natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Phase 2 (completed after the formal investigation opened):
faza (zaključena po uvedbi formalnega postopka preiskave):
catering facilities, an administrative building, a post-production laboratory and a third external filming area (back lot) of 5 hectares with an aquatic filming tank.
gostinski objekti, upravna zgradba, postprodukcijski laboratorij in tretja zunanja snemalna površina (studio na prostem) površine 5 hektarov z bazenom za snemanje v vodi. 2.B faza (dela se še niso začela):
Phase 2B (work not started):
velik bazen za snemanje v vodi, ki se spaja s horizontom.
a large, deep natural-horizon water tank.
faza (dela se še niso začela):
Phase 3 (work not started) a 5000 m2 sound stage (intended to be the world’s largest), another back lot and 4 TV studios.
zvočni oder površine 5000 m2 (ki bo največji na svetu), še en studio na prostem in 4 TV-studii.
The studio complex also houses a university school dedicated to audiovisual production (cinema, TV, radio, internet) which offers master’s degrees covering all aspects of production (artistic, technical marketing, communication).
Studijski kompleks vsebuje tudi univerzo za avdiovizualno produkcijo (film, TV, radio, internet), ki ponuja magistrske programe na vseh področjih produkcije (umetniško področje, tehnični marketing, komunikacije).
The initial plans in 2000 included other additional investments in adjacent malls, hotels and a sports complex which were to generate positive cash inflows for the project, but which have not been developed to date.
Prvotni načrti so leta 2000 vsebovali še druge dodatne naložbe v sosednja trgovska središča, hotele in športne komplekse, ki naj bi ustvarjali pozitivne denarne prilive za projekt, vendar do zdaj še niso bili razviti.
Although the necessary land was provided by the Generalitat in 2004 and invitations to tender for operation of these businesses under concession were launched in 2005, the bids were not attractive enough and the additional investments have not been followed up.
Čeprav je Generalitat leta 2004 zagotovila potrebna zemljišča in so bili leta 2005 objavljeni razpisi za koncesije za upravljanje teh podjetij, ponudbe niso bile dovolj zanimive in nadaljnjih vlaganj ni bilo.
Certain aspects of the ‘state-of-the-art’ facilities at Ciudad de la Luz put it well ahead of the limited number of competing major film studios in Europe in terms of capacity for large-budget films.
Nekateri vidiki najsodobnejših objektov postavljajo Ciudad de la Luz daleč pred omejeno število konkurenčnih večjih filmskih studiev v Evropi z vidika zmogljivosti za visokoproračunske filme.
For instance, the 5000 m2 sound stage in the original plans for Ciudad de la Luz would have been the largest in the world [7].
Zvočni oder površine 5000 m2 v prvotnih načrtih Ciudad de la Luz bi bil na primer največji na svetu [7].
The Commission notes that large sound stages are only of interest to major film productions.
Komisija ugotavlja, da so veliki zvočni odri zanimivi samo za največje filmske produkcije.
Until recently, the studio was managed by Aguamarga Gestión de Estudios SL, which acted as agent for the film studio in return for remuneration on the basis of a multi-annual management contract with the shareholder.
Studio je do pred kratkim upravljala družba Aguamarga Gestión de Estudios SL, ki je delovala kot zastopnica za filmski studio v zameno za plačilo na podlagi večletne pogodbe z delničarjem o upravljanju.
Public investments by SPTCV and business plans of Ciudad de la Luz
Javne naložbe SPTCV in poslovni načrti za Ciudad de la Luz
Prior to the start of the construction works, in 1999-2000, the feasibility, scope and strategic guidelines of the development of Ciudad de la Luz were analysed by third party consultants in four studies submitted by Spain in the course of the formal investigation procedure.
Pred začetkom gradbenih del, v letih 1999 in 2000, so svetovalci tretje strani analizirali izvedljivost, obseg in strateške smernice za razvoj Ciudad de la Luz v štirih analizah, ki jih je Španija predložila v formalnem postopku preiskave.
