Will TsentrObuv be saved by its new owner? Sergey Lomakin is wanted Karaulov tsentrobuv

Fleeing abroad, leaving behind the wreckage of a recently thriving business and millions in debt, is a scheme that is rapidly gaining popularity. This year, the champion in terms of the scale of its implementation, it seems, will be the owner of CenterObuv, Sergei Lomakin: the company’s debts are estimated at 30 billion rubles, the investigation is studying transactions in which it seems that money was withdrawn, and the entrepreneur himself, who at one time founded such successful projects in retail, like “Kopeyka” and Fix Price, seem to have disappeared.

At the height of the 2008 crisis, 35-year-old Sergei Lomakin was already considered a successful businessman. From the sale of the Kopeyka chain to Uralsib Bank, he earned about $120 million, which he invested in various discounter chains. At the beginning of 2009, one of these transactions was agreed upon - Lomakin and Khachatryan bought a third of the shares of CenterObuv for $40 million. “The amount of investment is such that CenterObuv will get tired of opening new stores,” the businessman rejoiced then.

Now Sergei Lomakin is no longer in Russia. He doesn't answer his cell phone either. In relation to LLC “CentrO” and JSC “TD “TsentrObuv””, the court introduced a surveillance procedure. From a network of 1.5 thousand stores, less than 200 points remained. Former partners, in response to claims from creditors, point the finger at Lomakin: they say it’s him obtained loans, determined the strategy and coordinated transactions, after which the company was essentially left without funds.

Knight of the penny

A graduate of the Moscow Mining University, Sergei Lomakin, laid the foundations of future capital in the year when other businessmen went bankrupt en masse. A year after defending his diploma, in 1998, Sergei, together with classmate Artem Khachatryan and entrepreneur Alexander Samonov, founded the Kopeika supermarket chain. The partners spotted the format of the discount store in the West, thinking that in a crisis year it would fit the Russian market. And although they only had a couple of years of wholesale coffee sales behind them, they managed to implement the idea very professionally. “This was one of the best management teams in the sector, building their business from scratch,” Viktor Shlepov, who in 2003 came to Kopeyka to manage finances from Uralsib Bank, told Finance magazine: the latter bought 50% of the company’s shares. .

Artem Khachatryan

The main shareholder of Kopeyka was Samonov - being 12 years older and having more serious business experience, he received 60% of the shares, Lomakin and Khachatryan - 20% each, but the development strategy, as the partners have repeatedly stated, was developed jointly. A business model was tested at Kopeyka, which was later implemented at TsentrObuv - aggressive development with active attraction of funds from the market. As a result, by the mid-2000s the chain already had more than 300 stores and was one of the ten largest food retailers in the country. The shareholders planned an IPO, wanting to sell a block of shares based on the company's value of at least $1 billion, but the market considered this value too high, and the deal did not take place. But a year later, in 2007, at the same price, the remaining 50 percent stake in Kopeika was sold to the same Uralsib.

Lomakin and Khachatryan received about $250 million from the deal between them, founded the investment company Sun Investments Partners and began to actively invest, as already mentioned, in discounters. First, rather out of habit, into food retail (they bought a 25% stake in the capital of the Ural chain “Monetka”), and then in clothing stores: again, following a Western model, they founded a network where everything is sold at one price - Fix Price, in the summer of 2008 purchased 5-7% of the Modis chain, which sells “fashionable clothing at affordable prices,” and then set its sights on shoes.

“All investments had one ideological leader - they were united by Sergei Lomakin,” Giedrius Pukas, managing partner of the investment company Quadro Capital Partners, which merged with Lomakin’s Sun Investments, which by that time was already called Retail Brands Collection. “We are generators of competitive advantages. We are looking at how we can beat our competitors,” Lomakin himself explained his investments. Pukas and Lomakin were partners and often appeared in public together: now Pukas does not want to talk about this partnership, and the page with information about past cooperation has been removed from the Quadro Capital website.

Shoes to throw away

The history of CenterObuv began in 1992 - Lomakin was then a first-year student and had not yet thought about business. Moscow entrepreneurs Anatoly Gurevich and Dmitry Svetlov first engaged in wholesale footwear trade, and in 1996 they opened their first store. The concept of a discounter did not come immediately; entrepreneurs decided to sell Chinese shoes made of artificial materials at minimal prices in the early 2000s. “Few people remember, but it was at TsentrObuv that they were the first to display all the shoes on the sales floor: they needed an order of magnitude fewer employees, and it was more convenient for the buyer,” recalls former employee of the chain Alla.

By 2008, TsentrObuv took a leading position in the Russian footwear market. The chain consisted of 309 own and franchised shoe stores in Moscow, St. Petersburg and other cities and was valued at $200 million, but stalled during the crisis. Svetlov and Gurevich thought about launching a youth line: young visitors bought two to three times more shoes than buyers “over 30,” and were prepared for the pair they bought to fall apart before the end of the season. With this audience in mind, we decided to master the fast fashion format - cheap tracings of fashionable shoes. However, to launch Centro (as the new network was called), investments were needed, and no one was in a hurry to invest in the opaque and risky shoe business. Nevertheless, Lomakin, who had been transporting Chinese goods to Russia at low prices for many years, became interested in the company.

After the “infusion,” sales of “TsentrObuv” really began to grow by leaps and bounds. In 2009, the chain opened 50 Centro in 28 Russian cities. Next year - the same amount. At the same time, stores of the main chain were opened. By the end of 2011, CentrObuv in Russia already had 598 stores of the same name and 148 Centro stores with total annual revenue of 30 billion rubles. At the same time, TsentrObuv also set its sights on the European market - its stores opened one after another in Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Ukraine.

In 2011, Lomakin announced that TsentrObuv was preparing for an IPO. Soon, the entry to the stock exchange was postponed for a year, and then completely canceled “due to unfavorable conditions.” Lomakin was not too lamented: what difference does it make how to attract investments, he said. Moreover, he had a new project - together with the German clothing retailer Takko Fashion, he undertook to develop a network of inexpensive stores under the Family Fashion brand.

In 2012, TsentrObuv showed record growth: the total number of stores increased to 1,168; over the next two years, the network added a couple of hundred more points - according to various estimates, up to 1,300-1,500; profits were estimated at 40 billion rubles. Such rapid growth, as in Kopeyka, was ensured through credit funds: TsentrObuv received loans from a dozen banks. Sources of “Money” confirm that it was Lomakin who obtained loans for the development of the network: given the success of his projects, good knowledge of retail and confident stories about IPOs, bankers gave money willingly. “He knew how to convince,” recalls one of the employees of the bank where CenterObuv received loans, “and the company seemed stable.”

