Тёмный лор Уральских пельменей (реально)

Main story 1: Lyutikov’s death and election pressure on Mikhalkova (summer 2016, Yekaterinburg)

The video presents two connected events occurring nearly simultaneously around the Ural Pelmeni team.

Lyutikov’s “strange death”

• A man from Moscow, Alexey Lyutikov (general director associated with Ural Pelmeni production), checks into a hotel near the airport (Angela Hotel).
• He spends almost all his time in his room and is not seen for ~12 hours (a “do not disturb” sign remains up).
• A maid enters and finds a body inside.
• The story later becomes widely described as a “strange death.”

Pressure on Yulia Mikhalkova around United Russia’s primaries

• At the same time, Yulia Mikhalkova is invited to discuss participation in United Russia’s primaries/elections.
• Instead of an office meeting, she is taken to a soundproof basement and threatened.
• She is told to withdraw her candidacy.
• The threat is paired with a bribe offer of €1 million.
• Mikhalkova responds with laughter, and the video claims she withdraws her candidacy within two weeks.

The video frames this as political “dirty work” tied to local power struggles.

---

What Ural Pelmeni “became” by 2016 (integration with local elites)

The video argues that by 2016 Ural Pelmeni had shifted from direct KVN-style satire toward networks connected to local elites and mainstream political/administrative circles.

It claims that internal disagreements grew after the group’s earlier political engagement, and that:

• Mikhalkova later wrote that some members followed opposition investigations, while others resisted.

The narrative links her entry into elite circles to:

• Sergei Isaev, who hosted corporate events for the local ruling class and arranged concerts with major stars
• Igor Altushkin, described as sponsoring these events

This framing is used to explain how Mikhalkova could become a high-visibility candidate in United Russia’s primaries.

---

Why Mikhalkova’s primary win triggered backlash

The video claims United Russia held open primaries in 2016 to attract attention and demonstrate openness after the 2011 protests.

• Mikhalkova is presented as brought in mainly for attention rather than fully groomed for politics.
• Journalists and opponents criticize her, including:
  • old footage connected to a city-assembly context,
  • photo shoots,
  • and especially her debate style, which becomes a meme (“Do you like the way I look?” / “make with taste”).

Despite this, she wins the primaries (11.7%).

After the vote, the video claims her surrounding campaign people cool toward her and she is invited into another ominous negotiation.

---

The “Pompasov” meeting and alleged coordination between Kremlin and local politics

In Mikhalkova’s account:

• A local influential politician (described by the pseudonym “Pompasov”) threatens her and demands withdrawal.
• She leaves and initially continues refusing.

The video then argues this reflects coordinated pressure from major local political forces and identifies:

• Vladimir Tungusov as a recurring name in media coverage, described as a “grey eminence” of regional politics
• It claims Tungusov was moved into a new governmental position shortly before the primaries
• Media later connected Tungusov’s influence to removing some open-primary winners (including Mikhalkova)
• The video adds that the alleged million-euro bribe was not returned to Mikhalkova

---

Linking 2016 events to the 2019 religious/temple conflict and Metropolitan Kirill

The video jumps to 2019, when Yekaterinburg faces a major dispute over constructing the Church of St. Catherine.

It claims:

• Isaev and Altushkin appear again within the same network
• Metropolitan Kirill aligns with supporters of the temple

The video suggests a possible chain connection to 2016:

• Kirill may have helped persuade Mikhalkova to withdraw
• It speculates Kirill could have traveled using a private plane operated by RMK around the negotiation period (framed as “possible,” based on flight-log lookups)

Broader thesis: elite networks converge repeatedly, and the team’s internal and external conflicts are intertwined.

---

Main story 2: The long corporate war inside Ural Pelmeni (2015–2021)

The leadership purge (2015) and the arbitration record

The video describes a separate but interrelated “dark” track: corporate conflict inside Ural Pelmeni.

• In October 2015, nine members remove Sergei Netievsky (described as longtime leader/director) and replace him with Sergei Isaev.
• Official explanations are said to focus on Netievsky allegedly spending too much time in Moscow and focusing on other projects.
• The video argues the real reasons appear in arbitration-court filings, including allegations of:
  1. Unauthorized transfer of the word trademark to Netievsky’s own company
  2. A challenged contract where Netievsky transferred money to himself (~39 million rubles)
  3. A “mysterious” payment tied to a concert title that allegedly never existed (later framed as a working title of another concert)

Outcome in court and nuance of “damage” claims

The video emphasizes that even if actions looked suspicious:

• the team could not fully prove material damage in court.

It claims court outcomes did not match the dramatic accusations cleanly:

• some claims failed
• the trademark issue shifted after Netievsky returned trademarks for a symbolic amount (2 rubles), after which the logo returned in credits

It then raises the question of who convinced others that Netievsky deceived them, suggesting the conflict may have been shaped by new arrivals and influence within internal structures.

---

Alleged takeover attempt by Orlov and Lyutikov (timeline beginning 2012)

The video claims that in 2012, two key figures—Evgeny Orlov and Alexey Lyutikov—entered Netievsky’s production-related structures.

It says they began reviewing old contracts and showing them to participants, and that:

• Netievsky later described it as a hostile takeover attempt
• though this is presented as not absolutely proven

---

Lyutikov’s death framed against the corporate struggle

The video claims that after the internal conflict escalated, Lyutikov’s body is found in August 2016.

It highlights:

• staying at a hotel near the airport (described as odd)
• an investigation finding no signs of foul play
• relatives attributing cause to heart problems
• the chest wound supposedly resulting from a fall onto glass

The video contrasts this with Netievsky’s interpretation:

• he calls the death “strange,” linking it to business arrangements
• he alleges transfer of a valuable archive tied to Lyutikov’s new company and notes that Lyutikov then headed it

It describes subsequent legal escalation and harsh public commentary on the conflict via the official Ural Pelmeni site.

---

Archive rights dispute and final corporate battles (until 2021)

The video states that a major legal fight involved rights to 61 programs, allegedly valued extremely high and sold for much less.

It claims:

• Netievsky lost some court attempts
• diplomacy gave way to “mutual destruction,” with a surge in lawsuits

By 2021, it describes how corporate votes increased authorized capital:

• existing owners must contribute additional money
• if Netievsky does not contribute, his stake effectively diminishes
• similar effects impact other participants (e.g., Andrey Rozhkov)

It ends with claims that:

• the conflict “resolved” only later (withdrawal of claims by both sides)
• the long litigation split team relationships and motivations
• media narratives (“everyone against one Netievsky”) may not reflect reality

---

Presenter / contributors (named in the subtitles)

• Yulia Mikhalkova
• Alexey Lyutikov
• Vladimir Tungusov
• Metropolitan Kirill
• Sergei Isaev
• Igor Altushkin
• Dmitry Prikotkin (appears as an opposing political-position person)
• Evgeny Orlov
• Sergei Nitievsky
• Alexander Popov (named as chairman at a 2021 meeting)
• Roman Tustozvonov (appears as a contributor/performer in the video)
• Roman Myasnikov
• Andrey Rozhkov
• Sergei Irshov
• “Pompasov” (appears as a pseudonym for a real politician; not confirmed as an identity within the video, but linked in commentary to Vladimir Tungusov)
• “Morse Corporation” (entity mentioned; not a person)