Абсолютная форма притяжательных местоимений. Определение в предложениях синтаксической роли инфинитива (Грамматические упражнения), страница 4

Popov

Well, with all the progress we’ve made towards the new joint-stock company, there are two principle questions remained to be clarified. The first one is investment in new equipment, and then the last but not the least problem is the necessity to purchase building in St.-Petersburg

Lewis:

Yes, That’s the situation. As you remember, I’ve already mentioned how we see it.

Popov:

Correct, I do remember it. But look at it form our point of view. You’re asking us to invest nearly half a million Euros in new production equipment and training in order to meet your specifications.

Lewis:

That’s correct. And as you do remember, we agreed that our commitment would be to invest into the new joint-stock company the equal sum of money in form of guaranteed orders.

Popov:

Our calculations show that we’d only plough if you guaranteed us orders worth around 200,000 Euro in the first year.

Lewis:

We couldn’t possibly guarantee that in the first year, but we’d guarantee minimum orders worth 200,000 Euro in the first two years.

Popov:

I’m afraid that wouldn’t make our investment worth while. However, if you’re prepared to negotiate on the basis of two years’ guaranteed orders, I may be able to get the Board to agree to the investment.

Lewis:

In this case, I’d propose guaranteed orders worth 250,000 Euro over two years. How does that sound to you?

Popov:

If you increased that to 250,000 Euro, I think we’d have a deal.

Lewis:

OK, we’ll agree to 250,000 Euro of guaranteed orders in the first two years provided that you allow our quality control engineers to inspect the new equipment when it’s been installed.

Popov:

Yes, I think we could go along with that.

Lewis:

Good. Moving on then to the next intricate problem of our meeting today, we should always bear in mind that the new company needs a factory building.

Popov:

Well, you’re right. Perhaps I could just summarize our conclusions so far. You’ve agreed purchase a factory building of 3,000 m2 to employ 500 people in this factory, starting in September of the next year.

Lewis:

That’s corrects, yes.

Popov:

Fine. And from our side, we’ve agreed to give you a capital grant of 45 per sent towards the purchase of the factory. As we’ve agreed we’d take care of the infrastructure, and the factory would be fully serviced with telecommunications, electricity, water and so on. We’re also pleased to note that we’ve reached a separate agreement with St.-Petersburg Utility Company for the supply of components.

Lewis:

Yes, I’m very satisfied with the result of your negotiations. By the way, there is another circumstance- we haven’t talked in any detail about recruitment so far. Can you take responsibility for that?

Popov:

That’s good point. My answer is positive. I could also arrange a meeting for you with the management at the St.-Petersburg Institute of Machinebuilding where young  specialists are trained. In fact, it might be a good idea if you had a walk with them. Shall I arrange that?

Lewis:

Yes, that seems like a good idea. Thank you.

Popov:

Well, just with the future draft contract in mined, I’d like to go over all those allotments mentioned here.

Lewis:

Good. The entire sum of allotments will be around or slightly higher than one billion Euros over the first two years. Yesterday I inquired the price indexes published in the USA and UK to fined out that average annual rise in prices of the equipment makes 8-10, i.e. 16-20% for two years which means the necessity to spend around to 850 000 Euro for the equipment providing that the rest money is expected to be spent on training. Note, that telling about equipment I mean the equipment that meets modern requirements and has a level of automation considerably higher than that characteristic  for the equipment installed at our plants in England.

Popov:

Well, another question that arises is what we shall get in return. I’d hate to think it would be money spent with insufficient return or no return.

Crow:

No it wouldn’t. Moving back on to your question about the profitability of the new enterprise I think that we are to expect it from 10 to 15 % of our fixed capital investment that is around of 100 000 to 150 000 Euros per year.

Lewis:

But while talking about income don’t forget that at the end of each business year we’ll have to decide how much of the profit should be retained in the business.

Popov:

When it comes to it I think that both of our sides will hold to the routine pattern. The Board of Directors should recommended and the Annual General Meeting of the shareholders decide that kind o matter. We shall have to prepare and publish annual Report of the joint-stock company and send it out to every shareholder. From the published Report the shareholders can easily determine the total profit the joint-stock company has earned and how much is available for distribution.

Lewis:

That’s precisely correct.

Popov:

Fine. So we’ll discuss the questions of recruitment and also the trade union in greater detail at our next meeting on the third of February. Have I covered everything?

Lewis:

Yes, that seems to be all, except one detail.

Popov:

What detail have we omitted?

Lewis:

What actually I have in mined is a trademark that might be a distinctive symbol, character, sign, or name that enables consumers to identify products our joint-stock company will manufacture. And as you know, by associating a product with a trademark as a sign of quality and not only buy the same product again, but also buy other products with the same trademark. But I wonder, whether your company has got any?

Popov:

To tell you’re the truth, we haven’t got any trademark yet. And what’s more, our Board of Directors has never paced any emphasis on it considering a issue would be of lesser importance to us.

Lewis:

I don’t think it would be wide to waive the idea of a trademark, thought it’s not an easy thing to event one from the legislative point of view.

Popov:

Is it? What kind of problems can one face while trying to design and put into circulation a trademark for a company?

Lewis:

Well, It’s John, who has the knack of giving all of examples to illustrate any legal problem. Would you mined, John, illustrating peculiarities involved?

Crow:

OK, I’ll give you the down-to earth example reflecting the essence if the matter. Suppose, after years of experimenting with different recipes, I have finally perfected my barbecue sauce. I hope that this will be the first in a small line of food products that I shall sell at local farmers markets. To make sure that my customers know this barbecue sauce is mine, I ask a designer it create a distinctive trademark that I cant put on the bottles of sauce.

I must choose a trademark that is not generic or simply descriptive of my product. For instance, I cannot trademark such names as Barbecue Sauce or Spicy Barbecue Sauce. Furthermore, my trademark must not make a false or misleading information. If I named my sauce Crow’s Scotch Whisky Barbecue Sauce, the sauce would have to contain Scotch whiskey. In addition, I must make sure that no one else has a trademark like mine. If I begin selling product with my trademark, nobody else has the right to use it.

Lewis:

Well, John, you explanation is precisely correct and the example you’ve given to illustrate it is extremely picturesque.

Popov:

Honestly speaking, John, I am absolutely delighted with the way you explain and illustrate all stores of tricky financial and legal questions. By and large, we may discuss the necessity for the new joint-stock company to get a trademark at our next meeting too. This time, I hope, we have covered everything, haven’t we?

Lewis:

It looks that way.

Popov:

Well, in case, let’s go and have a drink together before lunch.