Military Review

Third Peremoga: 1 dollar for 1 cubic meter

111
If you want you do not want, but you ask the question: gentlemen, here you need it? Why all this fuss, as a result of which, no matter how hard the owl bears on the globe with the inscription “Gas wars with Russia”, will it not fit in any way?


Third Peremoga: 1 dollar for 1 cubic meter


Think about it: 1 dollar per 1 cubic meter of gas.

Ukraine did not know such peremoga. They knocked at the bottom, but it was full. Personally, I am wondering one thing: how many more experiments of this kind will be put on the people of this country?

Guys, well, so just can not. This is not something that is not funny, tears also do not hesitate because of their bulging utterly.

1 dollar per 1 cubic meter.

And how everything was beautiful in the Ukrainian press a few days ago ... “Peremoga! “Gazprom” has been put in place! ”Well, yes, the arbitration there pile up ad-libs. It happens. Gazprom, being a joint-stock company, did not want to finance Ukraine, and here's the result.

But already zdraly. But nobody could even imagine how much he would be.

The “Third Russian-Ukrainian Gas War”, announced in the Ukrainian media, in contrast to the two previous ones, ended not simply with defeat. The war ended, and the gas nightmare began.

In general, the defeat of Kiev in this war was predictable. The subject of blackmail in previous wars, Sevastopol, safely sailed. "Nord Stream-2" stretches, and his fellow in the south, too. It does not seem like Europe is threatened with cold, although they rushed to buy oil there just in case.

Everyone already knows the result. Gazprom began the termination of all contracts with Naftogaz in the same Stockholm arbitration, where they were suing before, Ukraine immediately began to buy gas on the side. And then the price figures leaked.

1 dollar per 1 cubic meter. Instead of 25 cents.

In general, someone remembers how it all began?

2005 year. Orange whirlwinds hovering over Kiev, reed rustled, that is, the first Maidan. Here, indeed, it would be better than the other "orange" in Kiev would have walked. But no, and on the wave of the first revolution the first gas conflict began.

The war against the unjust price that Russia has dragged from Ukraine. Remember? Well, yes, 50 dollars per 1000 cubic meters. FIFTY!!!

And, not only that it was the lowest gas price in Europe, it was still firmly established before the 2009 year. Every year the difference in price between the European price and the price for Ukraine grew after the rise in oil prices, but nobody cared.

And the "brotherly" Kiev in the procurement no one thought to limit! And they bought and resold to Europe, making more than money, money! Nothing.

Yes, Ukrainians will not let lie. 2005-2006 years. How was it, in terms of budget, bad?

And in 2006, this strange Victor, who Yushchenko, took everything and chopped off.

Who gave him this command, I can not say. I did not look so intently then on the whole cover. The fact is that the complex of the Yushchenko measures forever closed for Ukraine the resale of Russian gas on such lovely terms.

The shop was closed by Mr. Yushchenko, but the memory remained.

In the year 2009 began again. The “hostilities” began with the theft of gas by European consumers, scandals, accusations and everything else. And it all ended pretty quickly.

It was then that for the first time the shutdown of the entire Ukrainian GTS and the transfer to the real reverse feed mode was tested.

A week after the start of the "war", Prime Minister Tymoshenko signed an unconditional surrender in the Kremlin.

With this agreement is still not all clear. Someone considers him bonded, someone considers him the only way out.

But in itself it is funny: allegedly the pro-Russian President Yanukovych imprisons the former opposition prime minister Tymoshenko for a treaty that was signed in the interests of Russia.

Detective…

Well, the third war. Not war, so ... Voynushka.

The fact that Kiev will lose was clear from the very beginning. There are no pressure levers. Not at all. Europe clearly does not want to swear for the sake of Ukraine. The United States generally pretends to have lost Ukraine on the map.

But what really happened could not have been imagined by the most notorious optimists among us and pessimists among them.

1 dollar per 1 cubic meter. Or 1 000 dollars for 1 000 cubic meters.

Yes, pani and pani, this is Europe for you. This is for you gas on European gas hubs. Welcome to adulthood.

Lesson cruel. The toughest even. But - fair.

In the end, it must have happened sooner or later. The policy is so firmly settled in this area that the result is obvious.

Well, plus the frank stupidity of the management of Naftogaz in particular, and Ukraine as a whole.

After all, even the fact that the Europeans began to tear up the Ukrainians (ha-ha, that's for sure, a single European family!) In three (or rather, in four) "road", this is not the worst.

The worst thing in the other.

1. Yura Vitrenko briskly stated that he wants the difference from Gazprom. That he let his mom-oppositionist tells. For this, it is necessary to find such an inadequate composition of the court that it simply takes aback. Vitrenko can buy gas for 3000 dollars for 1000 cubes, but what does that mean? The fact that he does not know how to work. And negotiate.

And no court in the world will side with his demand for Gazprom to compensate for the difference. This is a fiasco for any judge.

But it's flowers. Berries will be later, as expected.

2. Gap contracts "Gazprom" and "Naftogaz." Serious thing. "Naftogaz" can inflate his cheeks as much as he wants and say that he is against termination, who holds the key to constipation on the pipe, he is right.

3. "Turkish Stream". Five years in four years? Why not? Is it the first time? Quite really run by the end of the year. Mr. Erdogan, are you there to trade gas? And ok. That's good.

4. “Nord Stream-2”? It's even easier. Mrs. Merkel, are you ready with your palm to press a little harder on the veins of Europe? On the blue, with blue fuel?

Dope, dope and once again dope. How many in Kiev will still remember their joyful cries about Stockholm peremoga? And how many will curse the "European family", which has turned this peremogh into a very prosaic and familiar zradu for Ukrainians?

But everything could be completely different. Not brotherly. Well, we drove it already. At least in a neighborly way.

But no. Apparently, this train will not stop.
Author:
111 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Ravik
    Ravik 6 March 2018 07: 01
    +7
    For a long time ... I definitely won’t live.
    And the funny thing is that they like it.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 6 March 2018 07: 04
      +19
      Personally, I’m interested in one thing: how many more experiments of this kind will be put on the people of this country?
      the longer, the healthier the effect.
      1. Vard
        Vard 6 March 2018 07: 30
        +2
        All that is not being done ... for the better ... When do they have elections? So let's see ...
        1. Berber
          Berber 6 March 2018 16: 47
          +3
          The question is - who are the presidential candidates? There the Americans hold the whole politics for a causal place. We need a full-fledged Russian revolution.
          1. Bratkov Oleg
            Bratkov Oleg 6 March 2018 17: 58
            +8
            Ukrainians from the Ukrainians and for 10 years not to beat. Well, if after 100 years at least something changes, but ... not a fact.
            1. Berber
              Berber 7 March 2018 12: 00
              +4
              I agree, but you need to work. We are Russian less. Losing Ukraine completely is a disaster.
          2. Wild ferret
            Wild ferret 9 March 2018 13: 48
            +1
            Sorry, but here I do not agree with you. It seems that on the same site there was an interesting article with which I agree. Indeed, if you let the “pro-Russian” politician sit down now, there will be possible options - either to “blame” all these troubles “on him” or to let him try to rectify the situation (I’m an optimist, everything isn’t as bad as the news broadcasts say) and then run the whole gimmick on a new one. But I agree with you that we need a revolution - a terrible, bloody one - perhaps only this will bring awareness to the generations that have been cultivating there lately.
            1. Berber
              Berber 13 March 2018 08: 44
              0
              I really hope that you are right. One problem, where to put the youth who grew up on the Maidan. Their consciousness is already formed.
        2. staviator
          staviator 6 March 2018 18: 19
          +1
          When is their election? So let's see ...

          What is the use of these elections? Everyone remembers the last election, the candidates were beaten, their cars burned, they threatened their families. The result is Poroshny’s victory. I think this time the story will repeat, only with worse consequences for the people. I don’t think that Poroshenko will forbid the use of weapons (like Yanukovych) for special forces.
        3. Alber
          Alber 7 March 2018 20: 07
          +1
          Quote: Vard
          All that is not being done ... for the better ... When do they have elections? So let's see ...

