While still part of the consortium, Leader insisted on improving the terms of the agreement or joining the consortium with a partner, InfraOne analysts explained. Now such a partner may appear. There are two contenders - the Turkish Renaissance Construction, as well as a consortium that will include a large Gazprom contractor - the VIS group, said three negotiators and two people close to Renaissance Construction.
A representative of the VIS group confirmed that the company is applying to participate in the project in a consortium with the Italian Astaldi (participated in the construction of the Western High-Speed Diameter in St. Petersburg).
Representatives of Renaissance Construction and Astaldi did not respond to Vedomosti’s request.
Renaissance Construction has moved further in the negotiations, according to two participants in the project discussion: an agreement of intent has been signed with it. However, this is a non-legally binding document, one of them adds, negotiations are ongoing. A representative of the state company Avtodor, which oversees the construction and operation of toll roads in Russia, did not answer the question about new investors.
New ring
The construction of a new ring road around Moscow with a length of 530 km should cost 313 billion rubles. Almost half of the funds were allocated from the fund national welfare. Only one of the four sections will be free - the western part of the ring from Minskoye (M1) to Leningradskoye Shosse (M10).
Renaissance Construction, the general contractor for the Lakhta Center in St. Petersburg, has recently encountered problems in Russia. In the fall, FSB officers conducted searches in her office in a criminal case for violation of currency laws, TASS reported. The company denied the allegations at the time.
PF VIS is owned by its general director Igor Snegurov and Dmitry Ryabov, who is also the general director of TEK Mosenergo, a major contractor of the Gazprom group owned by Igor Rotenberg. But Ryabov plans to leave the co-owners of the company, his acquaintance assures. A representative of the VIS group denies this.
VIS has also been a contractor of Gazprom for a long time. From 2009 to 2017, its order portfolio, according to the company itself, grew from 74 billion to 513 billion rubles. Its two largest road projects are the construction of the Khabarovsk bypass and railway Bovanenkovo - Sabetta, says a representative of VIS.
Investors have a condition - the construction timeline for the Central Ring Road-4 must be shifted after 2020; it is impossible to build earlier, said two people participating in the discussion of the project, confirmed by a federal official and two people close to Renaissance Construction. The government allots 36 months for road construction after receiving permission, says a person close to Renaissance Construction: about two years remain. So far, Avtodor, according to its representative, has not received such proposals - “for at least, official and justified": construction must be completed in accordance with the project passport approved by the government - by the end of 2019. But the possibilities of builders are not unlimited and, unfortunately, they depend little on government decisions, the federal official admits.
At the beginning of June, the head of Avtodor, Sergei Kelbakh, promised that an agreement with the concessionaire for the Central Ring Road-4 would happen in October, but this has not happened yet. Avtodor has been criticized more than once because of the Central Ring Road. In 2015, Dmitry Medvedev reprimanded Kelbakh, and at the same time the Federal Antimonopoly Service raised complaints about competitions for the construction of the Central Ring Road. And in the spring of 2017, the Accounts Chamber issued an order to Avtodor due to failure to meet the deadlines for the construction of the third and fourth sections of the Central Ring Road - if the state company does not eliminate them by December 30, then operations on its accounts may be suspended, the auditor of the Accounts Chamber Valery Bogomolov threatened.
Not only the timing of the project is being discussed, but also the estimate, says a negotiator. Its increase is not discussed in negotiations with the VIS group, Snegurov said through a representative. The costs are determined by the project passport and have not changed (more than 90 billion rubles, about half must be invested by the investor), a representative of Avtodor points out.
Avtodor demands that an agreement be signed first and an investor appear in the project, and “then somehow resolve the issue of postponing the deadline,” says one of the participants in the negotiations. But investors don't want to risk their money, he adds. Foreign investors can understand: investments in Russia are possible only subject to clear guarantees - in in this case rescheduling, says Mikhail Blinkin, director of the HSE Institute of Transport. In the summer, Deputy General Director of Avtoban (member of the South-Eastern Highway consortium) Denis Anisimov estimated the degree of readiness of the territory for the construction of the Central Ring Road-4 at 20%, promising that the company would ask to postpone the completion of the project: “The fourth section is virgin land, this forests, swamps." Representatives of the Ministry of Transport and Avtoban did not answer questions from Vedomosti.
