Sberbank buys Vyatka Bank. Novaya Gazeta learned about the non-cash sale of Sberbank's subsidiary in Ukraine
The owner of Vyatka Bank Grigory Guselnikov is going to buy the Ukrainian "daughter" of Sberbank. According to media reports, as part of the transaction, he intends to transfer his Russian assets to Sberbank, including 98% of Vyatka Bank. Under whose brand will work " Vyatka Bank"What development scenarios await him and what his clients and employees need to prepare for now, Svoykirovsky understood.
Author: Elena Zholobova This story began in public space on March 13 in the center of Kiev, when Ukrainian radicals poured concrete at the entrance to the branch of Sberbank of Russia and put forward an ultimatum: if by April the Ukrainian "daughter" of the Russian bank did not officially stop working, they would "close »All branches of Sberbank in the country. Three days later, Kiev imposed sanctions against five Russian banks operating in Ukraine. On the same day, the head of Sberbank German Gref said that his company was looking for opportunities to leave the Ukrainian market as quickly as possible. And on March 27, Sberbank of Russia officially announced the conclusion of a legally binding agreement on the sale of the Ukrainian subsidiary.
The new owner of Sberbank’s Ukrainian assets will be an investment consortium, which will include Norvik Banka, a Latvian bank controlled by Grigory Guselnikov, and a Belarusian company owned by Said Gutseriev, the son of the famous Russian businessman Mikhail Gutseriev. The transaction amount was also named - $ 130 million. According to Novaya Gazeta, this is not only less than the bank’s own capital, but even the market value of one and a half hundred objects in which the branches of the Ukrainian "daughter" of Sberbank worked.
Mikhail Shevelev. Photo by Nikolai Pikhtin
- In both cases, the place of decision-making is not the city of Kirov. Sberbank has the closest management in Nizhny Novgorod, “ Vyatka Bank"- a branch of a Latvian bank. I can’t talk now about the equivalence or inequality of this exchange, because I don’t know which assets will be transferred. The Ukrainian network of Sberbank is quite high-quality, seriously capitalized and prepared both from the point of view of personnel and premises, and from the point of view of the entire technological system and computer security. On the other hand, " Vyatka Bank"- this, in my opinion, is also a fairly high-quality bank both in providing services and in terms of customer focus. The fact that " Vyatka Bank"Will come under the control of Sberbank - this is the most likely scenario. So Sberbank will have to do something with it. For him, this deal is unusual. This is not VTB, which segments its services by banks: VTB24 works with individuals and small businesses, VTB North-West is aimed at large corporate customers, and the former Summer Bank was engaged in microcrediting. For Sberbank, this is a complex approach precisely from the point of view of business management. And we should not be mistaken: the Kirov region is not so interesting in terms of forming its own banks-segments within the region. In addition, with the existing network, include offices " Vyatka Bank"Sberbank is also an absurd matter. So, in my opinion, combining these branches under a single brand is not practical. So, Sberbank is likely to resell this asset to someone, because it is simpler and more understandable. On the one hand, they will not upset the balance of power in the region, and on the other, they will remain to their advantage. Therefore, under what brand will “ Vyatka Bank"- this is an open question today. Other financial professionals, in contrast, suggest that “ Vyatka Bank»For Sberbank can be a very profitable acquisition.
We do not know for certain that the decision on the deal was made in a hurry. Some media say so, but in general, such transactions are being prepared for several months, because it is necessary to conduct preliminary calculations, check all reports, ”a source close to Sberbank shared his opinion on condition of anonymity. - If after checking it turns out that, for example, half of the loans in the bank are overdue, then the value of its assets will immediately fall. I am sure that Sberbank understood what “ Vyatka Bank"And he probably made sure that there are no" skeletons in the closet. " For Sberbank, reputation is very expensive. Yes, at Vyatka Bank“Last year there were difficulties, there were checks by the Central Bank and the Investigative Committee, but they did not reveal any serious problems. Plus over the last few years " Vyatka Bank"Held a lot of campaigns to distribute credit cards and attract small businesses, many clients came to their service. Therefore, I believe that the acquisition of " Vyatka Bank»For Sberbank - a deliberate purchase, not a forced operation and not twisting the hands.
According to the source, for the regional branch of Sberbank, a new asset is, first of all, a good opportunity to get a new flow of customers without additional efforts, as the client base “ Vyatka Bank”Is valuable by a large segment of small business and loyal individuals, which Sberbank will not hurt in any case.
