natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Taking also into account these difficulties encountered, the impact of potential State aid on the investments of private operators, the opening of procedure was also justified because the Dutch authorities did not submit to the Commission all information necessary to assess the project.
Poleg teh težav in vpliva morebitne državne pomoči na naložbe zasebnih operaterjev je bila sprožitev postopka utemeljena tudi, ker nizozemski organi Komisiji niso predložili vseh informacij, potrebnih za oceno projekta.
Finally, the Commission initiated the formal investigation procedure also in order to give the Dutch authorities and third parties the opportunity to submit their comments on its provisional assessment of the measure described and to make available to the Commission any relevant information related to the measure.
Poleg tega je Komisija sprožila formalni postopek preiskave tudi, da bi nizozemskim organom in tretjim strankam dala možnost, da predložijo svoje pripombe o njeni začasni oceni opisanega ukrepa in dajo Komisiji na voljo vse ustrezne informacije, povezane z ukrepom.
COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY THIRD PARTIES
PRIPOMBE, KI SO JIH PREDLOŽILE TRETJE STRANKE
UPC submitted its comments by letter registered on 17 July 2007.
UPC je svoje pripombe predložil z dopisom, evidentiranim 17. julija 2007.
UPC’s submission reiterates its position expressed before the Commission decision to initiate proceedings [31] according to which the business plan of the Citynet project is based on unrealistic economic assumptions, in particular regarding penetration rates and wholesale prices, hence the business plan does not appear to be commercially viable.
V predloženih dokumentih je UPC ponovil svoje mnenje, ki ga je izrazil pred odločitvijo Komisije o sprožitvi postopka [31], in sicer da je poslovni načrt projekta Citynet temeljil na nerealnih gospodarskih predpostavkah, predvsem glede stopenj gostote in grosističnih cen, ter da zato ni bil videti ekonomsko upravičen.
To substantiate this claim, UPC submitted a report prepared by a consultancy firm, RBB Economics, which updates other reports prepared by the same consultancy on the issue [32] submitted before the opening of the formal investigation [33].
Za utemeljitev te trditve je UPC predložil poročilo, ki ga je pripravilo svetovalno podjetje RBB Economics in v katerem so posodobljena druga poročila, ki jih je podjetje pripravilo na to temo [32] in predložilo pred sprožitvijo formalnega postopka preiskave [33].
As regards the commercial viability of the project, UPC argues that the new fibre network would not enable operators to offer significantly different services from the services offered by the current operators.
Glede ekonomske upravičenosti projekta UPC meni, da novo optično omrežje operaterjem ne bi omogočilo ponudbe storitev, ki bi se precej razlikovale od ponujenih storitev sedanjih operaterjev.
Consequently, and taking into account that the broadband penetration in the areas to be covered by GNA has already reached 65 % of the households, the new fibre network would fail to attract enough customers for its services to make its business plan viable.
Posledično in ob upoštevanju dejstva, da je gostota širokopasovnih storitev na območjih, ki naj bi jih pokrilo podjetje GNA, že dosegla 65 % gospodinjstev, novo optično omrežje ne bi pritegnilo dovolj strank za storitve podjetja, da bi bil njegov poslovni načrt ekonomsko upravičen.
To support this argument, UPC submitted figures concerning the overall churn rates [34] for its own cable network concerning the areas where GNA is already providing [35] triple play services.
V podporo tej utemeljitvi je UPC predložil podatke o skupnih stopnjah osipa (prehoda h konkurenci) [34] za svoje kabelsko omrežje na območjih, na katerih GNA že ponuja [35] storitve trojčka.
The churn figures cover the periods from 1 January 2006 to 1 June 2007 in the areas where the GNA network is being deployed.
Stopnje osipa zajemajo obdobja od 1. januarja 2006 do 1. junija 2007 na območjih, na katerih se uvaja omrežje podjetja GNA.
The maximum churn figures indicate that UPC’s penetration rates for analogue cable TV, Internet access, telephony or digital TV in the concerned areas were stable, and were even increasing for Internet access.
Najvišji podatki o osipu kažejo, da so bile stopnje gostote operaterja UPC pri analogni kabelski televiziji, internetnem dostopu, telefoniji ali digitalni televiziji na zadevnih območjih stabilne, za internetni dostop pa so se celo povečevale.
Therefore, UPC observes that there are no indications that there was a marked decrease of penetration due to the presence of GNA.
Zato UPC meni, da ni nobenih kazalnikov o precejšnjem upadu gostote zaradi navzočnosti podjetja GNA.