Micro company with authorized capital 150 thousand was able to obtain contracts from Gazprom for the construction of the Power of Siberia gas pipeline worth about 8 billion rubles. The winning bidder has no more than 5 people on its staff, and its general director was previously involved in organizing the delivery of pensions. Experts believe that there is a sign that a large contract has been transferred to a “pilot” company.
Inter Management LLC received 34 contracts from Gazprom for the construction of the Power of Siberia export gas pipeline to China. The total amount of contracts is 7.85 billion rubles. According to Interfax, each of the contracts does not exceed 400 million rubles, the work concerns the construction of temporary technological passages, technological sites, testing grounds for technical equipment and software, overhead power lines, as well as the lineman’s house and the construction of a landing pad for helicopters. At the same time, the only competitor of Inter Management at the public auction was the Moscow company TEKsvyazengineering LLC. But he was the only one who applied for some of the purchases won by Inter Management.
Little is known about the company that will receive almost 8 billion. According to the SPARK-Interfax system, it was registered in Moscow in August 2016 with an authorized capital of 150 thousand rubles, and it employs no more than 5 people. The company belongs to the general director Sergei Samarin, who was a co-owner of the already liquidated company Sever Stroy Engineering LLC from the city of Nizhnevartovsk, as well as a director municipal institution“Delivery of pensions” in Nizhnevartovsk.
This contractor, somewhat inappropriate for the scale of the work, raised questions. “This is not the first time. Gazprom has already expressed its preference for companies that did not have any experience in the proposed work. As far as I remember, one of the companies also won a large contract for construction works as part of the “Power of Siberia” project, a company that had previously been engaged in delivering pizza throughout a small regional city. Gazprom, of course, has no legal grounds for choosing such a contractor, since such companies cannot prove their competence and, in principle, should not even undergo the initial pre-qualification selection to participate in such competitions. The only explanation is that such companies are “pads” or “screens” for someone who does not want to shine. Apparently, Gazprom will again have very familiar contractors for such large works, companies whose owners are Messrs. Timchenko, Rotenberg, and so on, and formally this company will be represented by this “gasket,” the partner commented to Bfm.ru consulting company Rusenergy Mikhail Krutikhin. Forbes magazine previously wrote about Gazprom’s suspicious “inclination” to hand out billion-dollar contracts to micro-enterprises. “Now Gazprom has very exotic, at first glance, desires - to give orders to unknown or little-known companies. Evgeniy Lavrinenko’s enterprise “Tomskpromtrans” with five employees received 40 contracts worth 8 billion rubles for the construction of “Power of Siberia” facilities,” the publication wrote in its rating “Kings of Government Orders – 2017.”
However, according to Pavel Zavalny, deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on Energy, in this situation it is not Gazprom who is to blame, but the laws on public procurement. “I know that there is a program to support small businesses, and Gazprom and any monopolies should, in my opinion, give up to 15% of all contracts to small businesses. That's it, this program is being implemented. If the company meets the required criteria, no matter what the volume, Gazprom has no reason to reject it. It is clear that small businesses will not do the work themselves; they will hire someone. We insisted on giving away 15% of all contracts. Obviously, they’re giving it away,” Bfm.ru quotes the parliamentarian.
By the way, the radio station’s correspondents reached Inter Management LLC. A man answered the phone and introduced himself as Alexander. He did not specify the position and did not explain anything about the contract that was so successful for the microcompany, asking to send an official request; he refused to make oral comments, because “there is a very large flow of information and there is simply no time.”
Stroygazconsulting (SGK) returned to the ranks of Gazprom's largest contractors, finding itself alongside the companies of billionaires Gennady Timchenko and Arkady Rotenberg and having received orders from the monopoly worth 18.2 billion rubles since the beginning of the year, RBC reported on Tuesday, April 19, with reference to for materials on the government procurement portal.
The publication notes that only the traditionally largest contractors of the monopoly - Rotenberg's Stroygazmontazh and Timchenko's Stroytransgaz - have a larger number of orders from Gazprom. These companies received orders worth 25 billion rubles and 20.4 billion rubles, respectively, RBC clarifies.