          If it comes to what Roman says in his article, then I will not envy the simple people of Ukraine. Everything will be very sad ...
          Cold, and then famine, and even the massacre unleashed by the Iudobandera ....
          1. aybolyt678
            aybolyt678 12 March 2018 07: 55
            0
            Quote: Alber
            Cold and then hunger

            stick a stick there - it will bloom! hunger does not threaten them, with their chernozems !!! The cold is not Siberian either. They managed to survive in the besieged Leningrad, and they have a warm country !! I have minus 16 outside the window and in Kiev plus 1
    2. Vend
      Vend 6 March 2018 09: 04
      +6
      To break the contract transit through Ukraine, everything is prepared. And liquefied gas is already being delivered by sea and pipelines are being pulled. They promised to complete the transit in 2019, so it will be.
      1. 210ox
        210ox 6 March 2018 19: 40
        +3
        Yes, it’s true. And as for arbitration, I’m not sure. The defenders will put pressure and they will make the necessary decision. And here, on the contrary, well, tell the career of a judge who, God forbid, disobeys. Wait and see. For some time I think this canoe will drag on ..
        Quote: Wend
        To break the contract transit through Ukraine, everything is prepared. And liquefied gas is already being delivered by sea and pipelines are being pulled. They promised to complete the transit in 2019, so it will be.
    3. vik669
      vik669 8 March 2018 21: 46
      +1
      Masochism is the pleasure of suffering and pain!
    4. siberalt
      siberalt 10 March 2018 17: 35
      +1
      Correctly say - the greed of the Fryer ruined. They managed to steal gas when it cost only 50 bucks for a thousand cubic meters. It is a fact! And now the guard, there is nothing to steal! belay We managed to transfer the supply border to Russia well. Let them try to steal from Europe! lol They will arrange for such a "visa-free", which no one dreamed of. belay
  2. Olgovich
    Olgovich 6 March 2018 07: 37
    +5
    Ukraine has already stated that the price difference between the Gazprom and European roads will be deducted from Gazprom through arbitration.
    Knowing this western "justice" already, you cannot be sure what .....
    1. karish
      karish 6 March 2018 08: 17
      +4
      Quote: Olgovich
      Ukraine has already stated that the price difference between the Gazprom and European roads will be deducted from Gazprom through arbitration.
      Knowing this western "justice" already, you cannot be sure what .....

      Actually, this is absolutely logical.
      A contract was signed, prepayment received.
      The termination of the contract due to reasons not specified in advance in the contract leads to legal action and compensation.
      This is by law.
      Gazprom announced the notification to Naftogaz of the start of the termination of contracts for the supply and transit of gas through the Stockholm arbitration, and the Ukrainian state-owned company, having received it, announced the readiness of the Russian holding company to review contracts.

      RIA Novosti https://ria.ru/economy/20180305/1515805760.html
      1. Rey_ka
        Rey_ka 6 March 2018 09: 26
        +3
        Prepayment returned!
      2. Olgovich
        Olgovich 6 March 2018 09: 54
        +7
        Quote: karish
        Actually, this is absolutely logical.

        Just the additional agreement to the gas supply contract for March was NOT signed.
        Therefore, the prepayment was returned.
        Quote: karish
        The termination of the contract due to reasons not specified in advance in the contract leads to legal action and compensation.

        1. In March, there was no contract
        2. The Opportunity and Procedure for terminating the Contract in ANY contract is mandatory.
        Gazprom started it.
        1. Ascetic
          Ascetic 6 March 2018 10: 24
          +13
          Quote: Olgovich
          2. The Opportunity and Procedure for terminating the Contract in ANY contract is mandatory.
          Gazprom started it.

          And the contract itself ends at 10.00. January 01, 2020 Arbitration court proceedings of such disputes last for years, everything is correct, it remains to stock up on popcorn and wait for the inevitable ... gas flow past stupid bodies.
          1. EnGenius
            EnGenius 6 March 2018 22: 06
            0
            I believe that the procedure was launched in order to file a claim for reimbursement of costs from Naftogaz, since the previous decisions of the arbitration cannot be changed.

            There, Ukraine filed a transit claim, and it was correctly calculated from its bell tower, although it was only reimbursed by a quarter. The Swedes simply did not bind the conditions for transit and the conditions for the purchase in Russia, it is obvious that this was not done due to Gazprom’s omission. Thus, the arbitral award threatens with lawsuits of those “who are further down the pipe” - Slovakia, Poland, Hungary, because there is a candidate and it is possible that Gazprom will lose another 5 billion in these lawsuits.
          2. Lev Bronsch
            Lev Bronsch 7 March 2018 21: 07
            +1
            ABOUT! you are one of the few who read the contract!)
            And here they argue until you don’t understand what, but you don’t bother to open the search engine and read the contracts ...
        2. karish
          karish 6 March 2018 16: 35
          0
          Quote: Olgovich
          1. In March, there was no contract

          was
          Quote: Ascetic
          the contract ends at 10.00. January 01, 2020

          Quote: Olgovich
          The Opportunity and Procedure for terminating the Contract in ANY contract is mandatory.

          The possibility of a break - of course.
          For the reasons stated in the contract - does not entail legal claims, for reasons not prescribed - entails.
          What's wrong ?
          1. major147
            major147 7 March 2018 12: 00
            0
            Add. the agreement for March was not signed by Ukraine.
          2. Filxnumx
            Filxnumx 8 March 2018 00: 30
            +1
            And the fact that the Stockholm arbitration by its decision actually changes the terms of the current contract. Or do you think that the “take or pay” formula is identical to the “download or pay”? If Naftogaz does not want to pay for the shortage of Russian gas, then why should Gazprom pay for it? Ukraine does not like the existing contract, so we go forward. But apparently you do not like any version of the actions of Russia. Less often look into the training manual, but rather use it for its intended purpose, well, or at least make a fire if the paper is solid.
      3. Ascetic
        Ascetic 6 March 2018 10: 43
        +10
        Quote: karish
        The termination of the contract due to reasons not specified in advance in the contract leads to legal action and compensation.

        Everything is spelled out in advance
        “If the parties fail to reach a mutually acceptable solution within 30 days after the occurrence of any dispute or disagreement, then any dispute, disagreement or claim in connection with this contract or its violation, termination or invalidity will be finally resolved by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce. "

        Now about compensation
        most likely an attempt will be made to annul the arbitration decision through superior Swedish court Recalling paragraph 2 of section 33 of the Swedish Arbitration Court Act, which states that Arbitration decisions can be annulled if they were made with a clear violation of the principles of Swedish law. .
        link
        A new composition of the court is connected with this, if he takes the side of Naftogaz, then a lawsuit in a higher court, in this case, all the compensation and costs are paid by the losing party ... about how Berezovsky paid Abramovich.
        Gazprom gives Sweden an opportunity to think again in the new conditions - is it worth it to destroy its reputation and the business of the Stockholm arbitration for that. to try to help Ukraine.
      4. NEOZ
        NEOZ 6 March 2018 11: 32
        +3
        .
        Quote: karish
        to legal action and compensation.

        You own only that which you can protect.
        Imagine that some court ruled “in connection with the refusal of the Russian Federation to finance Ukraine, seize all the property of the Russian Federation, and divide the country!”
        Question: Who will execute the court decision? who exactly?
        Who will arrest the property of Gazprom? upon the seizure of property, what will be the answer?
      5. businessv
        businessv 6 March 2018 16: 29
        +2
        Quote: karish
        Actually, this is absolutely logical.
        A contract was signed, prepayment received.

        You probably missed the point! All this noise started because Ukraine stopped buying and pumping the volumes stipulated in the Contract, Gazprom sued and won, then Ukraine filed a lawsuit that it received less profit due to the fact that less than the agreed volumes were pumped and also won. Those. Itself began to take less gas, but Gazprom must pay for the lost profits (through its fault).
    2. Cube123
      Cube123 6 March 2018 08: 25
      +6
      Quote: Olgovich
      Knowing this western "justice" already, you cannot be sure what .....

      "Better a terrible end than endless horror." You can now pay a little, then to recoup in full.
      1. Olgovich
        Olgovich 6 March 2018 09: 59
        +1
        Quote: Cube123
        Quote: Olgovich
        Knowing this western "justice" already, you cannot be sure what .....

