Yulmart owner Dmitry Kostygin. Why was Yulmart owner Dmitry Kostygin detained?

The co-owner of Yulmart was returned a preventive measure with permission to go to work

The Smolninsky District Court of St. Petersburg returned Dmitry Kostygin, co-owner of one of the largest online retailers in Russia, Yulmart, accused of embezzling 1 billion rubles, back under house arrest. credit funds received from Sberbank. The entrepreneur himself denies guilt, and his defense intends to appeal the court decision. Sberbank told Kommersant that negotiations with Mr. Kostygin on debt settlement were unsuccessful.

On Monday, the Smolninsky District Court considered the request of the Main Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee for St. Petersburg to re-elect a preventive measure for Dmitry Kostygin, who was detained in October last year on charges of particularly large-scale fraud in the field of lending (Part 4 of Article 159.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). As follows from the case materials, Mr. Kostygin applied to Sberbank for a loan for the online retailer Yulmart and received 1 billion rubles. in several tranches in the spring of 2016. At the same time, according to investigators, the entrepreneur misled employees of the financial institution by providing them with false information - in particular, by not informing about the existence of overdue obligations from Yulmart to other creditors. The businessman himself denies involvement in the act accused of him.

In October last year, the Smolninsky District Court placed Dmitry Kostygin under house arrest, but in February this year did not extend the preventive measure for the businessman. The corresponding decision was appealed to the City Court of St. Petersburg, which canceled it, returning the case for a new trial. At a meeting on April 6, the Main Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee withdrew its petition, since by that time the deadline had passed by which the investigation had asked to extend Dmitry Kostygin’s house arrest, but submitted to the district court a new application for the election of the same preventive measure to the co-owner of Yulmart. Since the businessman’s defenders were not properly notified of this request from the investigation, the hearing was postponed to April 9.

At the hearing, the Main Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation argued its position by the fact that the person involved in the case is accused of a serious crime, he has “significant funds outside the Russian Federation”, Dmitry Kostygin himself, his wife and four of their five children, in addition to Russian, have citizenship of St. Kitts and Nevis. In addition, according to investigators, the co-owner of Yulmart can put pressure on witnesses. A representative of Sberbank, recognized as the injured party, supported the request of the Main Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation.

The defense objected, seeing no grounds for choosing any preventive measure at all. According to the businessman himself, negotiations are currently underway with Sberbank about restructuring the loan. “I offered my options, but there is no answer yet,” explained the co-owner of Yulmart. As confirmation, the defense included in the case materials the correspondence between the entrepreneur and the financial institution.

Sberbank told Kommersant that negotiations with Mr. Kostygin on debt settlement did not lead to results due to the position of the businessman himself.

The entrepreneur, as stated in the financial institution, repeatedly failed to fulfill the agreement, so several months ago the bank stopped negotiations with him due to their ineffectiveness. At the same time, the credit institution emphasized that they continue to work to collect overdue debt and losses through legal proceedings.

The defense also included interviews with about a dozen witnesses that were conducted as part of the lawyer’s investigation: it follows from them that Dmitry Kostygin had nothing to do with receiving the loan. This argument was supported, in particular, by correspondence between the accused and one of his partners, Mikhail Vasinkevich, from which it followed that it was the latter who agreed with Sberbank on the loan.

In addition, the defense drew the court's attention to the fact that although since February 14, no procedural coercion measure had been applied to Dmitry Kostygin, he notified the investigation in advance about his departure and himself petitioned the Main Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee to carry out investigative actions.

The court sent Dmitry Kostygin under house arrest for 36 days, until May 14. At the same time, the accused was allowed four-hour walks, during which he could attend work from eight in the morning to six in the evening. In addition, the court allowed four nannies for his children into the home where the entrepreneur is serving house arrest. Lawyer Alexey Dobrynin is going to get the city court to cancel the arrest.

Let us recall that Sberbank managed to recover 1 billion rubles from the online retailer through arbitration only on the fourth attempt. We also note that the criminal case was preceded by a conflict between Dmitry Kostygin and August Meyer, who own 31.6% and 29.9% of the shares of the online retailer, respectively, and Mikhail Vasinkevich, who controls 38.5% of the company through the Donna Union Foundation. The partners' differing views on business development led to the beginning of the confrontation. The majority shareholders proposed to continue investing in infrastructure and new products, while Mr. Vasinkevich insisted on optimizing the business and bringing it to break-even.

Also subscribe and read the news on our Telegram channel:

Dmitry Marakulin, Konstantin Kurkin

A criminal case was initiated at the request of Sberbank.