Basically, SGK received contracts for major repairs of gas pipelines. Stroygazconsulting refused to comment on this information, and Gazprom did not respond to the publication’s request.
Just four years ago, SGK, founded by Ziyad Manasir in 1996, was one of the largest executors of monopoly orders. During the four years of Dmitry Medvedev's presidency, Stroygazconsulting, according to Forbes calculations, won contracts from state-owned companies for almost 730 billion rubles. 2012 brought the company orders for another 80 billion rubles. But in 2013, Forbes calculated, Manasir was able to receive contracts for only 35 billion rubles - this is almost half as much as the year before.
In the summer of 2013, the former owner and president of SGK Manasir complained to the executive secretary of the presidential commission on the fuel and energy sector, Igor Sechin, that Gazprom was delaying payments to contractors and was not giving new contracts. In 2014, the company did not receive a single new contract from Gazprom.
In January 2015 new president SGK Mikhail Yakibchuk sent a letter to the head of Gazprom, Alexey Miller, in which he asked him to make a decision on the participation of SGK in investment program gas holding since 2015 and instruct controlled structures to pay the company’s expenses.
SGK began working with Gazprom again after the change of owners. In the spring of 2015, Gazprombank and the UCP fund managed by Ilya Shcherbovich bought the company from Manasir and his partner Ruslan Baysarov. On August 19, 2015, SGK won the Gazprom Dobycha Nadym tender for the construction of a rotational complex worth 293 million rubles at the Bovanenkovskoye field, RBC recalls. In total, in 2015, the company received contracts worth 20.2 billion rubles from the monopoly.
Due to the lack of new Gazprom contracts, SGK had problems with creditors. According to the Arbitration database, creditors filed claims to recover 11.2 billion rubles, in 2015 - for 46.6 billion rubles. Since the beginning of 2016, the company has received claims from creditors for another 6 billion rubles. Amount of company debts transferred bailiffs and outstanding, exceeds 17.7 billion rubles, notes RBC, citing data from SPARK.
Miller's subordinates are losing billions in arbitrations. State monopoly mining companies are going to court en masse
Gazprom structures accused their contractors of illegal enrichment at gas monopoly construction sites in the Yamalo-Nenets region Autonomous Okrug. The cost of claims against service companies, according to the state-owned company, is about 1 billion rubles. More than a dozen lawsuits have been filed against Stroygazconsulting LLC and Gazprom Burenie LLC. Representatives of Gazprom assets indicate that gas service companies managed to save significantly during the work, and demanded at least half of the proceeds from contractors. According to Gazprom Dobycha Nadym, the contractor won more than 980 million from crushed stone alone for the development of the Bovanenkovskoye and Kharasaveyskoye fields. At the same time, Gazprom’s subsidiary tried to close the conflict proceedings to public access, citing commercial secrets in their statements. Meanwhile, arbitration courts in several regions consistently took the side of the defendants, refusing to fill Gazprom’s budgets by saving on contracts, and the state-owned mining enterprises were left without billions of rubles.
The subsidiaries of PJSC Gazprom became involved in litigation for hundreds of millions of rubles with a large contractor of the gas monopoly, Stroygazconsulting LLC, which worked at facilities in the Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug. Thus, in arbitration courts there are currently claims from Gazprom Dobycha Nadym, Gazprom Dobycha Urengoy and Gazprom Dobycha Yamburg (100% of the founders of all are Gazprom PJSC), in which the companies insist on unjust enrichment of their partners.
Bovanenkovskoye field
Photo: gazprom.ru
The largest claims against Stroygazconsulting LLC (St. Petersburg) were made by Gazprom Dobycha Nadym LLC, demanding to recover 982.7 million rubles from the organization. As follows from the materials of the Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg and Leningrad region, the producing asset of Gazprom entered into an agreement with the contractor back in 2006, according to which it “at its own risk and at the expense of its own or borrowed funds” must carry out construction work as part of the development of the Bovanenkovskoye and Kharasaveyskoye gas condensate fields in the Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug.