I think that the first steps of the regional leadership of Sberbank will be an analysis of all the best practices, and they are definitely there at Vyatka Bank, after which it will begin rebranding and other activities aimed at strengthening Sberbank's position in the region. As for the new offices, most likely, their location and customer flow will be analyzed, and then a decision will be made whether to close or not to close one or another branch. At one time, Sberbank even closed several fairly advantageous outlets even in the city, so the offices “ Vyatka Bank”- this is an opportunity to restore service in those areas where Sberbank closed. There are reliable methods that allow us to determine how it is economically viable to place a bank branch in one place or another on the map, and I think that for the next three years the management of Sberbank will be provided with this work. But so far, as far as I know, a decision on rebranding has not yet been made. As for the possible sale of the asset to another market participant, a source close to Sberbank said that this was unlikely. “For Sberbank, such quick sales transactions are not typical. If there was such an idea, I think Sberbank would not have announced at all that the deal had taken place, ”he said.
What should employees prepare for?
The most painful selling process " Vyatka Bank"Will be for its employees, experts are sure. According to them, first of all, top managers are waiting for reductions.
It is clear that there cannot be two bosses on the same network, ”says a source close to Sberbank. - I don’t think that cash-desk workers should be preparing for something bad, especially since this is a long process. And the analysis and testing will be carried out according to the leaders, and then the question of professionalism will be carried out - who will remain to work.
But Konstantin Kropanev believes that ordinary employees now have the greatest risk, since with any further option, we can expect staff optimization. But how large-scale these reductions will be is difficult to predict.
Should customers worry?
Experts do not exclude that in the case of the transition " Vyatka Bank»Under the brand of Sberbank or its sale to a third party, he may lose some of his customers.
A change of ownership raises the level of uncertainty, which is why some customers can play it safe and go to other banks, ”says Mikhail Shevelev. - This is the background: no matter what the further move, as the banks are changing their management, it can give rise to some destabilization and outflow of customers. Though " Vyatka Bank»Has already repeatedly argued that a change of brands and owners only leads to a strengthening of its position.
Konstantin Kropanev. Photo: facenook.com
Konstantin Kropanev has a similar opinion:
If, nevertheless, Sberbank becomes the main shareholder " Vyatka Bank", For investors this is a significant plus. It’s becoming more and more complicated with customers, since Vyatka Bank has a specific client. Who wanted to be served at Sberbank, it is already served there. And in Vyatka BankGo for something else. Someone liked the service of this institution, for some banking products the conditions there are more favorable. So it’s not a fact that those who are currently served in Vyatka Bank", They will want to go to Sberbank.
At the same time, all the experts we interviewed agreed that current clients “ Vyatka Bank»Nothing to worry about. Firstly, the sale process itself is slow, it can take from six to nine months to approve the transaction by the Ukrainian Central Bank. Moreover, the deal can be artificially delayed in order to escalate the political situation. Secondly, according to sources, Sberbank really does not yet have an understanding of what to do with the new Kirov asset. But even in the event of a brand change or sale " Vyatka Bank»To another market participant, all obligations to borrowers, investors, payroll project participants and other customers will be retained in the same volume and under the same conditions.
In 2017, the sale of Sberbank PJSC is expected. Photo: EPA / UPG
The sale price of the Ukrainian subsidiary of Sberbank of the Russian Federation to a consortium of investors is not yet known, but it will be significantly lower than the bank’s capital, which is estimated at approximately $ 140 million. After the transaction is closed, the bank will change its name, as its new owners have already announced. However, the future of the asset is very vague.
PJSC Sberbank, which today is the "daughter" of the Russian Sberbank, is expected to be sold in 2017. Earlier it became known that. Said Gutseriev is the majority shareholder of the consortium, in which he owns 55%, Grigory Guselnikov owns 45%.
The National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) has not yet received an official notice of the sale of Sberbank. At the same time, most likely, the National Bank is already aware of the conditions of the upcoming transaction at least on an informal level. And this cannot but please the NBU, since the tense situation around the subsidiaries of Russian banks, in particular, Sberbank, does not contribute to improving the international reputation of the banking system of Ukraine.