In the ring of creditors

At the beginning of 2015, CenterObuv’s counterparties for the first time encountered the fact that the number one shoe chain did not pay its bills. At first, landlords and suppliers were asked to wait a little, then they began to ignore them completely. Payment refusals were widespread. After waiting several months, creditors went to court. By June 2015, 160 claims had already been filed against the company for a total amount of 228 million rubles, and then their number grew exponentially. “The rent debts are more than seven months, they don’t answer calls,” one of the landlords complained in a group on a social network, “they filed a lawsuit, they asked me to wait if I was ready to forgive half of the debt, they promised to pay it tomorrow.” It got to the point where landlords simply closed stores themselves, sending staff home.

Around the same time, TsentrObuv stopped paying Chinese suppliers - the Asian office of the corporation was closed. “A Chinese citizen contacted me; she owed about $7 million to her factory, TsentrObuv. And this is not the only and not the largest Chinese supplier,” says Olga Kosets, president of the local organization for the support and protection of small and medium-sized businesses “Business People.” According to various estimates, the total amount of debt to suppliers can reach up to $100 million. With the suspension of payments, supplies also stopped, of course - the network employees do not hide: almost the entire 2015 was selling off inventory.

The answer to the question of how the largest shoe chain was left without funds and with loan debts of 25 billion rubles worries many. The police are checking the version of the withdrawal of funds through fictitious transactions. These transactions were brought to the attention of law enforcement agencies by one of the largest creditors of the network, Gazprombank (the debt to it amounts to 8.6 billion rubles). A source close to the bank claims that in 2015, while monitoring the financial condition of the debtor, the management of CenterObuv assured creditors that the transactions did not go beyond the scope of normal business activities. One way or another, the network bought and then sold a number of foreign legal entities at several times cheaper; above them. The corporation also entered into commission agreements with suppliers - it issued funds for the purchase of goods and entrusted them with the implementation. After fulfilling the contract, suppliers transferred a small “profit” to the customer (less than 1% of the amount received), and the return of the funds received was postponed until later. “Many transactions within the CenterObuv network created conditions for VAT refunds,” notes the interlocutor of “Deneg,” “that is, if the fictitious, exclusively paper nature of these transactions is confirmed, it may turn out that damage was caused not only to the group’s creditors, but also to the state.” .

Looking for someone to blame

The company's top management places responsibility for carrying out all controversial transactions on Lomakin. “Mr. Lomakin, being one of the majority shareholders of Centrofasion Corp. (BVI), from April 2013 to March 2015, he was appointed managing shareholder of the company with the right to make any operational decisions for all companies, including the companies JSC Trading House CenterObuv and LLC CenterO,” says in a document signed by the current CEO Leonid Venzhik (available to the editors).

In recent years, Lomakin, indeed, began to curtail his activities in Russia: he put the Monetka chain (a franchisee of the Ural chain) up for sale and got rid of his stake in Modis. His purchase of a controlling stake in the Italian company Malo, specializing in cashmere products, also caused a stir - it cost Lomakin no less than $40 million. However, as they say in social circles, it was a gift from a rich husband to his wife, model Natalya Lomakina. On the occasion of the purchase, the couple threw two loud parties in and out, and even brought the founder of the brand, Giacomo Canessa, to the second.

However, TsentrObuv believes that the attempt to shift all the blame onto Lomakin is not entirely convincing. “Until the end of 2014, shareholders often held meetings with us,” they say at CenterObuv, “Svetlov, Gurevich, and Lomakin were there. And we received instructions not only from Lomakin. You know, they didn’t sign directly: each had their own seals, not official, but for internal documents. And we knew roughly where whose orders were.” The topic is continued by another former employee: “Obviously, there was some kind of split between them, and Svetlov is now pretending that he was allegedly not aware of Lomakin’s actions. But how can this be?”

The general director of the Yurkollegia company, Elena Gerasimova, who, before the introduction of the monitoring procedure, helped the creditors of CenterObuv to repay debts under writs of execution, does not rule out that some of the debts can still be collected as part of the bankruptcy procedure. “The arbitration manager will definitely check the activities of the managers for deliberate bankruptcy,” says Gerasimova, “and all dubious transactions will be challenged. If assets were withdrawn, they will try to return them, and since the company did not timely report the inability to repay creditors’ claims, management should be held vicariously liable.” True, while there is a trial and a case, it seems that there will be no one to attract, and there will be nothing to return.

“Tsentrobouv” will be tried on by the police

Vladislav Trifonov, Anatoly Kostyrev

As Kommersant learned, one of the creditors of the Centrobuv chain of stores, Gazprombank (GPB), is asking the Ministry of Internal Affairs to check the legality of the activities of the owners and management of the retailer. The bank suspects them of fictitious transactions and withdrawal of funds provided under the credit line. Tsentrobuvi claims that it is cooperating with GPB and conducting a joint audit.

GPB asks the police to give a legal assessment of the financial activities of the beneficiaries and management of JSC TD Centrobuv on the eve of the introduction of a surveillance procedure against the company (see Kommersant of April 4). With such a request, the bank, which is one of the largest creditors of Centrobuv, addressed on April 8 to the head of the capital department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for combating economic crimes and combating corruption, Major General Sergei Solopov. The statement (Kommersant has a copy) said that in 2013-2014 GPB entered into an agreement to open a credit line with LLC. “Centro” and JSC “TD “Tsentrobuv”” to finance business activities. To ensure the return of funds, the borrowers provided the bank with guarantees for each other. After the expiration of the refund period this year, the companies incurred a debt to GPB of 8.6 billion rubles.

From the text of the statement it follows that GPB suspects the management of Centrobuv of withdrawing funds. According to Kommersant’s sources, GPB counted 12 transactions, the legality of which was questioned. Lawyer Trofim Popov (representing the interests of GPB) confirmed that his client “has questions” to the owners and management of the retailer regarding a number of transactions and financial transactions, including with GPB’s credit funds. “We ask you to check whether they were fictitious,” he noted. The lawyer believes that the transactions could have significantly affected the financial position of Centro and the Centrobuv trading house, “which resulted in the inability of the borrowing companies to meet their loan obligations.” The statement mentions one of the owners of Centrobuv, Sergei Lomakin, who is named as the controlling shareholder.

Centrobuv, founded in 1992, today operates about 700 stores and is the largest shoe retail chain in Russia. According to SPARK-Interfax, 99.99% of JSC TD Tsentrobuv belongs to the Cypriot Plazia Consulting Ltd, the main beneficiaries of which are Sergey Lomakin and Artem Khachatryan. Shareholders also include Leonid Makaron, Vladimir Levy, as well as the founders of the retailer Dmitry Svetlov and Anatoly Gurevich. Centro LLC (engaged in import and export) is also 99.99% owned by Plazia Consulting Ltd.

