Military Review

Double-headed Gazprom

42
Double-headed GazpromExperts started talking about the imminent dividing of Gazprom into transport and mining companies. Shards may be more. This is in bad agreement with what the Kremlin has adhered to over the past ten years: they say, Gazprom has been effective only in the form of a multi-armed monster, and the same transportation component is of no business interest. According to the official version, the point of view on the section was forced to change the pressure of the European Commission and the "shale revolution" in North America. Informally, a new hack of national wealth is being prepared.


The main nipple of the country

No legislative initiatives on the future of Gazprom have yet been put forward. There are only media reports about closed meetings with the president in Novo-Ogarev, and links to anonymous government sources. On the other hand, pro-Kremlin experts were noisy, proving that the division of Gazprom in the current situation is necessary. And it is alarming: it is very similar to preparing the ground for a scandalous decision.

Today, Gazprom produces more than 8% of GDP and gives 20% of revenues to the federal budget. That is, almost all of the power block can be maintained for his deductions: the Armed Forces, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Investigative Committee. In 2012, the concern’s turnover was 4,7 trillion. rubles, 404 thousand Russians worked at its enterprises. In recent years, the main problems of Gazprom have been associated with the transit of gas to Europe through the territory of Belarus and Ukraine. But in the first case, it was possible to achieve complete victory, in the second - a reasonable compromise. The Nord Stream 1200-kilometer gas pipeline from the Leningrad Region to Germany was laid along the bottom of the Baltic Sea. By 2015, the South Stream will pass along the bottom of the Black Sea. Both projects are concessionary; companies and governments of Germany, France, Italy, Austria, the Netherlands participate in them. And one of the few advantages of Russia's accession to the WTO is the expansion of Gazprom’s access to the gas distribution system of the European Union.

It seems that the affairs of the gas corporation are going fine, and by the year 2030 an almost double increase in the export of Russian gas to Europe is expected - to 500 billion cubic meters. It seems that European partners are happy to invest in joint projects. And here pro-government experts are beginning to argue that the Third Energy Package, adopted by the European Commission, may close Gazprom’s routes to European markets.

“An energy package is a set of rules that prohibits players who simultaneously extract, transport and sell gas from working on the EU market,” says economist Andrei Bliznets. “But the Third Energy Package was adopted as early as 2009, and for some reason, Gazprom is working quietly. During the gas war with Ukraine, it became obvious that there was no alternative to Russian gas. The European Commission is said to have launched an investigation into the monopoly of Gazprom in the markets of Eastern Europe. Similar investigations were once carried out against General Motors or Exxon, but this has never led to an embargo in any form. Moreover, it could not have been the reason for the decision of the authorities to divide the corporation. In Saudi Arabia, the state-owned company Saudi Aramco controls all of the country's oil fields (a quarter of the world’s reserves) and has a huge fleet of supertankers to which it transports hydrocarbons around the world. In a way, monopolists are oil producing companies in China, Kuwait, and Venezuela.

A possible section of Gazprom is said to be sped up by the “shale revolution” in the United States and Canada. This is the name given to the progress in the extraction of natural gas from shale: allegedly, gas can now become cheaper. Plus, the Japanese are ready to begin industrial production of underwater gas hydrates. Even Middle Eastern liquefied gas, which is no longer in demand in America, creates competition for Russian gas producers in Europe. Moreover, the binding of gas prices to oil prices, which is spelled out in Gazprom’s contracts, may collapse. But what does the section have to do with it? After all, President Vladimir Putin in October 2012 said that we should not follow this path: "If we separate the transport, the transport component simply dies by itself."
“The situation is very similar to the 2004 year, when, under the pretext of fighting terrorists, the election of governors was canceled,” says political analyst Dmitry Baranov. - The link between Gazprom’s division and the situation in European markets is just as unclear.

Dreams Come True

The idea of ​​dividing Gazprom has been proposed by various forces since the creation of the concern. At the start of the 1990's split, experts from the IMF and the World Bank suggested. Under the presidency of Boris Yeltsin, nine serious attacks against Gazprom were singled out, when the gas industry was tried to be privatized, like the oil industry. It all ended the same way: Rem Vyakhirev meets with the president in the Kremlin, Gazprom undertakes to preserve domestic tariffs, to support social programs. Evil tongues talked about suitcases with cash dollars, which were recorded in some offices.