Subsequently, as stated in the case, the work of Stroygazconsulting at the sites was accepted by the customer in in full and without objection. But later, the managers of Gazprom Dobycha Nadym considered that they had overpaid the company and made multi-million dollar demands on the builders. Gazprom lawyers indicated that as a result of deviations actual cost crushed stone from the price recorded in the acts of form KS-2 for the period from August 2014 to March 2016, unjust enrichment arose in the form of savings in the amount of more than 982 million rubles. The mining asset demanded the return of these funds, but was refused by the contractor, which became the basis for the proceedings.
The court, however, did not agree with the arguments of the Yamal company, pointing out that the concluded agreement did not provide for the conditions and procedure for the distribution of savings. In addition, the arbitration, citing Article 710 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, noted that the contractor retains the right to pay for the work at the price specified in the contract unless the customer proves that the savings affected the quality of the work performed. Based on this, the court refused to recover funds from Stroygazconsulting LLC.
Let us note that Gazprom Dobycha Nadym tried to challenge this decision in the next instance, but the Thirteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal the day before made another decision in favor of the contractor. In addition to the claim for 982 million, Gazprom Dobycha Nadym also initiated other proceedings with Stroygazconsulting, in which it demanded to recover 16.3 and 52.2 million rubles, respectively. In one of them, it was also about unjust enrichment, and the mining asset insisted that “half of the savings received by the general contractor are due to the customer.” On this moment both proceedings are pending before the courts and have yet to be decided.
It is especially worth noting that Gazprom’s subsidiaries tried to close the courts from a wider audience, citing the fact that the submitted applications allegedly contained trade secrets, and in a number of cases they succeeded. In particular, in a closed court hearing, claims against Stroygazconsulting from Gazprom Dobycha Urengoy, which demanded to recover more than 92.3 million rubles from the company, were considered. At the moment it is only known that Arbitration court St. Petersburg and the Leningrad region, as in the case of Gazprom Dobycha Nadym, refused the state company, and now it has tried to challenge this decision in an appeal.
Gazprom Dobycha Yamburg also made colossal claims against Stroygazconsulting, initiating three cases in which it tried to recover more than 1.1 billion rubles in total. According to the Moscow Arbitration Court, in particular, we are talking about the contractor’s work at the Yamburg oil, gas and condensate field in Yamal.
“During the internal audit and analysis accepted works for the construction of “Connecting additional wells in the Lower Cretaceous deposits of the Yamburg oil and gas condensate field”, the plaintiff discovered that when carrying out work on transporting soil for the construction of roads to additional well clusters, the defendant used more powerful equipment than provided estimate documentation. <…>The calculation showed that the use of dump trucks with a carrying capacity of up to 30 tons led to a reduction in the cost of transporting 1 ton of cargo.<…>The change in the power of the equipment led to a deviation in the calculation of the cost of accepted work, according to the estimates, which do not correspond actual expenses. Thus, the plaintiff indicates that the defendant unjustly enriched himself in the amount of 355.8 million,” stated Gazprom’s lawyers.
Let us note that in all three cases, Gazprom Dobycha Yamburg was unable to defend its positions. In one case, the company lost in three instances; in two others, this month it completely abandoned its cassation appeals.
It is noteworthy that these are not all conflicts in which gas monopoly structures are trying to recover allegedly unjust enrichment from contractors. Pravda UrFO has already reported in detail about the vessels of PJSC Gazprom and Gazprom Dobycha Urengoy with Gazprom Burenie LLC (founders: Igor and Boris Rotenberg, as well as Alexander Zamyatin). In two cases alone, the contractor was presented with claims in excess of 400 million rubles. In particular, they talked about work at the pilot site of the Achimov deposits of the Urengoy oil and gas condensate field (Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug).
In addition to the claims already described above, last year Gazprom structures initiated at least three proceedings with the assets of the Rotenbergs. Gazprom Dobycha Urengoy demanded to recover 203.6 million (lost in the first instance, the claims are now being considered on appeal). In addition, Gazprom Dobycha Yamburg also announced unjust enrichment of the oligarchs, filing claims for 57.8 and 67.5 million rubles. However, the gas monopoly lost in both cases in court.
