Russia Business Watch VOL. 16, NO. 1
SPRING 2008
WASHINGTON, DC
THE QUARTERLY REPORT OF THE U.S.-RUSSIA BUSINESS COUNCIL
speciaL event:
u.s.-russia economic diaLogue Luncheon with andrei denisov and reuben jeffery page 10
outLooK:
interview with guLZhan moLdaZhanova, ceo, basic eLement page 12
USRBC CELEBRATES ITS 15TH ANNIVERSARY AND PAYS TRIBUTE TO GENE LAWSON
CONTENTS board of directors
Spring 2008 Russia Business Watch
Theodore Austell, III, The Boeing Company F. Guillaume Bastiaens, Cargill, Incorporated Stephen E. Biegun, Ford Motor Company Martin A. Cannon, New Health Sciences, Inc. Patricia M. Cloherty, Delta Private Equity Partners James F. Collins, Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, LLP Richard A. Conn, Jr., Conn International Group LLC Robert Droogleever, Caterpillar Inc. Robert W. Dudley, TNK-BP Neil W. Duffin, Exxon Mobil Corporation Terrence J. English, Baring Vostok Capital Partners Augie K. Fabela, II, VimpelCom Mark B. Fuller, Monitor Group Herman O. Gref, Sberbank Christopher Gubbey, General Motors Corporation Drew J. Guff, Siguler, Guff & Company, LLC Jay M. Haft, Renova Group Shannon S. Herzfeld, Archer Daniels Midland Company D. Jeffrey Hirschberg, Kalorama Partners, LLC E. Neville Isdell, The Coca-Cola Company Karl Johansson, Ernst & Young LLP Sergi Kaminsky, Washington Group International Owen-Christopher Kemp, Hewlett-Packard Company Alexey Kim, Philip Morris Sales and Marketing Ltd. David S. King, Halliburton Company Lamar McKay, BP America Inc. Paul Mountford, Cisco Systems, Inc. James J. Mulva, ConocoPhillips Roger Munnings, KPMG Peter B. Necarsulmer, The PBN Company Richard D. Paterson, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Peter J. Pettibone, Hogan & Hartson LLP Thomas R. Pickering, The Eurasia Foundation William R. Rhodes, Citigroup Daniel W. Riordan, Zurich-American Insurance Company Peter J. Robertson, Chevron Corporation Paul Rodzianko, Hermitage Museum Foundation Charles E. Ryan, Deutsche Bank Ltd. Claudi Santiago, General Electric Company Greg S. Slater, Intel Corporation Bernard Sucher, Merrill Lynch International Maurice Tempelsman, Lazare Kaplan International Inc. Peter Thoren, Access Industries, Inc. Kevin Tomlinson, JT International Inc. Michael D. White, PepsiCo, Inc. Frank G. Wisner, American International Group, Inc. Daniel H. Yergin, Cambridge Energy Research Associates
Special Event: U.S.-Russia Economic Dialogue 10 nn Summary: U.S.-Russia Economic Dialogue Luncheon Outlook Interview with Gulzhan Moldazhanova, Chief Executive Officer, Basic Element 15 nn Интервью с Гульжан Молдажановой, Генеральным Директором компании «Базовый Элемент» 12
nn
18 19 22 24
Activities nn Council Calendar nn Member Briefing with Dmitry Trenin nn Panel Discussion on Russia’s Healthcare Initiatives nn Road Show “Take a Closer Look at Russia”
Spring 2008
E. Neville Isdell, Chairman of the Board Robert S. Strauss, Chairman Emeritus Eugene K. Lawson, President
3 4 5 7 9
Special Event: USRBC 15th Anniversary nn USRBC 15th Anniversary Summary nn Remarks: Maxim Medvedkov nn Remarks: General Brent Scowcroft nn Remarks: Ambassador R. Nicholas Burns nn 15th Anniversary Gala Dinner
Sector Update 26 nn Russian M&A: 2007 in Review, by S. Raymond Tillett, Debevoise & Plimpton LLP 30 nn «Слияния и Поглощения в России: Обзор Произошедшего в 2007 году», С. Реймонд Тиллетт, «Debevoise & Plimpton LLP» Regional Profile Novosibirsk nn Новосибирск
35 38
nn
42
nn
New Member Profiles
RUSSIA BUSINESS WATCH
The quarterly report of the U.S.-Russia Business Council 1701 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 520, Washington, DC 20006 Tel: (202) 739-9180 • Fax: (202) 659-5920 • www.usrbc.org Bolshaya Nikitskaya Ulitsa 18/21, bld. 1, Office 201, Moscow, Russian Federation 125009 Tel: (7) 495-291-2105 • Tel/Fax: (7) 495-291-2105 Editor: Svetlana Minjack • Assistant Editor: Jeff Barnett Research Assistant: Elizaveta Arkhangelskaya, Sarah Longbrake, Greg Shtraks, Emily Stromquist Design: Maryia Dauhuliova Photography: Olga and David Muzio; Shmulik Almany, ImageLink Photography
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE president’s message
I have known and worked with Ed for over 20 years, and he comes to the Council with impeccable credentials and invaluable experience in the government, private sector and with association work. Ed has lived and worked in Russia for several years, speaks Russian and, most importantly, understands the essential dynamics of the U.S.-Russia relationship as well as anyone I know.
As you may know, this issue marks my last as President of the U.S.-Russia Business Council. It has been a remarkable 15 years, and I would like to thank all of you who have been and continue to be supporters of the Council and of closer U.S.-Russia trade and investment ties.
This summer is one of change on several fronts for the Council. Along with the installment of a new President, the Council has hired Ilya Kuperman to be Executive Director of our Moscow office. The addition of Ilya in Moscow will greatly expand the Council’s ability to provide top-notch service to those of our members who are located there. In order to make life a little more interesting for the staff, the USRBC will be relocating its office in Washington, DC
I would also like to invite you to mark your calendars for the Council’s 16th Annual Meeting, which will take place at the Four Seasons Hotel in Washington, DC on October 6-7, 2008. Our Annual Meeting returns to Washington for the first time since 2003, and we are hard at work developing the agenda. We already have lined up some superb speakers. You will begin receiving more detailed information in the coming weeks. Thank you again for your support of the U.S.-Russia Business Council and its mission, and I look forward to working with many of you again in the future. With warm regards,
Eugene K. Lawson
Russia Business Watch
As the founder of the U.S.-Russia Business Council, I have been anxious to make sure that I can hand the organization over to someone who will continue to build upon the successes that we have been able to achieve over the years. With the appointment of Ed Verona as the new President and CEO, I can step down from my position secure in the knowledge that the organization is in extremely capable hands.
There is no doubt that, under Ed’s leadership, the Council will continue to build on its reputation as one of the preeminent trade associations in the U.S. Even after I hand the reins over to Ed, I will remain engaged with the Council to ensure a smooth transition. I will also continue to be involved in U.S.-Russia commercial relations.
among these new personnel changes. In July, we will be moving our office to 1110 Vermont Avenue, NW in Washington. Watch for your invitation to the open house once the staff gets settled in August.
Spring 2008
ОБРАЩЕНИЕ ПРЕЗИДЕНТА
имея безупречный послужной список и бесценный опыт работы в государственном и частном секторах, а также в ассоциациях, подобных нашей. Эд прожил и проработал в России несколько лет, говорит по-русски, и, что наиболее важно, лучше всех, кого я знаю, разбирается в тонкостях динамики американороссийских отношений.
Russia Business Watch Spring 2008
Вероятно многим из Вас уже известно, что это последний номер журнала, выпущенный под моим руководством в качестве Президента Американо-Российского Делового Совета. Это были замечательные 15 лет, и я хотел бы поблагодарить всех, кто поддерживал и продолжает поддерживать Совет и укрепление американо-российских торговых и инвестиционных отношений.
Как основатель АмериканоРоссийского Делового Совета, я хотел передать эту организацию тому, кто смог бы преумножить успехи, которые нам удалось достигнуть за эти годы. С назначением Эда Вероны новым Президентом и Генеральным Директором АРДС, я могу покинуть свою должность с уверенностью в том, что организация находится в чрезвычайно умелых руках. Я знаю Эда лично и профессионально более 20 лет. Он приходит в Совет,
Без сомнения, под руководством Эда Совет продолжит укреплять свою репутацию как одной из самых выдающихся торговых ассоциаций в США. В целях гарантии гладкого переходного периода, после передачи своих полномочий Эду, я продолжу участвовать в делах Совета. Я также продолжу свое участие в американо-российских коммерческих отношениях. Это лето ознаменовано переменами для Совета на нескольких фронтах. Наряду с назначением нового Президента, Совет также расширил свое присутствие в России, приняв Илью Купермана на новую должность исполнительного директора Московского офиса, что позволит значительно развить и улучшить возможности Совета по предоставлению высококачественных услуг нашим членам, работающим в России. Для того, чтобы разнообразить жизнь своих сотрудников, помимо кадровых изменений, Вашингтонский офис Американо-Российского Делового
Совета переезжает в новое здание. В июле мы будем располагаться по адресу: 1110 Вермонт Авеню, Вашингтон (1110 Vermont Avenue, NW). Не пропустите приглашение посетить прием по поводу новоселья в нашем новом офисе, где мы надеемся полностью обосноваться к августу. Я также приглашаю Вас отметить в своем рабочем календаре даты проведения 16-го Ежегодного Заседания, которое пройдет в гостинице «Four Seasons» в Вашингтоне, 6-7 октября 2008 года. Наше Ежегодное Заседание будет проведено в Вашингтоне впервые после 2003 года. Работа над программой ведется очень активно, и нам уже удалось подобрать несколько интересных докладчиков. Более подробная информация будет предложена вашему вниманию в ближайшие несколько недель. Благодарю еще раз за Вашу поддержку работы и миссии АмериканоРоссийского Делового Совета и надеюсь иметь честь работать со многими из Вас в будущем. С наилучшими пожеланиями,
Юджин К. Лоусон
CeleBRateS itS 15th anniveRSaRy Washington, DC
nn
April 10, 2008
On April 10, the U.S.-Russia Business Council celebrated its 15th Anniversary with panel discussions and a Gala Dinner in Washington, DC. The event also served as a farewell to the Council’s founder and long-time President, Gene Lawson, who stepped down from that position in June 2008. The day’s events included a stellar lineup of distinguished statesmen and policymakers engaged in U.S.-Russia relations. Maxim Medvedkov, Director of the International Negotiations Department in the Ministry of Economic Development and Russia’s chief negotiator on the country’s World Trade Organization accession talks addressed the outlook for Russia joining the WTO. General Brent Scowcroft, former National Security Advisor, and Ambassador R. Nicholas Burns, former Under Secretary
of State, gave their views of the course of U.S.-Russia relations over the last two decades as well as their advice for how to move forward to form a more constructive bilateral relationship. At the Council’s Gala Dinner later that evening, Ambassador Thomas Pickering, former U.S. Ambassador to Russia and former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, delivered the opening address, in which he described the central role that the U.S.-Russia Business Council has played in the development of bilateral ties since 1993. Ambassador Susan C. Schwab, the United States Trade Representative, delivered an off-the-record keynote address on the current status of WTO negotiations with Russia and the remaining challenges that lay ahead in the talks.