In 2003, the idea of ​​dividing Gazprom was embodied in the project of the Ministry of Economic Development and its head German Gref. But Vladimir Putin made it clear for many years to come: the gas concern is a brand, a symbol, a national treasure. Since then, no one dared to seriously propose the division of Gazprom, but strange things began to happen to the assets.

In 2004, Gazprom sold its subsidiary Sogaz for 1,5 billion rubles, while its market value, according to economist Vladimir Milov, was 40 times more - 60 billions. The buyer was Rossiya Bank, which is associated with Petersburg businessmen Yury Kovalchuk and Dmitry Lebedev. In 2006, the Gazprom Pension Fund Gazfund, whose reserves alone amounted to 300 billion rubles, was bought by structures of the Bank of Russia for 880 million. In 2007, the great and mighty Gazprom suddenly decided to part with Gazprombank under a scheme of money-free exchange of shares instead of selling directly to the market. As a result, the bank, which is estimated at 750 billion rubles, did not bring real money to the gas corporation. Its new owner was the same bank “Russia”, which received the assets of Gazprom-media that hung on Gazprombank: NTV and TNT channels, Radio Ekho Moskvy, Itogi magazine, etc.

After coming to power, Vladimir Putin made a series of efforts to return Gazprom’s shares to the state. But a few years later, a strange disappearance of 6,4% of shares from it by the market value of 600 billion rubles occurred. In 2003, the balance of subsidiaries of Gazprom included 17,4% of shares, and 2007 - 0,3%. Officially, 10,7% passed the state-owned company Rosneftegaz, the fate of the rest did not interest any of the law enforcement agencies. Oppositionists estimate the value of assets withdrawn from the corporation at 1,8 trillion. rubles. The same amount is made today by Gazprom’s debts, and the price of gas for ordinary Russians has increased over 10 years from 350 to 4500 rubles per cubic meter. That is 13 times!

Over the past 10 years, Gazprom, in fact, has ceased to be a monopolist. Now Novotek, controlled by a businessman from St. Petersburg, has the right to sell Russian gas abroad. Gennady Timchenko. Through its structure, the lion’s share of Russian oil is exported, they produce about 60 billion cubic meters of gas and expand production at the largest Yamal-South Tambeyskoye field. Prior to 100, billion cubic meters plans to increase production and Rosneft Igor Sechin, which recently swallowed Itera and TNK-BP, and is also awaiting an export license.

New players are trying to transport liquefied gas by tankers, while Gazprom still controls all the main pipelines. The division of the gas corporation would have been in the hands of Timchenko and Sechin. First, the monopoly would finally collapse. Secondly, the construction of pipelines already pumped budget money. Third, when dividing Gazprom, the distribution of shares of two new legal entities is not obvious. And the administrative resource works wonders.
Author:
Originator:
http://argumenti.ru/society/n390/257383
42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. BARKAS
    BARKAS 4 June 2013 07: 34 New
    11
    I wonder if we will wait until the time when reforms of various Russian ministries of companies and other structures will be carried out in the interests of the state and not at the direction of several Russian shustriks from behind a hill with bonuses!
  2. treskoed
    treskoed 4 June 2013 07: 35 New
    +5
    pro-Kremlin experts have actively rustled, proving that the Gazprom section is necessary in the current situation.

    They will share! Between themselves!
  3. waisson
    waisson 4 June 2013 07: 37 New
    +8
    it is necessary to nationalize it and basta gas is the property of the state. natural gas and minerals belong to the people
    1. aszzz888
      aszzz888 4 June 2013 07: 44 New
      +7
      After all, the bowels of the Earth in which it is located belong to the state, and why, then, is private gas?
      1. starpom
        starpom 4 June 2013 09: 45 New
        +8
        Quote: aszzz888
        After all, the bowels of the Earth in which it is located belong to the state,

        Let us turn to the supreme regulatory legal act of the Russian Federation

        CONSTITUTION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
        Article 9

        1. Land and other natural resources are used and protected in the Russian Federation as the basis of the life and activities of the peoples living in the relevant territory.

