Nisanov and Vorobyov gouged the famous ski

Behind the demolition of “” – one of the 30 year-round ski resorts in the world – are the business interests of the “Airplane” group? The case reeked of scandal.

Instead of the largest all-season ski complex “” in Krasnogorsk, manhills will grow: by the end of 2023, excavator buckets may rattle on the site. Demolition will begin in March 2023. There is an opinion that behind the project “skyscrapers against” are the business interests of the Airplane group, that is, God Nisanov, the brother of the governor of the Moscow Region Andrei Vorobyov Maxim and their business partners. This version is also supported by the fact that the name of the ex-Minister of the Moscow Region Mikhail Oleinik, a former adviser to Vorobyov, has already appeared near the project.

In the meantime, the bankruptcy trustee of Snezhnaya Gorka, the owner of the complex, discovered and challenged a chain of transactions aimed at withdrawing liquid property. History can turn into a criminal case? Details – in the material of the correspondent of The Moscow Post in the Moscow region.

“Airplane” will land in the Pavshinsky floodplain?

The promised reconstruction turned into the dismantling of Russia’s first all-season ski complex – one of 30 of its kind in the world. Back in January 2022, they announced the first stage of reconstruction, and already in October a decision was made to dismantle it.

In February 2023, the bankruptcy trustee of the company that owns the complex, Roman Nosov, stated in comments to TASS that the demolition of the buildings could take up to eight months, and should begin in February-March 2023. At the same time, Nosov recalled that the facility is not functioning and is disconnected from all networks.

Thus, already in September-October 2023, the residents of Krasnogorsk, who actively protested against the demolition of the complex and collected more than 27 thousand signatures under the corresponding petition, can hear excavator buckets.

The bankruptcy trustee, in his commentary to TASS, called the object an emergency, and this accident rate was previously mentioned in a publication on the website. Meanwhile, Snezhnaya Gorka LLC (established in 2017), the owner of the complex built in 2007, appeared only twice in the FSIS “Unified Register of Inspections” – in 2021 and 2022, and no violations were found. But is the complex, which has been working flawlessly for at least the last six years, as bad as they want to show? Or do you just need to release an investment-attractive site for someone?

The Moscow Post has previously written about the possible interest of the Airplane group in the development project for the site under This information was previously distributed by the telegram channel Real Estate Insiders. Later it became known that the Rubikon company, owned by the ex-Minister of Transport of the Moscow Region, Mikhail Oleinik, is sending out a technical assignment for preparing a draft plan for the territory where the ski complex is now located.

The Rubikon company, owned by ex-Minister of Transport of the Moscow Region Mikhail Oleinik, sends out terms of reference for preparing a draft plan for the territory where the ski complex is now located (open sources)

According to the unified state register of legal entities, Rubicon LLC with the direction of activity “construction of residential and non-residential buildings” was established on May 23, 2022. The owner is Mikhail Oleinik, an ex-minister who left his post in February 2017. At the same time, he did not last long in the ministerial position – he was appointed in January 2016.

The fact that this is not just a namesake is also confirmed by the coincidence of the TIN of the minister and businessman.

It is noteworthy that before the creation of Rubicon, Oleinik did not show any interest in the construction market. Since 2021, he has been registered as an individual entrepreneur in the field of business and management consulting, and since November 2021, he has owned a 50% stake in Eco2 LLC, which operates in the provision of environmental consulting services. Here the question arises, in whose interests was the Rubicon created?

The distribution of the terms of reference from Oleinik, if it really took place, fits into the outline of the opinion about the possible development of the site after the dismantling of by the forces of Samolet, although the developer himself did not confirm his participation in the project earlier in the media comments. But the facts so far say otherwise. So, before Oleinik became a minister, he was a personal adviser to the governor Vorobyov. And, as you know, when you say “Airplane”, you mean the Vorobyovs. And since September 2021, God Nisanov, whose company acquired almost 10% of the share in Samolet Group of Companies.

