natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
For a fee made up of a "one time fee" of EUR 110000, an "annual fee" of EUR 1,1 million and Malév paying for all related maintenance and operational costs.
Za plačilo, ki je sestavljeno iz „enkratnega plačila“ v višini 110000 EUR, „letnega plačila“ v višini 1,1 milijona EUR in iz plačila za vse s tem povezane stroške vzdrževanja in operativne stroške, ki ga zagotovi družba Malév.
Instead, the repayment claim against Malév was later settled in the framework of the debt/equity swap arrangement of February 2010 mentioned below, i.e. one year after the advance payments were made to Malév.
Namesto tega je bil zahtevek za povračilo do družbe Malév pozneje poravnan v okviru spodaj navedenega dogovora o zamenjavi terjatev v lastniške deleže februarja 2010, t.j. eno leto po izplačilu predplačil družbi Malév.
The principal amount plus interest was then determined by an auditor to amount to HUF 4664604041 (EUR 17 million).
Revizor je nato določil, da glavnica z obrestmi znaša 4664604041 HUF (17 milijonov EUR).
Community guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty, OJ C 244 of 1.10.2004, p. 2.
Smernice Skupnosti o državni pomoči za reševanje in prestrukturiranje podjetij v težavah, UL C 244, 1.10.2004, str. 2.
Such as loss of employment, an impact on Malév's suppliers, falling traffic volumes at Budapest Airport, a reduced inflow of tourists and negative effects on the general attractiveness of Hungary as an investment location.
Kot so izguba zaposlitve, vpliv na dobavitelje družbe Malév, zmanjšanje prometa na letališču v Budimpešti, manjši dotok turistov in negativni učinki na splošno privlačnost Madžarske za naložbe.
The "third package" included the introduction of harmonised requirements for an operating licence for EU airlines (Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92), the open access for all EU airlines with such an operating licence to all routes within the EU (Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92) and the full freedom with regard to fares and rates was also introduced (Regulation (EEC) No 2409/92).
„Tretji paket“ vključuje uvedbo usklajenih zahtev za operativne licence za letalske družbe EU (Uredba (EGS) št. 2407/92), odprt dostop vseh letalskih družb EU s tako operativno licenco do vseh prog v EU (Uredba (EGS) št. 2408/92) in vso svobodo glede prevoznin in tarif (Uredba (EGS) št. 2409/92).
Judgment in Joined Cases T-228/99 and T-233/99 Westdeutsche Landesbank GZ v Commission [2003] ECR II-435 et seq, paragraph 245.
Sodba z dne 6. marca 2003 v združenih zadevah T-228/99 in T-233/99, Westdeutsche Landesbank GZ proti Komisiji, Recueil 2003, str. II-435 in naslednje, točka 245.
Case C-482/99 France v. Commission [2002] ECR I-4397, paragraph 71.
Sodba z dne 16. maja 2002 v zadevi C-482-99, Francija proti Komisiji, Recueil 2002, str. I-4397, točka 71.
Joined cases T-228/99 and T-233/99, already cited in footnote 15, paragraph 255.
Sodba v združenih zadevah T-228/99 in T-233/99 (navedena v opombi 15), točka 255.
Case C-305/89 Italy v Commission [1991] ECR I-1603, paragraph 20.
Sodba z dne 21. marca 1991 v zadevi C-305/89, Italija proti Komisiji, Recueil 1991, str. I-1603, točka 20.
Joined Cases T-228/99 and T-233/99, already cited in footnote 15, paragraph 246.
Sodba v združenih zadevah T-228/99 in T-233/99 (navedena v opombi 15), točka 246.
See also, Case T-16/96, Cityflyer Express vs. Commission, [1998] ECR II-757, paragraph 76.
Glej tudi sodbo z dne 30. aprila 1998 v zadevi T-16/96, Cityflyer Express proti Komisiji, Recueil 1998, str. II-757, točka 76.
Joined cases T-228/99 and T-233/99, already cited in footnote 15, paragraph 251.
Sodba v združenih zadevah T-228/99 in T-233/99 (navedena v opombi 15), točka 251.
Case T-16/96 Cityflyer Express Ltd v Commission, already cited in footnote 19, paragraphs 45 and 46.
Sodba v zadevi T-16/96 (navedena v opombi 19), točki 45 in 46.
