FAS accused Pulkovo airport of violating competition

As Kommersant found out, the owner of the cargo terminal at Pulkovo, Novaport, complained to the FAS that the airport operator was forcing him to pay the concession fee. In parallel, independent handling companies operating in Pulkovo complained about unequal fare conditions. FAS demanded that the airport develop a unified pricing policy and a standard contract for providing access to its infrastructure.

As it became known to Kommersant, the reason why the FAS issued a warning to the operator of the Pulkovo Airport “Air Gates of the Northern Capital” (VVSS) was complaints from the “Pulkovo Cargo Terminal” and the handling companies “U-TJ” and ” Yu-Ti-G-Domodedovo. The latter on the market are associated with the Utair airline, the terminal belongs to the Novaport holding.

As a source in Novaport told Kommersant, the appeal to the Federal Antimonopoly Service was related to the “concession payment” that the VVSS made to the Cargo Terminal. The holding acquired the terminal in the spring of 2021, and the “concession fee”, according to the interlocutor of Kommersant, was indicated in the contract “without specifics.” The airport did not provide a justification for it and ignored requests to clarify whether other companies present at the airport pay for it. “We do not dispute either its size or existence: we would like to understand whether others pay this contribution on an equal basis with us,” the Kommersant source explained.

In February 2023, the authorities of St. Petersburg extended the concession agreement with the VVSS for the development of the airport infrastructure until 2060. In 2021, the head of VTB (one of the shareholders of VVSS) Andrey Kostin said that the cost of the project is estimated at 60-70 billion rubles.

The handlers’ complaint was a continuation of the story of the struggle for equal access to Pulkovo’s airport infrastructure. In 2022, the Federal Antimonopoly Service, following a complaint from Pobeda airline, issued a warning to the airport, believing that it makes it difficult for competitors to access infrastructure in order to promote their handling services. At that time, Pobeda had a joint venture with UTG Group – Pobeda Handling. The situation, according to Kommersant sources close to Aeroflot, has not changed since Pobeda left the joint venture in the spring of 2023. “Pulkovo is successfully squeezing out competitors,” one of them concludes.

UTG JSC, according to SPARK for 2021, was 50% owned by Utair and, according to Kommersant’s sources, remains associated with the airline. UTG Domodedovo is owned by UTG Group, which is managed by its ex-co-owner and former board member of Utair Dmitry Tizin. The composition of its shareholders is not disclosed. Yu-Ti-G Group owns 49% in U-Ti-G-Vnukovo, the rest is owned by AV Holding Vitaly Vantsev.

The Federal Antimonopoly Service confirmed to Kommersant that they had received statements from the Pulkovo Cargo Terminal JSC, UTG and UTG Domodedovo about the violation of the antimonopoly law by the Air Force. Signs of a violation, they specified, “were expressed in the establishment of different conditions for operators to access the Pulkovo infrastructure.” On August 2, the Federal Antimonopoly Service obliged Pulkovo within three months to develop and agree with the service a “single economically justified pricing procedure” for its services and a standard contract. The service noted the inadmissibility of including “expenses included in other tariffs and fees” in the composition of payments.

Pulkovo told Kommersant that “VVSS uses a uniform approach to pricing.” “The airport management company will agree on payment terms for operators with the regulator and will not allow violations of antitrust laws,” the press service assured.

The airport, as a natural monopoly, is obliged to pursue a single pricing policy, and other things being equal, tariffs should not be different, notes Yaroslav Kulik, managing partner of Kulik & Partners Law.Economics. Monopolists can set different prices, but only “if there is an economic or technological justification,” adds Yelena Satina, lawyer at BGP Litigation. The concession implies the development of the entire airport complex, and including PPP costs only for the cargo terminal “does not seem reasonable,” she said. However, Ilya Zharsky, managing partner of the Veta group, adds that Pulkovo still has the opportunity to appeal the FAS conclusions in court, since “the antimonopoly authority proceeds only from the information that is available to it from the complaints.”

Aigul Abdullina