According to the report on affiliates, as of December 31, 2022, the main shareholders of Samolet Group of Companies PJSC were Pavel Golubkov (28.8%), Igor Evtushevsky (5.7%), Mikhail Kenin (30.7%). And although the governor’s brother, Maxim Vorobyov, does not appear among the shareholders of PJSC, in fact, Samolet is more than 200 legal entities and individuals belonging to the same group, the so-called affiliates. is managed by one of the minor shareholders of PJSC – Anton Elistratov, belongs to PJSC GK “Samolyot”, JSC “Investment Group 11” and the closed-end investment combined fund “First” managed by CEF-C Direct Investments. According to Rusprofile, Maxim Yuryevich Vorobyov was the founder of Investment Group 11 JSC. The second co-founder was Grand Land LLC, owned by a certain Lyudmila Vorobyeva. And, of course, by pure coincidence, the mother of the governor and his brother are also called Lyudmila. Now the beneficiaries of JSC Investment City group 11″ are not disclosed.

Also, with a major shareholder of Samolet, Kenin, Maxim Vorobyov previously owned LLC SPBR-Invest, now he is a co-owner of a closed-end mutual investment fund, whose beneficiaries are not disclosed. Or here: with another small shareholder of “Airplane” – Dmitry Golubkov – Maxim Vorobyov are co-owners of the company “Ultramar”. And with Evtushevsky, Maxim Vorobyov owned Specialized Developer Samolet LO LLC. And these are far from all the points of intersection of the shareholders of Samolet and the Vorobyovs, which indicates their close connection.

In the development of the Snezh.Koma site, there is another interesting fact, which also leads to the governor’s family.

Vedomosti reported that in 2012 it is known that Maxim Vorobyov previously served on the board of directors of Saint Petersburg Bank, which often appears in the court cases of Snezhnaya Gorka, the owner of Snezh.Com. Judge for yourself.

In 2015, this bank filed a lawsuit against JSC “Construction Department No. 155”, demanding 1.062 billion rubles and foreclosure on real estate, which appeared as collateral for a loan issued to the developer. And the administrative building of the all-season ski complex with a total area of ​​17,762.5 sq.m, the ski slope,’s movable property and four land plots acted as this pledge.

It is noteworthy that the founder and owner of the SU 155 holding was Mikhail Balakin, a former deputy of the Moscow City Duma, who was going to run for mayor of Moscow. In an interview with Vedomosti in 2018, Balakin actually announced a personal acquaintance with Governor Vorobyov. He stated that “at the personal request of Governor Andrei Vorobyov, he built a 19-storey building with a full finish in four months.”

But let’s get back to the lawsuit of the bank and The cadastral numbers of the plots from the court decision in this case correspond to those cadastral numbers that allegedly appear in the Rubicon mailing list indicated above. In this case, back in 2016, foreclosure was levied on the property and it should have been put up for auction for almost 900 million rubles. This is probably what happened, because Snezhnaya Gorka LLC, the new owner of, was formed in 2017. Moreover, as follows from the court ruling of 2019, in May 2018, the debt in the amount of 830.9 million rubles, as well as clauses on the recovery of assets, were transferred from the debtor – Construction Management No. 155 JSC as part of the procedural succession, to LLC “Snow Hill”. So the company, not having time to establish itself, found itself in debt.

But amazing coincidences and miracles in this case do not end there.

In 2017 and until November 2018, Pavel Matushevsky was the owner of Snezhnaya Gorka LLC, which assumed the multimillion-dollar debts of the infamous developer SU 155. And again, a coincidence: Matushevsky was the owner of the STK company, which is now owned by the closed-end investment combined fund “Nevsky – the Fourteenth Fund.” And the latter is managed by the “daughter” of the bank “St. Petersburg” – LLC “BSPB Capital”.

After Matushevsky, Sergei Yakovlev became the owner, and after him, from June 2021, to the present, Viktor Savichev. The latter does not have any other assets. But the personality of Yakovlev, who owned Snezhnaya Gorka from November 2018 to June 2021, is quite interesting. Yakovlev owns a stake in the St. Petersburg company Neva-Oil, whose subsidiary was featured in the publication of the Kommersant newspaper as having received permission from the Federal Agency for Marine and Water Resources to create an alluvium in the water area of ​​the Big Port of St. Petersburg to expand the infrastructure of the Turukhtanny Islands marine fuel terminal.

In addition, Neva Oil (but before Yakovlev legally became a co-owner, before him, the beneficiaries were hiding behind an offshore) owned a stake in a certain MBK LLC. Yulia Arsent’eva was also among the owners. The latter was for a short time a co-owner of the St. Petersburg developer – SZ Ntvo LLC, owned by Andrey Birzhin’s Glorax company. The Moscow Post wrote about Birzhin earlier.