“The regulator is more than interested in removing the situation that creates an unhealthy excitement around the banking system, because there is always an element of instability and chaos. In addition, all this looks very bad in the eyes, including the IMF, which never welcomes illegal pressure mechanisms. And, therefore, there will be no particular problems in the issue of approval of the purchase. Moreover, if the company has European jurisdiction, then it will be considered as a plus in the process of coordinating this issue, "the comment noted Ntare "apostrophe" Adviser to the President Association of Ukrainian Banks Alex Kusch.
However, despite the obvious European character of the future shareholders of Sberbank PJSC, there are still many questions regarding the upcoming transaction.
In particular, it is not clear why the bank will receive the name Norvik Banka if this bank is not a majority shareholder in the consortium that acquires it (the parent bank may subsequently increase its stake, but why this was not done at the purchase stage)? What is the role of an unnamed Belarusian company through which Sberbank buys Said Gutseriev? What are the real motives of buyers of the Ukrainian "daughter" of Sberbank?
Dragon Founder, Dragon Investment Debt Securities Sales Specialist, believes the bank’s voiced buyers are purely nominal.
"These shareholders have not needed a bank in Ukraine for 100 years. And they buy it at the big request of someone in the Kremlin. Or the Kremlin itself. And now the main thing is to understand what will happen next," he said.
According to the expert, in this situation two options are visible. “They buy it to merge. Or to hold it until better times,” Fursa said.
The answers to all these questions will obviously come soon.
Also, you should not wait in connection with the sale of Sberbank PJSC to quickly leave other state banks of the Russian Federation from the Ukrainian market. So, in particular, Alexander Parashchy, the head of the analytics department of the investment company Concorde Capital, believes.
Vitaly Shapran agrees with him. “I think that (selling the Sberbank subsidiary) will not accelerate, but, on the contrary, will satisfy the raging public,” he said.
Victor AvdeenkoFound an error - highlight and press Ctrl + Enter
After leaving Norvik Banka, he can count on working with defense industry enterprises.
Kirovsky Vyatka-Bank withdrawn from the international banking group Norvik. The main shareholder of both financial institutions, Grigory Guselnikov, intends to control Vyatka Bank without the mediation of Norvik Banka. Experts point to the formal nature of the transaction and believe that Vyatka Bank may become a "bargaining chip" in Mr. Guselnikov’s attempts to buy the Ukrainian "daughter" of Sberbank of the Russian Federation.
Latvian Norvik Banka and its main shareholder Grigory Guselnikov made a deal with the shares of Vyatka Bank (Kirov Region), as a result of which the Kirov Bank ceased to be a subsidiary of the Latvian financial organization. The bank notes that now Mr. Guselnikov and his family will control Vyatka Bank without an intermediary represented by AO Norvik Banka. How the transaction was conducted, the bank did not specify. Grigory Guselnikov was not available for comment yesterday. According to the President of Vyatka Bank Sergey Tuvalkin, the deal was approved by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation in 2017. As a result of its holding, Vyatka Bank completely separated from the Latvian bank. “If earlier they were not interconnected only by financial operations, then communication through equity was also liquidated,” the bank said. “The“ old shareholders ”returned to us, who always cared about the well-being of our bank, always put the interests and rights of our depositors as the highest priority. From now on, Vyatka Bank acts independently, without regard to European banking realities. This is the most correct and optimal way that could be realized, ”Mr. Tuvalkin noted. At the same time, the president of Vyatka Bank notes that due to the participation of Norvik Banka, the activity of the Kirov bank was complicated - he could not buy bonds of Sberbank of the Russian Federation and work with enterprises of the military-industrial sector. Now these problems are resolved.
Recall that in October 2014 Norvik Banka became the owner of a 97.75% stake in the Kirov regional bank Vyatka Bank OJSC, which until then had been owned by the Cyprus company Opidius Holdings since the end of 2010. Her ultimate beneficiaries were Grigory Guselnikov and his father Alexander Guselnikov. Norvik Banka then noted that the decision to acquire a controlling stake in a Kirov credit institution would simplify the ownership structure of the bank and make it more transparent. At the same time, the final owner of Vyatka Bank remained the same. In April 2015, a decision was approved to increase the authorized capital of Vyatka Bank by 1.4 billion rubles. by placing an additional issue of shares by private subscription in favor of, in particular, Norvik Banka, the Guselnikov family and a number of top managers of the bank. In October of that year, Vyatka Bank OJSC was reregistered into Norvik Bank PJSC.
