natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As explained in the introductory section, TV2 also carries on a number of commercial activities, which are fairly marginal in relation to its total activities.
Kakor je pojasnjeno v uvodu, TV2 izvaja tudi številne komercialne dejavnosti. Z vidika vseh dejavnosti TV2 pa so slednje bolj postranske.
The costs of these commercial activities have been allocated on the basis of the method presented in the Broadcasting Communication and so no full cost allocation has been applied.
Stroški teh komercialnih dejavnosti so se dodelili na podlagi metode, predstavljene v Sporočilu o oddajanju, torej ni bila uporabljena dodelitev neodvisnih stroškov.
As for the advantage that TV2 derives from access to the transmission frequency, the Commission notes that this is ring‐fenced to the public service.
Kar zadeva prednost, ki jo ima TV2 zaradi dostopa do oddajne frekvence, Komisija navaja, da je to namensko dodeljeno za mandat za javno radijsko in televizijsko oddajanje.
It also considers that the financing costs (interest benefits) can be fully attributed to the public service activities.
Komisija tudi ugotavlja, da se stroški financiranja (ugodnosti iz obresti) lahko v celoti pripišejo dejavnostim javnih storitev v skladu s Sporočilom o oddajanju.
To neutralise the effect of the tax exemption that the public service activities enjoy, 30 % of the profits on the commercial activities are transferred to that service but this has only been in operation since 2001.
Za nevtralizacijo učinka oprostitve od plačevanja davka, ki je veljala za dejavnosti javnih storitev, se 30 % dobičkov iz komercialnih dejavnosti prenese na dejavnosti javnih storitev. To se dogaja šele od leta 2001.
The Commission therefore acknowledges that there may have been a distortion on the broadcasting market in that TV2 has not had to take the corporation tax rate into account in setting its commercial prices.
Komisija tako priznava, da je morda obstajalo izkrivljanje na trgu radijskega in televizijskega oddajanja v tem, da TV2 ni bilo treba upoštevati davka od dobička pravnih oseb, ko je določala svoje komercialne cene.
However, the advantage should no longer exist in future because the share of the transfer corresponds to the actual rate of taxation, as a result of this neutralisation mechanism.
V prihodnje pa ta prednost ne bi smela več obstajati glede na to, da delež transferja ustreza dejanski stopnji obdavčitve zaradi tega mehanizma „nevtralizacije“.
This does not pose a problem for establishing the amount of past overcompensation as the total income of these commercial activities has been used to reduce the net cost of the public service.
Za preteklost to ne predstavlja težav za izračun višine prekomernega nadomestila, saj se je celotni prihodek teh komercialnih dejavnosti uporabil za zmanjšanje neto stroškov mandata za javno radijsko in televizijsko oddajanje.
has carried on loss-making commercial Internet activities.
je izvajala komercialne spletne dejavnosti, ki so prinašale izgubo.
Since these activities fall outside the public service broadcasting task no state funding is possible.
Ker te dejavnosti ne spadajo v mandat za javno radijsko in televizijsko oddajanje, državno financiranje ni mogoče.
Moreover, as no other activities have been operated on a stand-alone basis, no surpluses from commercial activities exist to cover Internet losses.
Poleg tega ni presežkov iz komercialnih dejavnosti za kritje spletnih izgub, ker ni drugih dejavnosti, ki so potekale na „neodvisni“ podlagi.
Behaviour restricting competitive in commercial markets
Protikonkurenčno obnašanje na komercialnih trgih
As is indicated in the Broadcasting Communication, the Commission is of the opinion that behaviour by public service broadcasters restricting competition cannot be considered necessary for the fulfilment of public service tasks.
Kakor je pojasnjeno v Sporočilu o oddajanju, Komisija meni, da se protikonkurenčno obnašanje izvajalcev javnih radijskih in televizijskih storitev ne more obravnavati, kakor potrebno za izpolnjevanje mandata za javno radijsko in televizijsko oddajanje.