USRBC President Gene Lawson concluded the evening with a farewell address, pointing out the remarkable growth that has occurred in Russia over the last 15 years as reflected in the growth of the Council over that time. He reiterated that he intends to remain engaged with the USRBC and in efforts to continue expanding U.S.-Russia commercial relations.
special event
the U.S.-RUSSia BUSineSS CoUnCil
In a letter to Council Chairman E. Neville Isdell, U.S. President George W. Bush congratulated Gene Lawson and the Council on its anniversary and noted the importance of the organization’s efforts to promote closer ties between the United States. and Russia. n
Russia Business Watch
U.S. Trade Representative Susan C. Schwab speaks at the 15th Anniversary Dinner.
Thomas Pickering addresses guests as the Master of Ceremonies.
Spring 2008
Brent Scowcroft (c.) answers an audience question with Gene Lawson (l.) and R. Nicholas Burns (r.).
3
special event
USRBC 15TH ANNIVERSARY
REMARKS
MAXIM MEDVEDKOV
nn Director, Department of Trade Negotiations, Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation
indicated that she wished to meet with Russian representatives within the next couple of months to discuss issues of accession. As soon as Russia concludes these negotiations it will be ready to finalize the consolidation of its schedules on both goods and services.
Maxim Medvedkov, Director, Department of Trade Negotiations, RF Ministry of Economic Development
Maxim Medvedkov, Director of the Department of Trade Negotiations of the Ministry of Economic Development and Russia’s chief WTO negotiator, spoke at the U.S.-Russia Business Council’s 15th Anniversary Celebration on April 10, 2008.
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
Mr. Medvedkov opened his presentation by expressing his optimism that Russia’s WTO accession negotiations are in their final stages. He proceeded to explain where Russia stands in the negotiating process and why it is important to conclude Russia’s accession in the near future.
Washington, DC nn April 10, 2008
He noted that significant progress has been made in bilateral and multilateral negotiations over the last three years. On the bilateral front, negotiations have been completed with 56 members, leaving only Georgia and Saudi Arabia in the negotiations process. Customs cooperation remains the obstacle in negotiations with Georgia, while concerns over market access for goods and services have delayed an agreement with Saudi Arabia. After Ukraine acceded to the WTO, the Ukrainian Prime Minister
On the multilateral front, Russia is close to issuing a new version of the Working Party Report. About 95 percent of the text has been previously discussed, but a few important issues remain to be resolved, such as Russian agricultural commitments. Mr. Medvedkov emphasized that Russia understands the demands and limitations of its negotiating partners, and he believes this process will move smoothly toward completion. Mr. Medvedkov indicated that the new Duma needs only a few more months to adjust the remaining five or six laws to bring Russian legislation fully into compliance with WTO regulations. He pointed toward the significant reduction in the number of remaining laws, in comparison to the 300 legislative regulations that needed to be amended in 1994 when negotiations first began.
Mr. Medvedkov proceeded to explain that the political and economic climate is currently favorable to Russia’s entrance into the WTO. He noted that the new government of Dmitry Medvedev will likely view WTO membership as an approaching reality in order to implement the reforms that will be necessary within the WTO framework. In the end, the final decision on accession is a domestic political issue, and politicians are aware of the painful adjustments that will be associated with WTO membership. However, the current strong economic situation in Russia today will allow accession to be less painful, especially for domestic corporations. At the same time, further delay in accession could pose a serious obstacle to the development of domestic business. Domestic companies are more active abroad, while foreign companies are more active in Russia than ever before. They want a predictable business climate and fair terms of trade, which WTO membership should help establish.
Since the negotiation process has been long and arduous, some Russians and members of the international community have questioned whether Russia truly wants to be a WTO member, and whether this membership is appropriate and beneficial for the country.
Mr. Medvedkov noted that WTO accession is important for domestic policies. Uncertainty about WTO accession hinders Russia’s negotiations on new trade and investment agreements. Once WTO accession is complete, Russia can negotiate new agreements with its trade partners that will outline clear institutional frameworks and sustain positive trends in its economic partnerships.
Mr. Medvedkov explained that, while critical voices are heard everywhere, they represent a small minority and not the general opinion of the Russian business community or the Russian population as a whole. Russian politicians as well as domestic and foreign business support Russia’s accession.
Mr. Medvedkov emphasized that this is the time when Russia’s WTO accession can bring the most benefit to the new government as well as the domestic and international business communities. He noted that he was optimistic that by July most, if not all, of the chapters should be ratified. n
REMARKS
Washington, DC nn April 10, 2008
GENERAL BRENT SCOWCROFT
nn Principal, The Scowcroft Group
The following is an excerpt of General Scowcroft’s remarks at the U.S.-Russia Business Council’s 15 th Anniversary Celebration. “…I will make just a few remarks about the relationship — a little bit about the past, a little bit about the present and how we got where we are at the present, and where we may be headed. Then, my friend Nick Burns will clean up after me. After all, he was my Soviet expert in the early 1990s, so you can blame him for anything I say wrong. The Cold War was a particularly harsh period in U.S. foreign relations — one of unremitting hostility. Yet, it ended not with a huge bang, but with scarcely a whimper. How did that happen?
Now, for several years before the Hungarians revolted a lot of people in the United States were arguing that we needed to kick the Soviets out of Eastern Europe. The Hungarian Revolution presented a wonderful opportunity to do just that. Suddenly, we were confronted with the fact that this might result in a nuclear war and what that might mean for the United States. The next step in this evolution was a report a couple of years later called the Gaither Report, which said that the United States had been resting on its oars and that the Soviet Union was catching up in nuclear weapons. As a result, we switched from a policy of Massive Retaliation to Counter Force, which meant that we would keep up with
“…Looking into the future, especially at this sensitive time, we should focus on our interests rather than on our values.”
In the early days of the Cold War we established a nuclear policy of massive retaliation. We were going to do it on the cheap. We had all these nuclear weapons; they had all the troops, so we just threatened nuclear retaliation. That was when we had the attitude that nuclear weapons, while a different kind of weapon, were mostly just a bigger bang to do the same kind of job. Then came the Hungarian Revolution.
In fact, we never completely made a transition to any of these policies, so we had a mixed strategy. This situation was worrisome enough that we decided that we needed to talk to the Soviets. So, at the lowest point of the Cold War, we started talking about arms control. It was not particularly fruitful for a long time, but it did one fundamental
thing — it got us acquainted with each other and the way we thought about these weapons. That process turned this Cold War confrontation into a very careful relationship. It was probably the first great power conflict where you had this overhang, where victory did not mean anything. That was one of the fundamental things that helped tamp down what otherwise could have been a more openly violent relationship. In the late 1970s, Brezhnev began to lose his mental faculties and was then replaced by Andropov, who had kidney failure and, in turn, was replaced by Chernenko, who had all kinds of things wrong with him. For a period of about eight years the Soviet Union stagnated, and then Gorbachev came to power in 1984 with the mandate to rejuvenate the country. He conducted a campaign against absenteeism, a campaign against drunkenness and he replaced negative incentives like jail and KGB terror with positive incentives to try to get worker productivity up. Although limited, it had some impact.
Spring 2008
the Soviets weapon by weapon. It turned out on closer inspection that this was a recipe for an unlimited arms race. We then modified Counter Force into what we called a Counter Value strategy, or to what the press called Mutually Assured Destruction or MAD.
General Brent Scowcroft, Principal, The Scowcroft Group
Russia Business Watch
Well, if you think that I am going to tell you, you are wrong. However, there were several factors contributing to what happened so apparently smoothly. One of those factors, I think, was what we learned in the process about nuclear weapons and their role in great power diplomacy.
special event
USRBC 15TH ANNIVERSARY
special event
USRBC 15TH ANNIVERSARY We now call it the era of glasnost and perestroika. Gorbachev worked hard at it, and he wanted these changes to spread to Eastern Europe by setting up a group of ‘mini-Gorbachevs’ to institute reform. What he did not realize he was doing was undermining the sinews of the Soviet Union. When Bush 41 came into office, there was a lot of discussion in Eastern Europe — especially in Poland — between Communists and Non-Communists. President Bush changed what had been our standard policy toward Eastern Europe, which, after all, was where the Cold War really centered. Our old policy of encouraging the Eastern European countries to distance themselves from the Soviet Union — which meant that our favorite was Romania and its
Washington, DC nn April 10, 2008
Every time there was an upsurge of liberalism, the Russians would clamp down and repression would follow. We wanted to keep it moving, but at a level that would not provoke a Russian reaction. Of course, we did not know what that level was, but that was our hallmark — to keep it moving and to keep it moving gradually. President Bush was also adamant that the United States not gloat when things started going well. When the Berlin Wall came down, one of our famous correspondents asked, ‘Why aren’t you over there dancing on the wall?’ That is the last thing he wanted to do, because he did not want another aftermath of World War I, which resulted in aggrieved and bitter populations. President Bush’s policy
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
“…Russia is undergoing one of the most fundamental societal adjustments in its history. We should be as patient and helpful as we can, relating to that process, with the hope that Russia will end up on the side of Europe. We can afford to go the extra mile, especially because the long term payoff could be very large.”
leader Nicolae Ceauşescu, who was constantly sticking his finger into the Soviet Union's eye — was no longer the tenable. We changed to supporting those who were trying to liberalize, whatever their attitude was toward the Soviet Union. As a result, Romania moved from first place to last place and Poland moved up to first place. What President Bush tried to do was not only to encourage liberalization, but to encourage it at a rate that would not bring about what happened to reform efforts in East Germany in 1953, Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968.
was that everybody won the Cold War. And it worked, or we were lucky, or both. By the time a coup occurred it was really too late, and it did not work. We always tried to be conscious of Soviet/Russian sensibilities. Since that time we have not always been so sensitive to the Russian psychology or soul. The change in the status of Russia since 1989 has been, for them, both dramatic and traumatic. It is not by accident that Gorbachev is probably the most hated man in Russia, because he is the symbol of the fall from power and national humiliation. Putin’s speech at the Munich conference last year says it
really quite well from the Russian side. He said that, ‘after the Cold War, when we were weak and powerless, you walked all over us.’ When looked at from the Russian side, events like moving the NATO borders East and abandoning the ABM treaty make those types of statements seem less exaggerated. The last part of his speech was one that was almost not reported in the American press. He said that now that Russia has recovered, the two sides should cooperate on issues like strategic nuclear weapons, on nonproliferation and on nuclear power. He even said we should cooperate so that no nation feels the need to enrich uranium. Sound familiar? I think that, looking into the future, especially at this sensitive time, we should focus on our interests rather than on our values. I do not believe that the Russians will, in the end, embrace democracy because we pressured them to do so. I would say quite the contrary. However, in the mean time we have a number of interests in common that are important to the United States, and on which I think we can get Russian cooperation: North Korea, Iran, Afghanistan (at least on drugs), terrorism, and energy. We sometimes forget that Russia is one of the largest energy suppliers in the world. So let me leave you with the thought that Russia is undergoing one of the most fundamental societal adjustments in its history. We should be as patient and helpful as we can, relating to that process, with the hope that Russia will end up on the side of Europe. We can afford to go the extra mile, especially because the long term payoff could be very large. ” n
REMARKS
Washington, DC nn April 10, 2008
AMBASSADOR R. NICHOLAS BURNS
Ambassador R. Nicholas Burns
“…I am not going to say a lot because I worked for General Scowcroft for three years in the White House, along with Condoleezza Rice, and I have the greatest respect for him, and I think he has pretty much framed this issue for us. Let me just make one point about the past, one about continuity in American policy, and one about the future….