According to GPB, the list of Centrobuv’s creditors also includes Sberbank, VTB and the Moscow Credit Bank (MCB). According to SPARK, the long-term and short-term liabilities of JSC TD Tsentrobuv at the end of 2014 exceeded 25 billion rubles.

Tsentrobuvi emphasizes that the introduction of the monitoring procedure in the company was coordinated with all major creditors, primarily with GPB. “Today, the management and management of the company, in close cooperation with GPB, are conducting a comprehensive audit, including the period of issuance and use of main loan funds,” assured the retailer’s representative.

Herbert Smith Freehills partner Alexey Panich suggests that GPB’s appeal to law enforcement agencies was made with the aim of adding additional pressure on the borrower. According to the lawyer, if law enforcement officers prove that the transactions are fictitious, the property or funds involved in them will be returned to the bankruptcy estate. The Ministry of Internal Affairs said that if, based on the results of the pre-investigation check, a criminal case is initiated, this will happen no earlier than in a month. Most likely, the ministry added, the case will be based on theft of loan funds, and the accusation at the initial stage is unlikely to be personalized.

Natalia Popova | 05/31/2016

The main shareholder of CenterObuv, which is on the verge of bankruptcy, is today entrepreneur Dmitry Vernimont. Other co-owners Sergey Lomakin and Artem Khachatryan believe that the chain’s business suffered due to the actions of the previous owner

In October 2015, the co-owner of CenterObuv Anatoly Gurevich gathered the chain’s management and introduced them to the new shareholder Dmitry Vernimont, says a former employee of the company. “Consider him [Vernimont] instead of me,” Gurevich said.

Another source, a close acquaintance of Gurevich, explains that the businessman borrowed money from Vernimont in order to improve matters at CenterObuv: who the loan was issued for - Gurevich himself or some structure of the network, RBC's interlocutor could not answer, but he is sure that Gurevich had personal obligations.

As a result, Vernimont received Gurevich's entire share in TsentrObuv - 40.4 percent. Another 32.8 percent belongs to the former owners of Kopeika Sergei Lomakin and Artem Khachatryan, 16.3 percent belongs to the co-founder of CenterObuv Dmitry Svetlov. Small shares - 6.7 percent and 3.3 percent - belong to Leonid Makaron and Vladimir Left; 0.5 percent is on the balance sheet of the company itself.

Khachatryan knows that Vernimont received the rights to claim the debt from Gurevich. Svetlov is aware of the emergence of a new shareholder. Gurevich refused to talk to RBC. It was not possible to get a comment from Vernimont - representatives of CenterObuv do not provide his contacts and do not forward the request.

According to a source close to Lomakin and Khachatryan, they learned about the change of majority owner much later than the others and “it shocked them.” In 2009, they became co-owners of CenterObuv at the request of Gurevich and Svetlov and for a long time almost did not interfere with the operation of the network: it regularly paid dividends until 2012 and was profitable until 2014. But over the past two years, TsentrObuv has sharply lost its market position, lost profits and damaged relations with banks. According to a source close to the management of the network, Lomakin and Khachatryan tried to gain access to the management of CenterObuv, conflicted with Gurevich and Svetlov, but the situation only worsened.

On September 6, the Moscow Arbitration Court is scheduled to consider the chain's bankruptcy case at the request of two creditors (surveillance has now been introduced at CenterObuv).

In addition, the Main Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in Moscow suspected the withdrawal of assets from TsentrObuv and on May 25 opened a criminal case against unidentified persons under Article 159.4 of the Criminal Code (fraud). The initiation of the case was preceded by an inspection carried out after a statement from one of the largest creditors of CenterObuv, Gazprombank.

Will CenterObuv shareholders be able to end the conflict and save the business?

After the sale of Kopeyka in 2007, Lomakin and Khachatryan were looking for new projects for investment. As a result, they gave $35 million of the more than $120 million they received for 32.8 percent of TsentrObuv.

“We knew Gurevich and Svetlov, periodically exchanged information about the state of the market, the introduction of technologies, even people sometimes migrated between companies,” Khachatryan recalls about the beginning of cooperation. They invested so much money that TsentrObuv had to “get tired of opening new stores,” the Kommersant newspaper quoted Lomakin in 2009.

With the money received, TsentrObuv launched another chain of stores—centro youth stores. It was not difficult: at that time, TsentrObuv, which already united 310 of its own and franchise stores, essentially competed only with market stalls.

According to Khachatryan, the founders of CenterObuv wanted new partners to help them with financing development and strategy, but without diving into the operational business. He and Lomakin, says Khachatryan, “discovered a large scope of work on purchasing, category management, new product positions,” and participated in the development of a program for opening new stores.

Lomakin and Khachatryan were only members of advisory boards, that is, they met with other shareholders informally. But they had their own representative on the board of directors of CenterObuv: votes on it were distributed in proportion to the shares of the owners. According to the shareholders' agreement, some decisions, including changes in the general director, could be made by at least 75 percent of the votes. Basically, everyone relied on the general director Andrei Nesterov, who worked at CenterObuv almost from its very creation.

The funds poured into the business had an effect, Khachatryan believes: in 2011, the network already united twice as many stores - 746 points operated from the border with the European Union to the border with Japan. In the fall of the same year, the owners of the network were preparing an IPO on the London and Hong Kong stock exchanges: it was planned to sell both shareholders’ securities and shares of an additional issue; the minimum placement volume was to be $500 million.

But later, due to the fact that there was no unanimous decision among the shareholders to conduct a placement on the stock exchange, preparations were suspended. “Even before 2013, it was necessary to sell the share to an investor to cover debts, but everything was a gem and it seemed that it would be like this forever. Therefore, all the shareholders did not agree among themselves either on entering the stock exchange or on possible transactions with funds,” explains an acquaintance of Gurevich and Svetlov.

In 2011, TsentrObuv was included in the rating of the fastest growing Russian retailers compiled by InfoLine-Analytics. Sales of the network increased by 58.4 percent, to 29.3 billion rubles, for comparison: Adidas gained 27.4 billion rubles in Russia that year. Over the course of the year, TsentrObuv also managed to increase its retail space by 49.3 percent, to 227 thousand square meters. m.

At the end of 2011, the company distributed dividends in the amount of about $90 million. And for his success, the shareholders presented Nesterov with a share of 0.5 percent.

Bonus for the CEO

At the beginning of 2012, a new player burst onto the market - the Kari discount shoe chain, created by the former owner of Eldorado, Igor Yakovlev. In just over a year, Yakovlev opened 480 Kari stores in Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Poland. “It’s like comparing a 2004 Olympic champion and a “hungry” novice athlete at a competition in Rio de Janeiro. The newcomer has a different motivation, he is “hungry”, and the leader is perhaps overly self-confident,” recalls Khachatryan.