In point 58 of the Communication it is stated that ‘a public service broadcaster, in so far as lower revenues are covered by the State aid, might be tempted to depress the prices of advertising or other non-public service activities on the market, so as to reduce the revenue of competitors.
V točki 58 Sporočila je zapisano: „izvajalce storitev javne radiotelevizije bi pokrivanje nižjih prihodkov z državno pomočjo lahko zavedlo k znižanju cen za oglaševanje ali za druge dejavnosti, ki niso javne storitve, da bi s tem zmanjšali prihodke konkurentov.
Whenever a public service broadcaster undercuts prices in non-public service activities below what is necessary to recover the stand-alone costs that an efficient commercial operator in a similar situation would normally have to recover, such practice would indicate the presence of overcompensation of public service obligations’.
Kadar koli izvajalec javnih storitev radiotelevizije zniža cene komercialnih dejavnosti pod mejo, ki je potrebna za povračilo neodvisnih stroškov, ki bi jih moral v podobnem položaju običajno nadomestiti uspešen komercialni operater, bi takšna praksa kazala na obstoj prekomernega nadomestila obveznosti iz izvajanja javnih storitev.“
TvDanmark submitted information showing that it cannot cover the stand-alone costs of its TV operations by the prices that TV2 charges.
TvDanmark je predložila podatke, ki kažejo, da ne more pokriti neodvisnih stroškov svojih televizijskih dejavnosti po cenah, ki jih zaračunava TV2.
TvDanmark compares its costs to the TRP 21-50 prices that TV2 has been charging.
TvDanmark primerja svoje stroške s cenami TRP za skupino 21–50, ki jih je zaračunavala TV2.
For this comparison to be valid the Commission has, as a first step, to establish whether TvDanmark can be considered to be in a similar situation to TV2 and whether it is an efficient operator.
Da bi bila ta primerjava veljavna, mora Komisija najprej ugotoviti, ali se za TvDanmark lahko šteje, da je v podobnem položaju kakor TV2 ali ne, in ali je TvDanmark uspešen operater ali ne.
First, the Commission has to appraise whether TvDanmark is in a similar situation to TV2. The Commission makes the points set out below.
Prvič, Komisija mora oceniti, ali je TvDanmark v podobnem položaju kakor TV2.
TV2's viewer share is about 35 % whereas the corresponding figure for TvDanmark is approximately 15 %.
Komisija je navedla naslednje: Delež gledalcev TV2 se giblje okrog 35 %, medtem ko znaša ta vrednost pri TvDanmark približno 15 %. Poleg tega se deleži na oglaševalskem trgu močno razlikujejo.
In addition the companies' shares of the advertising market differ significantly: TV2's market share is about 60 % whereas TvDanmark's market share is around 8 %.
Tržni delež TV2 se giblje okrog 60 %, medtem ko znaša tržni delež TvDanmark približno 8 %.
TV2's advertising turnover has been approximately five times that of TvDanmark.
Promet iz oglaševanja TV2 je bil približno petkrat večji kakor pri TvDanmark.
Moreover, TV2 is the only station to reach 100 % of the population, whereas TvDanmark2 has a coverage of 77 % and TvDanmark1 has even smaller coverage.
je tudi edina postaja, ki doseže 100 % prebivalstva, TvDanmark2 ima dostop do 77 % prebivalstva, TvDanmark1 pa celo manj.
In view of this, TvDanmark cannot be directly compared to TV2.
Glede na zgornje navedbe se TvDanmark ne more neposredno primerjati s TV2.
Second, the Commission has to establish whether TvDanmark is an efficient market operator.
Drugič, Komisija mora določiti, ali je TvDanmark uspešen operater na trgu ali ne.
An efficient operator can be identified by an analysis of generally used accounting ratios and a comparison of the operator's results with average profits generated in the Member State.
Uspešen operater se lahko določi z analizo običajno uporabljenih računovodskih razmerij in s primerjavo rezultatov operaterja s povprečnimi rezultati, doseženimi v neki državi članici.
The analysis must take into account the different size of the operators and their specific cost-structures.