These studies explored the growth prospects of the number of film productions [8], compared alternative locations in the Region of Valencia for the construction of film studios [9] and provided a preliminary analysis [10] and business plan [11] for a film studio complex.
V študijah so raziskane možnosti rasti števila filmskih produkcij [8] v primerjavi z alternativnimi lokacijami v regiji Valencija za gradnjo filmskih studiev [9], zagotovljena pa sta tudi predhodna analiza [10] in poslovni načrt [11] za kompleks filmskih studiev.
They had not been submitted by the Spanish authorities before the Commission’s decision to open a formal State aid investigation concerning the project.
Španski organi so jih predložili šele po prvem sklepu Komisije o začetku formalnega postopka preiskave državne pomoči v zvezi s projektom.
The data in the opening decision of 22 February 2008 were from a study (by Consultia) which the Spanish authorities had informed the Commission was carried out in 2002.
Podatki v sklepu o začetku postopka z dne 22. februarja 2008 so bili vzeti iz študije, ki jo je izvedla družba Consultia; španski organi so obvestili Komisijo, da je bila ta pripravljena leta 2002.
However, after the opening decision, Spain subsequently informed the Commission that this study had been carried out in 2004.
Po sklepu o začetku postopka je Španija dodatno obvestila Komisijo, da je bila študija pripravljena leta 2004.
The conclusions of the 2000 business plan developed by Arthur Andersen [12] were positive, including its profitability prospects in the medium to long term.
Sklepne ugotovitve poslovnega načrta iz leta 2000, ki ga je pripravil Arthur Andersen [12], so bile pozitivne, vključno z obeti glede srednje- in dolgoročne donosnosti.
The positive cash flows of the film studio project were documented for a five-year period (2002-2006) after completion of the construction of the studio buildings, a conference hall and school for film and television techniques.
Pozitivni denarni tokovi projekta filmskih studiev so bili dokumentirani v petletnem obdobju (2002–2006) po zaključku gradnje studijskih objektov, konferenčne dvorane ter šole za filmske in televizijske tehnike.
The cost of construction of these phases was estimated to be 16,9 billion pesetas (EUR 101,7 million).
Stroški gradnje teh faz so bili ocenjeni na 16,9 milijarde pezet (101,7 milijona EUR).
The land cost was not included and the business plan indicated that the costings could vary by +/– 30 %.
Stroški zemljišč niso bili vključeni in v poslovnem načrtu je navedeno, da se ocene stroškov lahko spreminjajo za +/–30 %.
Subsequent phases to complete the project were not costed.
Stroški poznejših faz za dokončanje projekta niso bili ocenjeni.
Since the construction took two years more than expected and the investment schedule was modified to be increased significantly, in 2004 Ciudad de la Luz/SPTCV commissioned a new study and business plan from Consultia [13].
Ker je gradnja trajala dve leti več, kot je bilo pričakovano, ter se je naložbeni načrt spremenil in močno povečal, je Ciudad de la Luz/SPTCV leta 2004 pri družbi Consultia naročila novo študijo in poslovni načrt [13].
The Consultia study also concluded positively on the profitability of the project, with a business plan for the period 2004-2014 showing a positive return for the investment by SPTCV until 2014 and in the longer term.
Tudi v študiji družbe Consultia je donosnost projekta ocenjena pozitivno, poslovni načrt za obdobje med letoma 2004 in 2014 pa izkazuje pozitiven donos za naložbe SPTCV do leta 2014 in tudi dolgoročno.
So the share of Ciudad de la Luz SA held by Producciones Aguamarga SL had fallen to 0,2 % by the time this was acquired by SPTCV.
Zato se je delež Ciudad de la Luz SA v lasti Producciones Aguamarga SL do trenutka, ko ga je odkupila SPTCV, zmanjšal na 0,2 %.
After this transaction, the company became wholly publicly-owned and hence became Ciudad de la Luz SAU.
Po tej transakciji je bila družba v celoti v javni lasti in je postala Ciudad de la Luz SAU.