Against the backdrop of increasing competition between shareholders, the first quarrels began. Lomakin wanted to take more part in managing the chain, and Gurevich, fascinated by the talents of the “Russian retail star,” was ready to give in to him, says a source close to CenterObuv. Therefore, Nesterov was de facto moved from the position of general director to the position of financial director. “Nesterov did not agree with what Lomakin was doing, and since the shareholders refused to delve into his claims, he decided to leave the company,” says RBC’s interlocutor. When he left the company at the end of 2013, he was paid a bonus of $5.6 million - the price of 0.5 percent recorded in 2011.

For a qualitative breakthrough, the shareholders decided to hire the Englishman Peter Ridler, who previously headed the company Monsoon Accessorize. But Ridler did not work for even a year: he was not ready to completely immerse himself in the new business and he himself offered his own resignation. The manager could not be contacted.

Although the networks themselves - both CenterObuv and Centro - had their own general directors - Marcin Tokaz and Evgeniy Peskun, respectively, in 2014 the shareholders decided to divide different areas of business among themselves in order to better understand what was happening with the company. Lomakin oversaw sales, Khachatryan oversaw logistics, Svetlov oversaw purchases and supplies of goods, Gurevich oversaw finances. This distribution is confirmed by both Khachatryan and Svetlov. Khachatryan notes that together with Lomakin they were simultaneously developing their personal business projects, that is, their work at CenterObuv was more like supervision.

At that time, the network had two main legal entities - JSC Trading House TsentrObuv (trade operator) and LLC TsentrO (importer of Chinese goods). The network rented premises for a period of 3-5 years, and most of the warehouses were also leased - in St. Petersburg, Nizhny Novgorod, Rostov, Yekaterinburg and Novosibirsk. The only own distribution center with an area of 50 thousand square meters. m was acquired by the company in 2012. The property also owns the Moscow office of TsentrObuv on 2nd Khutorskaya. To work with the main suppliers - Chinese factories (80 percent of purchases) - the Sinai company was created in Hong Kong.

When shareholders really became immersed in management, “one by one skeletons began to emerge from the closet,” Khachatryan claims. For example, it turned out that purchase prices for Kari from some suppliers were 20 percent lower than for TsentrObuv. “But if the deferred payment for the goods is 180 days, the goods are naturally more expensive. This is normal for working with imported goods,” argues Svetlov’s acquaintance. The Chinese provided large deferments to many players, says General Director of InfoLine-Analytics Mikhail Burmistrov, but often with Chinese suppliers a situation arises when the company believes that it is purchasing goods directly, but in fact is finalizing a deal with an intermediary company - and these are additional costs.

A source among shareholders believes that TsentrObuv approached the crisis year of 2014 in a “slack” state and was heavily dependent on bank loans. The fall of the ruble, sanctions and the Central Bank's increase in the key rate have had a dramatic impact on the network, he believes. On the one hand, the retailer has practically lost two foreign markets - Polish and Ukrainian. “Imagine, we turn on the TV, and there is military equipment in the background of our store, everything is clear,” says RBC’s interlocutor. In 2014, sales of CenterObuv in Ukraine fell by almost 42 percent, to $61.1 million, according to the network’s materials. The reports indicate that the Polish division was sold to a third party, with which CenterObuv continued to operate as a franchise. TsentrObuv wrote off the losses incurred in these markets.

In the main Russian market, sales of CenterObuv dropped by a third. “The company could not service its debts because the interest on the loans was equal to the rent payments,” says a source in the top management of CenterObuv. The retailer began to delay payments to Chinese factories, and they, in turn, reduced the terms of payment for goods: in the end they agreed on 90 days versus the usual 180. “It was clear that if this continued, the company would not be able to answer for its obligations to banks, nor to suppliers. And the most important thing for her life is to continuously purchase new goods and sell them,” explains RBC’s source among shareholders.

It got to the point that one of the shipments of goods worth 500 million rubles. "TsentrObuv" could not buy it on its own - Khachatryan and Lomakin themselves purchased this product, says a source close to the company. Khachatryan does not comment on this.

At the end of 2014, one of the partners of CenterObuv witnessed the unfolding drama: within 24 hours, 60 people from the development department, who were involved in selecting premises for new stores, were fired. According to RBC's source in the management of CenterObuv, in 2014, only about 400 people were laid off.

Gurevich decided to return Nesterov so that he could deal with debt restructuring, say Khachatryan and Svetlov. RBC has at its disposal a copy of Nesterov’s employment contract dated April 1, 2015: the agreement guarantees that if it is terminated against the employee’s own will, the company will have to pay him $5 million.

New owner

In April 2015, TsentrObuv had to repay a loan of 3 billion rubles. in front of VTB Bank. The company did not have such funds; according to Khachatryan, Lomakin, at the request of other shareholders, negotiated with the bank to extend the payment period and agreed on a deferment. A VTB representative declined to comment.

Claims were filed from the owners of the premises of the Centro and TsentrObuv stores: the chains did not pay rent for several months. In total, in 2015, according to SPARK, 477 claims were filed against CenterObuv companies for a total amount of 5.9 billion rubles, and in 2016 another 232 claims were filed for a total of 514 million rubles.

Svetlov and Gurevich were inclined to start bankruptcy proceedings, but Lomakin and Khachatryan did not agree with this. To save TsentrObuv, Lomakin offered to contribute his own 8 billion rubles. and promised to negotiate with banks on debt restructuring on his own. The time was approaching to order an autumn-winter collection of goods in China worth 100 million rubles. According to the top manager of CenterObuv, from June to August the shareholders prepared documents for the deal and agreed that in September the first tranche from Lomakin in the amount of 300 million rubles would arrive. But, according to an RBC source, Lomakin broke his promise. True, another source claims that Lomakin constantly heard rumors “about some new investors” and he did not want to risk money.

At that time, the shareholders were so disunited that they began to negotiate with new investors on their own. The president of the Rosenergomash concern, Vladimir Palikhata, became interested in the company, says an acquaintance of Svetlov and Gurevich. Palikhata offered 4 billion rubles. provided that Lomakin pays part of the network’s debt. In fact, from that moment on, the shareholders were divided into those who supported the new investor and those who did not want such a partnership, says Khachatryan, and in the end the deal did not take place. Palikhata did not respond to RBC's request.

At the same time, Lomakin, according to Khachatryan, negotiated a deal with the Russian shoe chain Zenden, which was ready to contribute 3 billion rubles. Zenden owner Andrey Pavlov confirmed that he had conducted due diligence, but did not comment on the amount of possible investments. The deal did not take place because, according to him, the company had too many shareholders who could not come to common decisions. “It is impossible to completely solve the company’s problems; the point of no return for rescue was passed too long ago,” says Pavlov.