In addition, UPC argues that the successful fibre deployments in the Dutch towns of Nuenen and Hillegom [36] brought forward by the Dutch authorities cannot be considered as a proper comparison with the Amsterdam project, as these projects allegedly received significant subsidies from the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, the networks are jointly owned by the inhabitants and the operators, the projects are relatively small [37], and existing broadband operators only offered basic broadband services in both towns.
Poleg tega UPC zagovarja mnenje, da uspešen razvoj optičnih omrežij v nizozemskih mestih Nuenen in Hillegom [36], na katerega se sklicujejo nizozemski organi, ne more biti ustrezna primerjava z amsterdamskim projektom, saj velja, da sta ta dva projekta prejela precejšnje subvencije od nizozemskega Ministrstva za gospodarstvo, omrežji sta v skupni lasti prebivalcev in operaterjev, projekta sta relativno majhna [37], obstoječi širokopasovni operaterji pa so v obeh mestih ponujali samo osnovne širokopasovne storitve.
This was in contrast with the situation in Amsterdam, where high speed offers are available on the existing cable and telecommunications networks.
Ta položaj je bil drugačen kot v Amsterdamu, kjer so visokohitrostne ponudbe na voljo na obstoječih kabelskih in telekomunikacijskih omrežjih.
According to UPC, as GNA’s business plan is unlikely to be realistic, the investment of the Amsterdam municipality in GNA is not in line with the MEIP and amounts to State aid.
Po mnenju operaterja UPC za poslovni načrt podjetja GNA ni verjetno, da bi bil realen, naložba mestne občine Amsterdam v podjetje GNA pa ni v skladu z načelom vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji in pomeni državno pomoč.
By reference to the Commission’s decision in the Appingedam case [38], UPC also reiterates its prior position that any State aid involved in the project cannot be considered compatible with the Treaty as it would be neither necessary nor proportionate.
Ob navajanju odločbe Komisije v zadevi Appingedam [38] UPC tudi ponavlja svoje prejšnje mnenje, da nobena državna pomoč v tem projektu ne more veljati za združljivo s Pogodbo, saj ne bi bila niti potrebna niti sorazmerna.
Furthermore, UPC also expresses doubts as to whether the public investment in GNA is made on equal terms with the investments of the other shareholders of GNA.
Poleg tega UPC izraža tudi dvome, da se je javna naložba v podjetje GNA izvedla pod enakimi pogoji kot naložbe drugih delničarjev v podjetje GNA.
UPC argues that the fact that the municipality of Amsterdam undertook certain pre-investments and other GNA shareholders decided to commit themselves to participate in the project after the municipality performed certain feasibility studies indicates that the investment was not pursued on equal terms by all the shareholders which would shed further doubts on the market conformity of the measure.
Po mnenju operaterja UPC dejstvo, da je mestna občina Amsterdam izvedla nekatere predhodne naložbe in da so se drugi delničarji podjetja GNA odločili zavezati se k sodelovanju v projektu po tem, ko je mestna občina opravila nekatere študije izvedljivosti, kaže, da naložba ni potekala pod enakimi pogoji za vse delničarje, kar bi lahko pomenilo nadaljnje dvome o skladnosti ukrepa s trgom.
Finally, UPC also points out that if the project fails, the network might be sold cheaply to another operator, which will not have to bear the full investment costs.
UPC tudi opozarja, da bi lahko v primeru neuspeha projekta omrežje poceni prodali drugemu operaterju, ki mu ne bo treba nositi celotnih naložbenih stroškov.
This operator therefore could strengthen its competitive position by capitalizing on a publicly funded project.
Ta operater bi zato lahko okrepil svoj konkurenčni položaj tako, da bi se okoristil z javno financiranim projektom.
UPC also highlights the alleged precedent character of the measure.
UPC izpostavlja tudi domnevno precedenčni značaj ukrepa.
In case the Commission were to find that the measure does not constitute State aid, other municipalities might follow the example of Amsterdam in deploying FttH networks.
Če bi Komisija ugotovila, da ukrep ne pomeni državne pomoči, bi lahko druge mestne občine pri razvoju omrežij FTTH sledile primeru Amsterdama.
UPC highlights that the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs and an engineering firm, Arcadis [39] have already developed a freely available, on-line business model calculation [40] allegedly encouraging municipalities to develop their own FttH networks.
UPC poudarja, da sta nizozemsko Ministrstvo za gospodarstvo in inženirsko podjetje Arcadis [39] že razvili prosto razpoložljiv spletni izračun poslovnega modela [40], ki naj bi mestne občine spodbujal k razvoju lastnih omrežij FTTH.