According to the analyst of Alor Broker Kirill Yakovenko, the situation with Vyatka Bank is “extremely difficult to call a deal, it is rather a technical separation of it from the structure of Norvik Banka”. “Changes in the structure of shareholders will occur only de jure. The de facto owner in the person of Grigory Guselnikov, who owns, in addition to Vyatka and the provisionally head Norvik Banka, will remain the same, ”said Mr. Yakovenko.
He believes that theoretically the withdrawal of a foreign Norvik Banka from the Vyatka Bank shareholders opens up the possibility for the latter to take part in servicing the public sector and, in particular, in lending to enterprises of the military-industrial complex, including those under sanctions: “At a minimum, The bank's management is actively leaning toward this version. But, in my opinion, the argument seems rather strained. There are no prohibitive legislative restrictions on the section of banks with foreign capital in lending to the state order, at least formalized ones. But Vyatka is hard to imagine among the banks for which this activity would be the main one. I don’t think that the separation of Vyatka from Norvik Banka will lead to some fundamental changes in this regard. ”
At the same time, Kirill Yakovenko noted that “the possible connection between the“ deal ”and the story of the purchase by Grigory Guselnikov and businessman Said Gutseriev of the Ukrainian“ daughter ”of Sberbank of the Russian Federation, which did not take place due to the refusal of the National Bank of Ukraine, is more interesting. “It is likely that it was Norvik Banka’s entry into the capital of a Russian credit institution that could cause a refusal to complete the transaction. I don’t exclude that what is happening is a link in a fairly long chain of events, within which Norvik Banka and Sberbank can exchange assets and Vyatka Bank can already truly change its owner in the future, however, the benefit of the state bank from such a transaction is not obvious, ”the expert believes.
On March 27, the Ukrainian party "Civil Corps", created on the basis of the Azov battalion, announced the closure of the action to block the work of the branches of the Ukrainian "daughter" of Sberbank of Russia. The action began on March 13, when Ukrainian radicals concreted shop windows and the entrance to a bank branch in the center of Kiev. Then an ultimatum was put forward that if before the beginning of April the Ukrainian “daughter” of a Russian bank did not officially stop working, they themselves would “close” all Sberbank branches in the country. As early as March 16, Kiev imposed sanctions against all five Russian state-owned banks operating in Ukraine. The head of Sberbank German Gref on the same day said that the company was looking for opportunities to leave the Ukrainian market as quickly as possible. And on March 27, Sberbank of Russia issued an official press release on the conclusion of a “legally binding agreement on the sale of the Ukrainian subsidiary.”
Activists blocked the branch of the "daughter" of Sberbank. Photo: RIA news
Later it was reported that the new owner of 100% of the Ukrainian subsidiary of Sberbank would be the investment consortium of the Latvian Norvik Banka, controlled by Grigory Guselnikov, and a Belarusian company owned by the son of the main owner of Rusneft and the Safmar group. The transaction amount was also named - $ 130 million. This is less than the bank’s own capital. And even less than the market value of one and a half hundred real estate owned by the Ukrainian "daughter" of Sberbank (these are premises throughout Ukraine, in which bank branches worked).
In addition, the assets of the Ukrainian "daughter" of Sberbank at the beginning of the year amounted to 48.356 billion hryvnias (this is about 100 billion rubles). The total amount of deposits is 18.798 billion hryvnias (37 billion rubles), of which deposits of individuals are 11.417 billion hryvnias (22 billion rubles).
In April 2015, German Gref informed Vladimir Putin that the loan portfolio of the Ukrainian subsidiary of the largest Russian bank is about $ 4 billion, but more than 50% of the portfolio is not serviced. The experts we interviewed agreed that over the two years the situation with the loan portfolio has not changed much. Both in volume and in the ratio of “bad” and “good” loans.
Even at the credit institution itself, according to our sources at Sberbank of Russia, the assets of the Ukrainian subsidiary are estimated at almost $ 2 billion.
At the disposal of "New" were the documents from which it follows that negotiations on the sale of the Ukrainian "daughter" began last year.
Judging by the “Plan of basic steps for the purchase of Sberbank Ukraine”, before January 31, Sberbank of the Russian Federation was to provide preliminary data “on an express analysis of the loan portfolio” of the Ukrainian “daughter”. Until February 10, they had to make “final settlement and final assessment of the value of the business of Sberbank Ukraine” and “coordination of the general parameters of the transaction assessment”.