In November 2015, according to Khachatryan, Gurevich, Vernimont and Palikhata met on behalf of CenterObuv with creditors, in particular with Gazprombank. Palihata said that he was “only an observer.” Khachatryan also insists that after the transfer of Gurevich’s share to Vernimont in CenterObuv, the board of directors changed and now he and Lomakin do not have their own representatives on the board. Also, without their consent, the accounts were transferred to another bank and a new general director was appointed, Leonid Venzhik, who, Khachatryan claims, is Palikhata’s childhood friend.

What is known about Dmitry Vernimont

According to Profile magazine, Vernimont was born in 1963 and graduated from the Plekhanov Russian Academy of Economics and the Institute of Finance. From 1997 to 1999, he served as advisor to the general director at Gazprom's subsidiary Gazkomplektimpex.

In 1999, he was appointed advisor to the Minister of Taxes and Duties Alexander Pochinok. As the magazine reported, Vernimont’s responsibilities included interaction with enterprises of the fuel and energy complex on issues of payments to the federal budget.

The SPARK system contains information about the full namesake of Vernimont, who owns 100 percent of the company Evolution Music Production LLC, whose main activity is publishing magazines and sound recordings.

So far, the remaining major shareholders have not made any predictions about the future of the company or their future participation in it. “We work according to the actual weather. We are in constant contact with banks, but we haven’t actually had access to information about the company since October 2015,” Khachatryan said. Lomakin only told RBC that the dialogue with banks on loan restructuring continues.

Svetlov noted that everything that happens in the company occurs in agreement with its creditors; he declined to comment further.

Criminal case

In May, documents were seized at the CenterObuv office. Since April, the Ministry of Internal Affairs has been checking the legality of the activities of the owners and management of TsentrObuv and Centro at the request of one of the largest creditors, Gazprombank. The bank suspected the company of fictitious transactions and withdrawal of funds from a credit line provided in September 2013.

RBC obtained a copy of the resolution of the Main Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in Moscow dated May 25, 2016 to initiate a criminal case under Article 159.4 of the Criminal Code against unidentified persons. The resolution states that the bank opened two credit lines with a limit of 8.6 billion rubles for the companies “Trading House “TsentrObuv” and “TsentrO”. By September 1, 2014, 8.2 billion rubles had been transferred to companies.

But back in the summer of 2014, as the Ministry of Internal Affairs found out, one of the CenterO employees invested 4.3 billion rubles. in Fullainvest LLC, Irma LLC and Nikty LLC. Apart from being expressly prohibited by the loan agreement, the bank was not notified of the transactions. The investigation also believes that before June 30, 2014, someone from the company’s management withdrew 400 million rubles.

The TsentrObuv group of companies, the largest in its segment both in terms of number of stores and revenue, was created in 1992. Develops two chains - discounters "TsentrObuv" and youth stores Centro.

The company orders the bulk of goods (80 percent) from factories in China, and places 20 percent of orders in Russia. According to InfoLine-Analytics, revenue in 2015 amounted to 28.2 billion rubles, and the number of stores was 748.

On the federal wanted list.

“By a resolution of the investigator of the Main Investigation Department of the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the city of Moscow, one of the leaders of a group of companies engaged in the sale of footwear and clothing was put on the federal wanted list,” says an official representative of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. The name of the wanted person and the network were not disclosed. But Lomakin himself, in a conversation with the media, confirmed that he knew about the initiation of a case against him. It is unknown where he is now. In mid-May it was reported that he had left Russia.

If detained, the businessman will have to tell the investigation where the loan funds issued for the development of the TsentrObuv and Centro networks went.

Sergey Lomakin

Valery Levitin/RIA Novosti

Strong manager

Until recently, Lomakin was considered one of the most successful top managers in Russia. In the late 1990s, he, together with his classmate Artem and a businessman, created the Kopeika chain of food discounters. A similar model has worked successfully in other countries and has proven effective in the Russian market. A little over ten years later, the chain numbered over 300 stores, and in 2007 it was sold to Uralsib. The parties did not disclose the amount of the transaction, but experts estimated the retail business at $600 million to $700 million. Lomakin and Khachatryan had a parity of 40% of the chain’s shares, so they could gain from $240 million to $280 million from the sale of the business.

Three years later, Kopeyka was resold to one of the leaders in the Russian retail market.

Lomakin and Khachatryan decided to stay in the retail business and founded the Sun Investments Partners fund. This fund, for example, invested in the Ural retailer Monetka (everything is sold at the same price), and then in Modis, which sells inexpensive fashionable clothing. In 2009, the partners acquired 32.8% in TsentrObuv. The company developed a network of stores selling fashionable and inexpensive shoes designed for one season. The concept was familiar to businessmen, which is why they apparently decided to invest about $40 million in the purchase of a new business. The arrival of new investors gave a powerful impetus to the development of the business. At the time of purchasing a stake in CentrObuv, the chain consisted of just over 300 stores, but two years later the company opened another chain, Centro, and the number of retail outlets increased to 800. In 2011, the retailer planned to enter an IPO, but never implemented these plans. And by 2014, he managed a network of 1.5 thousand retail outlets.

Thus, TsentrObuv became the largest shoe retail chain in Russia. According to Euromonitor, in 2015 its share among clothing and footwear sellers on the Russian market was about 6%.

The retailer also actively developed abroad: stores opened in Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Ukraine. For example, in Ukraine in 2013, the network operated 130 facilities under the CentrObuv and Centro brands. The stores were a great success: goods from inexpensive collections seemed to be in great demand.

“Development was proceeding at a very high pace: the company’s managers were ready to rent premises at higher rental rates compared to competitors. That is why the chain was present in almost all major shopping centers in the country,” says the director of a Ukrainian consulting company, who wished to remain anonymous. According to its management, the pace of development of the network was set by Lomakin. He planned to sell his business and even held negotiations with Asian investment funds.

For example, in 2012, he estimated the value of the retail business of TsentrObuv and Centro at $2 billion.

Decline of business

The company's problems began unexpectedly at the beginning of 2015. The retailer owed money to Chinese factories, stopped servicing loans to banks, and also stopped paying rent for premises. For example, in several Ukrainian shopping centers the debt amounted to about seven months, and some of the stores’ goods were seized.

The company's total debts are estimated at about 40 billion rubles, of which about 9 billion rubles. - in front of Gazprombank.

At the same time, TsentrObuv is actively closing stores: the chain has left Ukraine, and in Russia, out of 1.5 thousand facilities, no more than 300 remain. In some regions, for example in Ufa, not a single facility remains.

The bankruptcy of the network may also have market reasons. For example, this may be due to the busyness of Lomakin, who developed several businesses in parallel, increased competition (a similar model is promoted by the Kari, Zenden, and Mattino networks), as well as the onset of the crisis.