        "Better a terrible end than endless horror." You can now pay a little, then to recoup in full.

        This is yes.

        The only contracts needed to be broken in 2014.

        The decision of the WESTERN court against Russia, I think, was predictable for a long time. And it was not necessary to be seven spans in the forehead: and you (and I) would have suggested this with a high degree of probability, and many other quite ordinary citizens.
        1. Cube123
          Cube123 6 March 2018 10: 17
          +10
          Quote: Olgovich
          Contracts had to be broken in 2014.

          It was impossible to tear in 2014. North Stream 1 has just started. There was no talk of any SP 2. The southern stream drowned in Bulgarian squabbles. There were no agreements with China and a bunch of other issues. "Any impromptu should be very well prepared."
          1. Olgovich
            Olgovich 6 March 2018 10: 21
            0
            Quote: Cube123
            It was impossible to tear in 2014.

            It is possible, because breaking the contract does not mean terminating the termination of transit. Gas will be sold on the border of Russia-Ukraine. So it would be in 2014. IMHO.
            1. Cube123
              Cube123 6 March 2018 10: 25
              +3
              Quote: Olgovich
              Gas will be sold on the border of Russia-Ukraine. So it would be in 2014. IMHO.

              And on horseradish goat button accordion? In this case, Russia sells gas at "fraternal" prices, and then the Americans sell the same gas! resell it to Europe already on European. This was the reason kipish in 2014. Remember the son of Biden. It is much more profitable to just pay for transit.
              1. Olgovich
                Olgovich 6 March 2018 10: 42
                0
                Quote: Cube123
                In this case, Russia sells gas at "fraternal" prices, and then the Americans sell the same gas!

                No, right after the annexation of Crimea, it was announced by Putin and Medvedev to INCREASE the gas price to the world, because Kharkiv agreements expired due to the annexation of Crimea and the disappearance of the reason for discounts
                1. Cube123
                  Cube123 6 March 2018 10: 48
                  +2
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  No, right after the annexation of Crimea, it was announced by Putin and Medvedev to INCREASE the gas price to the world, because Kharkiv agreements expired due to the annexation of Crimea and the disappearance of the reason for discounts

                  And if they did not? The Americans, on the other hand, hoped that the conditions would remain the same. $ 100 per thousand cubic meters is very good money. But now it’s already possible to revise the conditions.
        2. Nyrobsky
          Nyrobsky 6 March 2018 10: 25
          +4
          Quote: Olgovich
          Yes, the only thing was that the contracts had to be broken in 2014.

          Then it would be painful to pay fines. And now the moment is ripe.
          1. Olgovich
            Olgovich 6 March 2018 10: 45
            0
            Quote: Nyrobsky
            Then it would be painful to pay fines. And now the moment is ripe.

            Tearing is conditionally said, meaning that the current legal termination procedure started could be started in 2014
          2. Siberian54
            Siberian54 8 March 2018 19: 12
            +1
            What do you think the legal services of the company are idiots, they don’t see the edges .. In vain! By the way, Petya strongly substituted with his gratitude for the decision of the court to the Minister of Defense of Sweden, slightly disavowing the arbitration ...
      2. NEOZ
        NEOZ 6 March 2018 11: 35
        +2
        Quote: Cube123
        a little and pay

        stop the panic!
        who will take what from us? who will be the executor of the judgment?
        he decided to pay ....
        nothing to squander the assets of the motherland!
    3. captain
      captain 6 March 2018 13: 01
      +5
      Quote from the author: “In general, does someone remember how it all began?
      2005 year. Orange whirlwinds roared over Kiev, the reeds rustled, that is, the first Maidan. Here, indeed, it would be better than the other "orange" in Kiev would have gone. But no, and in the wake of the first revolution, the first gas conflict began. The war is against the unjust price that Russia was tearing from Ukraine. Do you remember? Well yes, 50 dollars for 1000 cubic meters. FIFTY!!!
      And, not only that it was the lowest gas price in Europe, it was still firmly established before the 2009 year. Every year the difference in price between the European price and the price for Ukraine grew after the rise in oil prices, but nobody cared.
      Moreover, “brotherly” Kiev did not even think of restricting purchases! And they bought and resold to Europe, making not just money, money! Nothing. "
      Well, I do not understand the moaning of the author. Who made Ukraine sell gas cheaper than the EU? Maybe the USA, maybe Israel? They took away from their people, and fed a stranger, why? What country of the world could sign such an agreement? Only Yeltsin, and who was he before the presidency? That's right, a candidate member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU. He took care of all the peoples of the former USSR, and the peoples of Russia were for him slaves (when the USSR was), there is (as long as he ruled) and will be (for all internationalists-Leninists).
      And dear author, this did not begin in 2005, but in 1920, when pieces of territory were torn from Russia together with the people and presented to nationalists of all stripes, including Ukrainian. We taught all the Union republics to eat (namely to eat) at the expense of the peoples of the RSFSR, and now we are writing articles, they say for what they do not like us. It was not worth feeding everyone at the expense of the RSFSR, it was not worth humiliating the Russian people (handing out our lands and handing the Russian people into slavery, as it turned out now), and I think no one would pick it up. How did our king say; "Europe may wait for the Russian Tsar to fish." And in our country during the years of the USSR it turned out that everyone except the Russians, Tatars and other peoples of the RSFSR fished fish.
      1. businessv
        businessv 6 March 2018 17: 35
        0
        Quote: captain
        And in our country during the years of the USSR it turned out that everyone except the Russians, Tatars and other peoples of the RSFSR fished fish.

        Dear, you clearly underestimate the volume of "fishing"! In all republics without exception, the Russian language was the language of communication, all directives “descended” from Moscow, the only city fully provided for by all was Moscow. Why did many Russians find themselves outside the borders of the RSFSR? Who was sent to train, whom to manage, whom to exile. You, apparently, have lived your whole life in Russia and do not know much, like so many. Life in the republics of the Union was not “sweet”! The only thing I agree with you is that they tattered the whole of Russia to pieces, do not give a damn about the created way, however, as in 1991, similar figures and the Union can no longer be brought together!
        PS Ironically, the only republic to which subsidies and aid constantly went is Ukraine; it was not in vain that it entered the top ten countries of the world as one of the most industrialized.
        1. yustas
          yustas 6 March 2018 18: 56
          +4
          Dear, you are not quite right. My father and I rode around the union, past Ukraine, the Baltic states are very good, although in comparison with our Siberia, everywhere was better. And at the expense of Moscow, well, so everywhere in the world, all the best is brought to the capital, in the regions, only due to their characteristics, their advantages remain.
  3. oracul
    oracul 6 March 2018 08: 04
    +6
    One can argue about different differences, but I think that Russia is now able to stand up for itself. And any legally unjust decision in favor of an impudent Ukraine will come around comes around as a complete fiasco and European "justice" and Square. How much string does not curl, and the end is near.
  4. Strashila
    Strashila 6 March 2018 08: 09
    0
    One can only imagine in what fury "the one with the scythe" ... her followers are arrogantly enriching themselves and at the same time they are patriots, unlike her, for the same thing that gave her the term. Ukraine is probably holding an auction ... whoever gives the kickback is the supplier ... the price does not care ... only the size of the kickback.
  5. andrewkor
    andrewkor 6 March 2018 08: 14
    0
    Please specify in what consistency this gas should be, at what temperature and other parameters?
    1. Cube123
      Cube123 6 March 2018 08: 34
      +3
      Quote: andrewkor
      Please specify in what consistency this gas should be, at what temperature and other parameters?

      "Devices for measuring the consumption of natural gas"
      https://studfiles.net/preview/2180155/page:36/
      Everything is easily recounted for any temperature, composition and consistency.
  6. Altona
    Altona 6 March 2018 08: 29
    +6
    Quote: karish
    Actually, this is absolutely logical.
    A contract was signed, prepayment received.
    The termination of the contract due to reasons not specified in advance in the contract leads to legal action and compensation.