T-11/95, BP Chemicals, Judgement of 15.9.1998, paragraph 170;
Sodba z dne 15. septembra 1998 v zadevi T-11/95, BP Chemicals proti Komisiji, Recueil 1998, str. II-3235, točka 170;
Joined Cases T-415/05, T-416/05 and T-423/05 Olympic, Judgment of 13.9.2010, paragraph 385.
sodba z dne 13. septembra 2010 v združenih zadevah T-415/05, T-416/05 in T-423/05, Olympic (še ni objavljena v Zbirki odločb), točka 385.
Case C-40/85 Belgium v Commission (Boch) [1986] ECR 2321, at para 13.
Sodba z dne 10. julija 1986 v zadevi C-40/85, Belgija proti Komisiji (Boch), Recueil 1986, str. 2321, točka 13.
See also Joined cases T-129/95, T-2/96 and T-97/96, Neue Maxhütte Stahlwerke GmbH v Commission [1999] ECR II-17, at para 132.
Glej tudi sodbo z dne 21. januarja 1999 v združenih zadevah T-129/95, T-2/96 in T-97/96, Neue Maxhütte Stahlwerke GmbH proti Komisiji, Recueil 1999, str. II-17, točka 132.
List of existing aid measures referred to in point 1(b) of the Existing Aid Mechanism provided for in Chapter 3 of Annex IV of the Treaty of Accession of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia to the European Union.
Seznam obstoječih ukrepov pomoči iz točke 1(b) mehanizma za obstoječe pomoči, ki je določen v poglavju 3 Priloge IV Pogodbe o pristopu Češke, Estonije, Cipra, Latvije, Litve, Madžarske, Malte, Poljske, Slovenije in Slovaške k Evropski uniji.
See also Case T-332/06, Alcoa Trasformazioni v Commission, judgment of 25.3.2009, not yet published, para. 132, and joined cases T-127/99, T-129/99 and T-148/99, Diputación Foral de Álava v Commission, [2002] ECR p. II-1275.
Sodba z dne 25. marca 2009 v zadevi T-332/06, Alcoa Trasformazioni proti Komisiji (še ni objavljena v Zbirki odločb), točka 32, in sodba z dne 6. marca 2002 v združenih zadevah T-127/99, T-129/99 in T-148/99, Diputación Foral de Álava proti Komisiji, Recueil 2002, str. II-1275.
In particular, Malév was under the obligation to repurchase the Malév brand in 2017 for EUR 76 million, from which then MAVA would repay the MFB loan.
Zlasti je imela družba Malév obveznost, da v letu 2017 odkupi znamko Malév za 76 milijonov EUR in družba MAVA bi potem s tem poplačala posojilo MFB.
The evaluations for all three assets (the aircraft, the kerosene pipeline and the Malév brand) were prepared by American Appraisal.
Vsa tri sredstva (zrakoplov, cevovod za transport kerozina in znamko Malév) je ovrednotilo podjetje American Appraisal.
Cost-based method, taking into account also the yearly "The Aircraft Value Reference" magazine's information and an indicative offer for the aircraft.
Stroškovna metoda ob upoštevanju informacij letne revije „The Aircraft Value Reference“ in okvirne ponudbe za zrakoplov.
(The indicative offer for the aircraft was provided to American Appraisal based on Malév's information).
(Okvirna ponudba je bila na podlagi informacij družbe Malév predložena podjetju American Appraisal.)
Cost-based method.
Stroškovna metoda.
C-256/97 DM Transport, Judgement of 29.6.1999, paragraph 27; T-152/99 HAMSA, Judgement of 11.7.2002, paragraph 157.
Sodba z dne 29. junija 1999 v zadevi C-256/97, DM Transport, Recueil 1999, str. I-3913, točka 27 in sodba z dne 11. julija 2002 v zadevi T-152/99, HAMSA, Recueil 2002, stran II-3049, točka 157.
2010 Financial accounts
Finančna poročila za leto 2010
Communication from the Commission on the revision of the method for setting the reference and discount rates, OJ C 14, 19.1.2008, p. 6.
Sporočilo Komisije o spremembi metode določanja referenčnih obrestnih mer in diskontnih stopenj, UL C 14, 19.1.2008, str. 6.
Case C-70/72 Commission v Germany [1973] ECR 813, point 13.
Sodba z dne 12. julija 1973 v zadevi C-70/72, Komisija proti Nemčiji, Recueil 1973, str. 813, točka 13.