According to the investigation, Kostygin, being the chairman of the board of directors of the Yulmart Internet holding, on March 24, 2016, agreed with Sberbank to open a revolving credit line for 1 billion rubles. But, “without intending to fulfill the terms of the contract,” Kostygin provided the bank with false information about the state of Yulmart, the investigation believes. As a result, after receiving bank financing, “the defendant disposed of [it] at his own discretion.”

Yulmart completely stopped servicing the loan in April 2016, assures RBC’s interlocutor at Sberbank. The total amount of the holding's debt to the bank is 2.43 billion rubles, including credit and debt under the factoring scheme.

As a source familiar with the case materials explained to RBC, the bank and then the investigation considered the “false information” to be a violation of clause 2.3 of the loan agreement - the absence of unfulfilled or improperly fulfilled obligations to other creditors. A week before the signing of the agreement with Sberbank, on March 17, 2016, the Primorsky District Court of St. Petersburg received a claim from Oleg Morozov for the recovery of 248 million rubles from Yulmart. Morozov received the rights to claim this debt from Kostygin on March 15, 2016. In the fall of 2016, Morozov went to court with a petition for bankruptcy of Yulmart. “Based on the information we have, at the time of receiving the loan, individuals from among the management and beneficiaries of Yulmart were not just exploring the possibility of launching bankruptcy of the company to avoid liability to creditors, but were already taking very specific steps to do this,” the source explained to RBC in Sberbank.

There were no violations during the deal, Kostygin’s defense insists. “The court has already confirmed that there were no violations when issuing a loan of 1 billion rubles, and that the temporary forced non-repayment of the loan does not cause a loss to the bank,” said Konstantin Dobrynin.

The punishment provided for by law for fraud in the field of lending is up to ten years in prison and a fine of up to 1 million rubles. But, as an RBC source familiar with the investigation materials confirmed, and another source in the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for St. Petersburg confirmed, the case can be reclassified under Art. 196 of the Criminal Code (deliberate bankruptcy) - up to six years in prison. “Investigators believe that the agreement between Kostygin and Morozov was formal. It was concluded so that Dmitry Kostygin’s name would not appear in the bankruptcy case, which would be another sign of deliberate actions,” added the RBC source.

The investigation continues to question witnesses who could clarify whether Yulmart’s management entered into other agreements that were obviously unfavorable for the company, adds one of RBC’s interlocutors. In addition to the search at Kostygin’s place on October 10, investigative actions were carried out in the apartments of Morozov and the ex-CEO of Yulmart Sergei Fedorinov.

Who owns Yulmart now?

The Yulmart group, which develops an online store of the same name selling equipment, electronics and everyday goods, was founded in 2008 by Alexey Nikitin. In 2010, 50% of the company was acquired by Mikhail Vasinkevich, and in 2011-2014 the funds of Svoboda Corp. and Koshigi Ltd, controlled by Dmitry Kostygin and his long-time partner August Meyer, bought a 60% stake in Yulmart from Nikitin and Vasinkevich. Nikitin finally left the shareholders in 2016, selling the stake to Vasinkevich. As a result, in Ulmart’s parent company, Ulmart Holding Limited, Kostygin, through Koshigi Limited, owns 31.6%, and his partner August Meyer, through Svoboda Corp. - 29.9%. Another 38.5% belongs to the Donna Union Foundation, of which Vasinkevich is a beneficiary. ​

At the end of 2015, Yulmart was the largest player in the Russian online retail market, according to Data Insight. But in 2016, the company lost its leadership, and Yulmart’s turnover grew by only 2% over the year, to 49.3 billion rubles. The reason is the corporate conflict that flared up at the beginning of 2016. Shareholders had different views on the company's development. ​Vasinkevich wanted increased efficiency, while the other two partners insisted on aggressive expansion. Kostygin offered Vasinkevich to add $30 million to the company’s capital, but he refused and demanded the redemption of his share through a London court.

In the fall of 2016, A1, the investment division of Alfa Group, became Vasinkevich’s consultant in the dispute. A1 employees joined the board of directors of Yulmart, in response to which representatives of Kostygin and Meyer resigned. As a result, the work of the council was stopped, and Yulmart was left without a general director.

In March 2017, Kostygin said that the company itself would buy Vasinkevich’s share. It was assumed that after this the package would go to a new investor - the Da Vinci Capital fund. Kostygin hoped that the deal would be closed by the end of June. Kostygin called reaching agreements with Sberbank the key condition for attracting investors. As a result, the investment fund never entered into the company's capital.

Yulmart says that the company's operations are now continuing as usual. According to a representative of the Internet holding, “Yulmart’s management has done everything possible throughout this entire time to reach consensus and resolve issues related to debt obligations.” All agreements with partners that have already been reached, including on new projects, will be implemented, RBC’s interlocutor assures.

Why did Sberbank initiate criminal proceedings?