    ------------------------------
    Karish, let's turn on all the logic. The Stockholm arbitration revised the terms of the contract in favor of the other side, that is, in any case, Naftogaz needs to conclude new agreements with Gazprom, Gazprom cannot fulfill the previous agreements, agreed on another, Naftogaz apparently did not foresee this. In addition, Stockholm arbitration may award any compensation, but the arbitration is not a court and its decisions are not binding. We saw with the example of CAS what any Western arbitration is. Stockholm Arbitration was the most influential and non-politicized court. What organization do you think will be registered as an arbitrator in a new contract? Apparently not arbitration from Stockholm, that's for sure. So in one fell swoop you can shoot yourself twice in the head.
    1. karish
      karish 6 March 2018 08: 52
      0
      Quote: Altona
      Karish, let's turn on all the logic. Stockholm arbitration revised contract terms to other party

      You think so. The arbitration tribunal ruled on the claim
      As long as I remember . Naftogaz lost the first lawsuit. second Gazprom - now the question? Where was arbitration in your opinion honest and impartial?

      Quote: Altona
      that is, in any way, Naftogaz needs to conclude new agreements with Gazprom, Gazprom cannot fulfill the previous agreements, agreed on another

      All right.
      As in any normal place-- for example. you have signed a contract (let's digress from Gazprom and Nafta) - one of the parties decided. that the contract is not fulfilled - filed with the arbitration tribunal - received a decision. Note the decision on the implementation of the contract.
      Then I decided to break it. the same thing is wonderful - this is a separate legal procedure.
      There are 2 ways - the first you break and generally send all 3 letters.
      in this case, the second party sues and demands compensation (you must admit it is legal) ..
      In the second case, you file a petition through the court to terminate the contract in connection with such or such circumstances.
      the court will investigate - which in no way cancels compensation to the injured party.
      Quote: Altona
      Gazprom cannot fulfill, agreed on another, Naftogaz apparently did not foresee this.

      arbitration will decide.
      As you understand. In the first case (according to the previous decision), Naftogaz considered the same as right - but lost. Gazprom thought it was right - but lost the same.
      The court decides.

      Quote: Altona
      We saw with the example of CAS what any Western arbitration is.

      Normal arbitration. when Naftogaz lost the first lawsuit, you had a completely different opinion.
      Quote: Altona
      Stockholm Arbitration was the most influential and non-politicized court.

      when he decided not in favor of Nafta wink
      but he immediately became politicized when he ruled against Gazprom.
      You’re like with that Rabinovich - either put on your underpants - or remove the cross.
      Quote: Altona
      . What organization do you think will be registered as an arbitrator in a new contract?

      Think Basmanny court? I hasten to disappoint you - it will be the same Stockholm arbitration, or the London High Court.
      Quote: Altona
      So in one fell swoop you can shoot yourself twice in the head.

      Gazprom (or Nafta) will either fulfill the terms of the counterattack - or will pay compensation.
      When business and politics are mixed up (especially state-owned companies) - everything is paid by the taxpayer-- good luck hi
      1. dragy52rus
        dragy52rus 6 March 2018 09: 21
        +2
        Quote: karish
        when he decided not in favor of Nafta wink
        but he immediately became politicized when he ruled against Gazprom.
        You’re like with that Rabinovich - either put on your underpants - or remove the cross.

        collided two cars + one of the drivers gave the other in the eye. First, the driver received compensation for the beating, and both were found guilty in the accident. the second driver sues and says that he was in a hurry, as a result the first driver was recognized as the culprit and forced to pay for the repair of the second. to the question of the first, but I seemed to be in a hurry too, the answer was received that the second needed urgent, and traffic rules for fools.
      2. Lopatov
        Lopatov 6 March 2018 09: 52
        +12
        Quote: karish
        As long as I remember . Naftogaz lost the first lawsuit. second Gazprom - now the question? Where was arbitration in your opinion honest and impartial?

        How many words ...
        But there is a small nuance that you did not mention, but which changes everything. Gazprom's claim is partially satisfied. 2 billion out of 81.4, which Naftogaz owed under the contract. Since “Ukraine is experiencing financial difficulties”, Naftogaz’s lawsuit is completely.

        Which undermines the credibility of arbitration completely. And points to the explicit politicization and explicit application of double standards in legal proceedings.
        1. karish
          karish 6 March 2018 13: 13
          +1
          Quote: Spade
          Gazprom's claim is partially satisfied. 2 billion out of 81.4

          Why not out of 881 trillion?
          When they go to court they always count a damn cloud.
          Or is this the first time you hear this?
          Quote: Spade
          Since “Ukraine is experiencing financial difficulties”, Naftogaz’s lawsuit is completely.

          Can the original court decision or at least a translation?
          Quote: Spade
          Which undermines the credibility of arbitration completely. And points to the explicit politicization and explicit application of double standards in legal proceedings.

          read above.
          Something tells me the inner voice - what words like
          * Due to financial difficulties in Ukraine - to satisfy the claim in full * - do not appear in the arbitration decision.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 6 March 2018 13: 37
            +5
            Quote: karish
            Why not out of 881 trillion?

            Because the contract provided for only 81.4 billion. Take or pay. And exactly the same amount of Ukrainians owed, together with the late payment penalties stipulated by the contract again.
            Quote: karish
            Can the original court decision or at least a translation?

            Journalists wrote so. Personally, I was drummed by how the court justified its spit on the Law.

            Quote: karish
            read above.
            Something tells me an inner voice

            We have two completely mirror claims.
            First on "take or pay"not completely satisfied, moreover, the arbitration managed to appropriate the right to amend the contract, stupidly crossing out in it the obligatory purchase of 52 billion cubic meters of gas per year and putting its number, 5 billion cubic meters. So they wanted to do so, change the signed contract. We considered that right ...
            Second ondownload or pay". And here he is fully satisfied, so Gazprom still has to stay.
            There is a banal kid, after which mugs are beaten in a decent society, and in the business world such, with permission to say “courts”, completely lose their confidence.

            And I am more than sure that the Stockholm arbitration will not appear in any new Gazprom contract.
            1. karish
              karish 6 March 2018 16: 17
              0
              Quote: Spade
              Because the contract provided for only 81.4 billion. "Take or pay

              Ukraine purchased Russian gas worth about $ 5.7 billion a year.
              I wonder how many years (in your opinion) she did not pay, that she owed 81 billion? wink

              Quote: Spade
              Journalists wrote so.

              aahhh, journalists laughing
              Quote: Spade
              The first one on the “take or pay” theme is not fully satisfied, moreover, the arbitration tribunal managed to appropriate the right to change the contract, stupidly crossing out the obligatory 52 billion cubic meters of gas per year

              Well, it’s understandable why Tymoshenko was sent to prison.
              on the results of 2013, the export of natural gas from Russia to Ukraine amounted to 25,8 billion m3 of natural gas

              She signed a contract (it turns out laughing ) obliging Ukraine to purchase a double rate of annual consumption per year, and even at a price of 478 bucks (at a price in the same Germany - 270 bucks)
              a really interesting question - how much she received the kickback and strange, but why Ukraine protested this contract.
              No, not strange?
              Quote: Spade
              stupidly crossed out in it the mandatory purchase of 52 billion cubic meters of gas per year and putting his number, 5 billion cubic meters.

              Does it bother you? belay

              Quote: Spade
              There is a banal kid

              That's about it - a banal kid
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 6 March 2018 17: 28
                +2
                Quote: karish
                Ukraine purchased Russian gas worth about $ 5.7 billion a year.

                Lies. 13 years 10 billion, 12th year - 14 billion, 11 years - 12 billion.

                Quote: karish
                Well, it’s understandable why Tymoshenko was sent to prison.

                So what?
                Do not like the contract, terminate. Do not terminate, follow.

                Quote: karish
                Does it bother you?

                Highly.
                The Stockholm court is not a signatory to the contract.
                1. karish
                  karish 6 March 2018 22: 12
                  0
                  Quote: Spade
                  Lies. 13 years 10 billion, 12th year - 14 billion, 11 years - 12 billion.