The “Plan ...” item is noteworthy “preliminary resolution of the issue of the possibility of excluding the bank from the list of sanctions in the USA for conducting a transaction”. The British citizen Grigory Guselnikov, who controls Norvik Banka, who negotiated the purchase of the Ukrainian subsidiary of Sberbank, took the decision on this issue.
Until March 10, a “preliminary discussion of the deal with the regulator in Ukraine” was to take place.
Activists “label” the branch of Sberbank: “Russian Bank”. Photo: RIA Novosti
Judging by the chronicle of the development of events, the discussion took place, but the conversation was not constructive. It was then, in all likelihood, that they decided to connect activists of the Civil Corps party to the “negotiations”, which, I recall, on March 13 began an action to block the branches of the Ukrainian “daughter” of Sberbank.
There are suspicions that the president of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko became a "participant" in the transaction, approving March 16 sanctions against banks operating in Ukraine with Russian capital.
Sberbank could not stand such powerful pressure. And on March 27 he signed a “legally binding agreement on the sale of the Ukrainian“ daughter ”.
Novaya Gazeta learned that the sale of the Ukrainian subsidiary of Sberbank does not provide for a monetary component.
According to our information, Guselnikov transfers 98% of Vyatka Bank to Sberbank of Russia, controlled by Guselnikov since 2014. In addition, he transfers to Sberbank a land plot in the Moscow region valued at $ 13.6 million, the Hilton Yekaterinburg hotels ($ 19.8 million) and the Hilton Mozhaisk ($ 25.5 million), as well as refinanced loans for $ 23.4 million received by the operators of the Hilton Kirov and Hilton Perm hotels.
An exchange of assets between Sberbank of the Russian Federation and structures of Grigory Guselnikov. Infographics Aleksey Komarov / Novaya Gazeta
It is noteworthy that in the Kirov region, Sberbank has an extensive network of about five hundred branches. And Vyatka Bank is a direct competitor to the Kirov branches of the largest bank in Russia. Sberbank agreed to take a 98% stake in Vyatka Bank as payment for the shares of the Ukrainian "daughter" in order to immediately eliminate a competitor in the not the largest and most successful region of the Russian Federation? Too uneven is the exchange.
Sources of Novaya Gazeta suggest an alternative scenario: the sale of the Ukrainian “daughter” of Sberbank could be a negotiated deal between Russian and Ukrainian figures who wished to remain in the shadows for the time being, but ensured a public attack on the branches of the Ukrainian “daughter” of Sberbank and imposed sanctions against Russian banks working for Ukraine. And then this is most likely not the subjects of Great Britain Guselnikov and Gutseriev, who can be called the operators, but not the beneficiaries of the transaction.
Petr Sarukhanov / "New"
Grigory Guselnikov.Born February 25, 1976 in Novosibirsk. He graduated from Tomsk Polytechnic University with a degree in Economics, and has been working in the banking sector since 1996. In 2001, he headed the Binbank retail business department, and by 2008 became its president. In 2010, Guselnikov left Binbank and became the head of the board of directors of Vyatka Bank.
In February 2012, Guselnikov announced unscheduled inspections in the Vyatka Bank by the Central Bank. The inspectors, according to him, were interested in the accounts of the “Fund for Supporting Initiatives of the Governor of the Kirov Region” (at that time it was Nikita Belykh) and “Legal Company Navalny and Partners”. Guselnikov also said that a request came from the Ministry of Internal Affairs to the bank, which ordered the police to list the foreign counterparty companies and municipal enterprises of the Kirov region serviced by his bank.
In December 2013, Guselnikov, as a partner of the G2 Capital Partners investment fund, acquired 50% plus one share of the Latvian Norvik Banka, and in June 2014 he increased his stake in 82%. In October 2014, Norvik Banka became the main shareholder of Vyatka Bank, and in July 2015 Guselnikov's Kirov asset was also given a new name - Norvik Bank (according to the Central Bank of the Russian Federation as of March 1, 2017, its assets amounted to 13.6 billion rubles).
Guselnikov is familiar to the Russian audience as a member of the club “What? Where? When? ”, The guardian of whose traditions he has been since 2010. In November 2015, Guselnikov took part in the transfer as an expert.
In one of his interviews, Guselnikov called making money a soulless occupation. “I would generally cease to do this with interest. All mental things are connected not with earning, but with wasting, ”said Guselnikov.