        2. Earth and other natural resources may be in private, state, municipal and other forms of ownership.

        That's where the legs grow from.
      2. 101
        101 4 June 2013 13: 57 New
        0
        Well, since they were so popular as mineral resources and remain They are not taken away by everyone; everything is taken away only gas oil, etc.
    2. Orel
      Orel 4 June 2013 07: 55 New
      -7
      When it belongs to the people, then it does not belong to anyone. The state is an inefficient owner. Why should a government official develop production if it’s not all his business, and tomorrow they’ll take him off and chase him up? It’s better to cash in soon and topple over, and there’s even a flood. Of course, there are different owners, but still it’s better than the state one, which means it’s not anyone’s. Oil industry nationalized in Venezuela, so what? Investments in production and production, and as a result, production itself fell many times and oil revenues in the budget as well. The nationalization scheme can only work in a country with a very small population, in our case it is inefficient, we have already tried ... But Gazprom already deducts most of the taxes to the budget.
      1. BARKAS
        BARKAS 4 June 2013 08: 12 New
        +4
        Quote: Orel
        Investments in production and production, and as a result, production itself fell

        Yes, but thanks to the sabotage of foreign consumers.
        Quote: Orel
        oil revenues to the budget also

        Again, you are right if you had in mind the US budget.
        1. Orel
          Orel 4 June 2013 09: 55 New
          +1
          Everything is very, simple, when the state is the owner, it is forced to bear the costs, pay salaries, deductions for workers, invest our taxes in production and a whole bunch more ... Why? If you can get only net income in the form of taxes at no cost. Therefore, only a country with a small population can flourish.
        2. Orel
          Orel 4 June 2013 09: 56 New
          0
          Everything is very, simple, when the state is the owner, it is forced to bear the costs, pay salaries, deductions for workers, invest our taxes in production and a whole bunch more ... Why? If you can get only net income in the form of taxes at no cost. Therefore, only a country with a small population can flourish.
      2. Was mammoth
        Was mammoth 4 June 2013 08: 44 New
        +6
        Quote: Orel
        State inefficient owner

        I think you are fundamentally wrong. Is it possible to find an effective private owner with us? "To grab" is please.
        You think that nothing is poured on the classics of Marxism-Leninism and their political and economic works. I do not claim that they did not have mistakes and errors, but in times of crisis, interest in the same "Capital" of K. Marx increases. All the same, there are some answers to the questions of our time.
        The state must perform social functions, maintain the army, law enforcement agencies, develop education, science, culture .... And this is on interest from income, and not from income itself? In the world, one might say, almost all debtor states. To whom and for what? An example of "inefficiency" was shown by the USSR - it was restored twice from scratch, the third time it was betrayed.
        1. Orel
          Orel 4 June 2013 09: 58 New
          +1
          You can even ask the owner, but from the state? Are you going to jail the state? Or an army of officials with mutual responsibility? To the question: "Where is the money?" You will receive an answer from the official: "So, lope contracts, have you spent everything?" Do you think the owner will also spend money incomprehensibly on what and where? No, since he will spend his money, not our taxes with you.
          1. Curculum
            Curculum 4 June 2013 11: 49 New
            +1
            Quote: Orel
            You can even ask the owner, but from the state?

            Do not confuse God's gift with fried eggs, i.e. an individual and a government official who are similar in only one thing are both residents of the same state. Demand from the state leads to its destruction, there are more than enough examples of this. Therefore, the demand should be made from the state official and his entourage, who, in fact, are the top managers of the state (I hope I express myself in jargon that is clear to you). The effectiveness of their work is directly proportional to the effectiveness of the existence of a public entity within the boundaries designated and adopted by neighbors. Please note that all sorts of “great depressions” and “crises” prevail in states with the so-called "market economy" and developed private capital - and what does this result in?
            In the case of Gazprom, everything is much simpler than many see: the main consumer of gas from the Russian Federation is (for now) the EU states that accept all kinds of "charters" and "agreements", for example - the so-called. "3rd energy package", the essence of which is to artificially lower the cost of gas. Prior to this, there was a linking of gas pricing to the cost of oil, which is no longer beneficial to them. By the way, doesn’t it seem strange to you that in the EU, private companies are engaged in supply management and profit distribution, and government officials are engaged in all kinds of agreements? Is this corruption? (by and large).
            That is why the Russian Federation is trying to vary between various changes, up to the redistribution of efforts and resources to the Sino-Asian region, where the rules of the game are somewhat different.
            Quote: Orel
            To the question: "Where is the money?" You will receive an answer from the official: "So, lope contracts, have you spent everything?"