Analiza bi morala upoštevati tudi različne velikosti podjetij in njihovo individualno stroškovno strukturo.
However, as already established above, the operators on the Danish market are not in a sufficiently similar situation to allow a direct comparison of performance ratios based on profit and loss accounts.
Kakor pa je bilo že zgoraj ugotovljeno, se za operaterje na danskem trgu ne more reči, da so v podobnem položaju, ki bi omogočil neposredno primerjavo razmerij uspešnosti.
The Commission therefore is of the opinion that an analysis of those ratios on the Danish market is not appropriate in the case at hand.
Zato je Komisija mnenja, da analiza takšnih razmerij v tem primeru ni primerna.
Instead the Commission has analysed the financial performances of TvDanmark and SBS Broadcasting.
Namesto tega je Komisija analizirala podatke o finančni uspešnosti TvDanmark in SBS Broadcasting.
On this analysis the Commission cannot establish with certainty whether the losses incurred stem from high initial start‐up costs that TvDanmark has not yet been able to recover or whether the operator is simply not performing efficiently.
Na podlagi svoje analize Komisija ne more z gotovostjo ugotoviti, ali nastale izgube izhajajo iz velikih začetnih stroškov, potrebnih za zagon dejavnosti, ki jih TvDanmark še ni zmogla nadomestiti, ali pa TvDanmark dejansko ne posluje uspešno.
Despite several requests, the Commission could not obtain the data on the third television company, TV3, that are needed for a comparison with the third operator on the market.
Kljub več zahtevam Komisija ni mogla dobiti podatkov o finančnem uspehu tretje radijske in televizijske postaje, TV3, da bi lahko izvedla primerjavo s tretjim operaterjem na trgu.
As a consequence the Commission cannot conclude with certainty whether TvDanmark's losses are caused by TV2's pricing behaviour or by other factors for which TvDanmark itself is responsible.
Zato Komisija ne more z gotovostjo priti do sklepa, ali so izgube TvDanmark posledica oblikovanja cen pri TV2 ali jih povzročajo drugi dejavniki pod vplivom same TvDanmark.
Since it cannot be established with certainty whether TvDanmark is an efficient operator and since a direct comparison of the two operators is not possible the Commission considers that the appraisal that was made is not conclusive in this case.
Zato ni mogoče z gotovostjo ugotoviti, ali je TvDanmark uspešen operater ali ne, in ker neposredna primerjava obeh operaterjev ni mogoča, Komisija meni, da zgornja ocena v tem primeru ni dokončna.
It has therefore analysed TV2's pricing policies and available data on the advertising market in greater depth in order to appraise whether the operator acted with a view to maximising its advertising revenues during the period under investigation.
Zato je še nadalje analizirala cenovno politiko TV2 in razpoložljive podatke o oglaševalskem trgu, da bi lahko ocenila, ali je TV2 ravnala tako, da bi kar najbolj povečala svoje prihodke iz oglaševanja v preiskovanem obdobju ali ne.
First, the Commission compared the prices of the two operators and analysed TV2's pricing policies, focusing on the years 1998 to 2002 when, according to the complainant, TV2 started forcing down prices on the advertising market.
Prvič, Komisija je primerjala cene obeh operaterjev in analizirala cenovno politiko TV2. Analiza se osredotoča na leta 1998–2002, na obdobje, za katero pritožnik izjavlja, da je TV2 začela prodajati „pod ceno“ na oglaševalskem trgu.
Second, it analysed Danish advertising expenditure compared with the EU and the other Scandinavian countries in particular.
Drugič, analizirala je stroške oglaševanja na Danskem v okviru EU in predvsem drugih skandinavskih držav.
Third, it examined the contact prices in all Scandinavian countries and for all media types.
Nazadnje je naredila primerjavo sorodnih cen po vseh skandinavskih državah in vseh sredstvih javnega obveščanja.
TV2's behaviour on the advertising market is under investigation by the Danish competition authorities and the following appraisal is without prejudice to the outcome of that investigation.
