Betekenis van:
oligopoly

Voorbeeldzinnen

1. CWP, however, takes the view that there is no oligopoly on the relevant European market.
2. Should BE disappear, the relevant market would neither become a monopoly, nor a tight oligopoly.
3. The French authorities consider, moreover, that the company’s presence in the market helps to prevent oligopoly situations from arising.
4. Germany states that the European market for phosphoric acid and phosphates is one of oligopoly on which there is no overcapacity.
5. Thus a situation would exist in which State aid must be approved in order to avoid the creation or strengthening of a market dominant oligopoly.
6. In the case of insolvency, therefore, there is a risk that three banking groups would create or strengthen a dominant market position in Austria which considerably increases the risk of market dominance by an oligopoly.
7. The Commission doubted that the severe liquidity crisis of BAWAG-PSK would have lead to a stronger oligopoly in the Austrian banking markets not least because the activities of the bank could have been taken over by a new player on these markets.
8. In view of the Finnish authorities, market opening without transition may have led to an oligopoly or even monopoly on the market, as Tieliikelaitos would have disappeared from the market, with its share being picked up by the biggest private competitors.
9. It may be justified, for instance, by social or regional policy considerations, by the need to take into account the beneficial role played by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the economy or by the desirability of maintaining a competitive market structure when the disappearance of firms could lead to a monopoly or tight oligopoly situation.
10. It has already been explained with regard to a hypothetical case of insolvency that, in view of the market structures and BGB’s position on those markets, a reduction or limitation of BGB’s presence will not lead to the creation of a monopoly or tight oligopoly (see below).
11. Moreover, according to the provisions of Section 16.1(3) of the R & R guidelines, restructuring aid may be considered justified not only by social or regional policy considerations but also by the desirability of maintaining a competitive market structure when the disappearance of firms could lead to a monopoly or a tight oligopoly situation.
12. The measure, however, has certain characteristics that are neither necessary nor proportional and create unnecessary distortion in favour of the incumbent terrestrial television broadcasters, on a market seemingly characterised by a strict oligopoly where these distortions can have a considerable impact on competition.
13. State aid for helping firms in difficulty to restructure may be regarded as legitimate only under certain conditions. It may be justified, for instance, by social or regional policy considerations, by the need to take into account the beneficial role played by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the economy or by the desirability of maintaining a competitive market structure when the disappearance of firms could lead to a monopoly or tight oligopoly situation.