            And for this, controlling institutions must exist and operate, which in Europe and the USA have practically unlimited powers, and are controlled by government officials who can also be asked. Otherwise, a riot, the last example is Turkey.
        2. Orel
          Orel 4 June 2013 09: 58 New
          0
          You can even ask the owner, but from the state? Are you going to jail the state? Or an army of officials with mutual responsibility? To the question: "Where is the money?" You will receive an answer from the official: "So, lope contracts, have you spent everything?" Do you think the owner will also spend money incomprehensibly on what and where? No, since he will spend his money, not our taxes with you.
          1. Was mammoth
            Was mammoth 4 June 2013 10: 11 New
            +2
            Quote: Orel
            You can even ask the owner, but from the state?

            You can ask the official. Just not like with Serdyukov.
            1. Orel
              Orel 4 June 2013 10: 38 New
              -2
              It is possible and possible, but it’s not so simple, the state has the wrong eye. Those who spend their money will always follow this more closely than any state. State control and state participation in the economy are needed, but not everywhere and within reasonable limits. It’s like in production, 2 do 100% of the production, three 120%, and four already 85%. You understand what I mean.
              1. Was mammoth
                Was mammoth 4 June 2013 15: 00 New
                +1
                Quote: Orel
                You understand what I mean.

                I understand and saw! I do not understand the downsides to you. You have your own opinion. Another question is that you probably never tried to at least read the political economy. The one you tried to teach in the USSR. Standing engineers are those who went through the school of state enterprises. We learned to work systematically (even if a couple of years of experience there), although there are enough bureaucratic things. Why young people go to private traders is another question. I now work in a large private company. I see a mess no less than in a state-owned enterprise.
                1. Lankov Victor
                  Lankov Victor 5 June 2013 00: 38 New
                  0
                  I support. I work in NovaEnergetic Services, the daughter of Novatek. I didn’t see such idiocy and technical illiteracy of the leadership even in Samaratransgaz, Gazprom’s daughter.
            2. Orel
              Orel 4 June 2013 10: 38 New
              0
              It is possible and possible, but it’s not so simple, the state has the wrong eye. Those who spend their money will always follow this more closely than any state. State control and state participation in the economy are needed, but not everywhere and within reasonable limits. It’s like in production, 2 do 100% of the production, three 120%, and four already 85%. You understand what I mean.
        3. a
          a 4 June 2013 11: 09 New
          +1
          Germany was also recovering from scratch. Moreover, the USSR recovered faster. and lived and live better than we who defeated them.
          1. Was mammoth
            Was mammoth 4 June 2013 15: 29 New
            +1
            Quote: uno
            Germany was also recovering from scratch. Moreover, the USSR recovered faster. and lived and live better than we who defeated them.

            Of course, you know how many years alone the USSR opposed the entire capitalist world (just 250 million). And how much suffering our country has suffered over the twentieth century. And now he would have stood if not for the traitors. Gorbachev declares that he is not a communist. The leader of the Communist Party, Shevardnadze (Minister of Foreign Affairs) boasts that he put a lot of effort into the collapse of the country .... About Yeltsin is a shame on the country. In any country, for such matters the gallows ... but not with us.
      3. Karabin
        Karabin 4 June 2013 08: 48 New
        +8
        Quote: Orel
        The state is an inefficient owner.