ONO, a Spanish cable operator offering broadcasting transmission and telecommunications services, is of the opinion that the Commission should apply the MEIP test strictly as other municipalities might follow the example and invoke the MEIP in similar projects which could give rise to the proliferation of State subsidies.
ONO, španski kabelski operater, ki ponuja storitve radiodifuzije, prenosa in telekomunikacij, meni, da bi morala Komisija strogo preskusiti načelo vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji, saj bi druge mestne občine lahko sledile primeru in se sklicevale na načelo vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji v podobnih projektih, kar bi lahko spodbudilo širjenje državnih subvencij.
ONO asserts that public intervention should only take place in specific circumstances such as in the presence of market failure, ensuring the proportionality of the measure and respecting the principle of technological neutrality, which is allegedly not the case in the measure at hand.
ONO zagovarja stališče, da bi se morala javna intervencija zgoditi le v posebnih okoliščinah, kot so navzočnost nepopolnosti trga, zagotavljanje sorazmernosti ukrepa in spoštovanje načela tehnološke nevtralnosti, kar naj za zadevni ukrep ne bi veljalo.
If the investment of Amsterdam constituted State aid, ONO argues that any aid involved would be incompatible with the common market, as the circumstances are similar to that of Appingedam [41], and in that case any aid granted will be subject to a recovery obligation.
Če naj bi naložba Amsterdama pomenila državno pomoč, ONO meni, da bi bila vsaka vključena pomoč nezdružljiva s skupnim trgom, saj so okoliščine podobne kot v Appingedamu [41], tako da bo v takem primeru za kakršno koli odobreno pomoč veljala obveznost povrnitve.
ONO points out the alleged precedent character of the decision on the question whether and under which conditions the rollout of FttH networks can be supported with public funding.
ONO poudarja domnevno precedenčni značaj odločitve v zvezi z vprašanjem, ali in pod katerimi pogoji je razvoj omrežij FTTH mogoče podpreti z javnimi sredstvi.
France Telecom (‘FT’), the incumbent fixed line telecom operator in France, takes a similar view to UPC and ONO.
France Telekom (v nadaljnjem besedilu „FT“), prvotni telekomunikacijski operater fiksne telefonije v Franciji, je podobnega mnenja kot operaterja UPC in ONO.
The company expresses its doubts whether the investment of the municipality of Amsterdam in the Citynet project is in line with the MEIP.
Družba dvomi, da je naložba mestne občine Amsterdam v projekt Citynet skladna z načelom vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji.
FT also supports the Commission’s approach in distinguishing State aid measures in ‘white’, ‘grey’ and ‘black’ areas, which is applied by the Commission when carrying out the compatibility assessment in the presence of aid [42].
FT tudi podpira pristop Komisije pri ločevanju ukrepov državne pomoči na „belih“, „sivih“ in „črnih“ območjih, ki ga Komisija uporablja pri ocenjevanju združljivosti pomoči [42].
FT asserts that any State intervention in ‘black’ areas (such as Amsterdam) seems difficult to justify, as it results in serious distortions of competition.
FT zagovarja stališče, da je kakršna koli državna intervencija na „črnih“ območjih (kot je Amsterdam) videti težko upravičljiva, saj ima za posledico resna izkrivljanja konkurence.
According to FT, this was particularly the case for the measure at hand, since the deployment of fibre access networks require heavy investments from market operators.
Po mnenju operaterja FT je to zlasti veljalo v primeru zadevnega ukrepa, saj razvoj omrežja optičnega dostopa zahteva velike naložbe akterjev na trgu.
The comments submitted by COM HEM, a Swedish cable operator, take a similar line to the other operators.
Pripombe, ki jih je predložil švedski kabelski operater COM HEM, gredo v podobno smer kot pripombe drugih operaterjev.
COM HEM generally doubts the market conformity of the investment of the Amsterdam municipality.
COM HEM na splošno dvomi o skladnosti naložbe mestne občine Amsterdam s trgom.
In its observations, COM HEM argues that public funding for broadband projects in urban areas are seldom in line with the MEIP and have strong distortive effects on competition.
COM HEM v svojih pripombah navaja, da je javno financiranje širokopasovnih projektov na urbanih območjih redko v skladu z načelom vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji in precej izkrivljajoče vpliva na konkurenco.
COM HEM also calls for a strict application of the MEIP and highlights the precedent value of the Amsterdam case to future municipal and other public sector investments.
COM HEM poziva tudi k dosledni uporabi načela vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji in izpostavlja precedenčno vrednost amsterdamskega primera za prihodnje občinske naložbe in druge naložbe javnega sektorja.
Another party requiring anonymity, which provides telecommunications services in several European countries, welcomed the Commission decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure.