Joined Cases C-278/92, C-279/92 and C-280/92 Spain v Commission [1994] ECR I-4103, point 75.
Sodba z dne 14. septembra 1994 v združenih zadevah C-278/92, C-279/92 in C-280/92, Španija proti Komisiji, Recueil 1994, str. I-4103, točka 75.
Case C-75/97 Belgium v Commission [1999] ECR I-3671, points 64-65.
Sodba z dne 17. junija 1999 v zadevi C-75/97, Belgija proti Komisiji, Recueil 1999, str. I-3671, točki 64-65.
As concluded in paragraph (75) above, the Hungarian authorities did not substantiate the value of the Malév brand which can be as low as zero.
Kot je bilo ugotovljeno v uvodni izjavi (75) zgoraj, madžarski organi niso utemeljili vrednosti znamke Malév, ki bi bila lahko celo nič.
A second complaint (of a competitor which did not agree to the disclosure of its identity) dated 5 October 2010 was received by the Commission and forwarded to the Hungarian authorities by letter of 21 October 2010.
Komisija je prejela drugo pritožbo (konkurenta, ki se ni strinjal z razkritjem svoje identitete) z dne 5. oktobra 2010 in jo z dopisom z dne 21. oktobra 2010 posredovala madžarskim organom.
The Hungarian authorities provided comments about the substance of this complaint on 19 November 2010.
Madžarski organi so pripombe o vsebini te pritožbe predložili 19. novembra 2010.
The opening decision was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 26 May 2011 [5].
Sklep o začetku postopka je bil 26. maja 2011 [5] objavljen v Uradnem listu Evropske unije.
Comments were received from two interested parties:
Pripombe so bile prejete od dveh zainteresiranih strani:
According to the Hungarian authorities, assets worth EUR 76 million were transferred to MAVA along with the loan. These assets comprised the Malév trademark, a kerosene pipeline and one B767 aircraft.
Po navedbah madžarskih organov so bila skupaj s posojilom na MAVA prenesena tudi sredstva v vrednosti 76 milijonov EUR. Ta sredstva so bila sestavljena iz blagovne znamke Malév, cevovoda za transport kerozina in enega zrakoplova B767.
MNV made advance payments to Malév in January and February 2009.
Podjetje MNV je družbi Malév predplačilo izplačalo januarja in februarja 2009.
These advance payments were to be repaid within 2 working days if, after the due diligence, MNV decided not to proceed with the signing of the final sale and purchase agreement.
Ta predplačila je bilo treba v dveh delovnih dneh povrniti, če bi se podjetje MNV po skrbnem pregledu poslovanja odločilo, da ne bo podpisalo končne kupoprodajne pogodbe.
However, in the 2007 agreement the loan's maturity was prolonged until 2017.
Vendar je bila s pogodbo v letu 2007 zapadlost posojila podaljšana do leta 2017.
Therefore, as of 2007, the measure cannot be regarded as an existing aid measure anymore.
Zato od leta 2007 ukrepa ni več mogoče šteti za obstoječi ukrep pomoči.
With regard to the collaterals offered, these were to enable MAVA to repay the debt at the end of the maturity of the loan, i.e. in 2017 [26].
Ponujena zavarovanja naj bi družbi MAVA omogočila poplačilo dolga ob zapadlosti posojila, t.j. v letu 2017 [26].
No private investor would have undertaken such risk, i.e. to take over assets of an uncertain future value against a certain payment obligation.
Noben zasebni vlagatelj ne bi prevzel takega tveganja, tj. ne bi prevzel sredstev z negotovo prihodnjo vrednostjo za določeno plačilno obveznost.
However, no steps were undertaken by MNV to recover this debt after MNV stepped back from the deal in July 2009.
Vendar podjetje MNV po tem, ko je julija 2009 odstopilo od sklenitve posla, ni izvedlo nobenega ukrepa za izterjavo dolga.
Ex-post interest was only charged - but never paid - when the debt was swapped into equity in 2010.
Ko je bil leta 2010 dolg zamenjan v lastniške deleže, so bile obresti samo naknadno zaračunane, plačane pa niso bile nikoli.
Malév thus had this cash facility at its disposal free of charge.
Družba Malév je tako to gotovinsko posojilo dobila na razpolago brezplačno.
The Commission is of the view that the measure transferred to Malév an advantage when the repayment of the advance was not enforced after it became due in July 2009.