These accounts also show that SPTCV was owed interest on the 2005 and 2009 participating loans totalling EUR 7222160 for 2009 and 2010, In addition, EUR 1814187 of unpaid interest on the convertible loan stock had accumulated by 31 December 2010.
Kažejo tudi terjatve na račun obresti v korist SPTCV iz udeležbenih posojil iz let 2005 in 2009 v skupni višini 7222160 EUR za leti 2009 in 2010. Do 31. decembra 2010 se je poleg tega nabralo 1814187 EUR neplačanih obresti za zamenljive podjetniške obveznice.
Therefore, the investment of public funds by SPTCV in Ciudad de la Luz, including the interest pending on the loans provided, totalled EUR 274125946 by the end of 2010.
Do konca leta 2010 so tako javna sredstva, ki jih je SPTCV vložila v Ciudad de la Luz, skupaj z neplačanimi obrestmi za dana posojila, obsegala 274125946 EUR.
Commercial strategy and business results of Ciudad de la Luz
Poslovna strategija in poslovni rezultati Ciudad de la Luz
In the 2000 business plan, Ciudad de la Luz was aiming to become the studio complex with the second largest capacity in Europe (after Pinewood) and to attract Spanish productions (cinema, TV and commercials) supplemented with a target of sixteen foreign (EU and US) film productions per year.
Cilj Ciudad de la Luz v poslovnem načrtu iz leta 2000 je bil postati kompleks studiev z drugimi največjimi zmogljivostmi v Evropi (za Pinewoodom) in privabiti španske produkcije (film, TV in reklame), poleg tega pa še 16 tujih (EU in ZDA) filmskih produkcij na leto.
The 2004 revised business plan considered that one of the strategic objectives of Ciudad de la Luz should be to make large film and TV productions its main clients.
Skladno z revidiranim poslovnim načrtom iz leta 2004 bi moral biti eden od strateških ciljev Ciudad de la Luz, da postanejo glavne stranke velike filmske in televizijske produkcije.
The 2004 business plan regarded the main international competitors of Ciudad de la Luz to be large studios outside the US, particularly those which have similar characteristics to Ciudad de la Luz, namely Pinewood-Shepperton (UK), Cinecitta (Italy), Barrandov (Czech Republic), Babelsberg (Germany), Cinecite Montreal & Lions Gate (Canada) and Warner Roadshow & Fox (Australia).
Po poslovnem načrtu iz leta 2004 so bili glavni mednarodni konkurenti Ciudad de la Luz veliki studii zunaj ZDA, zlasti tisti s podobnimi značilnostmi kot Ciudad de la Luz, in sicer Pinewood-Shepperton (Združeno kraljestvo), Cinecitta (Italija), Barrandov (Češka), Babelsberg (Nemčija), Cinecite Montreal & Lions Gate (Kanada) in Warner Roadshow & Fox (Avstralija).
In the initial 2000 business plan, the planned tariffs for studio services (e.g. back lot rental, workshop) were envisaged within a range of the tariffs applied by comparable studios in the EU (i.e. Shepperton and Elstree in the UK, Babelsberg in Germany).
V prvotnem poslovnem načrtu iz leta 2000 so bile načrtovane tarife za studijske storitve (npr. najem studia na prostem, delavnica) predvidene v mejah tarif, ki jih uporabljajo primerljivi studii v EU (npr. Shepperton in Elstree v Združenem kraljestvu, Babelsberg v Nemčiji).
The 2004 revised business plan also presents a strategic pricing model with reference to the tariffs applied by studios with international reputation, roughly 15-20 % cheaper than established leaders (USA and Pinewood UK) but 50 %-100 % more expensive than EU studios (Barrandov in the Czech Republic and Babelsberg in Germany).
Poslovni načrt, revidiran leta 2004, predstavlja tudi strateški model oblikovanja cen glede na tarife, ki jih uporabljajo mednarodno priznani studii, ki so 15–20 % cenejši od uveljavljenih vodilnih studiev (ZDA in Pinewood UK), vendar pa tudi 50–100 % dražji od studiev EU (Barrandov na Češkem in Babelsberg v Nemčiji).