Obnašanje TV2 na oglaševalskem trgu trenutno raziskujejo danski organi za konkurenco. Naslednja ocena ne vpliva na izid preiskave.
Advertising prices
Cene za oglaševanje
Viewer shares and composition, programme content, the rules on advertising time, and the funding mechanism of the channels are all factors that affect competition on the advertising market.
Delež in sestava gledalcev, vsebina programov, predpisi o oglaševalskem času in tudi mehanizem financiranja postaj, vse to so dejavniki, ki vplivajo na značaj konkurence na oglaševalskem trgu.
As a result, prices also vary between different television broadcasters.
Torej se spreminjajo tudi cene med različnimi izvajalci radijskih in televizijskih storitev.
Channels also sell a range of differentiated products that fetch different prices.
Postaje prodajajo tudi paleto diferenciranih „proizvodov“, katerih cene se razlikujejo.
The prices charged by channels include significant discounts and so it is not relevant to compare listed prices in television advertising.
Cene, ki jih zaračunavajo postaje, vključujejo tudi znatne popuste. Zato ni bistveno primerjati navedenih cen v televizijskem oglaševanju.
By far the largest proportion of television advertising (approximately 90 % of all nationwide advertising) involves annual agreements under which television channels grant annual rebates.
Večji del televizijskega oglaševanja (približno 90 % vsega oglaševanja po celotni državi) poteka na podlagi letnih sporazumov, po katerih televizijski kanali dajejo letne popuste.
In addition other discounts are granted (for new advertisers, less attractive advertising slots, additional volume discounts, etc.).
Poleg tega obstaja še vrsta drugih popustov (za nove oglaševalce, za manj privlačen oglaševalski prostor, dodatni količinski popusti itn.).
Media agencies negotiate and arrange these agreements.
Pogajanja in sklenitev teh sporazumov so delo tako imenovanih agencij za medije.
In order to compare the different stations, an average of the different prices charged has to be established.
Da bi bila mogoča primerjava med različnimi postajami, je treba določiti povprečje različnih cen, ki se zaračunavajo.
The following table displays the average prices for the target group TRP 21-50.
Spodnja preglednica prikazuje povprečne cene za TRP ciljne skupine 21–50.
These prices have been calculated by dividing the relevant stations' national advertising spot turnover by the number of national TRP 21-50 delivered, as shown below:
Te cene so se izračunale tako, da se je promet zadevnih postaj iz nacionalnega prostora delil z doseženim številom TRP ciljne skupine 21–50:
Difference (EUR)
Razlika (EUR)
TVDanmark's CPP as share of TV2's CPP [40](%)
CPP TvDanmark kot delež CPP TV2 [40]( %)
TV2's average CPP for TRP 21-50 weighted for coverage (by 0,7) (EUR)
Povprečni CPP TV2 za TRP skupine 21–50, tehtan za pokritje (za 0,7) (EUR)
TVDanmark's CPP as share of TV2's weighted CPP (%)
CPP TvDanmark kot delež tehtanih CPP TV2 ( %)
On the data above, TvDanmark's TRP 21-50 price has been around 30 to 40 % lower than that of TV2.
Na podlagi gornjih podatkov so bile cene TvDanmark za TRP skupine 21–50 okrog 30–40 % nižje od cen TV2.
As the Commission held in its decision on State aid in favour of France 2 and France 3, there is a positive relationship between the average number of contacts and the average net price per contact in the television advertising market.
Kakor je izjavila Komisija v svojem sklepu o državni pomoči v korist France 2 in France 3, obstaja pozitivno razmerje med povprečnim številom stikov in povprečno neto ceno na stik na trgu televizijskega oglaševanja.
It follows that a difference in prices between broadcasters could be explained by a difference in their ability to attract viewers.
Zato se razlika v cenah med radijskimi in televizijskimi postajami lahko razloži z relativno močjo postaj v smislu njihove zmožnosti pritegnitve gledalcev.
In such a situation, it is relevant to establish whether the actual price difference reflects the conditions of the market.