Še ena stranka, ki je zahtevala anonimnost in ponuja telekomunikacijske storitve v več evropskih državah, je pozdravila odločitev Komisije o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave.
The company argues that its investment is endangered by the initiatives of municipalities using public funds which have a distortive effect on the market.
Ta družba meni, da je njena naložba ogrožena s pobudami mestnih občin, ki uporabljajo javna sredstva, kar izkrivljajoče vpliva na trg.
The company expects the Commission to ban any public money in the Citynet Amsterdam project.
Družba od Komisije pričakuje, da bo prepovedala vsakršno javno financiranje projekta Citynet Amsterdam.
V. COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE DUTCH AUTHORITIES
V. PRIPOMBE, KI SO JIH PREDLOŽILI NIZOZEMSKI ORGANI
By letter registered on 16 March 2007, the Dutch authorities submitted their comments in connection with the Commission’s decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure.
Nizozemski organi so z dopisom, evidentiranim 16. marca 2007, predložili svoje pripombe v zvezi z odločitvijo Komisije o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave.
Furthermore, the Dutch authorities also provided comments on non-confidential versions of the studies prepared for UPC by RBB.
Predložili so tudi pripombe o nezaupnih različicah študij, ki jih je za operaterja UPC pripravilo podjetje RBB.
Throughout their submissions, the Dutch authorities maintain their position that the investment of the municipality of Amsterdam in GNA is in line with the MEIP and therefore does not constitute State aid.
Nizozemski organi v vseh predloženih dokumentih vztrajajo pri svojem mnenju, da je naložba mestne občine Amsterdam skladna z načelom vlagatelja pod tržnimi pogoji in zato ne pomeni državne pomoči.
Comments submitted in connection with the decision to initiate procedure
Pripombe, predložene v zvezi z odločitvijo o sprožitvi postopka
The Dutch authorities highlight that large-scale fibre deployments are taking place in the US and in Asia, and that Europe, in comparative terms, is lagging behind.
Nizozemski organi navajajo, da se v Združenih državah Amerike in Aziji v velikem obsegu uvajajo omrežja iz optičnih vlaken, medtem ko Evropa zaostaja.
The authorities claim that projects similar to the one under assessment are particularly beneficial for the European economy and fully in line with the Lisbon agenda [43].
Organi trdijo, da projekti, kot je obravnavani, posebej koristijo evropskemu gospodarstvu in so popolnoma skladni z Lizbonsko agendo [43].
The authorities also emphasise the pro-competitive business model of GNA, which provides — contrary to the closed model of cable operators — open and non-discriminatory access to all retail operators.
Organi tudi poudarjajo poslovni model podjetja GNA, ki spodbuja konkurenčnost, kar v nasprotju z zaprtim modelom kabelskih operaterjev zagotavlja odprt in nediskriminacijski dostop vseh maloprodajnih operaterjev.
They argue that the new business model, inter alia, promotes service competition, boosts innovation and helps to reduce the risk of service providers by allowing them to use funding which matches the characteristics of each individual layer.
Trdijo, da novi poslovni model med drugim pospešuje konkurenco med storitvami, spodbuja inovativnost in pomaga zmanjševati tveganje ponudnikov storitev, saj jim omogoča uporabo sredstev, ki ustrezajo značilnostim vsake posamezne plasti.
The Dutch authorities take the view that the shareholders of the project provide further evidence that the GNA project is pursued on market terms.
Nizozemski organi menijo, da delničarji projekta pomenijo nadaljnji dokaz, da projekt podjetja GNA poteka pod tržnimi pogoji.
In this respect, the authorities emphasize the fact that two private investors and the commercial subsidiaries of the housing corporations are willing to participate in the project under the same terms and conditions as the municipality.
V zvezi s tem organi poudarjajo dejstvo, da so zasebna vlagatelja in komercialna hčerinska podjetja korporacij za upravljanje družbenih stanovanj pripravljeni sodelovati v projektu pod enakimi pogoji kot mestna občina.
They also refer to the open tender procedures for the construction of the network and for the wholesale service provision of the network.
Sklicujejo se tudi na odprte razpisne postopke za izgradnjo omrežja in grosistično storitveno ponudbo omrežja.
They further highlight that the fact that a significant bank loan was offered to GNA on market terms constitutes clear evidence that the project and the underlying business plan are based on prudent market terms.
Poudarjajo tudi, da je dejstvo, da je bilo podjetju GNA ponujeno precejšnje bančno posojilo pod tržnimi pogoji, jasen dokaz o utemeljenosti projekta in osnovnega poslovnega načrta na razumnih tržnih pogojih.