That leads to my second point about continuity. If you think about it, and trace the arch of our policy from President George HW Bush to Bill Clinton and now to President George W. Bush, there has been an evolution, of course, but there’s been remarkable continuity in U.S. policy toward Russia and the New Independent States since 1991. Each of those presidents has said that Russia is important, Russia is central to our ability to achieve the kind of world in which we want to live. We have to be engaged, first and foremost, in what you’ve done in this Business Council — we need to create a thousand bridges; economic, commercial and trade between these two great countries. This community has done it, and this Council has done that. You’ve led the way, and that’s been an American and Russian achievement. Both of us have prospered from it. We also said that we couldn’t forget the fact that, despite the declining state in its power, Russia was going to be a considerable country nonetheless, as it was in the 1990s, and has become again, much more so, in the last five or six years in its ability, as President Bush 41 said, to achieve a Europe that is whole, free and at peace. This pretty much sums up what Bush, Thatcher, Kohl, and Mitterand thought they were doing in 1989 and ’90 and ’91. President Clinton embraced that, and President George W. Bush has as well. Each of them had been interested in preserving the stability in our nuclear arsenals and, hopefully, in bringing it to lower and lower levels. There have been differences, most notably in the last administration of President George W. Bush,
Spring 2008
It was right to work with President Gorbachev in 1991. We wouldn’t have been able to maneuver in our relationship with the Soviet Union otherwise, especially concerning important aspects such as independence for the Baltic States. I remember the day the three Baltic ambassadors walked into the Oval Office — I was there with General Scowcroft, I think it was September 23, 1991. They were on their way to New York to say that they were reclaiming the independence that was taken from them in May 1940 during the Soviet invasion of the three Baltic countries. That didn’t just happen, it happened because there was trust between President Gorbachev and President Bush and it happened because of all the skillful diplomacy.
I’d like to rise to defend President Bush and General Scowcroft. I know history is going to say that this was a remarkable period of American diplomacy.
Russia Business Watch
About the past, you would expect me to defend the administration of George HW Bush, but I want to for one reason: in the immediate wake of 1990 and 1991 there was a criticism that took hold in academia and the think tanks here and the press that somehow President George HW Bush, Secretary Baker and General Scowcroft had been too cautious in dealing with the decline of the Soviet Union. I think General Scowcroft answered those critics of that time; you do not hear much about that today. With the perspective of 17 or 18 years, I thought that their policy of trying to very deftly balance a declining Gorbachev and a rising Yeltsin, particularly in the second half of 1990 and all throughout 1991, was really quite masterful.
There were people who wanted President Bush, General Scowcroft and Secretary Baker in essence to dance on the grave of the disintegrating Soviet Union. Their goal, as General Scowcroft has said better than I can say it, was peace. It was peace so that everyone could share in it, and it was peace so that the Soviet Union did not have to break apart in a violent way. I can tell you, during that winter of 1990, when there were predictions of famine in the Soviet Union, what we really worried about was a violent breakup of the Soviet Union. We worried about warlords in one part or different parts of the vast Soviet empire becoming local custodians of that nuclear arsenal. In looking back at it, I think one of the great diplomatic achievements of the United States in the post-Second World War era was this period of 1989 to 1992, when 350 million East Europeans found their liberty and freedom after having lived in tyranny. Even Russians can look back now at those events and say we are better off. That wasn’t always the case in Russia, as General Scowcroft noted, but I think it is more and more so today.
special event
USRBC 15TH ANNIVERSARY
special event
USRBC 15TH ANNIVERSARY but I see continuity that is very useful to think about as we look at these three people running for president. As that person takes office in January 2009, reflecting on the continuity of the last three administrations would be a very important thing for that person and his or her advisors to do.
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
My last point would be about the future. I think we are at a dangerous, precarious, treacherous time in U.S.-Russia relations. I don’t think that the bottom will fall out of the policy on either side of the relationship. Thank goodness we don’t have to think about what General Scowcroft mentioned at the beginning of his presentation — this awful specter of a nuclear conflict. The trust has eroded, though. There’s no question about that. At least the war of words, particularly in 2007, beginning with that Munich speech, which I frankly thought was very much ill advised, has not escalated. President Bush and Secretary Rice decided to keep it cool publicly, not respond, not get into a tit-for-tat exchange verbally, but to try to focus on the basics of the relationship.
But we are at a dangerous time because there was a consensus in Moscow and Washington, all the way from ’91, about how we would treat each other, about the basic, fundamental connection points in this relationship, and some of that has been lost. I would think it should be a major priority for the new American president to reestablish that as you saw President Bush trying to do when he met in Sochi with President Putin in early April. In that sense, we have to achieve a rational balance of how we look as Americans, coldly and objectively, at where are our national interests lay. Here I am responding to the flood of critics of the current President Bush, for whom I worked as Under Secretary until I resigned that position three weeks ago. Those critics say that President Bush
Washington, DC nn April 10, 2008
ought to essentially be striking a position diametrically opposed to President Putin, and he ought to be responding to all these outrageous statements, and we ought to take the relationship in a very different, negative direction. I think those critics should remember two things. Arguably, the two most important interests that we Americans have in the entire world are counterterrorism and counterproliferation. Who is going to be our major partner on both of them? Russia. Russia, along with China, the European countries and Japan, will be among our strongest partners. There is no objective more important to us than safeguarding this country from terrorist attack. We know that President Putin was the first world leader to call President Bush on September 11. We know that the Russian Federation also thinks of itself as a subject and a victim of these attacks, and sees a shared interest with the United States in forming an international counterterrorism policy that can work. We cannot defeat international terrorism by American efforts alone. We need the cooperation of great powers like Russia. Secondly is counterproliferation. If another vital American objective is to prevent North Korea, Iran and other irresponsible states from becoming nuclear capable, will the Russians have the same interest? The Russians have acted on those interests. We are two of the parties in the Six Party Talks with North Korea, and I can tell you as the American negotiator on the Iran issue over the last three years, I always felt that Russia was strategically aligned with us in the objective of preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons power. I still believe that Russia is acting on that challenge and that Russia will turn out to be our must influential partner in trying to maneuver the Iranians to the negotiating table, which is where we should be.
…I really think it would be profoundly wrong to assert that we cannot think of Russia as a partner any longer because we appear to be going in different directions rhetorically and sometimes on policy. Russia is a partner on these core American interests of how we must maintain peace in the world. I would, with the greatest respect, say that it cannot be just about those interests, that the values are very important. Here I think that it is important for Americans and for our government to stand up and say that the centralization of power in the Kremlin is negative. It is a negative trend as we see it, and it is negative for the Russian people. We do not get to vote in those elections, it is up to the Russians to decide the future makeup of their country. However, I do think that Americans should express an opinion. I also think that this aggressive Russian behavior toward some of the democratic states in its neighborhood, which Russia has famously called “its near abroad,” needs to be responded to as well. I am thinking of the cyber attacks of more than a year ago against the Estonians, our NATO ally. President Bush invited President Toomas Ilves of Estonia to the White House to say this is now our NATO ally, a country that should not be subjected to that kind of treatment; the treatment that the Soviet Union gave the Estonians and a democratic Russia should not. I do think that it is important that we Americans assert that these values of democracy and of the way the states treat each other in the 21st century are vital. This complicates our bilateral relationship, but I do not think it obviates the possibility of having a balance of interests that we pursue, and a healthier relationship between our two countries. That would be the point I make about the future and about those people who will occupy positions of responsibility in our government post-2009”. n
Washington, DC nn April 10, 2008
Gala Dinner The U.S.-Russia Business Council’s 15th Anniversary Celebration was capped by a Gala Dinner on April 10, 2008. The event served as not only a celebration of the Council’s 15 years, but as a farewell to USRBC founder and President Gene Lawson (b - Gene with his spouse Stephanie Green Lawson), who stepped down from that position in May. The evening’s events were presided over by Ambassador Thomas Pickering (e), and included an keynote address by United States Trade Representative Susan C. Schwab (c). The evening began with a video message to Gene Lawson from E. Neville Isdell, Chairman and CEO of The Coca-Cola Company and Chairman
of the Board of the U.S.-Russia Business Council. Several long-time friends and former colleagues of Mr. Lawson paid tribute to him over the course of the dinner, including R. Nicholas Burns (a), former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs; Peter J. Robertson (k), Vice Chairman of Chevron Corporation; Maurice Tempelsman (l), Chairman of Lazare Kaplan International; Daniel Yergin (g), Chairman of Cambridge Energy Research Associates; Blake Marshall (d), Sr. Vice President-International at The PBN Company; Terrence English (i), b
The Gala Dinner was capped by an offthe-record address by United States Trade Representative Susan C. Schwab, in which she outlined the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead in Russia’s WTO accession negotiations. n c
a
d
Director of Baring Vostok Capital Partners; Ambassador James Collins (h), Director of the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; D. Jeffrey Hirschberg (m), Partner at Kalorama Partners; Angela Stent (j), Director of the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies at Georgetown University; and James Symington (f), President of the American-Russian Cultural Cooperation Foundation.
e
f
g
h
j
k
l
m
Russia Business Watch
a i
special event
USRBC 15TH ANNIVERSARY
Spring 2008
special event
U.S.-RUSSIA ECONOMIC DIALOGUE LUNCHEON Washington, DC
nn
April 29, 2008
Reuben Jeffery, U.S. Under Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
The U.S.-Russia Business Council helped to launch the U.S.-Russia Economic Dialogue with a luncheon on April 29, featuring Andrei Denisov, First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation and Reuben Jeffery, Under Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs.