V takšnih primerih je bistveno ugotoviti, ali dejanske razlike v cenah odražajo pogoje na trgu ali ne.
In contrast to the situation in the French case, in the present case observations can be analysed only for two operators.
V nasprotju s primerom v Franciji se opažanja v tem primeru lahko analizirajo samo za dva operaterja.
As a consequence the slope of the linear regression line will be calculated on the basis of the prices of these two operators and will be of little statistical relevance.
Naklon črte linearne regresije se tako izračuna na podlagi cen teh dveh operaterjev in je z vidika statistike le malo pomemben.
It follows that no conclusions can be drawn on the appropriateness of the slope of the line.
Zato ni mogoče sklepati o tem, ali je naklon te črte „ustrezen“ ali ne.
In order to verify whether the actual price difference between the two operators reflects market conditions a correction factor was therefore applied to attempt to neutralise TV2's stronger position on the market.
Da bi preverili, ali za dejanske razlike v cenah med obema operaterjema lahko rečemo, da odražajo pogoje na trgu, ali ne, se je uporabil korekcijski faktor, da bi poskušali nevtralizirati superiorni položaj TV2 na trgu.
This weighting factor was derived from calculations by media agencies and reflects the different coverage in the target group attainable by purchasing 100 TRP 21-50 from TvDanmark and TV2.
Vplivni faktor se je določil na podlagi izračunov agencij za medije in odraža razliko v pokritju, ki se lahko doseže v zaželeni ciljni skupini z nakupom 100 TRP ciljne skupine 21–50 od TvDanmark in TV2.
TvDanmark is on average slightly below 70 % of TV2's reach (in purchasing 100 TRP 21-50).
TvDanmark ima v povprečju nekoliko manj kakor 70 % dosega TV2 (z nakupom 100 TRP ciljne skupine 21–50).
If this factor is applied the prices are nearer to converging, while TV2's price remains slightly higher than that of TvDanmark.
Če uporabimo ta vplivni faktor, se cene približajo. Opaziti je, da so cene TV2 še vedno rahlo višje od cen TvDanmark.
The difference in price thus seems to reflect market conditions.
Zato bi se zdelo, kot da razlika v cenah odraža pogoje na trgu.
However, this result has to be treated with caution since the weighting factor cannot possibly adjust all the differences between the stations.
Vendar moramo biti pri takšnih sklepih previdni, saj ne smemo pozabiti, da takšen korekcijski faktor nikakor ne more izravnati vseh razlik med postajami.
The Commission also notes that the complainant maintains that in fact operators on the television advertising market do not compete either on listed prices or on the average GRP or TRP prices as presented above.
Komisija navaja tudi, da pritožnik trdi, da dejanska konkurenca na trgu televizijskega oglaševanja ne poteka ne po navedenih cenah ne po povprečnih cenah GRP ali TRP, kakor je predstavljeno zgoraj.
TvDanmark argues instead that operators actually compete on marginal prices; these marginal prices derive from TV2's stronger position in the market.
TvDanmark trdi, da operaterji namesto tega konkurirajo po tako imenovanih mejnih cenah. Te naj bi se pojavile zaradi superiornega položaja TV2 na trgu.
In order for advertisers to achieve their campaign goals they have to buy a certain proportion of rating points exclusively from TV2.
Da bi oglaševalci dosegli cilje svojih kampanj, morajo kupiti določeno frakcijo točk gledanosti ekskluzivno od TV2.
Since there was no competition on these ‘infra-marginal’ units TV2 was able to gain additional profits on them.
Za te tako imenovane inframejne enote ni bilo konkurence, zato je TV2 lahko ustvarjala presežni dobiček iz teh enot.
As a result the operators competed on residual rating points and thus on marginal prices.
Zato so operaterji konkurirali pri preostalih točkah gledanosti, po mejnih cenah torej.
TvDanmark claims that these prices have been even lower than the average prices shown in the tables above.
TvDanmark trdi, da so bile te cene celo nižje od povprečnih cen, predstavljenih v gornjih preglednicah.