Komisija meni, da je družba Malév s tem ukrepom pridobila prednost, ko vračilo predplačila ob njegovi zapadlosti julija 2009 ni bilo izterjano.
Moreover, an advantage occurred even before, at the moment when the preliminary purchase agreement was modified in February 2009 and the advanced payment increased (above the evaluated market price of the company) without being sufficiently collateralised.
Do prednosti je prišlo celo že prej in sicer ko je bila februarja 2009 predhodna kupna pogodba spremenjena in se je predplačilo zvišalo (nad ocenjeno tržno vrednostjo družbe), ne da bi bilo zadostno zavarovano.
Indeed, no concrete steps were ever taken to enforce the debt as from July 2008.
Od julija 2008 ni bil sprejet noben konkreten ukrep za izterjavo dolga.
Moreover, the company's financial situation, despite some restructuring efforts continued to be very weak (see Table 1 above), and there was only little or no prospect at all that the company will return to profitability.
Poleg tega je bil finančni položaj družbe kljub prizadevanjem za prestrukturiranje še naprej slab (glej Preglednico 1 zgoraj) in možnost, da bi družba spet postala donosna, je bila zelo majhna ali pa je sploh ni bilo.
The Commission is of the view that Malév has been in permanent difficulty at least since 2006.
Komisija meni, da je bila družba Malév v stalnih težavah vsaj od leta 2006.
In particular, it has been loss-making at least since 2003 (see Table 1 above) and already in 2006 its equity was negative (Figure 1 above).
Zlasti je vsaj od leta 2003 ustvarjala izgubo (glej Preglednico 1 zgoraj) in že v letu 2006 je bil njen kapital negativen (Slika 1 zgoraj).
The Hungarian authorities notified the Commission of the financing arrangements in relation to the privatisation of Malév by electronic notification dated 10 April 2008.
Madžarski organi so z elektronskim obvestilom z dne 10. aprila 2008 Komisiji priglasili finančne dogovore glede privatizacije družbe Malév.
This measure was registered under reference N 190/2008.
Ta ukrep je bil registriran pod referenčno oznako N 190/2008.
(hereinafter: "AirBridge") concerning 99,95 % of the shares of its national flag carrier Malév Hungarian Airlines Zrt. (hereinafter: "Malév").
(v nadaljnjem besedilu: družba AirBridge) sklenila kupoprodajno pogodbo za 99,95 % delnic svojega državnega prevoznika Malév Hungarian Airlines (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Malév).
of 19 September 2012
z dne 19. september 2012
on the State aid SA.30908 (11/C, ex N 176/10) implemented by the Czech Republic for České aerolinie, a.s.
o državni pomoči SA.30908 (11/C) (ex N 176/10), ki jo je Češka republika odobrila podjetju České aerolinie, a.s.
(ČSA — Czech Airlines — Restructuring plan)
(ČSA – Czech Airlines – Načrt prestrukturiranja)
(notified under document C(2012) 6352)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2012) 6352)
Having regard to the decision by which the Commission decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the TFEU [1] in respect of the aid SA.30908 (C 11/C, ex N 176/10) [2],
ob upoštevanju odločitve Komisije, da začne postopek na podlagi člena 108(2) Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije [1] glede ukrepa pomoči SA.30908 (C 11/C, ex N 176/10) [2],
By letter dated 12 May 2010, the Czech Republic notified the Commission of the restructuring aid to České aerolinie, a.s.
Češka republika je v dopisu z dne 12. maja 2010 obvestila Komisijo o pomoči za prestrukturiranje podjetju České aerolinie, a.s.
(hereinafter referred to as "ČSA").
(v nadaljnjem besedilu: ČSA).
The Commission requested additional information by letters dated 6 June 2010 and 25 November 2010, to which the Czech authorities replied by letters dated 15 and 24 September 2010, 15 December 2010 and 28 February 2011.
Komisija je zahtevala dodatne informacije v dopisih z dne 6. junija 2010 in 25. novembra 2010, na katera so češke oblasti odgovorile z dopisi z dne 15. in 24. septembra 2010, 15. decembra 2010 in 28. februarja 2011.
By letter dated 23 February 2011, the Commission informed the Czech Republic that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the TFEU in respect of the aid (hereinafter referred to as "the opening decision").