For example, in Ukraine, the segment selling cheap shoes suffered the most. The most economical residents of the country refused to buy fashionable shoes for one season.

For the same reason, the competitor of CentrObuv and Centro, the Plato chain, closed in Ukraine. Representatives of the Intertop company explained that this is due to the unsatisfactory financial performance of the retailer.

Is the owner of Centrobuva facing a criminal case due to the withdrawal of assets?

Security forces will take care of Centrobuvue

A major scandal erupted in the Russian footwear industry after Gazprombank (GPB), controlled by Gazprom, turned to the head of the capital department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for combating economic crimes and combating corruption, Major General Sergei Solopov, with a request to “give a legal assessment” of the financial activities of the beneficiaries and management of JSC "TD "Tsentrobuv"".

At the same time, the GPB wants the Ministry of Internal Affairs to “figure out” the activities of Tsentrobuv on the eve of the introduction of a surveillance procedure against this company.

The media said that the bank suspects the owners of Centrobuva of committing fictitious loan transactions, as well as illegal withdrawal of funds. Gazprombank counted at least 12 questionable transactions.

Obviously, immediately after the capital’s police officers voice their “legal assessment,” the top managers and owners of Centrobuv may be arrested.

Withdrawal of assets

Bank representatives report that in 2013–2014, Gazprombank entered into an agreement to open a credit line with LLC Centro and JSC TD Centrobuv to finance business activities.

To ensure the return of funds, the borrowers provided the bank with guarantees for each other. After the expiration of the refund period in 2016, the companies incurred a debt to the bank of 8.6 billion rubles.

"Kidok"

In “professional slang,” the actions of Centrobuv’s top managers in relation to creditor banks can be described as a “kid.”

In essence, the owners of the retail network simply led the bankers by the nose, misleading them about the true intentions of the guarantors, which, in essence, boiled down to one thing - to “cover up” the process of theft of funds borrowed from banks.

Representatives of Gazprombank draw the attention of security officials to dubious financial transactions, including those with credit funds. These transactions, according to GPB, may have been fictitious in nature and, ultimately, could have a significant impact on the financial position of Centro and the Centrobuv Trade House.

Ultimately, all these machinations by the top managers and owners of Centrobuv resulted in the inability of the borrowing companies to meet their loan obligations.

Let us pay special attention to the fact that in the statement of Gazprombank sent to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, one of the owners of Centrobuv is mentioned, Sergei Lomakin, named as the controlling shareholder.

Owners

The main owners of Tsentrobuvi are Sergey Lomakin and Artem Khachatryan. At the moment, Tsentrobuv operates about 700 stores and is the largest shoe retail chain in Russia.

Sergey Lomakin, main owner of Centrobuv

At the same time, initially JSC “Trading House “Tsentrobuv”” (judging by the documents of the Unified State Register of Legal Entities) was founded by Svetlov and Gurevich, but now real control over this structure belongs to Lomakin.

Note that Centro LLC, which is engaged in import and export, is also 99.99% owned by Plazia Consulting Ltd. and is controlled by Lomakin.

It is no secret that Lomakin’s companies have other creditors besides Gazprombank. Centrobuv's creditors also include Sberbank, VTB and Moscow Credit Bank (MCB).

At the same time, the long-term and short-term liabilities of JSC TD Centrobuv at the end of 2014 exceeded 25 billion rubles. If Lomakin's structure goes bankrupt, the creditors will be left with nothing.

"Moment of Truth"

Experts do not exclude the possibility that Mr. Lomakin and his associates have arranged the withdrawal of assets from Tsentrobuv. Not long ago, Andrei Karaulov, the author of the television program “Moment of Truth,” made an incriminating investigation into Lomakin’s activities.

He was able to identify facts of flagrant violation of the law in the activities of Mr. Lomakin and his company.

One of the Centrobuvi stores

As it turned out, in the period from 2013 to 2014, the head of the Tsentrobuv group of companies, Sergei Lomakin, actually built a “financial pyramid”. During the management of Centrobuvue, according to Moment of Truth, Lomakin withdrew more than $350,000,000 from the enterprise (archive link 1; archive link 2)

According to Karaulov, the withdrawal of assets took place through loans to subsidiaries, the acquisition of previously illiquid companies that were not operating, as well as through the payment of millions in dividends to shareholders.

Withdrawing money abroad

In addition, experts do not rule out that Sergei Lomakin used the withdrawn money to purchase foreign assets in order to legalize the funds.

For example, in August 2014 (that is, when the asset withdrawal scheme was already in effect), journalists wrote that Sergey Lomakin was buying a stake in the Italian cashmere company with almost half a century of history, Malo. This company was estimated by experts at approximately 75 - 100 million euros.

There is an opinion that by investing in Europe, Lomakin simply wanted to protect his funds from being seized by Russian courts.

Debtor

It is worth noting that the Moscow Arbitration Court introduced the monitoring procedure at Centrobuv only on April 4, 2016. This decision was made following a claim by several creditors, the largest of which are the Sandorini company registered in 2015 and the Moscow Credit Bank.

The debt to the applicants is only about 4 million rubles, but Tsentrobuv’s accounts payable are several orders of magnitude larger. At the end of 2014, the company owed its creditors 25 billion rubles, as follows from its reporting.

In 2015, 478 claims were filed against Tsentrobuvi for a total amount of 5.9 billion rubles; since the beginning of this year, this amount has increased by another 438 million rubles due to new 135 claims.

Who is bankrupting Centrobuv?

It is interesting that many small companies are swirling around the monitoring procedure (and previously bankruptcy) of Centrobuv. So, for example, the debt of JSC “Trading House “Tsentrobuv”” to “Sandorini” amounted to 4.09 million rubles. , and Sandorini LLC itself was registered in March 2015, and its sole founder and general director is a certain Valentina Burlakova.

At the same time, the authorized capital of this LLC contains only 50,000 rubles, which is many times less than the debt that Tsentrobuvi has to Sandorini. Experts do not rule out that Lomakin and his partners could have deliberately introduced this structure into the creditors of Centrobuv in order to be able to influence the processes of introducing surveillance or bankruptcy of the retail chain.

An extract from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities for Sandorini LLC was taken from the website “egrul.nalog.ru”

The company "Eddyprom" LLC was registered at the end of April 2015 and soon after registration "acquired" a debtor in the person of "CentrO" LLC (with a debt of about 1.5 million rubles), the owner of which is TD "TsentrObuv" (0.01 %) and the Cyprus offshore company Plazia Consulting Ltd (99.99%).

Legal claims of Eddyprom LLC are taken from the Electronic Justice system

An extract from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities for Eddyprom LLC was taken from the website “egrul.nalog.ru”

The founder and director of Eddyprom LLC is a certain Eduard Tsaturyan, and the authorized capital of this company is only 20,000 rubles. It seems very likely that Eddyprom LLC could also become a creditor of TsentrO LLC through the efforts of Lomakin and his partners.