0
Mr. Jeffery opened the discussion by emphasizing the tremendous mutual benefits of closer U.S.-Russia bilateral commercial relations. He noted that Presidents Bush and Putin were cognizant of the positive momentum that economic ties can have on the general U.S.-Russia relationship, as evidenced by the U.S.-Russia Strategic Framework Declaration that the two men established during their meetings in Sochi in early April. The Declaration provides a forum for collaboration between the two countries in key areas of common interest, including enhancing
Andrei Denisov, First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
security, preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction, combating terrorism, and advancing economic cooperation through mechanisms like the U.S.-Russia Economic Dialogue. Mr. Jeffery explained that the aim of the Dialogue is simple: both Russia and the United States stand to benefit from enhanced economic cooperation. He quoted U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who was present at the inaugural Dialogue meeting on April 28, in saying that one of the most important tasks for the leaders of the two countries is ensuring that their people are able to take advantage of economic growth. Mr. Jeffery expanded on Secretary Rice’s assertion by confirming that government can create the enabling environment for successful commercial and entrepreneurial activity, but it is the private sector’s responsibility to transfer these opportunities into the realm of
economic growth, job creation and overall enhancement of welfare. The governments of both countries must continue to take advantage of the current climate, where there is keen interest on both sides in deepening and expanding bilateral trade and investment across numerous sectors. Mr. Jeffery noted that, among the topics of the first Dialogue meeting the previous day, the U.S. side discussed the U.S. economy and global and financial markets, as well as the regulations pursuant to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). The Russian side focused its attention on a discussion of the status of the Strategic Sectors law, as well as WTO accession, energy, the Jackson-Vanik amendment, and the institution of a bilateral investment treaty.
Mr. Jeffery noted that he and his U.S. government colleagues are especially committed to encouraging further private sector engagement. He mentioned that the U.S. has been successful at establishing CEO dialogues with certain large economies, and expressed his optimism that such senior-level cooperation will occur between the United States and Russia. The next opportunity for formal American and Russian commercial engagement will take place at the St. Petersburg Economic Forum in June. Secretary Gutierrez of the Department of Commerce will lead the U.S. delegation in discussing the important business-to-business connection between the two countries. Mr. Jeffery expressed his belief that U.S.-Russia ties are strong, but the potential for future mutually-beneficial involvement is even greater.
Andrei Denisov provided the Russian government’s perspective of the U.S.Russia commercial relationship and its involvement in the dialogue. He noted that the U.S.-Russia relationship is one of the foreign policy priorities of the Russian Federation, and that both sides should be pleased with the practical results of the meeting between Presidents Bush and Putin in Sochi in early April. The meeting produced the U.S.-Russia Strategic Framework Declaration, which Mr. Denisov hailed as a worthy road map for the present leaders’ successors. The Declaration contains a list of landmarks and steps for further cooperation, and focuses specific attention on economic ties between the two countries. Mr. Denisov stressed that the foundation for U.S.-Russia relations lies in economic cooperation. By the end of the year,
the relationship should be strengthened by the signing of an agreement on cooperation in peaceful nuclear energy (Ed.’s note: the agreement was signed on May 6); the establishment of permanent normal trade relations; the determination of new formats for energy and business dialogues; and Russia’s WTO accession. Mr. Denisov also noted that a great deal of progress had been made at the inaugural Dialogue meetings of the previous day, where both sides attempted to identify the rules and laws that impede trade and investment. The meeting also included a discussion regarding strengthening rule of law and increasing transparency in Russia. All of these measures should work to reinforce and deepen U.S.-Russia economic ties. n
First Deputy Minister Denisov speaks about the Russian government’s role in the Economic Dialogue.
Russia Business Watch
USRBC President Gene Lawson welcomes Under Secretary Jeffery to open the U.S.- Russia Economic Dialogue luncheon.
Washington, DC nn April 29, 2008
special event
U.S.-RUSSIA ECONOMIC DIALOGUE LUNCHEON
Spring 2008
outlook
WE ARE BUILDING A WORLD-CLASS COMPANY AN INTERVIEW WITH GULZHAN MOLDAZHANOVA, CEO, BASIC ELEMENT
Basic Element is one of the best known, fastest-growing and most dynamic companies in contemporary Russia. It manages about 100 companies, many of which play a major role not only in Russia, but in the global economy as well. Last year, Basic Element celebrated its tenth anniversary. Chief Executive Officer of Basic Element Gulzhan Moldazhanova answered our questions about the company.
Gulzhan Moldazhanova, Chief Executive Officer, Basic Element
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
Tell us about Basic Element’s origins.
12
Gulzhan Moldazhanova: “Basic Element started out as just one company, the Sayanogorsk Aluminum Smelter in Khakassia — one of the largest in the industry. Using that as a base, along with other enterprises in the aluminum sector, we began to set up the Sibirsky Aluminum group of companies. Oleg Deripaska, shareholder and CEO of the Sayanogorsk plant, was the inspiration and driving force behind the whole process. Few people then could have imagined that in just ten years the original company would be transformed into a huge enterprise employing several hundred thousand people and with assets on every continent. The 1990s were difficult times in Russia. Economic reforms and privatization went hand in hand with the struggle not only to build efficient companies and enterprises, but also with those
who wanted to drain these companies and drag their feet rather than to build and create something. Success was achieved by those who had thought about the future and who had a coherent plan of how to build that future. The aim of Sibirsky Aluminum was to create an efficient, full-cycle aluminum company responsible to its customers, partners, employees, and society — in short to all those who nowadays go under the fashionable word of ‘stakeholders.’ This goal was eventually achieved. Eventually, the aluminum business was no longer the only and most important thing to us (today, the aluminum business comprises only half of the company’s assets). It was at that point that we renamed ourselves Basic Element. We now have nearly 100 enterprises scattered all over the world and work in six sectors — energy, natural resources, manufacturing, construction, finance, and aviation. In 2007, our turnover increased by more than 50 percent to $28 billion. We intend to continue growing at a fast pace.” What is Basic Element striving for in the future? What you do see as its primary purpose?
GM: “Our primary purpose is to become one of the world’s leading companies in every sense of the word. Today, our goal is to make the management of all our assets in the sectors where we operate as efficient as possible. In our understanding, ‘efficient management’ means to grow faster than the market and to always stay a few steps ahead.
That is the benchmark we expect all of our businesses to reach in equal measure. In doing so, however, our growth will inevitably be linked to finding solutions to the most important problems now facing Russia. The development of the country depends on their resolution. One of our priorities is to participate in projects to develop modern infrastructure and competitive engineering and manufacturing. Right now, we see the work in these sectors as our main priority. Operating in these sectors presents great opportunities because there is huge unfulfilled demand in the market. For example, in recent years, investment in Russia’s roads has fallen significantly, while demand for more roads has increased. In Russia, there are 62 km of roads per 10,000 inhabitants, compared with 220 km in the United States and 450 km in Canada. A similar situation applies with regard to Russia’s airports. Over the past 15 years, their number has declined nearly fourfold. If Russia develops at the rates expected, investment in these areas will increase. Already, the Ministry of Transport intends to invest 9.9 trillion rubles (USRBC: $421 billion) in roads between 2008 and 2020. The Russian government will be allocating 70 billion rubles (USRBC: $3 billion) annually toward their construction between 2008 and 2011, while business intends to invest about $50 billion. Investment in the reconstruction of ports and airports by 2020 is expected to reach $45 billion.
So there is enormous demand, and we are confident that companies with the right capabilities, technology and experience, and which are perceived as reliable partners, will have plenty of work to do across the board for many years to come. The huge scope of these projects means you cannot avoid using public-private partnerships of the type that exist all over the world in one form or another, and without which there would have been no large-scale infrastructure projects of the sort that rebuilt post-war Europe. At the moment, for example, we are already participating in several tenders in the form of public-private partnerships, including tenders to construct major projects in St. Petersburg and in Sochi as part of the Winter Olympics due to be held there in 2014. More than $10 billion has been allocated to these projects. We are going to submit a tender as part of consortia with Strabag, Hochtief, Buygue and CITIC. This approach is meeting with a lot of interest, including with foreign investors. This is hardly surprising if you consider that the planned financing of such projects in the next 10 years amounts to approximately $1 trillion.”
and experience to our own corporate governance. Recent examples are the purchase of a 20 percent stake in the Canadian company Magna International Inc., a global manufacturer of car components, for which we paid over $1.5 billion. In the construction sector, we bought a 30 percent stake in the Austrian company Strabag for €1.2 billion and a 10 percent stake in Germany’s Hochtief. Our business is changing not only in quantitative terms — it is not just about increasing the number of companies owned by Basic Element — we are also changing from within by introducing greater openness and transparency into our business. We want to be a company with a clear and understandable strategy, management and management principles. And, we have started talking about our strategy in public much more than ever before. Basic Element is now establishing internal audit committees and boards of directors at our various businesses. We are talking about the company’s structure and are making our management procedures as open as possible to our partners. We also have to be understood by potential investors because over the next three years, many companies belonging to Basic Element will
be conducting Initial Public Offerings (IPOs).” Does Basic Element have any plans in the United States?
GM: “We have worked closely with American financial institutions on certain transactions, for example our purchase of the stake in Magna. We have also concluded a series of deals with Alcoa and sold them several of our plants for about $300 million, and with Chrysler. So, we do have experience on the American market, and I think contacts there will increase in the future.” Is Basic Element’s strategy linked to the political situation in Russia? Is it changing as a result of the election of the new President?
GM: “No. Our strategy is not set or defined by the political situation. But being a company of our size, it is quite natural that we are taking part in dealing with major issues facing the country. Above all, as I’ve already said, that is true with regard to infrastructure and engineering. The need in this area will never disappear. The lack of good roads is a problem that no one has managed to solve for centuries.
Russia Business Watch
In the last year, you have carried out a number of international transactions and become sareholders in major foreign companies. What were the reasons behind these decisions?
Spring 2008
GM: “We acquired stakes in foreign companies in order to gain access to the advanced technologies we need to develop our projects in Russia. Thus, we gain not only technology, but also know-how and partners. Moreover, we have been able to adapt best international practice
outlook
The construction of affordable housing and the demand for cement will increase 1.5 times by 2010. Sales of car parts and accessories to manufacturers will increase by around the same amount, and, by 2011, Russia will become the largest car market in Europe.
