The property criteria established by Arma at the competition for a manager for the Gulliver shopping center narrow the circle of participants-expert
Kyiv • UNN
The expert criticizes the criteria established by Arma for the competition for the management of the Gulliver shopping center, which require UAH 100 million of assets. Oschadbank is concerned about the possible loss of loan payments due to the new manager.
The criteria of the competition for the selection of a manager for the capital's Gulliver shopping center, which were put forward by the agency for asset search and management, can be an obstacle for a wide range of potential candidates and create the impression of a biased redistribution of the asset. This opinion was expressed in an exclusive comment to UNN by the former chairman of the public council under the ARMA Igor Chobitko.
Details
On October 30, ARMA announced a competition to select a manager for the Gulliver shopping center. The head of the agency Elena Duma proudly statedthat she approached the selection of the manager of this high-profile asset as strictly as possible and even set the maximum possible 4 criteria for candidates. Among the conditions that the contest participants must fulfill are the property status with a total value of at least UAH 100 million, a professional team, proven experience in managing similar facilities and confirmed financial viability.
Igor Chobitko noted that the financial viability of participants with a declared fortune of UAH 100 million may be an obstacle for a wide range of potential applicants, which may indicate bias in the organization of the competition.
"This is most likely similar to the fact that there is a question of redistributing business between competitors, and it is under this scheme that such competitions are held. and, if there were no such property criteria, then any entrepreneur with experience could exercise their right to manage such a complex," he said.
The expert believes that for fair selection, it would be necessary to focus on criteria that reflect the experience, professionalism and performance of participants, rather than setting a financial barrier.
"When a certain property criterion is established, as in this case, then any businessman who does not have such a fortune cannot participate. And accordingly, the question does not arise, since the answer is obvious: this is a redistribution of business for a specific participant who will actually take part in this redistribution," Chobitko stressed.
Add
In addition, when announcing the competition, the agency for asset search and management did not take into account the fact that the building of the Gulliver shopping center is collateral for a mortgage loan in state – owned banks, including Oschadbank. However, among the criteria issued by the ARMA, there is not a single mention of the need to pay the loan.
Oschadbank has repeatedly stated that the decision to transfer Gulliver to ARMA harms the interests of the state bank, because it will deprive it of loan payments from the company that owns the capital's complex. non-compliance by Oschadbank, revenues due to the termination of loan payments may reach more than UAH 20 billion.
After the announcement of the competition, Deputy Chairman of the Board of Oschadbank, responsible for working with NPL Arsen Milyutin in a comment to UNN stated that the State Bank plans to recover in its favor the building of the capital's Gulliver shopping center , if ARMA transfers it to management. He expressed outrage that instead of paying off the loan to state-owned banks, Gulliver's earnings will be given to an "incomprehensible manager.
Only after that and under public pressure, ARMA representatives decided to meet with Arsen Milyutin, Deputy Chairman of the Board of Oschadbank responsible for working with NPL, to discuss issues of managing the seized asset that affect the interests of the state bank in terms of paying off loan debts. As expected, it was not possible to reach a consensus at the meeting and the parties agreed to "continue cooperation". Milyutin saidthat at the meeting in Arma , they promised to once again "investigate in detail" the relevant regulations for the possibility of including payments to creditor banks in management costs. However, it is worth noting that Arma's rhetoric has not changed dramatically after this meeting – they continue to justify that the current legislation does not allow the agency to become a creditor or debtor in the obligations of the asset owner.
