Grazbachgasse: Rental flows in the myWorld/Lyconet network and internal interdependencies
While key companies in the myWorld/Lyconet network are now subject to insolvency proceedings, attention is increasingly turning to the infrastructure and asset structures that enabled operations to continue for years. The property at Grazbachgasse in Graz (previously Kärntnerstraße 9), often referred to internally as the group headquarters or ‘Lyoness House’, plays a special role in this context. This seems to be a prime example of how contractual obligations, economic uses and personnel interdependencies were intertwined.
High rent payments – to a real estate company with close ties to the system?
According to available information, significant rent payments, amounting to several hundred thousand euros annually, were made over many years for the use of this office space. The landlord was not an independent third party, but GARANT Real Estate GmbH (FN 169435w), whose ownership and management structure is conspicuously closely linked to the group environment.
A glance at the commercial register shows that GARANT Real Estate GmbH is majority-owned by Mag. Tzvetan Wagner, one of the co-founders of Lyoness, and his wife Maria Wagner. Their son Bojidar Wagner is registered as an authorised signatory. Over the years, various individuals have also held positions in the management of GARANT who simultaneously appeared in key positions within the myWorld/Lyoness structure. These include Ing. Franz Sulzberger MSc, Mag. Paul Unterberger as managing director and Karin Erregger as authorised signatory.
Particularly noteworthy is Mag. Paul Unterberger, who is listed as both a delegate of the board of directors with sole signing authority for Lyoness Europe AG and as chairman of the board of directors of Lyoness International AG, which demonstrates the close links between real estate development and group management.
Company register records also show that former GARANT managers – including Karl Heinz Arlati, for example – have economic ties to affiliated companies such as Jota Beteiligung – IVF Immobilien Versicherung und Finanzconsulting GmbH & Co KG (FN 205957d), which is located in the wider environment of the system. Incidentally, IVF Immobilien GmbH was liquidated at the same time as Lyoness Europe AG. Names that were active in the broader myWorld/Lyoness context in the past also appear in these structures, including Graz-based lawyer Dr Hubert Reif, who was already the sole economic owner of Lyconet Austria GmbH and chief legal advisor to Hubert Freidl himself. These interrelationships raise questions about the distribution of roles, influence and possible asset flows between real estate, investment and distribution companies.
Suspected structure: strategic leasing within a closed network?
This constellation suggests that the leasing of the group’s premises was based purely on market economy criteria, or that rent payments represented an internal cash flow within the group into a system-related asset structure. Insiders refer to this as a ‘matryoshka structure’, in which economic connections appear separate on the outside, but in substance benefit the same circles of responsibility.
Recurring individuals, changing functions – economic role rotation or targeted resource management?
It is striking that numerous individuals appear in rental companies, group bodies, property management companies and consulting firms, often in changing or complementary functions. Even though such constellations are fundamentally possible in corporate structures, the question arises in the context of the ongoing insolvency proceedings as to whether asset flows were deliberately channelled through legally separate but personally linked entities.
Relevance for grounds for contestation
The relevant questions would be whether:
✅ Rent payments were in line with market conditions or excessive,
✅ payments ultimately flowed back into internal circles via real estate constructions,
✅ this can be assessed as a concealed transfer of assets or potential creditor disadvantage,
✅ this gives rise to grounds for contestation (e.g. in the context of insolvency contestation or tortious liability).
Conclusion: The property as a key component of a larger network?
Even though final legal assessments are still pending, one thing is certain: the property in Grazbachgasse is symbolic of a system that was based not only on sales, incentives and clouds, but also on a self-contained asset and resource architecture. It is likely to be another building block in how financial resources were transferred, secured or concentrated within the network – often without this being visible to those who financed it.
Note:
This article is based on publicly available sources, documented complaints from investors and an official press enquiry to Blocktrade. It is a journalistic analysis. All statements about legal risks or possible contractual constellations are to be understood as assessments, not as conclusive legal advice.
Sources:
AKV press/case: myWorld Austria GmbH and reference to myWorld International AG (bankruptcy 04.08.2025).
Die Presse: ‘Lyoness successor myWorld International AG insolvent’ (restructuring/insolvency reports 08/2025).
Kurier: ‘Millions in debt … myWorld International’ (summary, 09/2025).
[Company register/directory documents]
‘… Landlord is GARANT Real Estate GmbH (FN 169435w) …’ [Company register portals/WKO]
Shareholders Mag. Tzvetan Wagner (90%) and Maria Wagner (10%); authorised signatory Bojidar Wagner …” [Firmenabc]
‘… previous use/management Kärntnerstraße 9 in the same complex …’ [Herold description]
‘… Classification in the context of the myWorld/Lyconet insolvency …’ [AKV/Die Presse/Kurier]
‘… possible property management / management network (SOB Bauträger GmbH)’ [Company register/WKO/Imprint]
Leave a Reply
Want to join the discussion?Feel free to contribute!