13 Sayanogorsk Aluminum Plant, Khakassia — the first aluminum plant built in the Russian Federation in the past 20 years.
outlook
GM: “It is true. In 1995, I joined the company as a secretary, earning $200 a month. I studied physics and graduated from university with honors. After defending my thesis, I spent a year at Moscow State University doing research. But, as I said earlier, the 1990s were a very difficult period and you had to earn a living. Back then, that was impossible in science.
Assembly of Volga sedans at Gorky Automobile Plant (GAZ), Nizhny Novgorod, Russia.
Finding solutions is necessary in any event, and it’s unlikely that the new President would see the matter any differently.
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
Russia needs to develop engineering and manufacturing, which used to be well developed, but in the last 15 years we have lost ground due to the lack of investment. We are ready to work in this sector, and this will benefit both us and Russia. This is what the country needs in an objective sense.
14
There is a problem with staff shortages at middle management. Enterprises using modern technologies require adequate personnel. That raises the need for education and training, so we’ve already been involved in those areas for a long time. We are also actively investing in research. The commercialization of scientific results is a very important priority, and if we get it right, our science will be able to be self-sufficient. That is the direction in which our Scientific and Technical Center is heading. Our strategy is to conduct business by meeting the real needs of society. We have both a constructive and pragmatic approach. I would like to stress that
Basic Element is a company that does what is profitable, and what coincides with the needs of society. I think that any company would like to characterize itself in roughly these words, regardless of whether it is from Russia, America, France, or anywhere else.” Yet many perceive Basic Element as a company that has a special relationship with the state...
GM: “Let us back away from the stereotypes and clichés and look at things objectively. We are one of Russia’s largest private companies and employ more than 300,000 people. We work in a number of strategic economic sectors. So, it is only natural that the state pays particular attention to us. But we are striving to be perceived as a responsible and reliable partner.” Could we talk a bit more about you personally? GM: “Why not?” You are the only woman in Russia whom The Wall Street Journal included in its global ranking of female business leaders. Is it true that you started your career as a secretary at the company?
However, I only worked as a secretary for two weeks. I worked as assistant to the Financial Director for a year, then I moved to the Foreign Economic Department, and, in 2000, I became Director of Sales and Marketing at RUSAL. In 2002, I was appointed Director of Strategy and Corporate Development, and I have been CEO of Basic Element since 2005.” What helped you to have such a distinguished career?
GM: “First of all, a good solid education. Secondly is the ability to work. In other words, you have to see the most important thing, to take on responsibility, and to bring an idea to its conclusion and implementation. Thirdly, I have a very strong sense of competition. And, of course, the luck factor was enormous — you had to be in the right place at the right time.” Is it difficult being a woman at the helm of such a large business?
GM: “I do not think there is any real difference in business whether you are a man or a woman. Recently, I have been meeting more and more women as partners in negotiations — even more frequently in Asia than in Europe.” Do you have any time left over for your family?
GM: “Unfortunately, time is at a premium, so I have to cherish every minute I can spend with the people close to me and my daughter Alina.” n
Интервью С Гульжан Молдажановой, Генеральным Директороm, «Базовый Элемент»
«Базовый Элемент» — это одна из самых известных, быстрорастущих и динамичных компаний в сегодняшней России. Под ее управлением находится около 100 компаний, многие из которых играют заметную роль не только в российской, но и в мировой экономике. В прошлом году «Базовый Элемент» отметил свое 10-летие. На наши вопросы отвечает Генеральный директор компании Гульжан Молдажанова. Как возник «Базовый Элемент»?
Гульжан Молдажанова: То, что сегодня называется «Базовым Элементом», началось на одном предприятии — Саяногорском алюминиевом заводе в Хакасии, одном из крупнейших в отрасли. На базе этого и других предприятий алюминиевой промышленности начали создавать группу компаний «Сибирский алюминий». Вдохновителем процесса был акционер и генеральный директор Саяногорского завода Олег Дерипаска. Вряд ли многие тогда могли предположить, что из всего этого через какие-то 10 лет получится компания с активами на всех континентах и с несколькими сотнями тысяч сотрудников.
К чему стремится «Базовый Элемент» в перспективе? В чем вы видите свою главную цель?
ГМ: Встать в один ряд с ведущими мировыми компаниями. По всем критериям. Сейчас мы стремимся к максимальной эффективности управления активами во всех секторах экономики, где мы присутствуем. В нашем понимании «эффективно управлять» означает расти быстрее рынка, играть на опережение. Эта планка ставится перед всеми нашими бизнесами в равной степени.
Работа в этих секторах открывает большие возможности, здесь не заняты огромные ниши. Пример: за
Если страна будет развиваться ожидаемыми темпами, инвестиции в эти сферы будут расти. Уже сейчас Минтранс намерен вложить 9,9 трлн. руб. (АРДС: $421 млрд.) в строительство дорог в период 2008-2020 гг. Правительство РФ в течение 2008-2011 г.г. будет ежегодно выделять на это 70 млрд. руб. (АРДС: $3 млрд.) Около $50 млрд. намерен вложить бизнес. Инвестиции в реконструкцию портов и аэропортов оцениваются в $45 млрд. до 2020 г. Объем строительства доступного жилья, как и спрос на цемент, вырастет в России к 2010 году в 1,5 раза. Приблизительно так же увеличится объем продаж автомобильных запчастей и комплектующих производителям. К 2011 году Россия станет крупнейшим автомобильным рынком Европы. Ниши в этих секторах рынка огромны, и мы уверены, что компании, обладающие необходимыми возможностями, технологиями, опытом и т.п., воспринимаемые как надежные партнеры, обеспечат себе фронт работ на долгие годы вперед.
Spring 2008
При этом наш рост будет неминуемо связан с решением принципиально важных для России задач. От их решения зависит развитие страны. Одной из наших приоритетных задач является участие в проектах по развитию современной инфраструктуры и конкурентоспособного машиностроения. Сейчас мы рассматриваем работу в этих секторах как свои основные приоритеты.
последние годы в России существенно сократились инвестиции в строительство дорог, хотя потребность в них росла. У нас на 10 тыс. человек приходится 62 км автодорог. Для сравнения: в США — 220, в Канаде — 450. Похожая ситуация с аэропортами. За последние 15 лет их число в стране сократилось почти в четыре раза.
Russia Business Watch
Девяностые годы были в России очень непростым временем. Экономические реформы, приватизация, борьба не только за эффективность предприятий, но и с теми, кто хотел лишь тащить, а не созидать. Успеха достигал тот, кто раньше задумывался о будущем и у кого был внятный план построения этого будущего. Целью «Сибала» было создание эффективной алюминиевой компании полного цикла, ответственной перед клиентами, партнерами, сотрудниками, обществом — всеми теми, кого называют сегодня модным словом «стейкхолдеры». Эта цель была через некоторое время достигнута. Потом наступил тот момент, когда алюминиевый бизнес перестал быть единственным и главным для нас (сегодня алюминиевый бизнес составляет лишь половину активов компании), и мы
стали называться «Базовый Элемент». Сейчас у нас около 100 предприятий, которые разбросаны по всему миру. Мы работаем в шести отраслях экономики — в энергетике, ресурсном секторе, машиностроении, строительстве, финансах, авиации. В 2007 году наш оборот вырос более чем на 50 процентов — до $28 млрд. Мы намерены и дальше расти хорошими темпами.
outlook
МЫ СТРОИМ КОМПАНИЮ МИРОВОГО УРОВНЯ
15
Здесь не обойтись без частногосударственного партнерства,
outlook
которое существует в той или иной форме во всем мире, и без которого не были бы реализованы масштабные инфраструктурные проекты, преобразившие послевоенную Европу. Сейчас, например, мы уже участвуем в тендерах по нескольким проектам в формате частногосударственного партнерства. Речь идет о строительстве крупных объектов в Санкт-Петербурге и в Сочи под Олимпийские игры 2014 года. На это выделено более $10 млрд. Мы идем на тендеры в консорциумах со «Strabag», «Hochtief», «Buygue», «CITIC». Это многим интересно. В том числе — иностранным инвесторам. Особенно если учесть, что плановый объем финансирования таких проектов в ближайшие 10 лет — порядка $1 трлн. В последний год вы заключили ряд международных сделок и стали акционерами в крупных зарубежных компаниях. Зачем вам все это?
Но наш бизнес меняется не только количественно, растет не только количество компаний, входящих в «Базовый Элемент»; мы также меняемся изнутри. Мы стремимся к большей открытости, к прозрачности бизнеса. Мы хотим быть компанией с понятной стратегией, менеджментом, принципами управления. Мы гораздо больше, чем раньше, публично говорим о нашей стратегии. Сейчас в «Базовом Элементе» создаются внутренние комитеты по аудиту, советы директоров в разных бизнесах. Мы рассказываем о том, как устроена компания, делаем наши процедуры управления максимально открытыми для партнеров. Мы должны быть понятны и потенциальным инвесторам, ведь
Spring 2008
ГМ: Доли в иностранных компаниях приобретались для получения доступа к передовым технологиям, необходимым для развития наших проектов в России. Таким образом, мы
получаем и технологии, и ноу-хау, и партнеров. Плюс, адаптируем лучший международный опыт корпоративного управления. Последние примеры — это покупка 20 процентов акций канадской «Magna International Inc.», мирового производителя автокомпонетов. Мы вложили в это более $1,5 млрд. Для строительного сектора мы приобрели 30 процентов австрийской «Strabag» за €1,2 млрд., и 10 процентов акций германской «Hochtief».
Есть ли у «Базового Элемента» какие-то планы в Соединенных Штатах?
ГМ: Мы плотно работали с американскими финансовыми институтами при подготовке некоторых сделок — например, при покупке доли в «Magna». Мы провели ряд сделок с «Alcoa», продав ей несколько наших предприятий на сумму около $300 млн., и с «Chrysler». Опыт работы на американском рынке есть, и в будущем контакты здесь, думаю, расширятся. А как увязана стратегия «Базового Элемента» с политической конъюнктурой в России? Изменится ли она в связи с выборами нового Президента?
ГМ: Нет. Наша стратегия не определяется политической конъюнктурой. При этом будучи компанией нашего масштаба мы совершенно органично и осознанно участвуем в решении масштабных задач, стоящих перед страной. В первую очередь, как я уже говорила, в сфере инфраструктуры и машиностроения. Потребности здесь никуда не исчезнут. Нехватка хороших дорог — это проблема не решалась столетиями. Решать ее в любом случае надо. Вряд ли у нового Президента отношение к этому может быть каким-то другим. Стране необходимо развивать машиностроение. Оно традиционно было сильным, но в последние 15 лет из-за недостатка инвестиций утратило свои позиции. Мы готовы работать в этой отрасли, и это будет хорошо и для нас, и для России. Это объективно необходимо.
