Hotel real estate in the Carpathians is reaching new heights. How three phases, a single standard, and the right partners are shaping a new-generation investment product
FORREST Trinity Resort — a project where answers to key investor questions are thought through before sales begin: who manages it, what is the financial model, how are my rights protected, and is there demand for this property in summer and winter?
Bukovel has long ceased to be exclusively a ski resort. According to market analysts, tourist traffic reaches 2.5 million people per year, and occupancy rates for high-quality hotels during peak season are 100%. In summer and during the off-season, this figure remains at 67–73%.
This means that a properly positioned hotel product in Bukovel doesn’t sit idle—it generates revenue.
But there’s a catch: not every project is the same. High-quality hotels with full-scale management, consistent service, and actual occupancy throughout the year are few and far between. Most offerings on the market are apartment complexes where operational efficiency depends on the decisions of each individual owner. FORREST Trinity Resort is built on a different logic.
Most resort projects are geared toward a single audience. Forrest is built differently.
Phase One — a space for those seeking peace and rejuvenation. Surrounded by forest, a wellness center, and a rooftop pool. For those tired of the city who just want to unwind.
Phase Two—conference rooms, meeting spaces, a paddle tennis court, and a networking area. For corporate groups, small forums, and teams combining work with relaxation. The MICE segment in Ukraine is underrated—and this is an opportunity.
Phase Three—a children’s area, a large spa, a climbing wall, an outdoor pool, and the panoramic restaurant FORREST Sky View—the resort’s signature dining destination, located 48 meters above ground, offering a 360° panorama of the Carpathian mountain landscapes. For those who want their children to have something to do while their parents relax.
Three distinct target audiences mean three different reasons to visit—and three independent booking streams. If one segment slows down, the other two continue to perform. This directly impacts occupancy stability and, consequently, the monthly payment to the owner.
At FORREST Trinity Resort, the model is fundamentally different. All 461+ units, without exception, are transferred to Maestro Hotel Management—a condition stipulated in the contract. The owner handles nothing: no bookings, no check-ins, and no maintenance of the rooms. Maestro is responsible for the entire cycle. A guest on Booking sees a fully-fledged resort property with consistent ratings—a higher average check and stable payments to every owner.
Maestro Hotel Management—a management company with 10 years of experience in the hospitality industry. Crucially, they joined the project not after construction, but at the very start. Together with the Perspektyva Group team, they shaped the room layouts, service standards, and financial model. When a management company participates in the creation of a hotel, the rooms are designed to fit the operational model—not the other way around. This ensures a different level of readiness on opening day.
The financial model is transparent: 80% of rental income goes to the owner, and 20% to the management company based on EBITDA. Operating costs are calculated in advance, and a profitability calculator is available before signing.
The unit owner has the right to stay at the hotel up to 30 days a year during the low season and up to 10 days during the high season—with full hotel service. On these days, no revenue is generated from the room, but the vacation is yours.
Perspektyva Group is a company with 30 years of experience and 17 completed projects. Over $300 million in attracted investments. FORREST Trinity Resort is the company’s first hotel project, which is why it has been approached with particular care: architecture, materials, engineering, and partners—no compromises.
The first phase is being built using the developer’s own funds. This means that the pace of construction does not depend on sales velocity. The first phase will be completed regardless of the number of units sold today. For investors, this eliminates one of the key risks.
Commissioning — Q4 2028. The second and third phases are being built in parallel — completion in 2029. The site is active, and construction is underway.
The quality of the architecture directly influences the average rental rate. Architecture by Filimonov & Kashirina, winners of architectural awards. A stone and glass facade, seamlessly integrated into the landscape. This is not just another hotel in the mountains—it is a property with its own distinct character.
Interiors where natural aesthetics blend with premium comfort — Makhno Studio, Serhii Makhno’s studio. Guests choose a hotel that is beautiful. Beauty is a driver of occupancy.
FORREST Trinity Resort has direct access to the 5G trail—one of Bukovel’s best panoramic trails. Ski-in/ski-out—a WOW advantage that saves time and underscores the project’s status.
Surrounded by forest, a waterfall, and a mountain river. A promenade that creates the atmosphere of a European resort.