It is obvious that the owners of Centrobuv want to either bankrupt the company themselves, or have control over the management of the monitoring procedure through creditors “subject” to them.

"Bonuses" for management

By the way, in 2014 (when, according to Karaulov, the mechanism for the withdrawal of assets was already working) there were personnel changes at the Centrobuv company, during which Marcin Rafal Tokaz came to the place of General Director Andrei Nesterov. Before that, he served as commercial director at a shoe company.

It is worth noting that Marcin Rafal Tokaz has worked at TD Centrobuv since 2010 as a commercial director.

Andrey Nesterov, former head of Centrobuv

The offshore ownership scheme for Centrobuvue (also with the offshore of Andrei Nesterov) was taken from the CrimeRussia website. See the link in higher resolution for the diagram.

A number of media reports claim that Nesterov previously owned a 0.5% stake in Centrobuv through Nolan Universal Ltd., and at the end of 2013 he was removed from the shareholders, for which he received a substantial compensation of $3 million (archive link).

Experts are confident that such “compensations”, as well as substantial “bonuses” for management, are further evidence of the withdrawal of assets from Centrobuva.

Fictitious purchases

Closer to the collapse of Centrobuva, a change in the model of purchasing goods began to be observed. So, initially the entire shoe business of TD Centrobuv was structured in such a way that the company received goods from the foreign supplier SinaiTradingLimited, and CentrO LLC acted as an intermediary. And after this, Centrobuv sold the received goods in the Russian Federation through a network of retail stores.

But then a “change of formation” occurred, and Tsentrobuv began making fictitious purchases of goods from third parties, increasing colossal debt.

Thus, the company has accumulated debts to Russian suppliers of almost 1 billion rubles, and to foreign suppliers – almost $100 million.

Experts are confident that Lomakin needed fictitious purchases, as well as increasing debt, to withdraw assets from Tsentrobuv before the bankruptcy of this structure. A number of information resources, with reference to the “Moment of Truth” program, say that Lomakin withdrew more than $350,000,000 from Tsentrobuv.

Fleeing abroad, leaving behind the wreckage of a recently thriving business and millions in debt, is a scheme that is rapidly gaining popularity. This year, the champion in terms of the scale of its implementation, it seems, will be the owner of CenterObuv, Sergei Lomakin: the company’s debts are estimated at 30 billion rubles, the investigation is studying transactions in which it seems that money was withdrawn, and the entrepreneur himself, who at one time founded such successful retail projects like Kopeika and Fix Price seem to have disappeared.

At the height of the 2008 crisis, 35-year-old Sergei Lomakin was already considered a successful businessman. From the sale of the Kopeyka chain to Uralsib Bank, he earned about $120 million, which he invested in various discounter chains. At the beginning of 2009, one of these transactions was agreed upon - Lomakin and Khachatryan bought a third of the shares of TsentrObuv for $40 million. “The amount of investment is such that TsentrObuv will get tired of opening new stores,” the businessman rejoiced then.

Now Sergei Lomakin is no longer in Russia. He doesn't answer his cell phone either. In relation to LLC "CentrO" and JSC "TD "TsentrObuv"" the court introduced a monitoring procedure. From a network of 1.5 thousand stores, there are less than 200 outlets left. Former partners, in response to claims from creditors, point the finger at Lomakin: they say that he was the one who obtained loans, determined the strategy and coordinated transactions, after which the company was actually left without funds.

Knight of the penny

A graduate of the Moscow Mining University, Sergei Lomakin, laid the foundations of future capital in the year when other businessmen went bankrupt en masse. A year after defending his diploma, in 1998, Sergei, together with classmate Artem Khachatryan and entrepreneur Alexander Samonov, founded the Kopeika supermarket chain. The partners spotted the format of the discount store in the West, thinking that in a crisis year it would fit the Russian market. And although they only had a couple of years of wholesale coffee sales behind them, they managed to implement the idea very professionally. “This was one of the best management teams in the sector, building their business from scratch,” Viktor Shlepov, who in 2003 came to Kopeika to manage finances from Uralsib Bank, told Finance magazine: the latter bought 50% of the company’s shares. .

Artem Khachatryan

Lomakin and Khachatryan received about $250 million from the deal between them, founded the investment company Sun Investments Partners and began to actively invest, as already mentioned, in discounters. First, rather out of habit, into food retail (they bought a 25% stake in the capital of the Ural chain "Monetka"), and then in clothing stores: again, following a Western model, they founded a network where everything is sold at one price - Fix Price, in the summer of 2008 acquired 5-7% of the Modis chain, which sells "fashionable clothing at affordable prices", and then set its sights on shoes.

“All investments had one ideological leader - they were united by Sergei Lomakin,” Giedrius Pukas, managing partner of the investment company Quadro Capital Partners, which merged with Lomakin’s Sun Investments, which by that time was already called Retail Brands Collection, told RBC magazine. “We are generators of competitive advantages. We look at how we can beat our competitors,” Lomakin himself explained his investments. Pukas and Lomakin were partners and often appeared in public together: now Pukas does not want to talk about this partnership, and the page with information about past cooperation has been removed from the Quadro Capital website.

Shoes to throw away

By 2008, TsentrObuv took a leading position in the Russian footwear market. The chain consisted of 309 own and franchised shoe stores in Moscow, St. Petersburg and other cities and was valued at $200 million, but stalled during the crisis. Svetlov and Gurevich thought about launching a youth line: young visitors bought two to three times more shoes than buyers “over 30”, and were prepared for the fact that the purchased pair would fall apart before the end of the season. With this audience in mind, we decided to master the fast fashion format - cheap tracings of fashionable shoes. However, to launch Centro (as the new network was called), investments were needed, and no one was in a hurry to invest in the opaque and risky shoe business. Nevertheless, Lomakin, who had been transporting Chinese goods to Russia at low prices for many years, became interested in the company.

In 2012, TsentrObuv showed record growth: the total number of stores increased to 1,168; over the next two years, the network added a couple of hundred more points - according to various estimates, up to 1,300-1,500; profits were estimated at 40 billion rubles. Such rapid growth, as in Kopeyka, was ensured through credit funds: TsentrObuv received loans from a dozen banks. Sources of "Money" confirm that it was Lomakin who obtained loans for the development of the network: given the success of his projects, good knowledge of retail and confident stories about the IPO, the bankers gave money willingly. “He knew how to convince,” recalls one of the employees of the bank where CenterObuv received loans, “and the company seemed stable.”