Russia Business Watch
16
в течение следующих трех лет многие компании, входящие в «Базовый Элемент», проведут IPO.
Для производства алюминия ОК «РУСАЛ» использует ресурсы всего мира: из бокситов Австралии и Гвинеи (на фото) получают глинозем в Европе, который перерабатывают в алюминий в России, используя ее богатые гидроресурсы.
Есть проблема нехватки персонала среднего профессионального уровня. Предприятиям с современными технологиями нужны адекватные кадры.
Наша стратегия заключается в том, чтобы вести бизнес, удовлетворяя реальные потребности общества. У нас одновременно и конструктивный, и прагматичный подход. Я хочу подчеркнуть, что «Базовый Элемент» — это компания, которая делает то, что ей выгодно, и что совпадает с нуждами общества. Думаю, что приблизительно такими словами себя стремится характеризовать любая компания вне зависимости от того, какая она — российская, американская, французская или какая-либо еще. Все же «Базовый Элемент» многие воспринимают как компанию, которая имеет особые отношения с государством…
— бизнес-лидеров. Правда ли, что Вы начинали карьеру в компании с секретаря?
ГМ: Правда. В 1995 году я пришла в компанию в качестве секретаря на $200 в месяц. Я физик по образованию, с отличием окончила университет, год после защиты диссертации работала в МГУ, занималась исследованиями. Но, повторюсь, 90-е были очень сложным периодом. Нужно было зарабатывать на жизнь. В науке тогда это было невозможно. Но и секретарем я проработала всего две недели. Потом год была помощником финансового директора. Потом перешла во внешнеэкономический департамент. В 2000 году стала директором по продажам и маркетингу «РУСАЛ» , в 2002 — директором по стратегии и корпоративному развитию. Компанией «Базовый Элемент» я руковожу с 2005 года.
ГМ: Почему нет?
Что позволило сделать такую блестящую карьеру?
Вы единственная в России, кого The Wall Street Journal включил в глобальный рейтинг женщин
ГМ: Во-первых, хорошее фундаментальное образование. Во-вторых, умение работать. То есть видеть
суть, брать на себя ответственность и доводить идею до реализации. Третье — во мне очень силен дух соревнования. Ну и, конечно, фактор везения был колоссален. Надо ведь было оказаться в нужное время в нужном месте. Сложно ли женщине в таком крупном бизнесе?
ГМ: Думаю, в бизнесе нет принципиальной разницы мужчина ты или женщина. В последнее время я все чаще встречаю женщин как партнеров на переговорах. Причем в Азии даже чаще, чем в Европе. Остается ли время на семью?
ГМ: К сожалению, времени катастрофически не хватает, и приходится дорожить каждой минутой, проведенной с моими близкими и дочерью Алиной. n
Spring 2008
Вы позволите несколько личных вопросов?
Сборка автомобилей «ГАЗель» на Горьковском автомобильном заводе (ГАЗ).
Russia Business Watch
ГМ: Давайте отойдем от стереотипов и взглянем на вещи объективно. Мы одна из крупнейших российских частных компаний. На наших предприятиях занято более 300 тыс. человек. Мы работаем в ряде стратегических отраслей экономики. Естественно, государство смотрит на нас с особым вниманием. Мы стремимся к тому, чтобы нас воспринимали как ответственного и надежного партнера.
outlook
Требуется ставить процесс подготовки, обучение. Мы уже давно этим занимаемся, причем достаточно широко. Мы также активно инвестируем в научные разработки. Коммерциализация научных разработок это очень важная задача, решение которой позволит нашей науке себя кормить самостоятельно. И наш научнотехнический центр работает в этом направлении.
17
activities
USRBC CalenDaR of eventS June 8
May 22
May 21
Council President Ed Verona speaks at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum on the panel “Russia’s Foreign Economic Policy and the Globalization of Russian Companies.”
The USRBC holds its monthly members-only briefing with Mary B. Warlick, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Russian Affairs at the National Security Council.
Council Vice President for Policy and Programs Randi Levinas speaks on a panel at the Henry L. Stimson Center on Russia’s trade and investment outlook.
May 20 The Council, in partnership with its Moscow-based Board of Directors, hosts a cocktail reception in Moscow to introduce the new Executive Director of the USRBC Moscow Office, Dr. Ilya Kuperman.
May 16
April 30
Council Director of Communications and External Affairs Svetlana Minjack and Senior Program Manager Jeff Barnett meet with Loyola-Marymount University Executive MBA candidates to provide an introductory seminar on the Russian economy.
Council staff meets with Andrey Belousov, Deputy Minister of Economic Development of the RF; Elena V. Danilova, Adviser to the Minister of Economic Development of the RF; and Dmitry N. Sazhin, Deputy Head of Department of the Ministry of Economic Development of the RF, to discuss the U.S.-Russia Economic Dialogue.
April 21-25 Council President Eugene K. Lawson and Federation Council Senator Mikhail Margelov travel to Atlanta, GA; Memphis, TN; Jackson, MS; Houston, TX; and Seattle, WA on a five day tour of the United States to meet with local business and government leaders to discuss the opportunities stemming from close U.S.-Russia trade and investment ties.
April 29 The USRBC hosts a luncheon with Andrei Denisov, First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, and Reuben Jeffery, U.S. Under Secretary of State, to launch the U.S.-Russia Economic Dialogue.
April 3
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
April 10 — The USRBC celebrates
its 15th Anniversary with afternoon addresses by Maxim Medvedkov, Director of the Department of Trade Negotiations at the Russian Federation’s Ministry of Economic Development; Nicholas Burns, former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs; General Brent Scowcroft; and a keynote address by Ambassador Susan C. Schwab, U.S. Trade Representative.
February 25 Council Vice President Randi Levinas and Senior Program Manager Jeff Barnett brief members of the Helsinki Commission prior to their visit to Russia.
The Council holds its monthly members-only briefing with Mary B. Warlick, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Russian Affairs at the National Security Council.
March 12 The USRBC hosts a members roundtable discussion on healthcare initiatives in Russia with a delegation from the Moscow City Duma, State Duma and Ministry of Public Health and Social Development.
February 15 The USRBC hosts a members briefing with Dmitry Trenin, Deputy Director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, on political change and the future prospects in the U.S.-Russia relationship.
nn Deputy Director, Carnegie Moscow Center
President, still presides over and nearly single-handedly controls the country’s internal and external affairs. Similarly, capitalism is thriving. Mr. Trenin then proceeded to discuss President Vladimir Putin’s legacy. He views Putin’s presidency in a historical perspective — next to Yeltsin and Gorbachev as a third element in Russia’s evolution in the late 20th century. While Russia moved forward under Mikhail Gorbachev (who dismantled Communism) and Boris Yeltsin (who pushed forward liberalization), Putin took a proverbial step backward. In Mr. Trenin’s view, however, Putin’s politics ratify rather than reverse the two strides that preceded him. Dmitry Trenin, Deputy Director, Carnegie Moscow Center
The Council hosted a briefing with Dmitry Trenin, Deputy Director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, on February 15 to discuss Russia’s election cycle, as well as its impact on U.S.-Russia relations. According to Mr. Trenin, the main message of his new book, Getting Russia Right, asserts that the central narrative of Russia today is not about failed democracy, but emerging capitalism.
Question & Answer Session Are you making a distinction between institution-building to create a civil society and political freedoms on the one hand, versus the Anglo-Saxon version of democracy on the other? Mr. Trenin answered that democracy does not need an adjective, such as “managed” or “sovereign.” Russia will make a democracy of its own, worthy of the name, which will not be preceded by the word “managed.” He further explained that democracy is built on rights and responsibilities. Lately, rights have been overemphasized while responsibilities received little attention. Mr. Trenin sees Russia as moving toward democracy, which he defines as responsible decisions made by people who own property. However, fundamental changes need to take place: a system
Spring 2008
Mr. Trenin expressed his mostly positive attitude toward Russia’s future, noting that the country now stands a better chance of succeeding as a nation at the beginning of the 21st century than it did at the beginning of the 20th century. The biggest challenge that Putin faced and Medvedev will be facing in a “tsarist” country is institution-building. Mr. Trenin remarked that, in Russia the sole poli-
The Russian people are becoming progressively more concerned about property laws and similar rights. Mr. Trenin believes that when citizens decide to actively protect their interests, civil society will begin to solidify. He also predicted that by 2020, Russia will transform into a Kaiser-like regime with an autocratic system of governance, but also with the rule of law. At that time, democracy may win its place on the agenda; however, it faces a long, strenuous road ahead.
Russia Business Watch
Mr. Trenin remarked that his perspective on the current developments in Russia is not the common normative perspective, but that of a pragmatic ex-military officer and an amateur historian. He categorizes all events in Russia in logically succeeding phases; after a break of almost 100 years, Russia is back on its historical path of development that was interrupted by the catastrophic First World War and the Bolshevik Revolution. Russia today is comparable to Russia 100 years ago. The Tsar, now called the
President Putin’s legacy will undoubtedly be two-sided. His supporters speak of him as the great stabilizer who put the country back on track after a period of turmoil and instability, while his critics claim that he reversed Russia’s progress toward democracy. Nonetheless, Mr. Trenin does credit Putin with one significant positive achievement: his decision to step down as president, even if he will still retain a considerable amount of authority. Mr. Trenin emphasized that it is tremendously important to have a rotation of the president, a tradition that Yeltsin established and wrote into the Constitution.
tical institution is housed in one jacket (or, perhaps, two after the election of Medvedev as president). The next step in Russia’s development will not be toward a fully-fledged democracy, but something approaching the rule of law.
activities
USRBC Member Briefing with Dmitry Trenin
19
activities
cannot be truly democratic where the people are not property owners and they rely on handouts from the state. Russians are changing and becoming more individualistic, and they will one day embrace both rights and responsibilities. Could you please comment on the surge of discussion on the emergence of a new Cold War?
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
Mr. Trenin responded that history will not repeat itself. He explained that today the political climate is very different, in that there is no contest between the United States and Russia for supremacy and no ideological confrontation. The thawed nature of the relationship between Russia and the United States does not mean that there will be a new Cold War. Harmony needs to be restored to a relationship that is becoming more complex. Currently, Mr. Trenin sees the global political atmosphere as an era of competing, not warring states.
