The Commission's further noted that the CEIEB claimed both that the Union industry did extremely well during the period considered (as stated in recital (146)) and that its business model and management was affected by structural flaws and other shortcomings stated in recital (151) of such a scale that it would explain why the sales of the Union industry grew by only 20 % over the period considered when imports from the PRC increased by 250 %.
Ces indicateurs ont permis d'aboutir à la conclusion qu'il existe un préjudice important, mais ne peuvent être interprétés comme constituant, en eux-mêmes, une conclusion complète en ce sens (ni, d'ailleurs, remplacer la détermination globale du préjudice effectuée par la Commission).