In the ring of creditors

At the beginning of 2015, CenterObuv's counterparties for the first time encountered the fact that the number one shoe chain did not pay its bills. At first, landlords and suppliers were asked to wait a little, then they began to ignore them completely. Payment refusals were widespread. After waiting several months, creditors went to court. By June 2015, 160 claims had already been filed against the company for a total amount of 228 million rubles, and then their number grew exponentially. “The rent debts are more than seven months old, they don’t answer calls,” one of the landlords complained in a group on social networks, “they filed a lawsuit, they asked me to wait if I was ready to forgive half of the debt, they promised to pay me tomorrow.” It got to the point where landlords simply closed stores themselves, sending staff home.

Around the same time, TsentrObuv stopped paying Chinese suppliers - the Asian office of the corporation was closed. “A Chinese citizen contacted me - she owes about $7 million to her factory, TsentrObuv. And this is not the only and not the largest Chinese supplier,” says Olga Kosets, president of the local organization for the support and protection of small and medium-sized businesses “Business People.” According to various estimates, the total amount of debt to suppliers can reach up to $100 million. With the suspension of payments, supplies also stopped, of course - the network employees do not hide: almost the entire 2015 was selling off inventory.

The answer to the question of how the largest shoe chain was left without funds and with loan debts of 25 billion rubles worries many. The police are checking the version of the withdrawal of funds through fictitious transactions. These transactions were brought to the attention of law enforcement agencies by one of the largest creditors of the network, Gazprombank (the debt to it amounts to 8.6 billion rubles). A source close to the bank claims that in 2015, while monitoring the financial condition of the debtor, the management of CenterObuv assured creditors that the transactions did not go beyond the scope of normal business activities. One way or another, the network bought and then sold a number of foreign legal entities at several times cheaper; above them. The corporation also entered into commission agreements with suppliers - it issued funds for the purchase of goods and entrusted them with the implementation. After fulfilling the contract, suppliers transferred a small “profit” to the customer (less than 1% of the amount received), and the return of the funds received was postponed until later. “Many transactions within the CenterObuv network created conditions for VAT refunds,” notes the interlocutor of Deneg, “that is, if the fictitious, exclusively paper nature of these transactions is confirmed, it may turn out that damage was caused not only to the group’s creditors, but also to the state.” .

Looking for someone to blame

The company's top management places responsibility for carrying out all controversial transactions on Lomakin. "Mr. Lomakin, being one of the majority shareholders of Centrofasion Corp. (BVI), from April 2013 to March 2015 was appointed managing shareholder of the company with the right to make any operating decisions for all companies, including the companies of Trading House JSC “TsentrObuv” and LLC “CentrO”,” says the document signed by the current general director Leonid Venzhik (available to the editors).

In recent years, Lomakin, indeed, began to curtail his activities in Russia: he put the Monetka chain (a franchisee of the Ural chain) up for sale and got rid of his stake in Modis. His purchase of a controlling stake in the Italian company Malo, specializing in cashmere products, also caused a stir - it cost Lomakin no less than $40 million. However, as they say in social circles, it was a gift from a rich husband to his wife, model Natalya Lomakina. On the occasion of the purchase, the couple threw two loud parties in Saint-Tropez and Moscow, and even brought the founder of the brand, Giacomo Canessa, to the second.

However, TsentrObuv believes that the attempt to shift all the blame onto Lomakin is not entirely convincing. “Until the end of 2014, the shareholders often held meetings with us,” they say at TsentrObuv, “Svetlov, Gurevich, and Lomakin were there. And we received instructions not only from Lomakin. You know, they were not signed directly: each We had our own seals, not official ones, but for internal documents. And we knew roughly where whose orders were.” The topic is continued by another former employee: “Obviously, there was some kind of split between them, and Svetlov is now pretending that he was allegedly not aware of Lomakin’s actions. But how can this be?”

The general director of the company "Yurkollegia" Elena Gerasimova, who before the introduction of the monitoring procedure helped the creditors of "TsentrObuv" to repay debts under writs of execution, does not rule out that some of the debts can still be collected as part of the bankruptcy procedure. “The arbitration manager will definitely check the activities of the managers for deliberate bankruptcy,” says Gerasimova, “and all dubious transactions will be challenged. If assets were withdrawn, they will try to return them, and since the company did not report on time the impossibility of paying off creditors’ claims, management should be involved to subsidiary liability." True, while there is a trial and a case, it seems that there will be no one to attract, and there will be nothing to return.

"Tsentrobouv" will be tried on by the police

Vladislav Trifonov, Anatoly Kostyrev

As Kommersant has learned, one of the creditors of the Centrobuv chain of stores, Gazprombank (GPB), is asking the Ministry of Internal Affairs to check the legality of the activities of the owners and management of the retailer. The bank suspects them of fictitious transactions and withdrawal of funds provided under the credit line. Tsentrobuvi claims that it is cooperating with GPB and conducting a joint audit.

GPB asks the police to give a legal assessment of the financial activities of the beneficiaries and management of JSC TD Tsentrobuv on the eve of the introduction of a surveillance procedure against the company (see Kommersant of April 4). The bank, which is one of the largest creditors of Tsentrobuva, made such a request on April 8 to the head of the capital department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for combating economic crimes and combating corruption, Major General Sergei Solopov. The statement (Kommersant has a copy) says that in 2013-2014, GPB entered into an agreement to open a credit line with Centro LLC and TD Centrobuv JSC to finance business activities. To ensure the return of funds, the borrowers provided the bank with guarantees for each other. After the expiration of the refund period this year, the companies incurred a debt to GPB of 8.6 billion rubles.

From the text of the statement it follows that GPB suspects the management of Centrobuv of withdrawing funds. According to Kommersant's sources, GPB counted 12 transactions, the legality of which was questioned. Lawyer Trofim Popov (representing the interests of GPB) confirmed that his client “has questions” to the owners and management of the retailer regarding a number of transactions and financial transactions, including with GPB’s credit funds. “We ask you to check whether they were fictitious,” he noted. The lawyer believes that the transactions could have significantly affected the financial position of Centro and the Centrobuv Trading House, “which resulted in the inability of the borrowing companies to meet their loan obligations.” The statement mentions one of the owners of Centrobuv, Sergei Lomakin, who is named as the controlling shareholder.

Centrobuv, founded in 1992, today operates about 700 stores and is the largest shoe retail chain in Russia. According to SPARK-Interfax, 99.99% of JSC TD Tsentrobuv belongs to the Cypriot Plazia Consulting Ltd, the main beneficiaries of which are Sergey Lomakin and Artem Khachatryan. The shareholders also include Leonid Makaron, Vladimir Levy, as well as the founders of the retailer Dmitry Svetlov and Anatoly Gurevich. Centro LLC (engaged in import and export) is also 99.99% owned by Plazia Consulting Ltd.