Banks from time to time resort to the help of law enforcement agencies to deal with problem borrowers. In particular, Sberbank filed a statement to initiate a criminal case against the head of the once largest importer of bananas, the JFC company, Vladimir Kekhman. Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika later responded to the passivity of the investigation into this case by another creditor of Kekhman’s structures, Raiffeisenbank.

Sberbank “consciously or not plays on the side of A1, which, in the interests of Mikhail Vasinkevich, has been unsuccessfully trying to attack Yulmart shareholders for almost a year and a half, not disdaining, as it seems to us, to use various government bodies in its own interests,” Kostygin’s lawyer Konstantin Dobrynin told RBC.

Representative A1 the group’s involvement in Kostygin’s conflict with Sberbank. “Sberbank, as a creditor of the group, has direct claims against Yulmart and Kostygin. There is a trial and decisions made on it,” he notes. “Lawyer Kostygin’s statement about the conspiracy between Sberbank and A1 is the fruit of his imagination,” said RBC’s interlocutor and refused to give further comments on “such statements.”

Could the case affect Kostygin’s other assets?

As a source close to Kostygin told RBC, and was also confirmed by representatives of two investment funds, all the time that the corporate conflict at Yulmart continued, the businessman tried in various ways to attract financing to settle with Sberbank - either through refinancing in other banks, or through selling shares in their other businesses. “Kostygin personally took part in all the negotiations, and, of course, given his arrest, it will be difficult to continue this work,” notes one of RBC’s interlocutors.

Yulmart is not Kostygin’s only business; he owns many other assets in the retail and consumer goods market, most often in partnership. In 2017, Forbes estimated his net worth at $550 million . Together with Meyer, he owns 51% of the second-largest drogerie chain "Rainbow Smile", 51% of the second largest chain of perfumes and cosmetics "Rive Gauche" (partner - Oleg Boyko's structures), 85% of the confectionery company "Lubimy Krai" and 90% of the hypermarket chain "Optotic club "Ryady". Kostygin is the sole shareholder of the Roztech company, which manages the Wild Orchid, Bustier and Defile chains. ​Also Kostygin, together with the former shareholder of CenterObuv Dmitry Vernimont, in the Stockmaster project (sale of store stocks through the auction system).

Representatives of companies related to Kostygin interviewed by RBC did not comment on how his detention would affect their business. As a source from Kostygin’s entourage explained to RBC, he was not involved in operational management anywhere except Yulmart, so “the arrest, at least in the short term, will not affect their work.”

Are Yulmart's problems a sign of a crisis in online retail?

The situation around Yulmart is “a classic problem of sharp growth in retail,” one of the capital’s investment bankers said in a conversation with RBC. Yulmart's accounts payable in 2016, according to SPARK-Interfax materials, amounted to 16 billion rubles. against 10 billion rubles. a year earlier. Loss in 2016 - 260 million rubles. against a profit of 288 million rubles. in 2015.

Yulmart's competitors in the field of online commerce also resort to bank lending - the accounts payable of Wildberries LLC (manages Russia's largest online store Wildberries) amounted to 11.5 billion rubles. in 2016 (revenue - 37.6 billion rubles), Kronar LLC, which manages Citylink, had 5.2 billion rubles. (revenue - 34 billion rubles). “Recently, Yulmart’s traffic has fallen from 20 million visits per month to 15 million, this is the most tragic drop among the largest online players,” said Alexey Fedorov, president of the Association of Internet Trade Companies. “Based on traffic indicators, the expected turnover in 2017 will be 25-27 billion rubles.”

In addition to Sberbank, VTB is another major lender to Yulmart. In February 2016, the bank opened a credit line for Yulmart for 715 million rubles. The last time the bank received payment for it was in June 2017, a VTB representative told RBC. Kostygin personally acted as guarantor for the loan. In July, VTB lawyers appealed to the authorities of the French city of Draguignan with a demand to seize Kostygin’s villa, and their demand was granted. Kostygin himself stated that he does not have a villa in France. Last week, on October 5, the Dzerzhinsky District Court of St. Petersburg decided to recover 650 million rubles from Kostygin in favor of the bank.

As a RBC source close to the bank notes, “VTB does not yet plan to follow Sberbank’s scenario”: “All demands have been presented and confirmed by the court - for now VTB considers this sufficient.”

Do law enforcement agencies have other claims against Kostygin or Yulmart’s top management?

According to a statement from law enforcement agencies, Kostygin is also accused of tax evasion. The criminal case is also being processed by the Main Directorate of the Investigative Committee for St. Petersburg. The case is based on a statement from the Federal Tax Service, including against the former general director of Yulmart Fedorinov and the founder of the holding Nikitin. The company's tax debt has already been paid off, the Investigative Committee said in a statement. However, the case is still being investigated against an unknown number of persons.