In addition, the former owner of Snezhnaya Gorka, Yakovlev, has a common asset (LLC Gefest) with a certain Alexei Vorobyov. Whether this Vorobyov is related to a well-known family could not be established. The Gefest company is “registered” in St. Petersburg, but even there, for example, Maxim Vorobyov has business interests. So, it may well be that Alexei Vorobyov is some kind of relative.

Now let’s return to the bankruptcy case of Snezhnaya Gorka LLC, from which, in general, all the troubles of the ski complex began, which brought it to demolition.

And what do we see now? In the bankruptcy case, the largest creditor is still the same bank “St. Petersburg”, which we wrote about above. It was his demand that the court accepted for management and declared the LLC bankrupt. And already in October 2022, the creditors decided to dismantle the facility, that is, the site will actually be vacated. At the same time, the wording of the decision of the meeting of creditors was very vague – “take measures to increase the value of the debtor’s property, for further sale on more favorable terms, including the dismantling of buildings.” That is, to sell the land without some kind of ski complex? After all, “squares” in “humans” bring more margin than sports.

Muddy deals and withdrawal of assets

But this is not all dirty linen in the story of the bankruptcy and demolition of Snezh.Com to free up a site for human settlements. A criminal case seems to be on the horizon.

The bankruptcy trustee revealed a whole chain of transactions aimed at withdrawing the debtor’s liquid property. And although the court sided with the plaintiff, this story is not over – on March 27, 2023, one of the defendants in the chain, Bulgarian citizen Krasimir Shishmanov, plans to appeal the verdict.

In September 2022, the arbitration of the Moscow Region heard a statement from the bankruptcy trustee LLC Snezhnaya Gorka and invalidated the interest-bearing cash loan agreement dated 07/15/2019, the assignment agreement dated 08/01/2019 as invalid transactions. the contract for the sale of a land plot dated August 13, 2019 and the debt offset agreement dated August 14, 2019 between the debtor and Grigoriev Denis Anatolyevich, Shishmanov Krasimir Todorov, that is, it was about a chain of “transactions aimed at withdrawing the debtor’s liquid property.” All the details and details were set out in the materials of the court.

As it turned out, on July 15, 2019, a certain Grigoryev (the lender) and Snezhnaya Gorka (the borrower) signed an interest-bearing loan agreement for 4.5 million rubles. At the same time, the money was allegedly transferred in cash, and the interest for them amounted to 7.5%. It should be noted here that at the time of these transactions, Yakovlev was the director and owner of the LLC.

What happens next? And then Grigoriev cedes the right to claim the debt to a certain Bulgarian citizen Krasimir Shishmanov. And already on August 13, 2019, an agreement for the sale and purchase of a land plot with a total area of ​​672+/-9 sq.m. is concluded between Snezhnaya Gorka LLC and a Bulgarian. And in the form of a payment for the plot, an alleged offset under a loan agreement went. But the court ultimately considered that “all agreements in relation to the disputed property are a consistent chain of actions agreed upon by all participants, aimed at achieving a single result – the removal of the debtor’s liquid property.”

An interesting episode. There is something for the investigating authorities to pay attention to.

In the same piggy bank of oddities around, one can add the message of deputy Dmitry Svishchev that “the design and estimate documentation for the ski complex has been lost, there is no expert opinion on its technical condition and the property, which is part of the sports technological equipment, without which the full functioning of the object is impossible, has already been sold.

As we can see, the demolition case, including murky deals aimed at withdrawing liquid property, has every chance of turning into a criminal case. After all, back in September 2022, after Svishchev’s deputy’s request, the Prosecutor General’s Office took control of the activities of the owners of the complex. Who will the investigators turn their attention to? After all, such a rich selection of personalities.

The views and opinions expressed in these articles are those of the source and do not necessarily reflect the official position of ‘Tony Hughes Law,’ which shall not be held liable for any inaccuracies presented. The information provided within this article is for general informational purposes only. While we try to keep the information up-to-date and correct, there are no representations or warranties, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability of the information in this article for any purpose.

This article is syndicated automatically through a third-party agency from

To view the original article at, you can visit

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like