In practice, the national and international targets of the business strategy of Ciudad de la Luz have not materialised.
V praksi se nacionalni in mednarodni cilji poslovne strategije Ciudad de la Luz niso uresničili.
Out of 33 films shot in Ciudad de la Luz between 2005 and 2009, 28 are Spanish productions and only 5 are EU co-productions (Greece, France).
Od 33 filmov, posnetih v Ciudad de la Luz od leta 2005 do 2009, je 28 španskih produkcij in samo 5 koprodukcij EU (Grčija, Francija).
Apart from occasional highlights provided by major European co-productions such as Asterix at the Olympic Games and most recently a US-Spanish coproduction, in practice the films shot at Ciudad de la Luz since it opened in August 2005 have been mainly Spanish national productions.
Razen občasnih svetlih trenutkov, ki so jih prinesle večje evropske koprodukcije, na primer Asterix na olimpijskih igrah in v zadnjem času koprodukcija ZDA-Španija, so bili vsi filmi, posneti v Ciudad de la Luz od odprtja avgusta 2005, predvsem španske nacionalne produkcije.
Despite the prospects shown by the 2004 business plan setting 2010 as the first year of (modest) positive operating results, the commercial operation of Ciudad de la Luz has been loss-making to date.
Kljub možnostim, navedenim v poslovnem načrtu iz leta 2004, kjer je bilo navedeno, da bodo leta 2010 doseženi prvi (skromni) pozivni poslovni rezultati, je doslej Ciudad de la Luz poslovala z izgubo.
Operating losses are also bigger than expected.
Tudi izgube iz poslovanja so večje od pričakovanih.
The Commission’s investigation was prompted in 2007 by a complaint from Complainant A, as well as a subsequent complaint from Complainant B, both of which are prominent players in the film sector in different Member States.
Komisija je uvedla preiskavo na podlagi pritožbe pritožnika A iz leta 2007 in poznejše pritožbe pritožnika B, ki sta ugledna subjekta v filmskem sektorju v različnih državah članicah.
The complaints alleged illegal State aid in the public funding of Ciudad de la Luz and, especially, in the system of film-specific incentives put in place by Ciudad de la Luz.
Pritožbi sta navajali nezakonito državno pomoč v obliki javnega financiranja Ciudad de la Luz, zlasti pa v sistemu spodbud za posamezne filme, ki jih je uporabljala Ciudad de la Luz.
As to the possible compatibility of the aid, the Commission had no information enabling it to verify whether the conditions of the Regional Aid Guidelines applicable to the Region of Valencia at the time (2000-2004) were met.
Komisija ni imela nobenih informacij glede morebitne združljivosti pomoči, ki bi ji omogočile, da bi preverila, ali so bili izpolnjeni pogoji smernic o regionalni pomoči, ki so se v navedenem času (2000–2004) uporabljali za regijo Valencija.
The Commission also doubted that the cultural exception referred to in Article 107(3)(d) of the Treaty could be applied, since Ciudad de la Luz was not promoting culture or heritage conservation, could be used for all sorts of audiovisual works, including commercials, and was competing with other operators to attract commercial productions.
Dvomila je tudi, da bi se lahko uporabljala izjema v zvezi s kulturo iz člena 107(3)(d) Pogodbe, ker Ciudad de la Luz ne spodbuja kulture ali ohranjanja kulturne dediščine, se lahko uporablja za vse vrste avdiovizualnih del, vključno z reklamami, in konkurira drugim operaterjev pri pridobivanju komercialnih produkcij.
The Commission also noted possible State aid in the incentive system for shooting at Ciudad de la Luz and identified the relevant film producers as beneficiaries.
Komisija je ugotovila morebitno državno pomoč tudi v sistemu spodbud za snemanje v Ciudad de la Luz in ugotovila, da so upravičenci zadevni filmski producenti.
The film-specific incentives were targeting specific activities in a specific location on the basis of unknown criteria and thus appeared not to meet the rules laid down in the Commission’s ‘Cinema Communication’.