Save

Experts call them “dreamers.” Businessmen announced the company's IPO next year and expect to raise up to $1.5 billion for 25% or less of shares.

Kostygin himself is confident in the success of the IPO. He reports excellent revenue for last year: only according to preliminary estimates - 1.3 billion rubles. Predicts profit growth this year. He says that JPMorgan and Morgan Stanley have assured that by 2016, Yulmart will be worth almost $6 billion. But experts don’t believe the picture is rosy. They remember that at the beginning of 2014 the retailer was going to “make happy” some strategic investor with an additional issue of 10–15% of the capital. This number of shares was then estimated at only $100 million. From which analysts concluded that the entire company could not have been worth much more than $1 billion, and today they believe that there will be no way for excess profits to come from within two years. They think correctly - after all, the deal never took place.

Part-time consultant

Dmitry Kostygin, a citizen of the Federation of Saint Kitts and Nevis, a state in the eastern part of the Caribbean, is the owner of a retail empire with multi-billion dollar turnover, which in 2013 totaled 67 billion rubles, and the businessman’s personal fortune was close to $450 million. He and August Meyer own a number of federal-scale retail chains through controlled offshore companies. This includes the Rive Gauche perfume chain, the Wild Orchid lingerie stores, a number of other lesser-known companies and, of course, the Russian analogue of Amazon - Russia's largest electronic megamarket Yulmart - the fattest asset.

It only took one major scandal to build a business empire, thanks to which Kostygin is now guaranteed to be included in the Forbes list and become a master of intrigue and multi-move combinations. We are talking about a well-known conflict between shareholders of the Lenta hypermarket chain in St. Petersburg, founded by Oleg Zherebtsov. The owner of Lenta was looking for investors. The choice fell on Kostygin and Meyer, who beat the EBRD's offer by paying $15 million for 49% of the shares - 3 million more. Top managers of the retailer recalled that the new owners did not interfere in management and behaved extremely passively. But this continued until Zherebtsov managed to expand Lenta - from one store in 2000 to twelve in 2006.

As the managing director of VTB Capital Bank Timofey Demchenko told the media in 2010, if Zherebtsov, “as the founder of the company and its permanent leader, was interested in business development for many years,” then Kostygin and Meir were interested “in using the company’s resources for private purposes". Tired of the intrigues of the tandem, Zherebtsov was forced in 2009 to sell his 35 percent stake to the investment funds TPG Capital and VTB Capital. But the new business partners did not suit the co-owners of Lenta either. VTB Capital, as a representative of the state, stood guard over its interests and could not allow Russia to be perceived as a place where the rights of shareholders are violated by a certain group of private individuals. Especially when among the shareholders are the largest international institutional investors with an impeccable reputation - the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the TPG Capital fund.

But Kostygin never thought about the interests of the state, or that his behavior as a shareholder in relation to serious foreign investors could adversely affect the investment climate in the country. The main thing is personal enrichment. And the businessman never hid this. It was his immense appetites that displeased the new owners of Lenta. Only on transfer pricing Kostygin together with the CEO Sergei Yushchenko(later a criminal case was opened against him for fraud on an especially large scale) withdrew up to $4 million monthly from the company; in 2010, the owner of a 1% stake in Lenta set himself, without informing the board of directors, the salary of a “part-time consultant” “$1 million per year, plus bonuses worth 16 million rubles, a huge “golden parachute” in case of dismissal, rental of an armored car for $700 thousand per year, as well as profit received from transactions with rip-off companies.

Tires with taste

What goals Kostygin pursued in the history of Lenta is clear: making a short-term profit. Otherwise, why sell a stake in a profitable network? How can one not recall here the words of a businessman when he was asked why he left the post of general director of the Yaroslavl Tire Plant (YaShZ) in 2005, where he was assigned by his former business partner Vadim Gurinov (at that time the head of Sibur - Russian Tires): “ It became clear that tire business They won’t sell it at an attractive price, so I left.” It’s curious, but it was Kostygin who was to blame for the fact that YaShZ’s assets became unattractive. In 2003, when he came to the plant, they produced 6.3 million tires a year, and after the resignation of the general director - already 5.4 million tires. Before Kostygin, YaShZ’s profit was 100 million rubles, and after himself the top manager left losses of 89 million rubles.