The Dutch authorities also stress that numerous similar successful fibre projects all over Europe and especially in the Netherlands [44] undertaken by market operators provide sufficient evidence that such investments can be pursued under normal market conditions.
Nizozemski organi tudi poudarjajo, da so številni podobni uspešni projekti omrežij iz optičnih vlaken po vsej Evropi in zlasti na Nizozemskem [44], ki so se jih lotili akterji na trgu, zadosten dokaz, da je takšne naložbe mogoče izvajati pod običajnimi tržnimi pogoji.
On the pre-investments
Predhodne naložbe
Regarding the pre-investments by the municipality of Amsterdam, the Commission noted in the opening decision that the municipality took initiatives before establishing GNA which seemed to go beyond what normal market practice would suggest.
Glede predhodnih naložb mestne občine Amsterdam je Komisija v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka ugotovila, da je mestna občila prevzela pobudo pred ustanovitvijo podjetja GNA, kar se je zdelo, da presega običajno tržno prakso.
The Commission expressed concerns that the pre-investments might have reduced the risks associated with the project for all investing parties. Some of the start-up risk of the business underlying the GNA business plan might have been absorbed or mitigated by the municipality of Amsterdam before the investments by ING and Reggefiber in GNA were made.
Komisija je izrazila zaskrbljenost, da je mestna občina Amsterdam za dejavnosti iz poslovnega načrta podjetja GNA prevzela del zagonskega tveganja v začetni fazi poslovanja, preden so bile izvedene naložbe družb ING in Reggefiber v podjetje GNA.
Based on the information submitted by the Dutch authorities before the opening of the formal investigation, it could not be clarified whether all shareholders in GNA did invest under the same terms and conditions.
Na podlagi informacij, ki so jih predložili nizozemski organi pred sprožitvijo uradne preiskave, ni bilo mogoče ugotoviti, ali so vsi delničarji vlagali v podjetje GNA pod enakimi pogoji.
In their reply, the Dutch authorities underline that all investors committed themselves on 24 May 2006 to the investment in GNA on identical terms and conditions.
Nizozemski organi so v svojem odgovoru poudarili, da so se 24. maja 2006 vsi vlagatelji zavezali naložbi v podjetje GNA pod enakimi pogoji.
As regards the pre-investments (reaching the amount of EUR […]), the Dutch authorities claim that it has always been the understanding of all GNA shareholders that the pre-investments by the municipality of Amsterdam would have to be repaid by GNA.
Glede predhodnih naložb (v znesku […] EUR) nizozemski organi trdijo, da je med vsemi delničarji podjetja GNA veljal dogovor, da bo moralo podjetje GNA povrniti predhodne naložbe mestne občine Amsterdam.
To support this assertion, the Dutch authorities distinguish between two parts in the pre-investments.
V podporo tej trditvi nizozemski organi razlikujejo med dvema deloma predhodnih naložb.
As regards the first part, the Dutch authorities stress that, although the agreements establishing the GNA were only signed on 24 May 2006 binding all parties to the EUR […] investment, in the letters of intent of […], the future GNA shareholders decided together to earmark a lump sum of EUR […] (ex. VAT) for the preparation costs of the project.
Glede prvega dela nizozemski organi poudarjajo, da so bili sporazumi o ustanovitvi podjetja GNA, ki so vse stranke zavezovali k naložbi v znesku […] EUR, sicer podpisani šele 24. maja 2006, vendar pa so se prihodnji delničarji podjetja GNA že v pismih o nameri z dne […]odločili, da za pripravljalne stroške projekta namenijo pavšalni znesek […] EUR (brez DDV).
Amongst others, this amount also covered the costs of the tender procedures for the selection of the builder of the network (BAM/Draka) and for the wholesale operator (BBNed), certain costs related to the notification procedure and certain digging activities.
Med drugim je ta znesek zajemal tudi stroške razpisnih postopkov za izbiro graditelja omrežja (BAM/Draka) in grosističnega operaterja (BBned), nekatere stroške v zvezi s postopkom priglasitve in stroške nekaterih izkopnih dejavnosti.
As for the second part of the pre-investments (amounting to EUR […]), the Dutch authorities argued that such pre-investments are fully in line with normal market practice: prudent market investors would follow the same practice in joint projects as one of the parties usually has to take on the role of ‘lead investor’.
Glede drugega dela predhodnih naložb (v znesku […] EUR) so nizozemski organi menili, da so bile take predhodne naložbe popolnoma v skladu z običajno tržno prakso: preudarni tržni vlagatelji bi v skupnih projektih sledili enaki praksi, saj mora ena od strank običajno prevzeti vlogo „vodilnega vlagatelja“.