One of the key fears of investors in Ukraine is: what if the developer doesn’t deliver? FORREST Trinity Resort operates under the MON model—a special property right to the future property. What this means: — the agreement is registered in the State Register — double sales are impossible; — there is a refund mechanism if the completion is delayed by more than 6 months; — changes to the property without the investor’s consent are impossible; — assignment (sale of a unit before completion) — unrestricted, without penalties.
Minimum unit size — 26 m². Price starting at $4,500/m².
Projected return on management: up to 12% per annum in currency.
Asset appreciation from the start of sales to opening: projected 19–20%. An investor who enters at the start receives an asset valued at ~$5,400–5,500/m² by the time of commissioning—even before the hotel’s first day of operation.
FORREST Trinity Resort stands out for its combination of rare factors: Product: three phases for three target audiences, 5G connectivity, architecture by Filimonov & Kashirina, interiors by Makhno Studio. Management: 100% of units managed by Maestro. The management company joined at the design stage. Developer: Perspektyva Group, 30 years of experience, 17 projects. Phase 1 is funded with the developer’s own capital. Security: Ministry of Education and Science approval, state registry, transparent model, free transferability.
Together, this is an asset backed by a system, not just a promise.
FORREST Trinity Resort. Three worlds—one asset. A unique resort ecosystem created for living, relaxation, and capital growth.
More details on investment terms and profitability calculations: +380 (777) 999-999
BUKOVEL, FORREST Trinity Resort, INVESTMENT, PROFITABILITY, REAL ESTATE, VACATION
Algeria has officially begun construction of the Algerian section of the Trans-Saharan Gas Pipeline (TSGP), which is intended to connect Nigeria, Niger, and Algeria and provide a new route for natural gas supplies to Europe and other international markets.
According to the Algerian news agency APS, the start of work on the Algerian section marks the project’s transition into the practical implementation phase. The Nigeria–Niger–Algeria gas pipeline is expected to stretch over 4,000 km and is considered one of Africa’s largest energy infrastructure projects.
As noted by the Experts Club information and analytical center, the fifth meeting of the project’s ministerial steering committee took place in Algeria on the eve of the construction launch. Following the meeting, the parties approved the final report of the updated feasibility study, prepared by the international consulting firm Penspen, and agreed to move on to the next stages of the project’s implementation.
The project involves transporting natural gas from Nigeria through Niger to Algeria. From there, the gas can be fed into Algeria’s existing gas transmission system and exported to European and other international markets.
According to Anadolu, citing project documents, the new Algerian section under construction is expected to be approximately 1,210 km long—from the border with Niger to Aoulef, where it will connect to the network leading to the Hassi Rmel gas hub. From there, the gas can be routed to export terminals on the Algerian coast.
The total length of the Trans-Saharan Gas Pipeline is estimated at approximately 4,327 km. Of this, about 1,185 km are to run through Nigeria, 720 km through Niger, and the Algerian section, including both new and existing segments, totals about 2,424 km.
Various estimates put the project’s capacity at over 20 billion cubic meters of gas per year, though earlier figures cited a capacity of up to 30 billion cubic meters. Public estimates previously valued investment in the project at approximately $13 billion; however, updated financing parameters may be refined following the approval of the feasibility study and the transition to practical implementation.
For Europe, the Trans-Saharan gas pipeline could become another potential source of gas supply diversification. Following the onset of the energy crisis and efforts to reduce dependence on Russian gas, the EU has intensified its interest in alternative routes from North Africa, the Eastern Mediterranean, the U.S., and other regions.
For Algeria, the project strengthens the country’s role as one of Europe’s key gas suppliers. Algeria already exports gas to Europe via pipelines to Spain and Italy, as well as through LNG infrastructure. Connecting Nigerian gas to the Algerian system could enhance the country’s significance as an energy hub between Africa and Europe.
For Nigeria and Niger, the project has not only export but also economic significance. The gas pipeline is expected to create new opportunities for monetizing Nigerian gas resources, developing infrastructure, creating jobs, and strengthening Africa’s energy integration.
At the same time, the project remains challenging in terms of security, financing, and implementation timelines. The route spans vast distances and territories with high infrastructure and political risks. Therefore, the actual completion timeline will depend on financing, route security, and coordination among the three countries.
The Trans-Saharan Gas Pipeline has been discussed since the early 2000s as one of Africa’s key energy corridors. The project aims to connect Nigeria’s gas resources with Algeria’s export infrastructure and the European market via Niger.
