Betekenis van:
mojo

Voorbeeldzinnen

1. Will Apple lose its mojo now that its visionary founder is dead?
2. According to Mojo and Music Dome, the profit-sharing mechanism did not remove the operator’s advantage.
3. The Dutch authorities therefore rejected the view put forward by Mojo and Music Dome.
4. Further submissions from Mojo and Music Dome were received on 14 September 2007 and 5 October 2007.
5. From 2013/2014, in that scenario, the rent paid by Ahoy Management NV would be higher than the rent calculated by the complainants Mojo and Music Dome.
6. In addition, the turnover of an event could easily differ from expectations. The Dutch authorities therefore rejected the view put forward by Mojo and Music Dome.
7. Mojo and Music Dome referred to Annex 3 to the lease (years 2003/2004 and 2004/2005) and provided an overview for the period 2003/2004–2007/2008.
8. With regard to the argument put forward by Mojo and Music Dome here, the Commission cannot exclude the possibility that in its decision to invest in the project the municipality did not behave as a profit-maximising private investor.
9. According to Mojo and Music Dome, the municipality will receive nothing if the investment does not generate additional income: it will recover its investment only if extra income is indeed generated.
10. The Dutch authorities specifically reaffirmed that, contrary to the views of Mojo and Music Dome, there was indeed a trend in the year-to-year turnover of Ahoy Rotterdam NV.
11. According to Mojo and Music Dome, the profit-sharing mechanism did not remove the operator’s advantage. It was clear that the final profit-sharing arrangement had not been tested by any independent consultant.
12. According to Mojo and Music Dome, the management report accompanying the financial accounts for 2004/2005 suggested that there was a trend in Ahoy’s turnover in which ‘good’ years alternated with ‘moderate’ years.
13. Following the initiation of the procedure, the Commission received comments from three interested parties, namely Ahoy Rotterdam NV, the alleged recipient of State aid [4]; Mojo and Music Dome, which submitted joint observations [5]; and one individual person [6].
14. Following the initiation of the procedure, the Commission received comments from three interested parties, namely Ahoy Rotterdam NV, the alleged recipient of State aid; Mojo and Music Dome, which submitted joint observations; and one individual person [10].
15. The comments submitted by the individual person were not directly relevant for the assessment of the measure, but focused instead on the motives behind the complaint lodged by Mojo and Music Dome.