iz izvješća proizlazi da je promidžbom na web-mjestu ryanair.com posebno pospješena vidljivost marke u slučaju jedne zračne luke.
The report adds that smaller regional airports aiming to increase their traffic base can build their brand value by entering into advertising agreements with AMS.
U izvješću je dodano da manje regionalne zračne luke koje žele povećati svoj promet mogu posebno ojačati vrijednost svoje marke sklapanjem ugovora o promidžbi s društvom AMS.
The report suggests that the cash-flow approach is to be preferred over a capitalisation approach under which AMS expenditure would be treated as capital expenditure on an intangible asset (i.e. the brand value of the airport).
U izvješću je navedeno da je pristup temeljen na toku novca poželjniji od pristupa kapitalizacije kojim se troškovi društva AMS smatraju troškovima kapitala u nematerijalnoj imovini (odnosno u vrijednosti marke zračne luke).
Marketing expenditure would be capitalised as an intangible asset and then amortised over its useful life, with a residual value at the end of the scheduled expiry of the air services agreement.
Promidžbeni troškovi upisuju se u nematerijalnu imovinu te se zatim amortiziraju tijekom uporabe te imovine, predviđajući eventualnu preostalu vrijednost nakon predviđenog isteka ugovora o uslugama zračne luke.
This approach would, however, not capture additional benefits to the airport as a result of signing the air services agreement with Ryanair, and estimating intangible asset value due to brand expenditure and the length of the asset’s useful life is difficult.
Tim se pristupom, međutim, ne uzimaju u obzir dodatni dobitci koje zračna luka ostvaruje potpisivanjem sporazuma o uslugama zračne luke s društvom Ryanair te je teško procijeniti vrijednost nematerijalne imovine zbog troškova marke i duljine uporabe imovine.
Comments by AMS
Primjedbe društva AMS
AMS disputes the assertion that the Marketing Services Agreement that it concluded with Angoulême airport constitutes State aid.
AMS osporava da Ugovor o marketinškim uslugama sklopljen sa Zračnom lukom Angoulême može predstavljati državnu potporu.
The contract does not confer any selective advantage on it.
Naime, tim Ugovorom društvu AMS nije dodijeljena selektivna prednost.
AMS emphasises that it has genuine company objects, which consist in the provision of marketing services on the internet.
AMS naglašava da ima stvarni predmet poslovanja koji uključuje pružanje marketinških usluga na internetu.
It states that most of its activity is intended to increase the value of the advertising space on Ryanair’s website.
Tvrdi da je većina njegovih djelatnosti namijenjena povećanju vrijednosti oglasnog prostora na web-mjestu društva Ryanair.
Furthermore, it points out that Ryanair has chosen to work with other intermediate structures to market other advertising space.
Nadalje, AMS napominje da je Ryanair odlučio surađivati s ostalim posredničkim strukturama kako bi komercijalizirao druge oglasne prostore.
It follows that there are no grounds for taking the view that it is necessary to carry out a joint assessment of any economic benefit granted to Ryanair and AMS.
Iz toga slijedi da nema potrebe za zajedničkom ocjenom eventualne gospodarske prednosti u korist društava Ryanair i AMS.
AMS considers that the increase in the number of passengers using Ryanair services is not the only benefit accruing to Angoulême airport from the Marketing Services Agreement.
AMS smatra da povećanje broja putnika zbog uporabe usluga društva Ryanair nije jedina prednost u korist Zračne luke Angoulême koja proizlazi iz Ugovora o marketinškim uslugama.
First, it notes that the contract concluded by the airport with AMS is different from the one concluded with Ryanair.
S jedne strane, AMS ističe da je Ugovor sklopljen između Zračne luke i društva AMS različit od onog sklopljenog s društvom Ryanair.
Second, it emphasises that Ryanair promotes its services using its own resources.
S druge strane, naglašava da Ryanair svoje usluge promovira vlastitim sredstvima.
Accordingly, Angoulême airport does not help to promote Ryanair services by concluding a marketing services contract with AMS.
Stoga Zračna luka Angoulême sklapanjem Ugovora o marketinškim uslugama s društvom AMS nije pridonijela promidžbi usluga društva Ryanair.
By way of illustration, AMS notes that Ryanair’s load factor is invariably […] % on average, regardless of whether or not a marketing services contract is concluded with it.
Radi ilustracije, AMS je zamijetio da je stopa popunjenosti letova društva Ryanair u prosjeku nepromjenjivo iznosila […] %, neovisno o sklapanju ugovora o marketinškim uslugama s društvom AMS.
Furthermore, AMS argues that the revenues accruing to Ryanair are identical for all passengers, either at arrival or departure from a particular airport.
Osim toga, AMS ističe da su prihodi koje je ostvario Ryanair isti za sve putnike, bilo da oni polaze iz određene zračne luke ili u nju dolaze.
In general, AMS notes that advertising campaigns benefit the providers of the advertising space themselves.
Općenito, AMS tvrdi da su promidžbeni napori poduzeti kako bi sami pružatelji oglasnog prostora imali koristi.
In this case, that externality is reflected in the increasing popularity of Ryanair’s website, regardless of whether the entity behind the advertising campaign is public or private.
U tom slučaju, iz tog vanjskog učinka proizlazi rastuća popularnost web-mjesta društva Ryanair, neovisno o činjenici je li osoba koja je naručila promidžbenu djelatnost javna ili privatna.
Since a private investor would not refrain from making an investment on the ground that third parties would benefit, AMS considers that Angoulême airport did not have to take into account the fact that Ryanair also benefited from its investment in advertising.
Budući da privatni ulagač nije odustao od ulaganja jer ono ide u korist trećim osobama, AMS smatra da Zračna luka Angoulême nije trebala uzeti u obzir činjenicu da njezina promidžbena ulaganja koriste i društvu Ryanair.
AMS takes the view that in this case Ryanair played a pioneering role since most airlines now commercialise the space available on their website.
AMS smatra da je, u tom pogledu, Ryanair imao ulogu predvodnika, s obzirom na to da otada većina komercijalnih zračnih prijevoznika prodaje raspoloživi prostor na svojem web-mjestu.
However, it believes that Ryanair’s website was unusual in that it had an exceptional value.
Međutim, AMS smatra da je web-mjesto društva Ryanair posebno jer ima izvanrednu vrijednost.
Accordingly, it was not comparable with the websites of other airlines.
Prema tome, nije usporedivo s onim drugih zračnih prijevoznika.
Criterion of a prudent investor in a market economy
Kriterij razumnog ulagača u tržišnom gospodarstvu
Existence of an advantage in favour of AMS
Postojanje prednosti u korist društva AMS
AMS considers that it did not benefit from any economic advantage within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
AMS smatra da nije imao nikakvu gospodarsku prednost u smislu članka 107. stavka 1. UFEU-a.