20
He added that Russia’s foreign policy today is revisionist, where the Russian leadership under Putin strives to rewrite the ending of the Cold War. Russia yearns to break free from a global system that benefited from the country’s temporary weakness. Furthermore, Putin’s diplomacy does not proclaim confrontation, but rather emphasizes the desire to change the rules of the game in Russia’s relations with the United States. Putin’s Munich speech from a year ago is illustrative of this point, given its two main themes. First, the world must accept Russia as it is: Russia will change, but will not change under outside pressure, or under forced conditions. Russia will be a democracy, but not an Anglo-Saxon one. Next, Russia must be treated as an equal: Russia is not a defeated enemy or poor relation; it is a fairly large, important and independent country. Russia
would like to do business with the United States when there are sufficient overlapping interests, but on equal terms. You used an interesting word ‘insult’ and referred to the disrespect that Russia perceives as emanating toward it from the United States. What symbolic mistakes would you advise a leader in the U.S. presidential race to avoid? Mr. Trenin presented three main issues that should be at the top of the U.S. agenda in its relations with Russia. The first concerns Ukraine’s potential membership in NATO, which, according to Mr. Trenin, has the potential to bring about a new Cold War. A real prospect of membership will cause major political divisions and instability in Ukraine and magnetize foreign involvement on all sides, and therefore must be avoided. The second possible mistake that future U.S. leadership should avoid is dismissing Russia’s offer to collaborate with the United States on missile defense. Mr. Trenin believes that cooperation on missile defense is a way for the United States to send a positive message to Russia about its defense policy. Russia is watching U.S. activity in Central Europe as an indicator of where U.S. defense policy is going vis-à-vis Russia. The United States should realize that Russia is constantly reading between the lines, and act with appropriate caution. The third (seemingly small) issue that continues to antagonize relations is the United States’ refusal to ratify the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty. The treaty that Russia signed after the end of the Cold War established comprehensive limits on key categories of conventional military equipment in Europe and mandated the destruction of excess weaponry. Russians, who have had to make the
largest concessions, have ratified the treaty, but those that would benefit — such as the United States — have not. According to Mr. Trenin, the loss of the CFE Treaty would be tragic, and the United States needs to rethink its position. I was struck that you did not mention Kosovo, which appears to be on the verge of becoming a larger and more urgent problem. Any comment? Mr. Trenin responded that he recognizes that Kosovo is a looming crisis, but did not mention it because Russia does not have any geopolitical goals in the Balkans. Nonetheless, in respect to the issues concerning Kosovo’s independence, Russia does have an interest in two factors: the principal of territorial integrity, and the principal of international law being entrusted with the United Nations. According to Mr. Trenin, Russia is a champion of the U.N. for one reason: its veto power at the Security Council. If the Security Council is perceived as a stumbling block, decisions would be taken without its involvement. Consequently, the world order will be transformed by the emergence of at least two regimes: one that will apply to the United States, Europe and other U.S. allies, and the other that will apply to Russia, China and others. Some countries will leave one regime and enter the other, which will destabilize the global system. As you have mentioned, one focal area will be institution building, and currently there is only one institution. If there is a path forward toward institution building, where would it start? Since the political reality in Russia is that all power is vested in the president, institutions need to be established that surpass power relationships, such as the rule of law. Almost
Top to bottom, people are progressively more invested in their rights being observed. Currently, these desires stand in stark contrast to the vested and widespread disregard for law.
The big question is how the military is postured and what country is seen as an adversary.
The energy conflicts that Russia has had were with the former Soviet Union states, such as Ukraine and Belarus. Doing business with countries that are similar to Russia should have been less problematic than it turned out. Mr. Trenin noted that Russia shot itself in both feet by ignoring political realities, leading to confrontations such as the chaotic and prolonged gas dispute with Ukraine. Mr. Trenin dismissed allegations of Russia’s imperial ambitions, and clarified that Russia’s interests are purely commercial. He summarized his view of Russia’s foreign policy in three points. Primarily, Russia’s business is Russia, not the establishment of an empire. Second, Russia’s business is business; the acquisition of downstream energy assets is purely commercial in intent. Third, Russia is no one else’s business, but Russia’s; the country is on its own path, and will not be influenced by outsiders. The Putin administration has set forth to redefine its relationship with the international community. Is the Russian government on the
Mr. Trenin responded that his wish is to see the Russian people begin to redefining their relationship with the government. This process is slowly starting, even though the Kremlin still occupies an incredibly dominant position. The Kremlin is in control of all aspects of political life, from building several parties at the same time to funding NGO activity in Russia. Such excessive government involvement also makes a statement about the willful non-participation of the Russian people. One of the most noteworthy challenges for Russia in the future will be instituting good governance. According to Mr. Trenin, the Russian people will not ask for democracy, but instead they will ask for public goods to be delivered to them. In this respect, changes will need to take place not so much in the Kremlin or the Duma, but in the regional and local authorities that are closer to the people and that are profoundly corrupt. It is these authorities that people find difficult to accept in their present form. Accountable governance is the next step — accountability demands responsibility on the behalf of those governed. No one can be sure that the Russian people will insist that their government answer to them in the next several decades, but Mr. Trenin noted that he is optimistic. n
Spring 2008
Mr. Trenin replied that such a danger does exist. Most notably, if relations between Russia and the United States significantly deteriorate, then the capitalism that emerges in Russia will be significantly distorted, and militarism will again become prominent.
Mr. Trenin noted that he is less concerned about Russia’s use of energy as a tool of foreign policy. People mistakenly equate energy power to nuclear power. The real relationship between Russia and Europe exposes Russia’s proportionately higher dependence on income from its energy sales to Europe, than Europe’s overall consumption of Russia’s hydrocarbons as percentage of its total energy imports.
verge of redefining the relationship with its own people?
Russia Business Watch
Up to this point it has been relatively easy to exploit opportunities in Russia because the country is interested in doing business. Recently, however, Russia’s growing capital is being used to rebuild the military and to exert political pressure on the Europeans through energy, for example. When you mix business with politics, with foreign policy, business suffers. Do you see that happening?
So far, the weight of Russia’s militarization has been modest, only about $30 billion for the next seven years, which is considerably less than the country needs. The reason for underinvestment is Putin’s lack of trust in Russia’s own institutions and electorate to make decisions that are beneficial for the country.
activities
everyone in Russia has an interest in the establishment of the rule of law — it is important that the top government officials understand that their future and their fortune are not dependent on personal relationships with the new administration. The people who are one notch down, the business elite of Russia, are very dependent on the power relationships at the top, and want to be free from the constant begging and interference in their business. They want rules established and observed. Yet another notch down the ladder, the millionaires, do not want to depend on their governors and regional political systems. All the way at the bottom, people whose huts have been destroyed and replaced by high cost developments, who have been only meagerly compensated, want better property rights.
21
activities
Panel Discussion on Russia’s Healthcare Initiatives nn March 12, 2008 — Washington, DC
On March 12, the Council hosted a panel discussion on Russia’s latest healthcare initiatives with a delegation of Russian officials that was brought to the United States in conjunction with USRBC member MiraMed, which has been uniquely successful in working with legislators and key government officials in the fields of countering human trafficking, HIV/AIDS education and child protection. The delegation included Lyudmila Stebenkova, Chairman of the Moscow City Duma Commission on Healthcare and Protection of Public Health; Bishop Igor Nikitin, Chairman of the World Christian Council; Aleksandr Belov, from the Center for Humanity; and Victoria Nikita-Shin, Vice President of the Russian Broadcasting Network. Lyudmila Stebenkova discussed the primary challenges facing Russia’s healthcare system and the initiatives being taken by the Russian government to remedy the problems. She began by stating that healthcare systems in many countries are facing major challenges, and Russia, as well as the United States, is not an exception. In Russia, of all the health-related issues, providing adequate primary care presents the biggest difficulty due to a lack of physicians.
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
Ms. Stebenkova asserted that before other health initiatives can be implemented, primary care must be addressed first.
22
The second problem is the scarcity of high-tech medical facilities in Russia. Since the national priority project on healthcare was launched two years ago, only $400 million has been devoted to establishing such centers. The third issue that Russia’s health care system has to address is the lack of resources in emergency care, specifically the lack of ambulances.
Ludmila Stebenkova (l.) with members of the Russian delegation and MiraMed’s representatives.
According to Ms. Stebenkova, the implementation of the national project has demonstrated some success in beginning to remedy several of Russia’s healthcare problems. In the last two years that the program has been in force, the number of physicians in the Moscow region has increased by 1,500, many laboratories have opened in Moscow and healthcare expenditures have grown from three percent to four percent of GDP. However, analysts believe that in order for a national healthcare program to be successful, at least five percent of GDP must be dedicated to its operation. Russia still needs to make significant strides toward achieving the desired improvement in this area, and Ms. Stebenkova believes that the national project will continue to deliver results and ameliorate the condition of the healthcare system in the Russian Federation. In Russia, adequate healthcare is especially important given the demographic crisis that the country is facing. Healthcare reform includes several components, but Ms. Stebenkova focused the discussion on two aspects that
are being implemented in the regions. The first addresses mother and child care. Ms. Stebenkova explained the system of “birthing certificates” that was introduced in all regions of the Russian Federation in January 2006, which has proven to be successful. All expectant mothers receive such certificates and take them to the hospital where they choose to deliver. This system encourages competition between hospitals and birthing centers, because they receive additional federal funding for each certificate they redeem. The second component of the reform effort focuses on preventive programs. Ms. Stebenkova explained that the City Program on Health Care Development’s “Capital Healthcare” for 2008-2010 was approved in February 2008, and addresses these two and many other issues, including cardiovascular diseases, malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS. Discussing the issue of HIV/AIDS, Ms. Stebenkova stressed that the Moscow government’s approach concentrates on promoting responsible behavior. Preventative measures are similar to the
Ms. Stebenkova noted that the Moscow government does not share Transatlantic Partners Against AIDS’s (TPAA) opinion that harm-reduction programs (including needle exchange and methadone substitution therapy) represent effective strategies to prevent the further spread of HIV/AIDS. Bishop Igor Nikitin continued the presentation on issues facing the Russian health sector and current efforts that are being made by both state and private groups to ameliorate the problems of the general health of the population. As Chairman of the World Christian Council, Mr. Nikitin has been working on three initiatives: Smile of the Child (a children’s educational television channel); the establishment of anti-trafficking and rehabilitation centers; and programs that address HIV/AIDS. Bishop Nikitin’s organization cooperates with faith-based organizations and NGO’s that have a record for achieving positive results in Russia.
Question & Answer Session Will current programs be expanded or will the focus shift towards other health issues, such as genetically modified organisms (GMOs)? Ms. Stebenkova replied that a person’s health is 50 percent a result of their lifestyle and 20 percent a reflection of the health care system — consequently, the Russian government is emphasizing food quality. The members of the Moscow Duma Commission on Healthcare and Protection of Public Health have introduced an amendment to the current legislation to prevent federal expenditure on products containing GMOs. Ms. Stebenkova indicated that she is particularly concerned about the consumption of GMOs in Russia, given that tests have shown negative effects on the reproductive system. She stressed that Russia is in the midst of a demographic crisis, and, therefore, this issue has to be taken seriously. Ms. Stebenkova suggested that Russia and the United States should create an organization to conduct GMO testing. Will there be more systemic transformations of the health care system, and if yes, will the budget be able to cover new expenditures?