The European Union is tightening the rules for screening foreign direct investments. The EU Council has approved an updated regulation that will strengthen oversight of deals in strategic sectors—energy, transportation, artificial intelligence, digital infrastructure, critical raw materials, and dual-use goods.
The new rules will replace the mechanism in place since 2020. The main change is that all EU countries must have their own investment screening systems, and the approach to such deals will become more uniform across the entire union.
This is particularly important for Ukraine amid EU accession negotiations and future post-war reconstruction. The country needs significant foreign capital for energy, infrastructure, industry, logistics, defense technologies, IT, and raw material extraction. It is precisely these sectors that will now be under closer scrutiny from Brussels.
In practice, this means that Ukraine will have to gradually align its regulations with European standards for investor screening. This may apply to major deals involving capital from third countries, especially when it comes to strategic assets, critical infrastructure, or dual-use technologies.
For Ukrainian businesses, the new rules are also important when entering the EU market. The acquisition of assets, the creation of joint ventures, or investments in sensitive sectors in EU countries may be subject to more detailed scrutiny.
On the other hand, this could be an advantage for Ukraine. If Kyiv establishes a transparent system for monitoring foreign investments, it will boost confidence from the EU and major international investors.
For Ukraine, the main takeaway is simple: in the country’s recovery, it will be not only the volume of foreign capital that matters, but also its origin, transparency, and compliance with EU economic security standards.
The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the European Union (EU) are expanding their support program for micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) and larger companies in Ukraine, which will enable the mobilization of EUR2 billion in new financing through EBRD partner banks thanks to EUR315 million in additional EU support, the financial institution announced on its website.
The additional EU support is being implemented through the Ukraine Investment Framework (UIF) program and includes EUR200 million in guarantees, EUR105 million in grants, and EUR10 million in technical assistance.
As noted in the press release, the new package is expected to provide loans to at least 3,000 MSMEs and preserve approximately 180,000 jobs.
Funds will be provided through the EBRD’s partner financial institutions in Ukraine. According to the bank’s assessment, the expansion of the program should support businesses’ access to financing amid the war, particularly against the backdrop of rising borrowing costs, disrupted logistics, and companies’ need to replace or modernize damaged equipment.
Ukrainian companies will be able to receive investment incentives in the form of EU grants to cover 10% to 30% of the cost of critical capital investments, primarily in high-efficiency and “green” technologies.
At least 50% of these grant incentives will be directed toward priority categories of MSMEs: enterprises with assets damaged or destroyed as a result of the war, businesses in frontline zones, veteran-owned companies, enterprises supporting the reintegration of internally displaced persons and people with disabilities, micro-companies, startups, small farms, as well as businesses led by women and young people.
The program also provides for support to restore activity in Ukraine’s insurance market, specifically the development of solutions for insuring military risks. As part of a pilot project, insurance subsidies are planned to be provided to MSMEs.
Part of the expanded support will be implemented through the Enterprise Security Enhancement (ESE) mechanism, which the EBRD is rolling out on a pilot basis in collaboration with partner financial institutions in Ukraine. It allows banks to reduce the debt burden for borrowers whose assets have been damaged by the war.
To implement this mechanism, it is planned to use EUR 200 million in first-loss guarantees provided by the EU as part of the new phase of the program. Such coverage of credit risk associated with the loss of assets due to the war is intended to support lending for capital investments and the continuity of economic activity.
This support builds on the first phase of the Financial Inclusion Recovery Program, which confirmed significant demand from Ukrainian businesses for financing through partner banks.
As reported, in May the EBRD launched a pilot ESE donor mechanism in Ukraine to partially write off business debt on investment loans in the event of damage to financed assets resulting from hostilities: with PrivatBank—in the amount of EUR 6.8 million, and with Raiffeisen Bank—EUR 1.2 million.
In 2025, the EBRD allocated a record EUR2.9 billion in financing to Ukraine, including EUR1.2 billion through partner financial institutions, as well as EUR504 million under portfolio risk-sharing programs, which facilitated new lending of up to EUR1.6 billion.
In May 2026, the National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) fined LLC “1 Safe Agency of Necessary Loans” (TM “MyCredit”) 6.13 million UAH and Avangard Bank 2 million UAH for violating financial monitoring regulations, the regulator announced on its website.
According to the statement, LLC “1 Safe Agency of Necessary Loans” was fined for improper organization and conduct of initial financial monitoring. In particular, the National Bank pointed to violations in the application of a risk-based approach, the development of internal documents, proper customer due diligence, work with politically exposed persons, and the provision of information in response to the regulator’s requests.