Spodbude za posamezne filme so bile namenjene posameznim dejavnostim na določeni lokaciji na podlagi neznanih meril, zato je videti, da ne izpolnjujejo pravil iz Sporočila Komisije o kinematografiji.
The Commission received comments from ten interested parties in total.
Komisija je prejela pripombe od skupaj desetih zainteresiranih strani.
Four of these are active in the exploitation of film studio business in Member States other than Spain (Complainant A, Complainant B, Barrandov Studio and Mediterranean Film Studios Limited);
Štiri izmed njih izvajajo dejavnosti filmskih studiev v drugih državah članicah kot je Španija (pritožnik A, pritožnik B, Barrandov Studio in Mediterranean Film Studios Limited);
five are active in the Spanish film sector (the Federación de Asociaciones de Productores Audiovisuales Españoles – FAPAE, the Associacio de directors de cinema valencians, the Empreses audiovisuals valencianes federades — EAVf, the association Productors audiovisuals valencians and the Sociedad Proyectos Tematicos de la Comunidad Valenciana — SPTCV SAU);
pet jih je dejavnih v španskem filmskem sektorju (Federación de Asociaciones de Productores Audiovisuales Españoles – FAPAE, Associacio de directors de cinema valencians, Empreses audiovisuals valencianes federades – EAVf, združenje Productors audiovisuals valencians and the Sociedad Proyectos Tematicos de la Comunidad Valenciana – SPTCV SAU);
and one was a national film funding and policy body (UK Film Council).
ena pa je nacionalni organ za financiranje filma in politiko (UK Film Council).
Observations by active film studios
Pripombe aktivnih filmskih studiev
In its confidential submission of 25 June 2008, Complainant B expresses its concerns about the aid through which Ciudad de la Luz developed and operates at present.
Pritožnik B v zaupnem sporočilu z dne 25. junija 2008 izraža zaskrbljenost zaradi pomoči, na podlagi katere se je razvila in trenutno posluje Ciudad de la Luz.
It claims that the measures taken by the Commission in opening the procedure are essential for its company and the sector.
Pritožnik B ugotavlja, da so ukrepi, ki jih je sprejela Komisija pri začetku postopka, nujni za njegovo družbo in sektor.
In its confidential submission dated 30 June 2008, Complainant A confines its comments on the in-depth investigation to four issues:
Pritožnik B v zaupnem sporočilu z dne 30. junija 2008 svoje pripombe omejuje na podrobno preiskavo štirih vprašanj:
the costs of financing the studios, (ii) the approach to financing a ‘start-up business’, (iii) the final disposal valuation and (iv) the other incentives granted by Ciudad de la Luz.
stroški financiranja studiev, (ii) pristop k financiranju zagonskih stroškov podjetja, (iii) ocena končne odtujitvene vrednosti in (iv) druge spodbude, ki jih ponuja Ciudad de la Luz.
In its view, ‘a private investor would regard even an established and profit-making studio business as at least a medium risk investment …. This is based on the fact that, although a studio business is asset backed …, its operational gearing is likely to be high, which makes profit difficult to forecast. Further uncertainty is introduced by factors such as the cyclical nature of the film production sector.’
Po njegovem mnenju „bi bilo celo vlaganje v uveljavljen in donosen studio za zasebnega vlagatelja srednje tvegana naložba … Ta ocena temelji na dejstvu, da ima poslovanje studia pogosto visok poslovni vzvod, zato je težko napovedati dobiček kljub zavarovanju poslovanja s premoženjem … Še več negotovosti vnašajo dejavniki, kot je ciklična narava sektorja filmske produkcije.“
According to Complainant A, a weighted average cost of capital (WACC) of about 15 % might be appropriate for an established studio business, although ‘the return expected by [Complainant A’s] private equity investors was higher than that’.
Po mnenju pritožnika A bi lahko bilo za uveljavljeni studio primerno tehtano povprečje stroškov kapitala (WACC) okoli 15 %, čeprav „vlagatelji zasebnega kapitala [pritožnik A] pričakujejo večjo donosnost“.