        In Saudi Arabia, the state-owned company Saudi Aramco controls all of the country's oil fields (a quarter of the world's reserves) and has a huge fleet of supertankers, which transports hydrocarbons around the world.
        Is this an inefficient owner?
        But Iran, where not a single private owner is allowed to oil, survives the same sanctions regime due to inefficiency?
        State-owned companies are ineffective only where government is ineffective. Judging by the results, our government is defective and imprisoned for further ripping.
        Quote: Orel
        But Gazprom already contributes most of its taxes to the budget.

        Therefore, he expels that so far a single state-owned company. Divided into pieces, privatized and stolen offshore. Wait then deductions. This has already passed with energy. I hope it is unnecessary to remind about rising tariffs.
        Quote: Orel
        A nationalization scheme can only work in a country with a very small population,

        The USSR had a very small population. And he had half the world.
        1. Orel
          Orel 4 June 2013 09: 59 New
          0
          Read above and do not confuse a state-owned company with companies with state participation in equity.
        2. Orel
          Orel 4 June 2013 10: 00 New
          0
          Read above and do not confuse a state-owned company with companies with state participation in equity.
        3. Orel
          Orel 4 June 2013 10: 43 New
          0
          Maybe we had 50 thousand tanks and 000 missiles, but we walked in bast shoes ... Now we have fewer tanks and missiles, but we are still the only country in the world that can destroy the United States. Do you propose again the return of 10 tanks, 000 rockets and bast shoes?
        4. Orel
          Orel 4 June 2013 10: 44 New
          0
          Maybe we had 50 thousand tanks and 000 missiles, but we walked in bast shoes ... Now we have fewer tanks and missiles, but we are still the only country in the world that can destroy the United States. Do you propose again the return of 10 tanks, 000 rockets and bast shoes?
          1. Was mammoth
            Was mammoth 4 June 2013 15: 11 New
            0
            Quote: Orel
            Do you propose again the return of 50 tanks, 000 rockets and bast shoes?

            It seems to me that the bulk of the people are now walking in "bast shoes."
            [media=http://files.adme.ru/files/news/part_50/505505/114455-R3L8T8D-500-QdSv0h-
            TTZc.jpg]
        5. a
          a 4 June 2013 11: 12 New
          0
          Quote: Karabin
          In Saudi Arabia, the state-owned company Saudi Aramco controls all of the country's oil fields (a quarter of the world's reserves) and has a huge fleet of supertankers, which transports hydrocarbons around the world.


          you do not forget that in the SA theocratic monarchy. accordingly, there that which belongs to the state essentially belongs to the private family of ibn Saud.
      4. Koshel2901
        Koshel2901 4 June 2013 14: 59 New
        +1
        Where did the money come from in Venezuela for social programs under Chavez? Ryzhik destroyed the unified power system and where are the electricity prices now? Gazprom's lineup? So wait after a sharp jump in energy and electricity prices, etc.
    3. a
      a 4 June 2013 11: 15 New
      -1
      nationalize him? whom? Gazprom? so he already belongs to the state. more than 50% of the shares in the hands of the state. which means that he fulfills only the will of the state. part of the shares belongs to his own employees, who essentially do not decide anything. part of the shares is owned by large foreign companies. but these are strategic investors. no way without them. but they essentially also do not solve anything ..
      so what will we nationalize ?? your own company?
      1. Karabin
        Karabin 4 June 2013 13: 01 New
        +1
        Quote: uno
        more than 50% of the shares in the hands of the state. and this means that he fulfills only the will of the states.

        In 2004, Gazprom sold its Sogaz subsidiary for 1,5 billion rubles, while its market value, according to economist Vladimir Milov, was 40 times higher - 60 billion. In 2006, the Gazprom Pension Fund Gazfond, whose reserves alone amounted to 300 billion rubles, was bought by the structures of Rossiya Bank for 880 million. In 2007, the great and mighty Gazprom suddenly decided to part with Gazprombank under a cash-free exchange scheme instead of selling directly on the market. As a result, the bank, estimated at 750 billion rubles, did not bring the gas corporation real money. - good will of the state. Russia is a generous soul.
        part of the shares is owned by large foreign companies. but these are strategic investors. no way without them. but they essentially also do not solve anything ..