                  You can reference, but with your hypothetical 12 mln, how did she get a debt of 81 billion? wink
                  Quote: Spade
                  Do not like the contract, terminate. Do not terminate - follow

                  Right now, you mean (as an example) they rolled back a couple of lards to a state official of another country, he signed a contract not only not real but also with different draconian gadgets - and the whole country must bend and fulfill.
                  There is a procedure for contesting the contract.
                  There are world prices, profit margins, associated costs, etc., etc.
                  But when one country pays 450 bucks for 1000 cubic meters, and the second (and others) 270 - despite the fact that the first country is much closer in terms of transit.,
                  You will have to give economic justification in court - why did you decide to peel your partner as sticky?
                  Quote: Spade
                  Stockholm court is not a contract signer

                  Lopatov - don’t be stupid (excuse me) --- no arbitration is a signatory to Yu contract, or would you like the arbitration to sign a contract, and then impartially laughing sorted out the conflict of the parties.
                  Strange logic
        2. Antares
          Antares 6 March 2018 17: 05
          0
          Quote: Spade
          The lawsuit of Naftogaz is complete.

          nothing like this. The suit of Naftogaz was larger at times. Plus, no one recalls that the court cut off all Wishlist about the price of transit and brought Gazprom out of the courts of Ukraine in claims.
          As for the financial situation, there it was not so. The wording was kind of due to the economic situation and lower gas consumption. Ukraine chose smaller volumes.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 6 March 2018 17: 29
            +2
            Quote: Antares
            and withdrew Gazprom from the courts of Ukraine in claims.

            Gee ...
            Why do you think Gazprom, to terminate the contract, filed a lawsuit again in Stockholm and not in the city court of Birobidzhan?
            1. karish
              karish 6 March 2018 22: 14
              0
              Quote: Spade
              Why do you think Gazprom, to terminate the contract, filed a lawsuit again in Stockholm and not in the city court of Birobidzhan?

              because it’s written in the contract.
              Any international contract contains a court (recognized by both parties and pledging to implement its decisions) - so here is the Stockholm arbitration.
              And I want to see how either side does not fulfill his decision.
            2. Navigator Basov
              Navigator Basov 6 March 2018 22: 23
              0
              Because it is not just the Stockholm court (city court), but the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce, also known as the Stockholm International Arbitration Court, from the 1970's. recognized as a neutral center for resolving trade disputes. Jurisdiction is, in fact. Everyone is suing there, and Gazprom, together with the Ukrainian Neftegaz, filed mutual claims in the same arbitration court.
      3. BAI
        BAI 6 March 2018 10: 29
        +2
        Think Basmanny court? I hasten to disappoint you - it will be the same Stockholm arbitration, or the London High Court.

        1. This will be the Stockholm City Court (see Swedish Arbitration Act 1999).
        2. Maybe the Basmanny court. Then the constitutional norm of Russia on the supremacy of the Russian Legislation over international laws in Russia (which, incidentally, corresponds to the New York Convention) will come into force. Costs may be incurred with foreign ownership of Gazprom, but they can be covered by raising the price of gas in subsequent contracts. The difference in price between American and Norwegian gas on the one hand and Siberian on the other allows this to be done. But here it must be considered - a price increase will lead to a decrease in sales. But the reverse for Ukraine will be prohibitive.
        1. Navigator Basov
          Navigator Basov 6 March 2018 17: 01
          0
          Quote: BAI
          constitutional norm of Russia on the supremacy of Russian legislation over international laws in Russia
          And the constitution itself is aware of such a norm in general? And nothing that there is no such thing as international law? International law governs international treaties.
          Quote: Art. 15 h. 4 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation
          The universally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation are an integral part of its legal system. If the international treaty of the Russian Federation establishes other rules than those provided for by law, the rules of the international treaty are applied.
    2. BAI
      BAI 6 March 2018 10: 21
      +2
      his decisions are optional

      ALL participants in the arbitration process agree in advance that their decisions are binding (see Stockholm Arbitration Rules). But there are other legal ways to circumvent, change or appeal its decision. For this we need good professional lawyers, and we have developed the practice of hiring the same legal office, which regularly loses cases in Russia in international courts. Why it does not change - I do not know.
  7. cedar
    cedar 6 March 2018 08: 33
    +3
    See the root. The American owners of Ukraine decided to accelerate the genocide of local Indians ...
    1. Rey_ka
      Rey_ka 6 March 2018 09: 28
      0
      Well, if Yellowstone babakhnet then you need your citizens somewhere to put up apparently preparing places
  8. d ^ Amir
    d ^ Amir 6 March 2018 08: 40
    +1
    A week after the outbreak of the “war”, Prime Minister Tymoshenko signed unconditional surrender in the Kremlin

    this "madame with a scythe" did not sign the surrender, but the agreement giving her the opportunity to run her hands in payments for gas on the very shoulders ... not for nothing that she was called the "gas princess" ..
    And not a single court in the world will stand on his side with a demand for Gazprom

    who told you this ???? they wrote the same thing about Stockholm arbitration that everything was without politics ... I myself commented “it’s not possible because after that any rogue refuses to pay and sets this court decision as a precedent” - it turns out there is such a word “necessary” !!!! in Washington they said "necessary" and the arbitration tribunal answered "yes" ... so you will see now also the rating will be lower than Zimbabwe ... it's only business ...
    1. Saffron
      Saffron 6 March 2018 10: 51
      +3
      And now, no self-respecting company will register arbitration in Stockholm at the conclusion of the contract, because they have created a dangerous precedent for themselves, they will find others that are less dependent and more legally competent. Or how is it in the zonovskom language - the comrades from Stockholm "got stuck"
      1. d ^ Amir
        d ^ Amir 6 March 2018 11: 01
        0
        as an option...
  9. Altona
    Altona 6 March 2018 09: 10
    +2
    Quote: karish
    All right.
    As in any normal place-- for example. you have signed a contract (let's digress from Gazprom and Nafta) - one of the parties decided. that the contract is not fulfilled - filed with the arbitration tribunal - received a decision. Note the decision on the implementation of the contract.
    Then I decided to break it. the same thing is wonderful - this is a separate legal procedure.
    There are 2 ways - the first you break and generally send all 3 letters.
    in this case, the second party sues and demands compensation (you must admit it is legal) ..
    In the second case, you file a petition through the court to terminate the contract in connection with such or such circumstances.
    the court will investigate - which in no way cancels compensation to the injured party.

    ----------------------------------
    Do not confuse the concepts of “court” and “arbitration”. In general, the discussion was about the “take or pay” principle, with which NAK Naftogaz did not agree and did not want to fulfill it. This principle is designed to ensure that the infrastructure built by the supplier has a minimum guaranteed funding. In this case, the principle was violated; Gazprom did not agree with this. Of course, let them decide what they want there, but if you so rudely revise the basic principles, you can send them in three letters.
    For the first time, the Take-or-Pay principle was introduced in the Netherlands, where large gas reserves were discovered - the Groningen gas field. Its development turned out to be very expensive. State money was invested to build the infrastructure for gas production and transportation. And in order to return the invested funds, it was necessary to ensure the stability of payment and supplies. To do this, the “Take or pay” principle was invented, and gas prices are tied to the price of oil. Long-term multi-year contracts were concluded with gas buyers in which the volumes of gas that the buyer agrees to receive are fixed. If the buyer does not acquire the entire contracted volume, then he must pay a fine. Gas prices were reviewed quarterly [1].
  10. Scud
    Scud 6 March 2018 09: 19
    +7
    You are lying!
    You envy that we have no brain ... oh visa-free work, and we all go to the Vienna Ball.
    You envy that we have a disastrous and grinning ... pah-you are the right and successful European jest.
    How do you still hilarious ... convincingly prove that we do not have life but a banana hell .. not a paradise!
  11. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 6 March 2018 09: 19
    +2
    I do not believe that Gazprom lawyers are green mugs and do not know what they are doing. So, no matter how puffed up our Israeli friends - there are necessary items in the contracts that can be used for this action. The transit will end in the 19th, but they won’t sell gas ... Burst guys, reverse. While they give. And when the reverse is over and the gas goes through Germany ... Oh, I don’t know what price can be expected from lean burghers laughing By the way, the Poles will need to get ready. And then they rolled out 850 mlr. Reparations. Winners, damn it ...
    1. Snail N9
      Snail N9 6 March 2018 12: 38
      0
      They (Polyakov and Ukraine) also have “V-option” LNG terminals in иноwinoustice (Poland). Americans are already rubbing their hands, their LNG will soon be in great demand. In addition, Lithuania has revived with its LNG terminal in Klaipida, it is already demanding from the EU "help" her with the construction of pipelines for gas supplies to Ukraine ....
    2. Lev Bronsch
      Lev Bronsch 7 March 2018 21: 01
      0
      Alas, you are wrong. Read the contracts. Spend a maximum of half an hour. The conclusion is unequivocal - the supply contract was signed on the Ukrainian side in order not to comply, but at the same time any arbitration will remove the insane volumes prescribed in it without consequences for Naftogaz. But transit is trickier. Actually, Gazprom has always had a phys. the ability to transit 110 billion cubic meters. - see the Gazprom website for export to Europe. But at the same time, SP1 and Belarusian-Polish transit would obviously suffer from underloading. Therefore, even without registering penalties for the shortage of pumping volumes, there is reinforced concrete reason to go to arbitration. Well, there, as they say. What actually happened ...
      And for 7 years, not a single movement by Gazprom towards negotiations on changing the volume of mandatory pumping !! Would you, as an arbiter, regard such behavior of the counterparty ?? So in Stockholm arbitration just like you wink
      And Gazprom’s leadership is simply incompetent, arrogant and lazy. That's all, more and there is nothing, alas ...
  12. seos
    seos 6 March 2018 09: 25
    +1
    Sklmorohov prankster wassat but does he know that the cost of gas in Primorye is higher than that of hahlov ...
    The only company in the Primorsky Territory selling gas http://www.primgas.ru/tseny/tseny
    That is, it covers only 3 cities from 12 in the Primorsky Territory - that is, 9 cities do not have access to gas at all
    Note the tariff for gas to the apartment 95,20 rub./m3 that is, in 1,5 more than he mocks horses here)
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 6 March 2018 10: 08
      +2
      Quote: seos
      Note the tariff for gas to the apartment 95,20 rub./m3 that is, in 1,5 more than he mocks horses here)