Avangard Bank was fined for improper application of a risk-based approach, failure to identify a financial transaction subject to financial monitoring, and improper analysis of customer transactions for indicators of suspicious activity.
In addition, the financial institution received written warnings for the improper development and implementation of internal documents on financial monitoring, as well as for submitting information on foreign exchange transactions to the NBU with errors.
The Central Bank also fined FC “A Finance” LLC 800,000 UAH for violating the procedure for conducting currency exchange transactions and failing to equip a separate structural unit with a video surveillance system.
FC “MBK” LLC was fined UAH 799,000 for violating financial monitoring requirements, specifically the improper submission of information and documents in response to requests from the National Bank, failure to fulfill the obligation to conduct proper customer due diligence, improper application of a risk-based approach, violation of the procedure for storing documents in client files and preparing statistical reports on AML/CFT issues.
The company also received a written warning for improper development and implementation of internal documents on financial monitoring, deficiencies in the operation of the automation system for continuous monitoring of client transactions, and failure to include verified information in client questionnaires.
PT “Pawnshop No. 1” of “Contract-Group” LLC was fined 200,000 UAH for violating the procedure for conducting foreign exchange transactions, specifically the cashier’s failure to provide cash register receipts simultaneously with the receipt or issuance of cash in foreign currency for reversal and verification transactions.
In addition, the pawnshop received a written warning for the absence in a separate structural unit of a copy or excerpt from the order on its opening, specifying the list of transactions carried out at the cash desk, as well as for violating the requirements for technological video surveillance systems.
Alliance Capital Group FC LLC was fined UAH 100,000 for violating the procedure for conducting currency exchange transactions, specifically the cashier’s failure to accept or issue cash for a currency exchange transaction simultaneously with the issuance of a cash register settlement document.
The regulator also issued a written warning to the company for violating the requirements for the video surveillance system, specifically the absence of date and time information in the video footage from the customer area.
FC “Alfa-Invest Group” LLC received a written warning for violating the procedure for conducting currency exchange transactions, which consisted of failing to issue foreign currency cash to an individual customer simultaneously with the provision of a cash register receipt.
As reported, in May, the NBU fined LLC “FC ”Kontraktovy Dom“ and LLC ”Swift Garant” 135.15 million UAH each for improper organization and conduct of initial financial monitoring. In addition, PJSC “Insurance Company ”VUSO” was fined UAH 40.71 million for a similar violation.
Ukrainian legislation needs a clearer distinction between the elements of crimes related to collaboration, treason, and war crimes, according to Inna Linyova, director of the Human Rights Institute of the Ukrainian Bar Association.
In an interview with Interfax-Ukraine, she noted that the practice of adjudicating cases of collaboration remains ambiguous. According to her, civil society organizations have already documented cases where individuals who, under international humanitarian law, may fall into protected categories were held criminally liable.
This includes, for example, employees of municipal utilities who continued to clean the streets during the occupation, doctors who continued to work in hospitals, or teachers who ensured the basic functioning of local institutions. Under international humanitarian law, such actions may be viewed as maintaining the region’s viability rather than as criminal collaboration with the occupying power.
A different situation, Linyova emphasized, arises in cases where a person passes on information about the location of Ukrainian military forces, directs fire, holds leadership positions in the occupying authorities, or heads a police department or local administration under Russian control. In such cases, there may be grounds for criminal prosecution, but the right to a defense must be ensured here as well.
Separately, Linyova cited the example of employees at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant. According to her, if a person performs technical or professional functions necessary for the safe operation of the nuclear power plant, this in itself is not a crime. But if we are talking about administrative and managerial functions in the interests of the occupying authorities, the assessment may be different.
The expert believes that the problem lies in the imperfection of the legislation: some criminal offenses overlap, and a clear line between treason, collaboration, and war crimes is not always evident.
According to her, the Office of the Prosecutor General is working on drafting a bill intended to systematically bring Ukrainian criminal and criminal procedure legislation into compliance with the Rome Statute.
Such reform is important not only for domestic judicial practice but also for Ukraine’s international reputation. Cases involving war crimes and collaboration are closely monitored by international organizations, and the quality of judicial proceedings can influence the trust of partners, European integration, and future compensation mechanisms.