V dopisu z dne 23. februarja 2011 je Komisija obvestila Češko republiko, da se je glede ukrepov odločila začeti postopek v skladu s členom 108(2) PDEU v zvezi s pomočjo (v nadaljnjem besedilu: sklep o začetku postopka).
its comments were received by letters dated 31 August 2011 and 3 February 2012.
njene pripombe je prejela v dopisih z dne 31. avgusta 2011 in 3. februarja 2012.
DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE AND THE RESTRUCTURING PLAN
OPIS UKREPA IN NAČRTA PRESTRUKTURIRANJA
The total notified envisaged restructuring costs amount to CZK [8,9-10,5] [3] billion [4] (EUR [360–410] million).
Celotni priglašeni predvideni stroški prestrukturiranja znašajo [8,9–10,5] [3] milijarde [4] CZK ([360–410] milijonov EUR).
On 21 March 2012, the Commission adopted a decision in case SA.29864 – Possible State aid implications of a loan provided by Osinek, a.s.. The conclusion of the investigation was that the Osinek loan did not constitute State aid and even if it did, such aid would be compatible with the Community Temporary Framework for State aid measures to support access to finance in the current financial and economic crisis [5] (hereinafter referred to as "the Temporary Framework").
Komisija je 21. marca 2012 sprejela sklep v zadevi SA.29864 – Mogoče posledice državne pomoči v primeru posojila družbe Osinek, a.s. V preiskavi je bilo ugotovljeno, da posojilo Osinek ne pomeni državne pomoči in tudi če bi jo, bi bila taka pomoč skladna z začasnim okvirom Skupnosti za ukrepe državnih pomoči v podporo dostopu do financiranja ob trenutni finančni in gospodarski krizi [5] (v nadaljnjem besedilu: začasni okvir).
Therefore, the present restructuring case no longer deals with that measure.
Zato se v tem primeru prestrukturiranja ta ukrep ne obravnava več.
The guaranteed bank credit in the amount of EUR 20,8 million was abandoned because ČSA was able to secure a financial lease provided by […].
Zajamčeno bančno posojilo v višini 20,8 milijona EUR ni bilo najeto, saj je lahko ČSA pridobila finančni najem, ki ga je zagotovil […].
Hence the only restructuring aid measure that remains to be assessed is the debt-for-equity swap of the Osinek loan preceded by the loan's de-collateralisation.
Tako je edini ukrep pomoči za prestrukturiranje, ki ga je treba oceniti, zamenjava terjatev v lastniške deleže posojila Osinek, pred tem pa še sprostitev zavarovanja.
De-collateralisation and debt-for-equity swap
Sprostitev zavarovanja in zamenjava terjatev v lastniške deleže
On 3 May 2010, the Czech Government adopted Resolution No 333 on the restructuring plan of ČSA (hereinafter referred to as "Resolution No 333") by which the Czech Government instructed the Ministry of Industry and Trade [6] to implement the release of pledges over some of the collaterals before the increase of ČSA's registered capital.
Češka vlada je 3. maja 2010 sprejela Sklep št. 333 o načrtu prestrukturiranja ČSA (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Sklep št. 333), s katerim je naložila Ministrstvu za industrijo in trgovino [6], naj pred dokapitalizacijo ČSA sprosti nekatera zastavljena zavarovanja.
The debt-for-equity swap was legally based on that Resolution and implemented on 30 June 2010.
Pravna podlaga za zamenjavo terjatev v lastniške deleže je bil ta sklep, izvedena pa je bila 30. junija 2010.
ČSA has been the national air carrier of the Czech Republic since 1923.
ČSA je že od leta 1923 nacionalni letalski prevoznik Češke republike.
In 2009, it carried 37 % of passengers who started or finished their journey in Prague.
Leta 2009 je prepeljal 37 % potnikov, ki so potovanje začeli ali končali v Pragi.
ČSA is a State-owned company, with 95,69 % of its shares owned by the Czech Republic through its Ministry of Finance.
ČSA je družba v državni lasti, saj ima 95,69 % njenih delnic v lasti Češka republika prek Ministrstva za finance.
Minority shareholders are Česká pojišťovna a. s. (2,26 %), the Capital City of Prague (1,53 %) and the Capital City of Bratislava (0,51 %).
Manjšinski delničarji so Česká pojišťovna a. s. (2,26 %), mesto Praga (1,53 %) in mesto Bratislava (0,51 %).
It is a member of the Sky Team Alliance and offers scheduled air transport services (104 destinations in 44 countries).