A start-up studio business would be viewed by a private investor as ‘a medium to high risk venture and would therefore expect materially higher returns from its investment (albeit that some lead time to profitability would be tolerated). Given that there is usually limited (if any) capacity for start-ups to borrow from conventional sources, the WACC for a start-up business is generally increased by both the higher equity returns that are required and the lack of lower cost debt.’
Zasebni vlagatelj bi štel začetek poslovanja studia kot „srednje do visoko tvegan posel in bi zato pričakoval bistveno večjo donosnost naložbe (čeprav bi bil pripravljen počakati nekoliko dlje). Ker imajo družbe, ki začenjajo poslovati, omejene (morebitne) možnosti izposojanja iz konvencionalnih virov, je tehtano povprečje stroškov kapitala družb, ki začenjajo poslovati, po navadi višje zaradi večjih zahtevanih donosov in zaradi pomanjkanja možnosti cenejšega zadolževanja.
As to the final disposal value of Ciudad de la Luz indicated in the opening decision, Complainant A considers it unrealistic.
Pritožnik A tudi meni, da končna odtujitvena vrednost Ciudad de la Luz, navedena v sklepu o začetku postopka, ni realna.
It also claims that a private investor would generally find it unusual for a multiple of earnings before interest and tax of more than 12-15 to be a good proxy for valuation.
Pravi tudi, da bi bilo za zasebnega vlagatelja nenavadno, da bi bil večkratnik dobička brez obresti in davkov več kakor 12–15 dober približek za vrednotenje.
Finally, as to the incentives granted to attract productions, Complainant A alleged that they appear to have effectively subsidised the cost to film production companies of bringing in qualified technical and support staff, which are allegedly lacking in the Valencia region.
V zvezi s spodbudami za privabljanje produkcij tudi meni, da je videti, da so družbam za filmsko produkcijo dejansko subvencionirale stroške za zaposlovanje usposobljenega tehničnega in pomožnega osebja, ki naj bi ga bilo v Valenciji premalo.
Complainant A considers that the incentives have a serious adverse effect on competition as the studios would have found it more difficult to attract film productions without such incentives.
Pritožnik A meni, da spodbude zelo škodljivo vplivajo na konkurenco, ker studii brez takih spodbud težje privabijo filmske produkcije.
In their initial submission of 25 June 2008, Barrandov Studio stressed that the alleged aid distorts the relevant market and disadvantages other competitors and requested an additional time period to submit further comments, given the complexity of the case.
Barrandov Studio je v prvotnem sporočilu z dne 25. junija 2008 poudaril, da domnevna pomoč izkrivlja trg in postavlja druge konkurente v slabši položaj, zato je glede na kompleksnost zadeve zahteval dodatni rok za predložitev nadaljnjih pripomb.
The low density of film professionals and infrastructure in Alicante compared to Madrid or Barcelona does not indicate a logical choice of location.
Majhna koncentracija filmskih strokovnjakov in infrastrukture v Alicanteju v primerjavi z Madridom ali Barcelono ne potrjuje logične izbire lokacije.
In terms of strategy, an investor in the studio business would split their clientele into local clients providing stable income and foreign clients focused on large foreign productions.
Strateško bi vlagatelj v studio delil stranke na lokalne stranke, ki zagotavljajo stabilne prihodke, in tuje stranke, osredotočene na velike tuje produkcije.
Ciudad de la Luz adopts the opposite strategy, based on the provision of studio services at extremely low prices which disregard the establishment costs.
Ciudad de la Luz zavzema nasprotno strategijo, ki temelji na zagotavljanju studijskih storitev po izredno nizkih cenah, ki ne upoštevajo stroškov ustanovitve.
Moreover, given the uncertainty caused by the difficulty of forecasting revenues beyond 3-5 years in the industry, a private investor would have requested a much faster return.
Poleg tega bi glede na negotovost, ki jo povzroča težavno napovedovanje prihodkov v tej panogi čez 3–5 let, zasebni vlagatelj zahteval precej hitrejši donos.