Übersetzung für "Neu gegründetes unternehmen" in Englisch

In these circumstances, a private investor would not necessarily carried out a new valuation, as it could assume that the valuation report based on 2009 figures, provided an accurate view of the business.

Furthermore, the firm does not have to be a newly created firm.

Why does a start-up company produce two-piece aluminium beverage cans?

How do you save on costs as a small start up?

A new firm could not, by its very nature, encounter this type of difficulties.

It is therefore not a new firm within the meaning of the Community guidelines. Moreover, NGP displays the characteristics of a firm in difficulty.

Air Malta was created in 1974 and cannot therefore be considered as a newly created firm.

Capro Schwedt is a new company, owned by Aquafil, an Italian synthetic fibre producer.

The greater the initial size of the firm, the greater the chances of survival.

Here are three examples for local business, international business and a for newly founded company:

In the decision to initiate proceedings, the Commission had doubts whether CMR was eligible for restructuring aid, as it appeared to be a newly created company.

The Commission’s conclusions here would apply in the hypothesis that CMR was not a new company, but a company in financial difficulties and therefore eligible for restructuring aid.

Kahla II is an Auffanglösung, this is, a new set-up which has taken over the assets of a bankrupt company.

In the decision to initiate the procedure, the Commission expressed doubts as to whether the financial measures in question could be authorised as restructuring aid, on the one hand, since SORENI seemed to be a newly created firm emerging from the liquidation of the three subsidiaries and, on the other, in the light of point 7 of the Restructuring Guidelines, according to which a newly created firm is not eligible for rescue or restructuring aid even if its initial financial position is insecure.

In its decision to open the formal investigation procedure the Commission noted that Jahnke, which was registered in November 1999, was a newly created firm.

It raised doubts whether Jahnke fell within the exception to the general prohibition on restructuring aid to a newly created firm because there had been no liquidation of HAMESTA’s assets, nor can Jahnke be considered to have taken over the assets since the creditors’ meeting had decided not to proceed with the sale of the assets to Jahnke Halle but instead to dispose of them by public auction.

For the reasons set out above, the Commission cannot consider that Jahnke fulfils the criteria for exemption from the general prohibition on restructuring aid to a newly created firm.

Europe is especially lacking in high-risk funding and those individuals, the business angels, who are prepared to invest in a company in its early stages.

In the decision to initiate proceedings, the Commission expressed doubts whether the financial measures in question could be authorised as restructuring aid, considering, on the one hand, that CMR seemed to be a newly created firm emerging from the liquidation of CMdR and bearing in mind, on the other hand, point 7 of the Restructuring Guidelines, according to which a newly created firm is not eligible for rescue or restructuring aid, even if its initial financial position is insecure.

As regards the doubts as to whether CMR was a firm eligible for restructuring aid, France argued that despite the fact that CMR was a new company, it still faced difficulties.

It does, however, argue that although it is a new company, CMR is experiencing difficulties that make it similar to an existing company, the cause of these difficulties being the takeover of the workforce and the related social security costs.

CMR is a newly created company, which, moreover, is not in difficulty within the meaning of the Restructuring Guidelines.

One Chinese producer was in a start-up phase and did not have either audited or any other sort of financial accounts.

Furthermore, France claims that, even if SORENI were to be viewed as a new firm, it still remained a firm in difficulty within the meaning of the Restructuring Guidelines owing to the charges (work contracts, asbestos-related early retirements) and difficulties (need to adapt production tools and need for rationalisation) associated with the assets.

In the decision to initiate the procedure, the Commission raised doubts as to whether SORENI was a new firm.

France further argues that, even if SORENI is to be viewed as a new firm, it remains a firm in difficulty because it exercises the same type of activity as the three subsidiaries and because it is bound by the financial liabilities stemming from social security legislation.