Every day, Gazprom Group companies compete for dozens of multi-billion dollar tenders, a significant share of which is for the construction and repair of linear and underwater crossings of main gas pipelines. This topic is especially relevant in the context of the upcoming unprecedented construction of the Power of Siberia gas pipeline, the first part of which, 208 km long, was received without competition by Gennady Timchenko’s Stroytransgaz. As Gazprom explained, the transfer of such a volume of work on a non-competitive basis became a forced step - in due to lack of time to complete the planned program. But representatives of the state monopoly promised to “play out” the rest of the volumes, taking into account all competitive procedures.
However, the issue of competition in last years becomes rhetorical, since the winners of Gazprom’s largest lots are de facto known - in addition to the aforementioned STG, the fight is being waged by Ziyad Manasir’s Stroygazconsulting LLC, Arkady Rotenberg’s StroyGazMontazh LLC (before the introduction of anti-Russian sanctions, it belonged on a parity basis to Arkady and Boris Rotenberg), Gazprom-Invest-Yug (a subsidiary of Gazprom).
Manasir’s participation, however, in recent years has been more of a decorative nature - a businessman of Jordanian origin, who was once among the kings of government contracts for Forbes version, quarreled with the top Gazprom authorities and therefore lost his influence (last year his company actually came under the control of management led by Chechen businessman Ruslan Baysarov).
In general, all general contractors were or became “insiders” for the management of the gas giant.
But what if “their” general contractors also have “their” subcontractors - those who take a piece of the huge pie? As an investigation by Novaya Gazeta shows, the national heritage of our country has been redistributed from the initial customer to the final performer. The higher the person sits, on whom at least something depends, the greater the size of his profits. The amount of funds extracted by the general contractor (who often does not carry out any work) can now reach 25%, the subcontractor following him receives his 7-15%, the remaining cash flows are distributed evenly among the management of the Gazprom structure, which places an order for the execution of certain or other works, and final performers.
How in modern world those who want to cling to the gas pipe live and get along, can be understood from the example of a specific story in the Samara region. It has a place for everything - an artificial increase in the cost of work, and an attempt by management to bypass its shareholder to cut off a competing subcontractor, and an attempt by the subcontractor himself to offer a billion rubles for the right to work as a kind of “kickback” - for the needs of the Dynamo football club, For example.
On September 17, 2013, the corporate cost management department of OJSC Gazprom posted a notice of bidding for work on major repairs of the facility of Gazprom Transgaz Samara LLC “2nd district of the underwater passage of the Urengoy - Novopskov gas pipeline through the Kuibyshev reservoir” . That is, the time has come to change the pipes through which gas flows to Russian and Ukrainian consumers.
The initial cost of work on the reserve lines of the Urengoy-Novopskov gas pipeline was 2.355 billion rubles, but as a result of recalculation, the price exceeded 5 billion. The doubling of the cost, according to an employee of Gazprom Transgaz Samara, was due to the results of a pre-repair inspection carried out in parallel by two applicants for the contract .
On October 22, 2013, the commission for summing up the results of requests for proposals, chaired by the head of the department for corporate cost management of OJSC Gazprom Mikhail Sirotkin, identified the general contractor - it became StroyGazMontazh of the Rotenberg brothers (document 1; document 2).
According to the Federal Register government contracts, in 2013 this structure received orders from Gazprom for total amount over 300 billion rubles, so the chances of winning the Samara auction were extremely high. However, almost the entire scope of SGM’s work, says a Gazprom employee, is subcontracted to “its” structures, withholding an official general contracting commission of 2% of the contract value (and an unofficial commission of 20-25%). In recent years, SpetsGazmontazhStroy LLC (SGMS) has been among its “friends”.
On October 25, the director for capital repairs of SGM sent a letter to the Samara Transgaz about the admission of SGMS employees to the facility (document). Thus, the management of the Rotenberg company made a fundamental decision to transfer the volume of work to SGMS, although at that time there was no subcontract agreement and from a legal point of view, the SGMS members were something like a team of volunteers.
We will return to this company later - but for now let's see what happened next.
Subcontracting under the carpet
Three days later, the deputy general director Gazprom Transgaz Samara LLC sent another letter to Alexander Golovachev indicating the structure of the work organization (document 1; document 2): according to this circular, SGMS was to become the subcontractor, and Podvodgazenergoservice LLC (“PGES”) was to become the actual contractor. .