But he started with promises to increase the profitability of the enterprise to 300 million rubles. But the fuse was only enough to extort $2 million from the management of Sibur - Russian Tires to set up a food shop, which instantly turned into a subsidiary of YaShZ-Food LLC, serving half of Yaroslavl. Naturally, the LLC's suppliers were companies affiliated with Kostygin - he began his entrepreneurial activity by trading food products, so the director of YaShZ did not spare money for their purchase. Quite soon, the top manager no longer hesitated to withdraw funds from the enterprise through front companies, also using promissory note schemes for cashing out funds. When Sibur got tired of enduring the antics of a subordinate, in which production was falling, jobs were being cut, and management costs, on the contrary, were growing exorbitantly, Kostygin was asked to leave the director’s chair ahead of schedule.

Classics of the genre

But it would be wrong to consider Dmitry Kostygin as a kind of “great schemer” of the new time, using cunning business schemes. In the already mentioned story with Lenta, the conflict, as is known, was accompanied by falsification of documents and the forceful seizure of the office by the Kostygin team with the participation of muscular athletes. The businessman has used classic raider attack schemes before. For example, when he took away a bakery from a resident of St. Petersburg, the owner of the small but hardworking Vega LLC, Tatyana Lepetenina, whose profitable enterprise haunted Dmitry Kostygin.

Already in 2012, the founder of Dream Industries, which managed the Internet services “Theory and Practice”, Zvooq and Bookmate, Alexey Ostroukhov publicly announced a raider takeover of the corporation organized by Kostygin, by that time the main investor of the company. The Association of Internet Publishers then even wrote a letter to Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev that Dream Industries was subjected to a violent seizure and legal raid. At the same time, Ostroukhov told the media that Kostygin and August Meyer gained control over the Rive Gauche network through raider schemes.

Retailers-smugglers

As it turns out, the seemingly transparent business of Yulmart turned out to be just another laundering company. The partners entered into the capital of Yulmart during a period of rapid growth in consumer interest in online trading. The main competitive advantage of online stores was favorable prices, so attractive that it was impossible to explain them only by the new sales system. It turned out that everything was banally simple: the owners of Yulmart did not disdain goods of dubious origin - “gray” imports, and often smuggling. Until recently, Yulmart did not have a single direct contract with manufacturers, despite the fact that it was officially listed as a reseller on the websites of foreign companies. For example, Dmitry Kostygin’s company purchased peripheral devices from Seagate, Zotac, MSI and a number of other manufacturers through the Tatris group, which provides professional services for money laundering and delivery of contraband goods.

Naturally, sooner or later this scheme should have interested customs officials. At the end of November 2014, an inspection was carried out at the Yulmart logistics fulfillment center on Blagodatnaya Street in St. Petersburg. Businessman Kostygin interpreted this unpleasant surprise as follows: they say that the company itself turned to customs officers with a request to check a number of suppliers suspected of dishonesty. True, Yulmart later appealed in court against the actions of St. Petersburg customs, which looks illogical if the company itself appealed to the service.

The issue of customs clearance of the goods being sold is not the only thing that should attract the attention of government agencies. No less interesting are the large-scale fictitious returns of goods, which for some reason both the police and tax authorities turn a blind eye to. It's interesting how the retailer handles these returns. Yulmart unceremoniously and quietly uses the passport data of its employees. As a result, ordinary workers return goods in volumes equivalent to their earnings for a good ten years. And all this is being done to legalize completely “black” products, which Yulmart did not even officially purchase.

Shadow business empire

They say that Kostygin allegedly always knew how to solve problems with law enforcement officers and regulators, either by openly corrupting them, or with the help of administrative resources. At the same time, hiding behind connections with high-ranking patrons, he actually sets them up and misleads them. It is not surprising that the “exploits” of the entrepreneur are already being observed by law enforcement officers, whose leader has a status much higher than the ministerial one. They know that with an income of about $500 million, Kostygin declared only 5% of this amount. Moreover, he immediately cashed out even this money.

The entire activity of Yulmart, with a brilliant future, as its owner Kostygin positions it, was structured in such a way that, despite excellent production indicators, the company did not pay any taxes, having the lowest profitability in the industry. Having become familiar with the needs of Dmitry Valentinovich, it is not difficult to guess where the funds withdrawn from his own company, as well as from the country, go. This includes financing crazy investment projects in the West, satisfying small everyday needs, such as chartering a personal plane, purchasing a luxurious villa with the poetic name “Symphony” and costing about 30 million euros in the most prestigious place of the French Riviera - in St. Tropez, as well as on establishing a comfortable life in Monaco, where, they say, the family of a citizen of the Federation of Saint Kitts and Nevis lives, and where he himself is going to settle, having pumped there as much money as possible from Russia.

Recently, Yulmart has been a member of the Association of Internet Trade Companies (AKIT), the main goal of which is to establish fair principles of competition, create a safe service zone for customers in the e-commerce market and reduce the share of the “gray” market. Why Yulmart needs AKIT is obvious - in anticipation of its IPO, it needs the mask of a respectable company, under which the essence of Kostygin and Meyer’s business, built on trading in contraband and hiding profits, will be hidden from Chinese investors. But for AKIT, whose logo is a kind of standard of quality, a guarantee of product purity, it’s time to think about its image - every day the shadow cast by Dmitry Kostygin’s business empire is growing over it.