      You compare warm to soft.
    2. Saffron
      Saffron 6 March 2018 10: 47
      0
      Of the tanks - this is the last century.
      Do not confuse liquefied and piped gas. Pipeline gas in Primorye is paid no more than 7 rubles. and if you refuel a car in a cylinder, then it turns out and there is nothing terrible in this
      1. seos
        seos 6 March 2018 12: 36
        0
        There are no pipelines in the region ... and those that go to China .... the population does not have a connection to them ... moreover, units receive gas from the tanks (usually the tanks are empty)
        There is the city of Nakhodka (This primgaz has a branch there) - there has not been gas there for a very long time ... and the cost of gas indicated on the site in the find increases from 1000 rubles for 50 liters to 5000 rubles for these 50 liters .. and buy it even for 5000 rub is almost impossible ...
    3. Dym71
      Dym71 6 March 2018 11: 07
      0
      Quote: seos
      That is, it covers only 3 cities from 12 in the Primorsky Territory - that is, 9 cities do not have access to gas at all

      Coeff. 0.7 does not apply to the electricity tariff for the population in these 9 cities? belay
      1. seos
        seos 6 March 2018 12: 38
        0
        In Primorye, electricity is slightly cheaper than in the western part of Russia, but not because of some mythical factors, but because the hydroelectric power station in the Khabarovsk Territory gives cheap electricity .... the coefficients are all in the USSR ...
        1. Dym71
          Dym71 6 March 2018 13: 40
          +1
          Quote: seos
          the odds are all in the USSR remained

          Here is the FTS RF information letter
          http://www.zakonprost.ru/content/base/67857
          And the tariffs of Khabarovsk and Khabarovsk Territory from January 1, 2018
          https://tarif-24.ru/russia/electro/2018/501-tarif
          y-na-elektroenergiyu-dlya-xabarovska-i-xabarovsko
          go-kraya-s-1-iyulya-2018-goda.html
          The coefficient 0,7 for non-gasified houses is taken into account, see the table of tariffs hi
    4. businessv
      businessv 6 March 2018 17: 54
      0
      Quote: seos
      Note the tariff for gas to the apartment 95,20 rub./m3 that is, in 1,5 more than he mocks horses here)

      Where do these prices come from ?! Look here: https://energovopros.ru/issledovania/2335/3079/43
      136 / You really confuse the tariff per person per month, this is in the absence of a meter! And this is based on consumption - from 8 to 12 cubic meters per month. In your case, most likely 12, and this is 7,9 rubles / cubic meter.
      1. seos
        seos 6 March 2018 22: 39
        0
        Where do these prices come from ?! Look here: https://energovopros.ru/issledovania/2335/3079/43

        Neither the Primorsky Territory nor the Far East are listed in the table ...
        Prices from the company that sells gas ...
        The coefficient 0,7 for non-gasified houses is taken into account, see the table of tariffs
        When all houses are non-gasified, the meaning of these coefficients disappears ...
        1. Dym71
          Dym71 7 March 2018 18: 29
          0
          Quote: seos
          When all houses are non-gasified, the meaning of these coefficients disappears ...

          That is, the difference is 4,27 rubles. and 2,99 rubles. per kWh do you not see? belay
          1. seos
            seos 7 March 2018 20: 34
            0
            We are talking about gas which is not available in some regions of Russia and not about electricity tariffs ...
            1) The cost of electricity in the Far East is low due to hydroelectric power stations, because it is one of the most economical sources of electricity.
            2) In addition to electricity, there is also Heat energy - which is generated in Primorsky Krai using fuel oil or coal (expensive energy sources) and horse bills come to people (heating costs are higher than in western regions)
            And it is impossible to turn off central heating in our country ... nobody will allow you to heat an apartment with electricity ...
  13. aszzz888
    aszzz888 6 March 2018 09: 47
    +1
    And no court in the world will side with his demand for Gazprom to compensate for the difference. This is a fiasco for any judge.

    This is where everything can be turned upside down. And this already has a precedent - the previous “verdict” of the court to Gazprom. Where are the guarantees that geyropovskih judges will side with Gazprom? Moreover, Gazprom filed everything in the same court. They will make scapegoats for us and that's all.
  14. ver_
    ver_ 6 March 2018 10: 09
    0
    Quote: Ravik
    For a long time ... I definitely won’t live.
    And the funny thing is that they like it.

    .. well so - mozahists ..
    1. Nyrobsky
      Nyrobsky 6 March 2018 10: 34
      +5
      Quote: ver_
      Quote: Ravik
      For a long time ... I definitely won’t live.
      And the funny thing is that they like it.

      .. well so - mozahists ..
      As in Vysotsky’s song - “What a pity that they didn’t drop irons on your skull, I’m sorry that you didn’t do much. It’s just a charm of a concussion! After all, this pleasure is plaster on the body! I was lucky, I was lucky again - God saw that I reached the point .... Dump truck 30 thousand kilos, crushed my skeleton into pieces !!!
  15. ver_
    ver_ 6 March 2018 10: 13
    0
    Quote: Andrew Y.
    Personally, I’m interested in one thing: how many more experiments of this kind will be put on the people of this country?
    the longer, the healthier the effect.

    ..what are the people - such and experiments ..
  16. Saffron
    Saffron 6 March 2018 10: 37
    +4
    They paid attention to how evasively the West wanted to force Russia to finance $ 2.6 billion in the election period of Poroshenko? But the nifiga didn’t work out and the Stockholm arbitration vilified itself with a non-legal decision (now others will consider whether it is worth including it in the arbitrators when concluding contracts, they will find another better) and Ukraine received gas at $ 1 per cubic meter, and it will be necessary for the population to pay for it is difficult for sponsors now find the last otvidili ...
    1. Lev Bronsch
      Lev Bronsch 7 March 2018 20: 51
      +1
      You are right and no. The fact is that Naftogaz has already painted, and publicly, where to put this money))). In the extraction and repair of networks. It seems to be sensible, but it’s clear that you can steal on this! And the sum is remarkable by the way - this is exactly the sum of the annual payments of the population of Ukraine for gas consumed. Population, not industry. So, before the election, for example, to reduce the price of gas for the population by 25-30% - and Poroshenko will be brought into his hands for a second term. So again, politics is climbing, alas hi
  17. nnz226
    nnz226 6 March 2018 12: 32
    +3
    Every nation deserves its own government! Beat in barrels on the Maidan No. 1 ??? Got a wretched holy fool for post No. 1. Which, after 5 years of rule, had a rating close to absolute zero. Even the generation has not changed (this takes 25 years), as the rams went through 10 years to the next Maidan No. 2. Well, and galloped. There is no historical memory - freeze, starve, wash toilets in "Europe" ... What are they sorry for, citizens of the territory independent of Russian gas?
  18. ramzes1776
    ramzes1776 6 March 2018 12: 54
    0
    I still do not understand. Gazprom will pay 2,7 lard greens to Naftogaz by a court decision or not ???
    1. businessv
      businessv 6 March 2018 18: 00
      0
      Quote: ramzes1776
      I still do not understand. Gazprom will pay 2,7 lard greens to Naftogaz by a court decision or not ???