        As foreign investors do not decide anything, you can look at the fate of the failed association of KAMAZ and MAZ. It was the German "strategic partners" who broke the deal. But they have only 14% of the shares.
        Quote: uno
        so what will we nationalize ?? your own company?

        Exactly. Drive a private trader, let alone a foreigner.
    4. optimist
      optimist 4 June 2013 12: 22 New
      +1
      You tell this putler and K. laughing Ordinary people are only in favor!
  4. bairat
    bairat 4 June 2013 07: 38 New
    +7
    I would generally prohibit or rigidly quota the export of unprocessed hydrocarbons. Create jobs here, build plants for deep processing, only in this case it will benefit our economy. And so, it remains only to be proud of the size of the yachts and the presence of football clubs in our oligarchs.
  5. individual
    individual 4 June 2013 07: 42 New
    +4
    Petersburg insist on the redistribution of gas resources.
    Government for the division of Gazprom.
    The touchstone has been launched in the media.
    1. Rustiger
      Rustiger 4 June 2013 08: 30 New
      +6
      Quote: individ
      Government for the division of Gazprom. A touchstone has been launched in the media.

      I immediately thought as soon as I read the headline. I also thought that I had deja vu. This happened already when the red-haired ferret convinced everyone that after the division of RAO UES everyone would be happy. . . And then the same thing happened with the housing sector.
      Now the turn of GazPrem. Only their "heads" will not grow back, but the trunks with which they will suck with a doubled-tripled strength, as for the last time. . .
      We will have to switch to dung heating, because the forest is also no longer a “public treasure”. But they protect him from us for "deer hunts", and not for "mushroom gatherings" and "tourist trips." . .
      I hate GazPröm. . . There are reasons . . .
  6. mogus
    mogus 4 June 2013 07: 43 New
    +4
    It seems that the affairs of the gas corporation are going fine, and by 2030 it is expected that the export of Russian gas to Europe will be nearly double - up to 500 billion cubic meters.

    And where is it mined, will they also be heated by gas or wood / coal by 2030?
  7. Dmitry 2246
    Dmitry 2246 4 June 2013 07: 47 New
    +1
    While powerful state corporations are being created, we have a chance to survive.
    1. a
      a 4 June 2013 11: 19 New
      0
      here the majority of the population survives from such powerful state corporations. communal prices, for everything every year are rising. and tell me that powerful state-owned corporations have nothing to do with it?
      in the Far East, gasoline is almost 2 times more expensive than in central Russia. why? Yes, because there is one powerful state-owned corporation, ROSNEFT. and she sets the prices she wants.
  8. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 4 June 2013 08: 00 New
    +6
    In general, companies for the extraction and processing of natural resources should belong only to the state. As well as the need to minimize the export of unprocessed resources. Enough of reparations to just anyone to pay.
  9. ole
    ole 4 June 2013 09: 07 New
    +4
    National treasure ? In the Vologda Oblast, a school is being built in the village of Lomovatka, which seems to be a socially significant event, two roads are led by a railway, an unpaved one, part of which runs along the gas pipeline, the gas workers blocked their own and advised them to build an airfield. request
    1. Was mammoth
      Was mammoth 4 June 2013 09: 31 New
      +3
      Quote: ole
      advised to build an airfield. request