The businessman has nothing to do with his former homeland. Suitcases are packed, one-way tickets to Monaco are paid for. This explains Kostygin’s readiness to easily break any law. Is it worth finally observing the law and decency, which are already unusual for Kostygin? The answer is obvious not only to him.

The story of Dmitry Kostygin’s difficult relations with creditors and shareholders

The Investigative Committee announced the detention on suspicion of fraud of Dmitry Kostygin, one of the two hundred richest businessmen in Russia, co-owner of Yulmart, Rive Gauche, Ulybka Raduga and other companies. Kostygin could face up to ten years in prison. Rumors about Kostygin’s dubious role in the failed bankruptcy of Yulmart have been circulating for a long time. Russiangate looked into the history of the allegedly fictitious bankruptcy, difficult relations with creditors and many years of conflicts between Kostygin and the shareholders of the companies he owned.

Majority and Minority Shareholders

Back in March 2016, co-owner of the first Russian online retailer Yulmart, Dmitry Kostygin, said in an interview with Vedomosti that in 2017 the company would reach a new level. At the same time, Kostygin spoke about the impossibility of obtaining a loan for Yulmart - according to him, the company existed on its own funds, which were sufficient. A month after the interview, Yulmart received a loan for 1 billion rubles from Sberbank.

This loan became the reason for initiating a criminal case under Part 4 of Article 159.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - “fraud in the field of lending on an especially large scale.” According to investigators, Yulmart received a loan by hiding information about its debts, while Kostygin’s defense is confident that Sberbank knew about the company’s debts.

The Yulmart shareholder conflict, which began in 2016, led to problems with creditors. However, Sberbank believes that even at the time of receiving the loan, the company’s majority shareholders Kostygin and his long-term business partner August Meyer had already decided to carry out a fictitious bankruptcy of the company and began to take steps in this direction.

August Meyer Photo: Svetlana Kholyavchuk / TASS

In 2008, Alexey Nikitin, who previously sold computers, opened the first Yulmart market together with Sergei Fedorinov, the former general director of the Kombrig company. Later, Nikitin’s friend Mikhail Vasinkevich came to Yulmart, who attracted the American August Meyer to participate in the business. This is how Dmitry Kostygin, Meyer’s long-time partner, appeared at Yulmart. In 2015, Nikitin’s share passed to Vasinkevich (however, Kostygin said in 2016 that Nikitin’s share was not fully bought out, and he informally remains among the shareholders).

By 2016, shareholders disagreed on the future of the company, and Kostygin and Meyer found themselves in conflict with Vasinkevich. Realizing that it would not be possible to disperse peacefully, fearing the seizure of the company by Kostygin and Meyer, Vasinkevich tried to sell his share of the shares, including through the court. Kostygin did not give in: in September 2016, the court arrested Vasinkevich’s property. Kostygin’s claim for a half-billion loan from Gazprombank, for which Kostygin and Vasinkevich were guarantors, ended in the transfer of the debt to the Baltic Electronic Platform, which filed a bankruptcy petition for several Yulmart companies.

Raider seizure

This is not the first time that former partners have accused Kostygin of dishonesty. In the late 1990s, Kostygin met Meyer, who was impressed by Kostygin’s business successes and decided to invest in Russia. In 2001, Kostygin and Meyer invested in the project of St. Petersburg entrepreneur Oleg Zherebtsov - “Lenta”. The partners initially got along with Zherebtsov, but then they quarreled, and he began to create his own project - the Norma supermarket chain. In response, Meyer removed Zherebtsov from his post as head of the company. Then Zherebtsov tried to fire the new head, the matter went to court.

Entrepreneur Alexey Ostroukhov, founder of Dream Industries, which launched the Bookmate electronic library and the educational project “Theory And Practice,” also accused Kostygin of a “raider takeover” of Kostygin’s company. Kostygin invested money in the company, after which he agreed with two other investors to remove the founder Ostroukhov from the post of head of the company. Ostroukhov accused the shareholders of the takeover, calling Kostygin an ideologist of raiding, and went to court. Ostroukhov’s interests were represented by the investment company A1, whose lawyers later helped Vasinkevich. The conflict ended only in 2014 with the exit of Ostroukhov, whose share was bought by other shareholders.