"PGES" is the flagship enterprise of the Gazprom group of companies for the diagnosis and repair of underwater gas pipelines and one of the oldest in the gas monopolist system (the history of "PGES" dates back to 1972); The company, through OJSC Gazenergoservis, is controlled by Gazprom Tsentrremont LLC under the leadership of Dmitry Doev.
Despite the formal subordination to Doev, PGES is associated with the head of the Gazprom capital repair department, Alexander Filatov.
In 2008-2009, Filatov headed PGES, but in 2012 he moved to the central office of Gazprom. According to an employee of the monopolist, the new appointment took place largely thanks to the support of deputy chairman of the board Vitaly Markelov, who “actually created a new division under Filatov.” After Filatov’s departure, PGES was headed by his deputy Anton Nikonenko, who was considered a relative of the ex-boss. PGES categorically denied the family ties between Filatov and Nikonenko. One way or another, according to the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, Nikonenko owns Ceramic Materials Plant LLC together with Filatov’s sister Elena.
And when SGM had already decided on contractors, a new one appeared who wanted to repair the pipes under the Samara reservoir - VolgaUralSpetsStroy LLC (VUSS).
This company, once considered the “main subcontractor” of PGES, decided to work autonomously at the end of 2012, shares a Gazprom employee: “The founders of the company (father and son Alexander and Stanislav Serov - A.S.) parted ways with Filatov and Nikonenko - and there was a clear intention to crush them.”
But back in 2013, the management of Gazprom seriously considered the issue of introducing the technology developed by the Serovs for repairing various types of defects in main gas pipelines “using couplings with filling the interpipe space with a composite material.”
In 2012, deputy chairman of the board Vitaly Markelov reported to the head of the Gazprom board Alexey Miller about the uniqueness of this technology.
While engaged in R&D, VUSS simultaneously received significant amounts of work for the needs of regional “transgases” - mainly as a subcontractor to PGES. But then their paths diverged.
A representative of PGES, in response to a request from Novaya Gazeta, said that the VolgaUralSpetsStroy company “in the second half of 2013 compromised itself with the low quality of repairs of underwater gas pipelines to direct customers, and due to repeated violations of contractual relations, failure to complete work on time and "In the period 2012-2013, further cooperation with them was terminated."
We tried to contact father and son Serov to find out their vision of the situation, but their phones were not answered.
Football club
According to a representative of one of the contracting organizations familiar with the story around VUSS, “Serov Sr. parted ways with the management of PGES for financial reasons, after which he decided to act over Filatov’s head and negotiate [on the scope of work] with SGM.”
However, in 2013, an agreement arose between the management of SGM and PGES “to exclude VUSS from the chain of subcontractors,” shares a representative of one of the contractors: “As far as I heard, through a Gazprom employee, Serov and Boris Romanovich Rotenberg were contacted - the owner and director of VUSS was very persistent in his request to receive part of the work as a subcontractor. Rothenberg was not against it either. As I remember, Goryukhin (director of SGM - A.S.) didn’t really like this.”
On November 21, 2013, Deputy General Director of SGM Yaroslav Soga sent Filatov a letter approving the involvement of a contractor (document): “...In accordance with the instructions of the First Deputy Chairman of the Board of OJSC Gazprom (apparently, Vitaly Markelov was meant. - A.S. ), taking into account the technically complex nature of the work being performed, and also taking into account the request of Gazprom Transgaz Samara LLC, I ask you to agree on the involvement of Podvodgazenergoservice LLC as a contractor [at the Urengoy-Novopskov facility]..."
Novaya Gazeta provided this document to interested parties - SGM and Gazprom - as well as representatives of two Gazprom contractors performing work on the linear crossings of the company's pipelines.
SGM announced that it was conducting an internal investigation, but refrained from further public comments. Gazprom considered this document “like a fake.”