      State thinking wink . Build an airfield, buy a plane. Gas workers will then open the road. And you will be babble. Airfield, station, roads .... In short, "New Vasyuki." Rename the village will only remain.
  10. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 4 June 2013 09: 38 New
    +6
    Wondered what this information gives me? but nothing, I somehow do not care what happens there, it does not depend on me, and it does not concern me. I just know where I live, the gas pipeline runs 18 km from our city. And for more than 10 years, they promise to hold gas for us. When will it be held? when the cancer on the mountain whistles. The fact that national wealth is being sold out in billions, crumbs are passed on to us from this, and that is said very strongly.
  11. My address
    My address 4 June 2013 09: 47 New
    +2
    Talking about an inefficient owner in the person of the state is like talking about the lack of connection between the level of crime and the severity of punishment. Who hinders the establishment of normal managers with appropriate selection at the head of state-owned enterprises, including testing (for information - there are tests even revealing a liar, even if he does not want to be identified)? With a guarantee of support by force? With a guarantee of detention and confiscation with nasty things?
  12. vezunchik
    vezunchik 4 June 2013 10: 15 New
    +1
    MOSCOW, June 4. The first verdict in cases of large-scale fraud involving funds of Oboronservis OJSC entered into legal force. The former leading specialist of the FSUE Production and Repair Enterprise of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation (“PRP”), who made a deal with the investigation, Andrei Shishov received three years in prison. According to a law enforcement source, Andrei Shishov was detained in March 2012. Soon he began to cooperate with the Military Investigative Directorate of the RF IC, and a pre-trial agreement was concluded with him. Shishov spoke in detail about corruption schemes in the system of the Ministry of Defense. Some of his testimonies were used in the investigations of thefts at OJSC Oboronservis that began last fall. In April 2012, Shishov was changed to a preventive measure on his own recognizance, the name of this important witness was kept secret by the investigation.

    The Basmanny court found him guilty under article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (fraud) and sentenced him to three years in prison in a penal colony. Shishov and his lawyer appealed the decision to the Moscow City Court, but he left the accused as before.
  13. creak
    creak 4 June 2013 10: 27 New
    +2
    In the meantime, the court and the case since July 1 this year gas tariffs for the population increase by 15%. The fight against inflation however.
  14. Mr.M
    Mr.M 4 June 2013 11: 13 New
    +1
    Yeltsin’s pack continues to scam financial scams with impunity and rob the Russian people.

    Gazprom should not be divided in any case, otherwise it will be the beginning of the end. I hope that Putin will have the strength to once again defend this position.
    1. Karabin
      Karabin 4 June 2013 13: 07 New
      0
      Quote: Mr.M
      I hope Putin has enough strength

      Both Gazprom and Rosneft and Sber were sentenced to razderban before the election. The question is in the details: to whom, what and how much. As they come to a consensus on these issues, the process will gain momentum. And Putin will tell you about the correctness and necessity of this process.
  15. Micex
    Micex 4 June 2013 13: 55 New
    0
    In total, the state returned to itself 50%, i.e. a controlling stake, which now belongs to Rosneftegaz, the Federal Property Management Agency and some other Roskontore with a small number. Moreover, Rosneftegaz recently bought a part of Gazprom from the market to bring it up to 50%. + expansion of Rosneft to enlargement. I see the opposite tendency towards the enlargement and consolidation of disparate assets, and from these actions I was just beginning to approve the state’s policy in this area. In other words, the actions of the state contradict the ideas of this article about the possible fragmentation of Gazprom. The only thing that speaks in favor of separation is the behavior of its shares on the stock exchange; everything else suggests otherwise.
  16. Vtel
    Vtel 4 June 2013 14: 00 New
    0
    Today, Gazprom produces more than 8% of GDP and provides 20% of revenues to the federal budget.

    It would not be a bad idea to know where the rest and 80% of the departures flow, or soon the diamond diamonds will appear for Müllers and K. It’s necessary to connect Chubais for sure - he will definitely share everything equally, though we won’t get anything Russian again or come up with a new voucher, only from Miller - maucher.
    And gas prices for the people will increase again, but they will explain to us that this is for our own good, like the WTO.
  17. Savva30
    Savva30 4 June 2013 14: 51 New
    +1
    Gazprom is likely to share who will be the owner I do not know, but not for sure ...
  18. valokordin
    valokordin 4 June 2013 15: 17 New
    +1
    They will divide, they will not divide, but 5% of the proceeds from the sale of gas goes somewhere, and this is billions of dollars. One journalist in the book "Gas Emperor" noted this with confidence, without giving the address of the recipient. I was afraid. With annoyance, I watch a commercial about the 1st place in the world in gas production and that Gazprom is a public asset. Well, do not breshet? This is what kind of people own this property, probably the board of directors of Gazprom headed by .... Medvedev.
  19. pamero
    pamero 4 June 2013 18: 00 New
    0
    Gazprom predicts a fall in demand for natural gas in foreign countries! And they will sell their property gas, and even without fail. Medvedev having a lobbyist. And a bad man!