Dmitry Kostygin Photo: Semyon Kats for RBC

At the same time, Ostroukhov stated that Kostygin, using the same scheme, “captured” the Rive Gauche. There is no other evidence of this. In 2016, Kostygin said that Rive Gauche was the only company that at that time was bringing real profit. Now Rive Gaucher may have its own criminal case: in April 2017, the network’s top manager, Alexander Bolshov, was detained on suspicion of taking a bribe. As Fontanka reported, Bolshov was responsible for the company’s construction work. He received 2 million rubles from a representative of the contractor company, after which he was detained immediately. According to the publication, a criminal case can be initiated under Article 204 of the Criminal Code - “commercial bribery.” There is no information about what happened to Bolshov after the arrest and how the company’s owners are connected to the case.

The secret of correspondence

In the fall of 2016, businessman Oleg Morozov began bankrupting Yulmart. Almost nothing is known about Morozov: Kostygin once called him an “old partner”, there is no other information. It turned out that in 2015 Kostygin acted as a creditor to his own company, transferring 250 million rubles to it. Kostygin assigned Yulmart’s debt obligations under this loan to Morozov, which gave him the opportunity to file a statement regarding Yulmart NJSC, which owned the domain and trademark of the cybermarket.

Now you can find Kostygin’s alleged correspondence online from the time the lawsuit was filed. In June 2017, excerpts from the correspondence and links to a file with the full version appeared on the Bayonet.com website. There was a discussion on the Internet about the company’s development policy: Kostygin, who denied loans, was accused of the fact that Yulmart survived solely through constant lending and on-lending. From the correspondence it follows that Kostygin initially planned to file a claim against Yulmart for the repayment of the loan on his own in order to launch bankruptcy proceedings in both Russia and Malta, where the parent company is registered.

The irony is that a year earlier Kostygin spoke about plans to launch his own messenger, which could compete with Telegram and Whatsapp. According to the entrepreneur, messengers that defend the secrecy of correspondence can be turned off at any time - and the majority of Russians, like Kostygin himself, do not need secrecy at all.

Bankruptcy

Morozov filed a claim for debt collection in the Primorsky Court of St. Petersburg, won the case, and in November filed an application for bankruptcy of the company with arbitration. It’s easy to get confused in the lawsuits that Yulmart has acquired: money was recovered through the court by VTB and Sberbank. Kostygin filed a counterclaim against Sberbank, bankruptcy applications were sent to Yulmart to the companies Sanation Consulting Group and Baltic Electronic Platform, which, according to media reports, also belong to Kostygin’s friend, businessman Alexey Vasiliev. It seems that of all the creditors, only Sberbank is not eager for bankruptcy, for which in this case it will become much more difficult to get their money.

Vasilchuk came across some interesting documents - correspondence from Dmitry Kostygin, co-owner of the Yulmart online store.

It turns out that Kostygin not only sells stale Western goods to Russian citizens, but also robs banks. One of the victims is the domestic Sberbank - the hope of our pensioners, where they receive their pension.

Kostygin is an ordinary thief “on trust” who scammed the bank for a loan and has no intention of paying it back. All this is clearly visible from the letters of the owner of Yulmart, who signed the loan agreement with one hand, and with the other wrote orders to liquidate his company, because there was no more money in it. For example, in one of his letters from March 2016, Kostygin cynically suggests “launching bankruptcy proceedings for Yulmart in Russia and Malta through its debt.” Sberbank is just about to issue a loan, but the swindler Dmitry Kostygin is already preparing a deliberate bankruptcy and knows that he will not give any loan. The correspondence contains specific instructions on how to bankrupt Yulmart, which company will handle this and which crooked lawyers need to be paid: “For my part, I confirm the need to provide access to all documents of the Yulmart group of companies (including the data room) for colleagues from Pen&Paper and Fukau. Thank you Dmitry." Please, Dmitry! Pay off your debts and sleep well.

When Sberbank learned that Yulmart could go bankrupt faster than it could pay off its debts, it, of course, demanded its money back. But it was not there! Kostygin accused the state bank of all mortal sins and threatened to organize a protest of his employees at the doors of Sberbank. Like, 10,000 people will one day scream outside the windows of a bank. Navalny is relaxing with his 5,000 Protestants. But, if Navalny hides behind political motives, then Kostygin does not hesitate to defend his billions. The co-owner of Yulmart, around whom financial and criminal scandals constantly flare up, accuses Sberbank of trying to put pressure on his business, although the bank is just trying to get back its people's money.

The enchanting career of Dmitry Kostygin, a former jeans merchant at the Riga market in Moscow, for some reason was always accompanied by conflicts and quarrels with partners. His huckstering behavior painfully coincides with the methods of the notorious William Browder - get a small share in the business, then threaten to throw out all partners and manage the cash register alone. As the events at Yulmart show, Kostygin manages the cash register poorly and prefers to borrow money from anyone he can. And when they end, a cunning game of bankruptcy and ruin begins. Employees start running and writing sad letters. For example, former CEO Fedorinov, who is now under investigation, wrote: “... it is clear that it is impossible to contribute money to a company that has no trust... despite the difficult financial situation, the situation in the company is definitely not critical, but changes are absolutely necessary...”