Before voicing the versions of the origin of this document, we propose to study two others that followed it: the first (dated November 27, 2013) - a letter from Ruslan Goryukhin addressed to Alexander Filatov with a request to “explore the possibility of attracting VolgaUralSpetsStroy LLC to work on the facility,” and the second (November 28, 2013) - Filatov’s answer. The last one is worth quoting (document):
“The VolgaUralSpetsstroy LLC organization does not have sufficient material and technical resources and qualified personnel, and also does not have experience in performing technologically complex deep-sea works similar to the [Urengoy-Novopskov] facility. To carry out work on this object We recommend that you consider engaging Podvodgazenergoservice LLC.
At first glance, this letter looks like overt lobbying of a company in which Filatov once worked as a director and which is now headed by a stranger to him. But two market participants who have read the correspondence claim that Filatov was asked to write this letter. “Although, of course, he didn’t mind - the person with whom he had a relationship at that time asked him constructive relationships", says Novaya's interlocutor. Who could ask him about this “constructively”?
Representatives of the contractors believe that Ruslan Goryukhin did this, and the correspondence itself had one goal - to convince Boris Rotenberg that the management of Gazprom is categorically against VUSS: “Goryukhin’s subcontract with SGMS fell through precisely because of his activity.” WOOSS.” In order to punish them [the Serovs], it was necessary to configure Rotenberg in a certain way. And this, understanding the magnitude of Boris Romanovich, could only be done in one way - by inventing a conflict with Gazprom. Like, they [at Gazprom] want PGES to join the cooperation instead of VUSS - will we quarrel with Markelov or will we give in?”
The fact that “the subcontract with SGMS fell through” is evidenced by a letter from the management of SGM to Gazprom Transgaz Samara dated December 2, 2013 (document), in which the representative of the general contractor asked “not to take into account the letters sent dated 10/25/2013 ( on the admission of SGMS employees to the facility. - A. S.), and dated 10/28/2013 (on approval of the structure of work. - A. S.).”
In addition, as representatives of Gazprom contractors noted, Alexander Serov showed enviable persistence. On December 5, 2013, he sent a letter to FC Dynamo addressed to the newly appointed president of the club, Boris Rotenberg (document 1; document 2): “VolgaUralSpetsstroy LLC specializes in construction, reconstruction and major repairs of facilities oil and gas industry, has the necessary personnel, organizational and technical readiness to perform tasks that meet the requirements of the contract, control and contract documentation of OJSC Gazprom. The issue of engaging VUSS as a permanent subcontractor for major repairs [of a facility in the Samara region] is currently being considered. VUSS" to carry out work on these facilities would allow us to allocate up to 1 billion rubles to support the development of domestic sports and FC Dynamo. during 2014-2015 We express our deep respect to you and look forward to long-term cooperation.”
SGM did not comment on this letter.
A representative of the Gazprom contractor is aware of this appeal and says that Serov’s move was impeccable - because “Boris Romanovich became the president of Dynamo and this gesture was very important for him.”
It should be noted that the practice of financing clubs by partners of its shareholders has been especially widespread in recent years. Due to the use of barriers by the European Football Union (UEFA) financial measures(Financial Fair Play), limiting income from the shareholder and related parties, people controlling football clubs are trying to diversify the investor base.
However, despite the unequivocal proposal for a “rollback” through football club, Serov failed to achieve a subcontract agreement. And Boris Rotenberg, apparently incorrectly informed by his management, decided to “give in” - and at the end of 2013, SGM nevertheless concluded a subcontract agreement with PGES. (And Dynamo was left without a billion...)
For VUSS, defeat in this battle turned out to be fatal, says one of Gazprom’s contractors: in 2014, the company declared bankruptcy.
An employee of one of Gazprom's contracting organizations, familiar with the situation, has his own vision of what was happening: “Serov was simply removed from the board - his further interaction with Filatov and Nikonenko became impossible. In fact, for VUSS the main task was to stop the negative cash flow- debts grew, including bank interest. And when you have loans and the bulk of your revenue comes from orders from Gazprom, which you suddenly stop receiving, it’s a death sentence!”
Returning to Serov’s letter to Rotenberg, the interlocutor suggests paying attention to the amount of the offer - “up to 1 billion rubles” - and immediately asks the question: “What should be the profitability of the contract if the subcontractor is ready to pay a billion to receive it?”
According to a Gazprom employee, the facility in the Samara region “has too high a profitability, but for management in a particular case, it is first of all important that the work be completed.” Gazprom does not comment on this.