Družba je članica združenja Sky Team Alliance in zagotavlja storitve rednega zračnega prevoza (104 ciljni kraji v 44 državah).
In 2009 ČSA carried 4,7 million passengers and generated CZK 14,9 billion (EUR 96 million) in revenues.
Leta 2009 je ČSA prepeljala 4,7 milijona potnikov in ustvarila 14,9 milijarde CZK (96 milijonov EUR) prihodkov.
Table 1 shows the development of ČSA's financial data from 2006 to the first half of 2011.
Preglednica 1 prikazuje finančne podatke ČSA od leta 2006 do prve polovice 2011.ts
Czech Airlines financial data (according to Czech Accounting Standards)
Finančni podatki Czech Airlines (v skladu s češkimi računovodskimi standardi)
'000 CZK
v tisočih CZK
Profit/loss
Poslovni izid
Cash flow from operating activities
Denarni tok iz poslovanja
Net interest
Čiste obresti
Development of key criteria in 2009 (according to Czech Accounting Standards)
Gibanje ključnih meril v letu 2009 (v skladu s češkimi računovodskimi standardi)
Net asset values
Čista vrednost sredstev
The turnover diminished slightly over the observed period whereas cash flow was declining considerably.
V opazovanih obdobjih se je promet nekoliko zmanjšal, medtem ko je denarni tok drastično padel.
The level of debt, calculated as the sum of long-term and short-term liabilities and bank loans, was more or less stable.
Višina dolga, izračunanega kot vsota dolgo- in kratkoročnih obveznosti ter bančnih posojil, je bila bolj ali manj stabilna.
The value of assets decreased significantly, notably in 2009.
Vrednost sredstev se je v letu 2009 bistveno zmanjšala.
The change in turnover equalled CZK [4,88–5,42] billion between March and June and CZK [5,04–5,59] billion in the June-September period.
Sprememba prometa je znašala [4,88–5,42] milijarde CZK od marca do junija in [5,04–5,59] milijarde CZK od junija do septembra.
The change does not vary significantly, therefore it cannot imply that the situation of the company worsened particularly in the first half of the year.
Sprememba ni velika, kar kaže, da se je položaj v družbi poslabšal zlasti v prvi polovici leta.
The debt of the company decreased in the period March-June and increased by CZK [0,89–1,05] billion in June-September.
Dolg družbe se je zmanjšal v obdobju od marca do junija, medtem ko se je v obdobju od junija do septembra povečal za [0,89–1,05] milijarde CZK.
Finally, the total value of ČSA 's assets increased in the first observed period (March–June) and decreased by CZK [75–85] million in June-September.
Ne nazadnje se je celotna vrednost sredstev ČSA povečala v prvem opazovanem obdobju (od marca do junija), nato pa zmanjšala za [75–85] milijonov CZK v obdobju od junija do septembra.
The Czech authorities claim that, while ČSA's financial situation deteriorated as a consequence of the global economic recession as early as late 2008, it had reason to believe that significantly better results should be achieved in the 2009 summer season, when revenues in the airline industry commonly peak.
Češke oblasti menijo, da se je finančni položaj ČSA sicer poslabšal zaradi svetovne gospodarske recesije že v letu 2008, vendar upravičeno menijo, da bi morali biti v poletni sezoni 2009 doseženi bistveno boljši rezultati, saj prihodki v letalski industriji dosegajo najvišje vrednosti ravno poleti.
Based on this prognosis, supported by its experience from previous years, ČSA expected that it would create sufficient reserves to enable it to stabilise cash flow and prevent further losses.
Na podlagi te napovedi in izkušenj iz preteklih let je ČSA pričakovala, da bo ustvarila zadostne rezerve, s katerimi bo stabilizirala denarni tok in preprečila nadaljnje izgube.
None the less, the 1st half 2009 results, reported to the management in mid-August 2009, showed a significant decline in average revenue in June.
Kljub temu so rezultati poslovanja v prvem polletju 2009, sporočeni vodstvu sredi avgusta 2009, pokazali velik padec povprečnih prihodkov v juniju.
It became clear that the company was no longer able to run its business without immediate cost-cutting measures and financial assistance from external sources.
Postalo je jasno, da družba ni bila več sposobna opravljati poslov brez takojšnjih ukrepov zniževanja stroškov in finančne pomoči iz zunanjih virov.