So far, all claims against the two oil companies look like obvious nit-picking and a desire to redistribute fields in favor of their competitor

It was no coincidence that Bashneft faced the threat of revocation of its license for the fields named after. Trebs and Titov during the period of change of government and president: the balance of power changes, and since everyone has their own “favorites,” any market participant can suffer.

There were more than enough applicants for the purchase of the Trebs and Titov fields: all the largest Russian companies except Rosneft applied to participate in the competition, which was held in 2010. The excitement was understandable: at the time of the sale of these licenses, only about 6% of all Russian oil reserves remained in the unallocated subsoil fund, including 7-8 large fields. Of these, deposits named after. Trebs and Titov were among the largest (reserves - 1.027 billion barrels of oil equivalent, or about 140 million tons in categories C1, C2).

The competition itself cannot be called transparent: the applications of most competitors were rejected for formal reasons, and Surgutneftegaz withdrew from the race itself. So the license went to Bashneft virtually in the absence of competition. All this clearly indicated that the issue with the sale of the deposits to them. Trebs and Titov, the decision was made at the government level: Bashneft is a developing company, it lacks reserves, and the state decided to support it.

But even despite the opacity of the competition, the state received a good price for the asset - about $607 million. Thanks to this deal, Rosnedra managed to fulfill the annual revenue plan, although of all the announced competitions and auctions only about 25% were recognized as having taken place in 2011 (and in 2010 year and even less - 16%). In terms of a barrel of reserves, the price paid for the Trebs and Titov fields was about 59 cents. For comparison: at approximately the same time, Surgutneftegaz acquired two medium-sized fields in the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug with total reserves of 235 million barrels, or 32 million tons (C1, C2), based on prices of 20 and 30 cents per barrel of reserves. Bashneft’s activity clearly benefited the state: after the company began competing for licenses, prices went up sharply. For example, at the beginning of the year, Bashneft offered $4.1 per barrel for the resources of the Sabriyaginsky site in the Nenets Okrug.

Having won the competition, Bashneft decided to invite Lukoil to the project (Vagit Alekperov’s company was going to receive 25% in the project). And this was the most obvious option. Lukoil has been operating in the region for a long time, and it has the infrastructure to implement the project as quickly as possible. To launch the fields named after. Trebs and Titov's partners would only need to build a relatively short oil pipeline to the Varandey terminal of Lukoil, from where oil would be exported by sea (license obligations to process part of the oil from the Trebs and Titov fields could be fulfilled through swap transactions). The capacity of this terminal would be just enough for oil from the fields named after. Trebs and Titov, because it was designed for raw materials from the Yuzhno-Khylchuyu field of Lukoil, the production of which, due to difficult geology, turned out to be much lower than the design one.

It is unclear who exactly is behind the problems of Bashneft and Lukoil. But along with Lukoil, Rosneft has also been operating in this region for a long time. One of its main assets in Timan-Pechora is the Gamburtseva Val group of fields. But the production of Rosneft’s subsidiary Severnaya Neft has been declining here for several years in a row (from 5.6 million tons in 2006 to 3.6 million tons in 2011). So new licenses from the state company would obviously come in handy.

To the competition for the sale of deposits named after. Trebs and Titov have a lot of questions, but the statements made by officials now are also casuistic - so far all the claims against Bashneft and Lukoil look like obvious nit-picking and a desire to redistribute fields in favor of their competitor. This situation runs counter to statements about the need to improve the investment climate. Unfortunately, in terms of the number of scandals in the oil and gas industry that have occurred over the past 10 years, Russia is perhaps one of the leaders among countries with a developed oil industry. The West remembers well not only the “YUKOS affair”, but also the recent high-profile failure of the deal to create an alliance between Rosneft and BP for the development of the Arctic shelf. Competition with the sale of deposits named after. Trebs and Titov is another example that does not best characterize the management style of the oil industry in Russia.

Direct damage to the state is seen in the fact that all the maneuvers around the deposits named after them. Trebs and Titov may delay the development and commissioning of the field. At the same time, the fields launched in recent years (Vankorskoye, Talakanskoye and Verkhnechonskoye) will reach their peak already in 2014-2015. This means that beyond these years, Russia will inevitably face a drop in production. It could be compensated for by 6-7 million tons of oil, which could be added by Bashneft and Lukoil at the fields named after. Trebs and Titov, but now the speedy implementation of the project is in question.

At the corporate level, Lukoil appears to be the most vulnerable party. The company has repeatedly complained that when distributing resources, the state gives priority to state-owned companies. For now, Lukoil is really forced to maintain production mainly through projects abroad, and its production in Russia continues to decline. For Bashneft, the loss of a partner will also be bad news, because then the company will have to spend money on infrastructure in the region, and this will lead to an increase in the cost of the project.

Revoking Bashneft's license so far looks much less likely, but if it happens, an undesirable precedent will appear. Until now, the state has threatened many times to revoke licenses for one reason or another, but with rare exceptions, it has never taken real action in the case of large assets. Even the Kovyktinskoye field, which the Ministry of Natural Resources threatened to take away from TNK-BP for several years, the company was eventually able to independently sell to Gazprom.

Who is behind the problems of Bashneft and Lukoil?