The whole joke is that the bankers wanted to make money on Kostygin, but it looks like he will cheat them like a new sailor. The banks have become hostages to the online swindler-retailer, and ordinary depositors of Sberbank, VTB and Uralsib will pay for the ponies. Kostygin, with a fortune of 700 million dollars, will move to the islands of St. Kitts and Nevi, of which he has been a citizen for a long time.

There is no crime that a capitalist will not commit if he makes a huge profit. Then Kostygin tried to apply the same cunning scheme at Yulmart, where again, together with August Meyer, he bought 61.5% of the shares. Businessman Mikhail Vasinkevich, who introduced Kostygin to Yulmart founder Alexei Nikitin, did not even suspect that he was the next victim who would be disposed of when the company became super profitable. The most interesting thing is that Kostygin and Meyer did not intend to invest a penny in the development of the company - only through loans, which led Yulmart to the financial crisis in mid-2016. Vasinkevich insisted on increasing

But Vasinkevich had to not just sell his shares, but sell them cheaply - Kostygin doesn’t work any other way. For Yulmart, it was necessary to plunge into the abyss of debt and sharply reduce its market value. The instrument chosen for this purpose was creditor banks, with which Kostygin stopped all communication and negotiations on debt obligations. Among them, in addition to VTB and Sberbank, are Uralsib, Gazprombank, Globex and Bank St. Petersburg. Creditors, suspecting that the internal conflict could lead to bankruptcy of the company, began to demand early repayment of debts. VTB is trying to recover 650 million, and Sberbank - 2.4 billion rubles. Dmitry Kostygin, instead of normal negotiations, tried to aggravate the situation by filing a counterclaim against Sberbank, which regarded this as blatant blackmail with a demand to write off part of the debt. Sberbank is just trying to protect its interests and return the loan money. Negotiations between the bank and the retailer on debt restructuring began in the fall of 2016, but did not lead to any result. Sberbank is going to file bankruptcy claims against Yulmart NJSC, YulmartDevelopment LLC and Yulmart PZK LLC; previously the bank had already demanded to recover 1 billion rubles from the company’s shareholders.

Against the backdrop of lawsuits and financial turmoil, Yulmart gradually lost its position in the market and lost first place to the Wildberries chain. In the spring of this year, the retailer’s shareholders finally agreed to buy out Vasinkevich’s stake, but then, obviously, they again did not agree on the price. Dmitry Kostygin is not afraid of banks' attempts to bankrupt Yulmart - it is beneficial for him, obviously he hopes that Vasinkevich will get rid of his share at any price. Today, Yulmart's debts amount to about 4 billion rubles, including 2.4 billion rubles. before Sberbank, which is seeking to seize all of Kostygin’s property as a personal guarantor for the loan. VTB is also seeking the same thing, according to whose claim, the Dzerzhinsky District Court of St. Petersburg has already issued a ruling on the seizure of Kostygin’s property. Kostygin himself has so far remained calm and refused to negotiate with banks on debt restructuring. Most likely, he is deliberately aggravating the situation, trying to put pressure on Vasinkevich and force him to get rid of his assets in Yulmart. The tragedy of the situation is that the banks have become hostages of internal corporate struggles and ordinary depositors of Sberbank, VTB and other financial institutions will pay for Kostygin’s ambitions. Dmitry Kostygin, being a citizen of the island state of Saint Kitts and Nevi, and having a fortune of 700 million dollars, is unlikely to be declared bankrupt by Russia.

Letters from Kostygin:

1. Letter to Vasinkevich

To: Alexey Vitalievich Nikitin ;

Alexey Vitalievich,

This no longer matters much, since the company is rapidly heading towards insolvency proceedings, however, I would like to restore the course of events.

My first personal conversation with you about the sale of your shares in Yu took place in November 2014, at the “Business Petersburg” ceremony. There you confirmed that you would like to exit, and I confirmed that we are trying with potential investors to make payment to you part of the deal.

Subject: Re: A sketch plan of action for a couple of weeks

The sketch plan is like this:

And we develop this topic.

After that, we may be able to select a joint director in Russia

on Friday the 25th of the year in Malta may decide on insolvency

(based on a claim from DK) and start preparing for the procedure in Malta too.

In principle, if in Malta all debts are converted and money is transferred from us, then this is a direct and strong solution.

The only downside is that if they challenge it, it could last for years.

And we will develop Russia to secure the situation.