Meanwhile, problems seem to have arisen with the execution of the work. An employee of Gazprom Transgaz Samara says that the plan for 2014 was not actually implemented due to “reasons beyond the control of the customer.”
According to him, at the end of 2014, the director of Transgaz, Vladimir Subbotin, was personally contacted by “a big man from the capital repair department of Gazprom” with a request to sign an acceptance certificate for the work performed, despite the “actual absence of these works”: “This is in some way That's a degree of mockery. First they impose a contractor on you, and then they blame you for his sabotage. And, unfortunately, nothing can be done about it: firstly, the head of any “transgas” is dependent on the central office, and secondly, Subbotin was threatened with dismissal for not spending the budget.”
Vladimir Subbotin left Novaya’s request unanswered.
The representative of PGES admits that the practice of signing an act without actually completing the work, “as in all large enterprises,” exists: “But this does not mean that the work will not be completed, the deadline is simply postponed. How else? If we don't master the money in reporting period, on next year they won't shift. We have to ask to close the interest accounts. It becomes a kind of advance."
According to PGES, the final contractor repair work is ZAO Podvodno-Tehnicheskiy Trest (PTT) and LLC SpetsNefteGazMontazh (SNGM).
The representative of PGES does not disclose the amount of subcontract agreements with PTT and SNGM, noting that “the companies long term are stable and reliable partners in this service market, have positive characteristics, decent technical support and qualified personnel.”
How well known are these companies in the market?
If the competence of PTT, even after a cursory study, does not raise any doubts - the company, owned by the famous Samara businessman Artem Sobolev and his wife Anna, has sufficient personnel and equipment to perform technically complex work - then the activities of SGM are much more mysterious. According to the Federal Tax Service, SpetsNefteGazMontazh LLC was founded by Margarita Bondar and Sergei Petrov in April 2013 in the Samara region, and at the end of 2014 it was re-registered with other owners in Moscow. There is no information about the company's availability of specialized equipment and staff.
As a rule, explains a representative of the Gazprom contractor, such companies are included in the chain for one purpose - to withdraw money.
The Rotenbergs' best friend
In the fight for a subcontract agreement for the Urengoy-Novopskov facility, SGMS lost, but in general the company, according to three sources unrelated to each other, remains the “exclusive” subcontractor of Arkady Rotenberg’s SGM in the construction and repair of underground passages of main gas pipelines . What kind of company is this?
According to the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, SpetsGaz-MontrazhStroy LLC was founded at the end of 2011 by a certain entrepreneur Andrei Chelomin, after which the main share (85%) was received by businessman Andrei Dzhagarbekov.
However, according to our sources, including in law enforcement agencies, until the summer of 2014, actual control over the company was exercised by entrepreneur Vitaly Kachur, who is currently in the Lefortovo pre-trial detention center on charges of complicity in fraud and testifies against State Duma deputy Denis Voronenkov (see “Money was needed for elections”, No. 37 of Novaya).
Through SGMS, explains a representative of the Gazprom contractor, Kachur could, among other things, optimize SGM’s costs.
Kachur’s connection with SGMS can be established by indirect evidence: according to the operational information from the FSB FSB (document), attached to the materials of the criminal case, the businessman used premises for work in a building located at the address: st. Donskaya, 29/9. “SGMS” (document) was located at the same address at that time.
According to our source, immediately after the arrest, Vitaly Kachur contacted Ruslan Goryukhin to report “about the current situation.” SGM and SGMS refused to comment on their interaction with Kachur, as well as his connection with Goryukhin. Be that as it may, less than a month after Kachur’s arrest, Goryukhin left the post of head of SGM (he was replaced by Andrei Kirilenko), moving to the position of adviser to the general director. However, his influence on the company’s decisions, shares an employee of one of the contracting organizations, has not been lost - “SGMS”, despite the lack of a number of permits, entered into a number of agreements with “SGM” in 2015.
It seems that now they will be the main “insiders” among the “insiders”. In a wonderful world where everyone is willing to get five billion for a job that was previously priced at half that price, and donate “up to a billion” for the favorite toy of the person writing the check, others don’t survive.