Leaving aside the question whether this claim is correct, the Commission considers that such behaviour would have been made possible by TV2's strong position on the market.
Če odmislimo vprašanje o tem, ali je ta trditev pravilna ali ne, Komisija meni, da bi bilo takšno postopanje mogoče zaradi močnega položaja TV2 na trgu.
However, the present investigation has to establish whether TV2's behaviour on the advertising market was such that it did not attempt to maximise its revenues.
Pričujoča preiskava pa mora ugotoviti, ali je bilo ravnanje TV2 na oglaševalskem trgu takšno, da ni poskušala kar najbolj povečati svojih prihodkov.
While it cannot be excluded that TV2 kept its prices low to maintain a high market share this behaviour does not point unequivocally to refraining from maximising income.
V zvezi s tem ne moremo izključiti dejstva, da je TV2 ohranila svoje cene nizke, da bi obdržala velik tržni delež, takšno ravnanje pa ni v nasprotju s poskusom, da bi kar najbolj povečala svoje prihodke.
TV2's pricing behaviour during the investigation period
Oblikovanje cen pri TV2 v preiskovanem obdobju
It has been established above that TV2's prices have been higher than TvDanmark's during this period.
Na podlagi zgornjih podatkov lahko ugotovimo, da so bile cene TV2 v preiskovanem obdobju višje od cen TvDanmark.
It is also clear that, despite increases in listed prices, the actual price level has been declining during this period.
Prav tako je očitno, da je dejanska raven cen kljub povečanju navedenih cen v tem obdobju padala.
has significantly increased the level of the discounts granted.
je znatno povečala stopnjo svojih popustov.
However, an analysis of prices cannot establish whether alterations in prices have actually contributed to reducing total income from advertising, thereby increasing the need for state funding.
Toda na podlagi analize cen ne moremo ugotoviti, ali je gibanje cen dejansko prispevalo k zmanjšanju skupnega prihodka iz oglaševanja ali ne, pri čemer se je povečala potreba po državnem financiranju.
To address this issue the Commission analysed TV2's pricing policy and its consequences for the overall advertising income that it has generated.
Da bi Komisija obravnavala to vprašanje, je analizirala oblikovanje cen pri TV2 in posledice tega ravnanja na skupno stopnjo prihodkov iz oglaševanja, ki jih je ustvarila TV2.
As is explained below, during the period under investigation TV2 both raised and cut prices on a number of occasions (the latter by granting higher discounts).
Kakor je pojasnjeno v naslednjih uvodnih izjavah, je TV2 v preiskovanem obdobju večkrat zvišala in znižala cene (z uvedbo večjih popustov).
The following table provides an overview of changes in TV2's overall level of advertising revenue in the period 1998 to 2002, during which the complainant contends that TV2 was forcing down prices on the Danish market.
Spodnja preglednica ponuja pregled nad gibanji skupne stopnje prihodkov TV2 iz oglaševanja v obdobju 1998–2002, za katero pritožnik trdi, da je TV2 zniževala cene na danskem trgu:
National advertising income
Nacionalni dohodek iz oglaševanja
In 1997 TV2 took the strategic decision not to expand capacity utilisation but to increase its prices in 1998.
Leta 1997 je TV2 sprejela strateško odločitev, da ne bo povečala izkoriščenosti svojih zmogljivosti, ampak bo namesto tega zvišala svoje cene leta 1998.
Another price increase was implemented in 1999.
Drugo zvišanje cen je potekalo leta 1999.
The Danish authorities claim that in 1999 competition became so fierce that TV2 encountered difficulties as a result of the price increases and its income from advertising fell by about 10 % compared to the preceding year.
Danske oblasti trdijo, da je postala konkurenca do leta 1999 tako huda, da je imela TV2 škodo zaradi zvišanja cen, zato so prihodki TV2 iz oglaševanja od leta poprej padli za približno 10 %.
In 2000 TV2 expected competition to intensify significantly and did not raise its prices.
Leta 2000 je TV2 pričakovala, da se bo konkurenca bistveno okrepila, zato ni zvišala svojih cen.