      IMHO, no one has decided anything yet: http://www.interfax.ru/business/595499
    2. Lev Bronsch
      Lev Bronsch 7 March 2018 20: 47
      +1
      Well, if you do not understand, then why? Go get a beer, in the five of a Zhiguli, vodka in the same place, roll and the problems disappear laughing . And then gas, transit, contract, arbitration - why do you need so many new incomprehensible words .. bully
  19. Lebedev
    Lebedev 6 March 2018 16: 08
    0
    Some kind of masochism ...
  20. v.yegorov
    v.yegorov 6 March 2018 16: 18
    +1
    By the way, with the Turks troubles on the second pipe in the stream do not give consent. They throw a pipe without agreement.
  21. Earnest
    Earnest 6 March 2018 16: 25
    0
    Quote: karish
    Quote: Altona
    Karish, let's turn on all the logic. Stockholm arbitration revised contract terms to other party

    You think so. the arbitration tribunal ruled in the suit ... Gazprom (or Nafta) will either comply with the terms of the contract or will pay compensation.
    When business and politics are mixed up (especially state-owned companies) - everything is paid by the taxpayer-- good luck hi

    This is what you think, because with some fright, you are sure that the contract of Gazprom and Naftogaz does not provide for its early termination. So? Suppose that it was composed ... And since termination is not provided, then COMPENSATION FOR TERMINATION by these "idiots" is also not provided. And there is nothing to arbitrate)). Well, if some arbitration there considers a certain compensation on the principle: "Sex, finger, ceiling, Ukraine is bankrupt, Gazprom has money, Putin, pay five hundred billions" - then let him pay. Count your money, not strangers. Good luck.
    1. karish
      karish 6 March 2018 16: 32
      0
      Quote: Earnest
      You think so, because you are sure with some fright that the contract between Gazprom and Naftogaz does not provide for its early termination.

      Provided, would not have appealed to arbitration.
      Quote: Earnest
      Suppose that it was composed ... And since termination is not provided, then COMPENSATION FOR TERMINATION by these "idiots" is also not provided.

      You probably do not know. that Gazprom terminates the contract.
      Quote: Earnest
      Well, if some arbitration there considers some compensation on the principle: “Sex, finger, ceiling, Ukraine is bankrupt, Gazprom has money, Putin, pay five hundred billions” - then let him pay.

      I do not even know . what to say.
      February 23 is long gone, March 8 has not yet arrived request
      Why is it so buggy?
  22. Bo Yari
    Bo Yari 6 March 2018 16: 33
    +1
    Gazprom has lost the largest consumer ... that’s the question, and you’re writing all kinds of ... essence)) it’s ridiculous.
    1. staviator
      staviator 6 March 2018 18: 37
      0
      He didn’t lose anything, Ukrainians will never buy gas 4 times more expensive, they will return, but with different conditions and attitudes. And Gazprom made it clear that it also has leverage.
    2. Lev Bronsch
      Lev Bronsch 7 March 2018 20: 44
      0
      Where did you come from, the liberal tribe ??? Gazprom of course could sell 10-11 billion cubic meters to Ukraine. BUT! First, they themselves refused. Back in 2015, the relevant decree of the government of Yatsenyuk. And secondly, instead of gas (raw materials), the Russian Federation sells fertilizers made from this gas to Ukraine, which loads our capacities, jobs, taxes, and Gazprom is guaranteed to receive money, rather than running to the courts)). It seems that the liberals believe that it is bad to trade in raw materials (well, apart from the great omega, they can) - well, we are trying! And what Ukraine cannot buy a larger volume of, so these are questions to them, what do we have to do with ?? request
  23. Earnest
    Earnest 6 March 2018 16: 54
    +1
    Quote: seos
    Sklmorohov prankster wassat but does he know that the cost of gas in Primorye is higher than that of hahlov ...
    The only company in the Primorsky Territory selling gas http://www.primgas.ru/tseny/tseny
    That is, it covers only 3 cities from 12 in the Primorsky Territory - that is, 9 cities do not have access to gas at all
    Note the tariff for gas to the apartment 95,20 rub./m3 that is, in 1,5 more than he mocks horses here)

    Ale, are you a troll or an ignoramus? This link contains the Decree of the Tariff Department of Primorsky Krai from 28.06.2017 No. 33 / 4 approved retail prices for liquefied natural gas sold to the population for domestic purposes from 1.07.2017:
    -gas liquefied from group tank installations - 42,01 rub / kg (including VAT) –99,98 rub / m3.
    And liquefied gas is a “slightly” different, non-gaseous state of matter. By the way, there is a price from 2016 of the year to 2017: 40,78 rubles / kg (including VAT) –97,05 rubles / m3. That is, there is nothing particularly new and did not exist at this price, because 1 liter of liquefied gas is 625 liters of it in its usual state. Already the price is changing, right? If in a cylinder, then 50 liters = 20 kg = 31250 liters of gas. In a cylinder of 31,25 cubic meters of habitual gas. But the price of liquefied gas in Ukraine is 630 hryvnia per cylinder, at a rate of 2,15 rub / g it is 1354 ruble, source https://kiev.flagma.ua/gaz-propan-v-ballone-50l-s
    zhizhenny-o3407773.html
    1. myobius59
      myobius59 6 March 2018 18: 36
      +1
      Here you are just ignorant. Or Troll. There are NEVER 30 gas cubes in a cylinder. There are only 10-11 cubic meters, any gasman will tell you that.
  24. staviator
    staviator 6 March 2018 18: 33
    +1
    I propose selling gas to Europe (Sweden in particular) for $ 1,5 per 1000 cubic meters. If they ask why it’s so expensive, to answer that with this money $ 1000, we will transfer to Ukraine, because by the decision of your court it is very poor and it needs to be helped to buy you have gas.
  25. myobius59
    myobius59 6 March 2018 18: 34
    +1
    Ah, ah. Poor Ukrainians. The author already described from pity
    But nothing that we have it (balloon) More than a dollar for this cubic meter. And what does he not cry about this?
    Moreover, Ukrainians are 100% provided with gas, and we still have more than half of the rural population drowning with wood. Personally, we are drowning. And no gas is promised to us in the near future. Because it is MUCH MUCH more expensive to spend 150 km of a gas pipe from the main pipeline to us than to build all the South and Nord streams combined.
    1. Lev Bronsch
      Lev Bronsch 7 March 2018 20: 38
      0
      Well you, Mobius, do not go too far! You must also be able to lie)). Gas at a gas station 17-18 rubles / liter propane-butane and 14 rubles / liter methane. This is about 25-30 cents, not a dollar. And since 1991, Gazprom has actually gasified many settlements, and within them, Gazprom is not responsible. But 2/3 of the Russian Federation is now with gas, but it was slightly less than 50%. And certainly it’s not Miller's fault that in the USSR ukrias were gasified at a frantic pace ... And your data on the price of building 150 km of a gas pipe are given by obvious liberalism))
      For your reference, there is no South Stream, for more than 3 years there has been no.
  26. Antares
    Antares 6 March 2018 19: 57
    +2
    The novel described the Gas Conflicts 2005/2006, 2008/2009 and this 2014-2018 rather poorly.
    The impression is that it’s not an analysis, but ... a philistine look without the Internet. Even everything is described on Wiki. And different sites can provide the views of the parties.
    The first intergovernmental gas agreement between Ukraine and Russia was signed in February 1994. It was supposed that it would operate for 20 years - until 2005, and annually Russia should supply Ukraine 50-70 billion cubic meters of gas. Gazprom and Ukrgazprom were asked to determine the price of this gas additionally in their contracts.
    The 1994 agreement prohibited the re-export of Russian gas from Ukraine, but allowed Ukraine to cover gas debts through construction work commissioned by Gazprom.

    In general, the 2004 contract kept the price of $ 50 until 2009, but Gazprom wanted the average European price (170) and Naftogaz wanted the average European transit price. In general, all Wishlist resulted in a conflict. Yushchenko was almost out of business there, they even dismissed Yekhanurov. It was a standard set of partners — we want it that way, but we want it that way. The price has risen both here and there. Central European. The same conflict with Belarus also led to an increase in prices, but not immediately. Gazprom raised the price of all post-Soviet countries.
    The second war is generally a fairy tale ... there it was cut, and Turkmen gas, huge debts of Ukraine ...
    For a serious discussion, I would not reduce these conflicts to some kind of stupidity on one side. This is not the only Russian and Ukrainian clans to feed ... And the countries there are so ... viewers / fans who, according to the authors, should hate each other for a virtual piece (which someone took from someone)
    Money is a great motivator of hate.
    In the gas wars, the Russian Federation gained influence / money, but lost a lot of money. Which is very difficult to recover.
    Gas conflicts are the topic of separate articles.
    1. Lev Bronsch
      Lev Bronsch 7 March 2018 20: 31
      +1
      I absolutely agree with you! Gazprom disrespect for the decisions of the Stockholm arbitration really puzzled the European business community, because arbitration just brought these undercontracts to modern economic realities. That's all! And all decisions of a specific arbitration are absolutely logical and almost fair! You can only applaud Tymoshenko and complain that there is a miller in the Russian Federation. Alas, real contracts are not in favor of Gazprom. Julia was an order of magnitude higher as a professional. Maybe she’s going to jail for this? wink
      And further. Actually, Ukraine has been buying gas to Gazprom for more than 2 years, based on the decision of the Cabinet of Ministers Yatsenyuk from 2015. So the question is - what prevented Miller from starting the procedure for terminating the gas supply contract 2 years ago ?? Or is he not German, but Estonian? It takes a long time? An even number of coaches in his soccer toy changes every year, and buys players every year with $ 100 million. Well, damn it, he has enough time and energy, and there was no time to break the inactive contract of 2 years through the arbitration! am
      Drive out of the manual !!
  27. The comment was deleted.
  28. Lev Bronsch
    Lev Bronsch 7 March 2018 20: 21
    +2
    Dear author and commentators, I urge you to simply read the contracts from 2009! They are on the network; Gazprom did not dispute the authenticity of the texts. My conclusion is that we are fantastically lucky that the current Naftogaz is led by real DBs, who, in addition to the national slogans, simply do not know and do not accept anything. Because the signed contracts are the height of the incompetence of the Gazprom leadership. Explain (very simple):
    1. A supply contract with a fixed volume of 52 billion cubic meters and a take-or-pay rule. Any arbitration will terminate this contract as inconsistent with the spirit of business realities, as already in the year of signing by simple addition of Ukraine’s own production and purchase from other suppliers (a little 2-3 billion, but still) and subtracting more than 35 billion cubic meters from the total consumption by the whole country, Ukraine was not physically required, and then this difference only grew up. Tell me, have you heard about the negotiations between Gazprom and the Ukrainian side to reduce the figure of 52 billion ?? No? And no one heard. This is a classic “signing under duress”, which is terminated in court by one or two. Understand that I can sign with you even jump from a skyscraper in case of default, but in court such a condition will be declared null and void and the contract terminated. And what the Stockholm arbitration announced to us is the preservation of the contract, the preservation of the take-or-pay principle, and $ 2 billion to Gazprom. What nasty arbitration ?? Truth? No.
    2. The transit contract is even more fun! Gazprom voluntarily signs 110 billion cubic meters of annual mandatory pumping. At the same time, a year earlier, it launched the SP1 project for 55 billion cubic meters, in the year of signing it actively receives permits for the construction of SP1 and builds it in 1,5 years, preserving the Belarusian-Polish transit route. And, according to Gazprom’s website, supplying at least 137 billion cubic meters annually to Europe / West, that is, it had the opportunity to pump 110 through the Ukrainian GTS. Well, + victorious reports of the last 2 years on "delivery records," but at the same time pumping through the hydraulic system does not even reach 90 billion. Have you heard about the negotiations initiated by Gazprom in 2011/12/13 to reduce the mandatory pumping figure to real numbers ?? and no one heard. And everyone understands that for a small fee the then management of Naftogaz could re-sign anything. Julia was in prison. Now yes, it’s useless to ideological Natsik to offer money, but what about Yanukovych? Who slammed it - Gazprom ... Yes, there is no penalty in the contract for reducing the volume of compulsory pumping, well, that’s the arbitration ... By the way, the Ukrainians asked for 17 billion, they awarded 4,5 arbitration. Is that bad too?
    Or maybe you need to sign normal contracts, and when changing economic conditions, try to resolve the issue with the counterparty ?? I think for the salaries of the miller with his entourage, they are obliged to deal with day and night direct business. And when you turn on the TV, so the miller sits at all matches of the zenith, but goes on trips, a fan, damn it! am And according to the infe of the players, in general, he personally buys the coaches and the composition changes and, in general, Zenit drives all the affairs in FC. Well, he would go to the political project as the general director, and let more competent people manage Gazprom !!
    Here is my personal opinion. By the way, the page contracts of 12-15 are quite readable. And everyone is free to draw conclusions himself. Mine is to drive the miller with his kodly filthy broom! Or 2-3 years to work without salaries, well, let them get the industry average! Just losses from their activities and compensate !!! laughing
    1. kan123
      kan123 8 March 2018 07: 29
      +1
      legally, a lot of things have been violated there, but this one, or this judicial one from Stolholm, has reduced everything to the fact that the Russian Federation should feed Ukraine. It’s free to supply gas for a year, while the snobs are from Kiev. Any fines are naturally written off - this is treated like a slave, but Stolholm expressed himself in the sense, politically, not legally, that the EU will not feed Ukraine, that is, in general. Who will feed her, besides these Russians? We just have, or betrayal, some lobby in the Kremlin, the Khokhlyat lobby - they make rockets there, have fun with the Nazis - then they cancel everything, and building up their capacities is ten times more expensive than it was babysitting, "for the sake of friendship, chewing gum " An 148 - hundreds of failures, instructions for gamers from simulators, - the second board crashed - we transferred all the production to ourselves, and some kind of criminal crest writes the instructions from the district town of Kuev. Everything is the same with gas - it has always been a rotten country, and the one who signs something with them is just a Khokhlyat lobby in Moscow. The Kremlin. You can sign these contracts with the Madhouse - it will make the same sense. These are just insane people. People who behave like animals are another question, is it people or horses, deer ..
  29. kan123
    kan123 8 March 2018 07: 12
    +1
    in the USSR there was free energy, not only was energy free for its republics (as it is today for the EU) - institutions and enterprises were introduced there. According to the USSR charter, the country spent two-thirds of its income on people — housing, social services, education medicine, etc., and a third went to the army and job creation — that is, enterprises subsidized — energy was free for everyone, but it also created power - everything is free. The Ukrainians probably decided to extend this tradition, to be fed with free, empty, energy - for a year they get gas free of charge - this is the profit of their billionaires, it will not bring anything to the Ukrainians - they will also be raised prices - about 10 hucksters will profit - for this, the whole circus - for the sake of their billions.
  30. Earnest
    Earnest 11 March 2018 19: 49
    0
    Quote: myobius59
    Here you are just ignorant. Or Troll. There are NEVER 30 gas cubes in a cylinder. There are only 10-11 cubic meters, any gasman will tell you that.

    I will answer with a quote: "Demand topping up after the sedimentation of the foam." Here with this statement 50 liters = 20 kg = 31250 l = 31,25 cubic meters will you argue? And even if you’re, it doesn’t matter to me how much you, as a gasman, usually steal from grandma’s cylinders in the village. While working as the head of the workshop and responsible for receiving material, including gas, he always checked by weight.