Are attempts being made to coordinate the activities of private clinics and insurance companies with the national effort? Private health companies represent only 5 percent of the total healthcare system in countries with socialized care, like Russia, Ms. Stebenkova noted. She added that national healthcare offices closely cooperate with private clinics and companies, since they often have medical equipment that state authorities cannot afford to have in national clinics and hospitals. Nonetheless, as indicated by the numerous complaints to the authorities, the quality of care in private clinics appears to be lower than that in the staterun institutions. Russians are significantly more affected by cardiovascular diseases than by TB or AIDS. Cardiovascular diseases in Russia, which are often caused by smoking, do not require high-tech treatment, but prevention. What kind of steps is the Duma taking to address this issue? Ms. Stebenkova answered that, given the high percentage of young smokers, the Moscow City Duma is currently working on an amendment to ban smoking in public places. Unfortunately, the tobacco lobby is influential, and, as a result, the restrictions on smoking originally proposed in the amendment have been loosened. n
Spring 2008
Ms. Stebenkova reiterated that systemic transformations must begin with primary care as a foundation for all other successful healthcare programs.
In order to encourage more Russians to become physicians, they need to be paid higher salaries, granted better working conditions and a prestigious status in society. She emphasized that 80 percent of Russia’s health issues can be addressed and remedied on the primary care level. Budgetary constraints are also a major impediment to solving such problems. The government wishes to cut taxes, however these reductions greatly reduce funds for national healthcare needs. Ms. Stebenkova affirmed her strong belief in Russia’s need of comprehensive reforms, especially in the insurance sector.
Russia Business Watch
Aleksandr Belov echoed Bishop Nikitin’s statements on the importance of faithbased initiatives in healthcare. He stated that his organization also collaborates with faith-based organizations on various social programs, works with the Russian Broadcasting Network to broadcast children’s and family-friendly shows, operates several rehabilitation centers for both narcotics abuse and HIV infection, and runs social project fairs where the most important plans are showcased to business representatives and expatriates who fund such initiatives.
Victoria Nikita-Shin spoke about the Russian language network that provides internet, satellite and periodicals to 150 million Russians living overseas. Television programs, especially Smile of the Child, promote family and moral values and depict positive family interactions. Ms. Nikita-Shin believes that such programming contributes to promoting mental health and encourages healthy family lifestyles.
activities
ABC (Abstain, Be faithful and Be tested, Condomise) approach introduced in the United States and supported by the U.S. government. In those regions where this approach has been used over the last three years, the HIV infection rate has fallen by six percent. Ms. Stebenkova stressed that the Russian government would like to expand U.S.-Russia cooperation on additional health initiatives.
23
activities
RoaD Show “taKe a CloSeR looK at RUSSia” nn April 21 — 25, 2008
Atlanta, Georgia — April 21, 2008 Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue welcomed RF Senator Mikhail Margelov and U.S.-Russia Business Council President Eugene Lawson to Georgia’s State Capitol to discuss the value of increased commercial relations between the United States and Russia. Noting the marked growth in Russia’s economy — now the world’s eighth largest — and Georgia’s increasing focus on world markets and interest in attracting foreign investment, Governor Perdue suggested that Georgia can and should take advantage of the economic opportunities that increased commercial ties engender.
From left: Jorge Fernandez, Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce; Gene Lawson, USRBC; Tom Mattia, The Coca-Cola Company; Senator Margelov and Randi Levinas, USRBC.
Tom Mattia introduces Senator Margelov at a business luncheon in Atlanta.
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
Memphis, Tennessee — April 22, 2008 On the second day of a tour across the United States to highlight the shared benefits of increased economic and political cooperation between the United States and Russia, Senator Margelov called on the two nations to adopt a “common sense approach” to their interactions. In a speech before the Memphis Regional Chamber of Commerce, Mikhail Margelov posited that the U.S.-Russia relationship would do well to “transform to one of mutual advantage” and that the two countries should work in earnest to “facilitate a systemic and continuous dialogue.” Senator Margelov noted that, the key is to engage in an honest discussion of bilateral issues and irritants before they evolve into problems. He pointed to an inter-parliamentary group of U.S. and Russian Senators — for which he is a co-chair (Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska is the U.S. co-chair) — as a successful example of such an effort.
USRBC President Gene Lawson and Senator Margelov meet with business and government leaders in Memphis.
nn April 21 — 25, 2008
Jackson, Mississippi — April 23, 2008 With a $1 billion investment in a state-of-the-art facility in Mississippi by the Russian company SeverStal as the centerpiece of a discussion regarding the often overlooked aspects of U.S.-Russian cooperation, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour welcomed Senator Margelov and USRBC President Gene Lawson to Jackson, Mississippi. Noting that the Russian investment by SeverCorr in its first phase had already added 450 high-paying new jobs to Mississippi ($88,000 on average compared to the state’s median income of $38,215), Governor Barbour said that Mississippi, “looks forward to a long and thriving relationship with Russia.”
Senator Margelov (l.) and Gene Lawson (r.) meet with Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour (c.).
Senator Margelov (l.), Gene Lawson (r.) and Lieutenant Governor Phil Bryant (c.).
Houston, TX — April 24, 2008 At a luncheon organized by the Houston World Affairs Council and sponsored by U.S. oil major ConocoPhillips, Gene Lawson saluted ConocoPhillips and Russia’s largest private oil company, Lukoil, for setting an excellent example as to how U.S. and Russian businesses can work together for common benefit and profitability.
Seattle, WA — April 25, 2008 Characterizing the opportunities between Washington State and Russia as “immense” before a business community luncheon featuring Senator Margelov and Gene Lawson, Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA) underlined the importance of having Russia as a member of the World Trade Organization.
activities
RoaD Show “taKe a CloSeR looK at RUSSia”
Noting that Microsoft’s fastest growing and most profitable global subsidiary is in Russia, and that Boeing enjoys a cooperative relationship in Russia with the country’s engineering talent and titanium industry, Jim McDermott said he was looking forward to the debate on PNTR and that he was “hopeful” about Jackson-Vanik’s eventual repeal. n Russia Business Watch Spring 2008
Randi Levinas (l.) and Gene Lawson (r.) speak with Sigmund L. Cornelius, ConocoPhillips (c.).
Gene Lawson and Senator Margelov meet with Microsoft executives at their Redmond offices.
sector update
RUSSian M&a: 2007 in Review S. Raymond Tillett is International Counsel at Debevoise & Plimpton LLP. Russian M&A had a banner year in 2007. This article will review what happened in the Russian M&A market during the past year and then look ahead to what is expected for 2008 and beyond, including pending Russian legislation that will rewrite the rules for acquisitions of Russian companies engaged in activities deemed to be of strategic importance to the Russian state. M&A: The Three-Year Record
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
In order to appreciate the significance of M&A activity in 2007, the past year needs to be viewed in the context of the two preceding years.
As Table 1 shows, the continued growth in the volume and value of Russian M&A transactions reached record levels in 2007. In a certain sense, there was nothing new in this. It could be argued that 2005 and 2006 each set new standards for the M&A market. In fact, according to data compiled by Mergermarket, the number of reported deals grew only incrementally in 2007 versus 2006 (from 353 reported transactions in 2006 to 376 reported transactions in 2007). However, when looking at the value of M&A transactions in 2007, the story is dramatically different. According to Mergermarket, in 2007 the volume of reported M&A transactions was $105.31 billion, an amount that more than doubled the reported volumes for 2005 ($42.57 billion) and 2006 ($47.65 billion). In 2005 and 2006, the Russian M&A market had a relatively balanced mix among the various industry segments.
BY S. RAYMOND TILLETT
table 1. volume and number of Deals 2005-2007
120 100
Value ($bn)
80 60
376 deals
40 20
280 deals
353 deals
2005 2006 2007
0
Year
In each of those years, transactions in the consumer, financial and energy and mining sectors accounted for around 60 percent of the total M&A transaction volume. Russian M&A went in a different direction in 2007; indeed, 2007 could be called the “year of the energy deal.” The reorganization of Unified Energy Systems of Russia (RAO UES), the country’s power monopoly, held center stage with the spin-off and privatization of its key assets into some 25 separate companies having a combined value estimated at around $60 billion. The continued sale of the former YUKOS assets generated transactions with an aggregate value of around $20.78 billion. Tables 2 and 3, set forth below, summarize the 2007 M&A split by industry sector value and volume as reported by Mergermarket and illustrate where 2007 was different from the preceding two years, as well
as the substantial increase in the share of the M&A pie commanded by the energy and mining industry segment. 2007’s Largest Transactions Turning to a review of 2007’s largest M&A transactions, the impact of the RAO UES reorganization and the Yukos sell-off becomes even clearer. Table 4 (p.29) summarizes the largest M&A transactions of 2007. Of the 11 individual transactions on the list, the individual spin-offs of certain RAO UES assets plus one of the YUKOS asset sales account for four of 2007’s largest transactions. Deal Flow Trends Consistent with the growing financial strength and operating maturity of the Russian business community, 2007 saw a significant shift in the proportion between outbound and inbound M&A
table 3. industry Sector Split by volume in 2007
Financial - 5%
Financial 11%
Industrial 11% Industrial 17%
energy & Mining 55%
Other - 1% TMT - 3% Chemicals 1%
Other - 6% energy & Mining 63%
Consumer 12%
activity. According to data compiled by KPMG, 70 percent of Russian M&A transactions were outbound and 30 percent were inbound in 2007. KPMG found that this compares to 2006’s ratio of 40 percent outbound to 60 percent inbound. For the Russian inbound market, Western European companies are the dominant players. Outbound activity is more diversified, with Russian companies focusing mainly on acquisitions in the CIS and Western and Eastern Europe. KPMG reports that crossborder activity accounted for 52 percent of Russian M&A in 2007 and is expected to remain high. Legal Developments
Legal rules and restrictions on foreign investment into Russian companies engaged in business activities deemed to have strategic significance is nothing new. This new law, however, is a comprehensive reworking of
Consumer 6%
everything that had come before. It clearly reflects the thinking and policies of the Putin years about the prudence and benefits of controlling strategic industries and resources. At the same time, it is an effort to clarify the rules of the strategic sector M&A game for foreign investors. The law creates the requirement for a multi-layered Russian governmental review and approval of transactions that would result in the acquisition of “control” over a Russian company engaged in an activity of strategic importance to Russian national security. One form of “control” is the acquisition by a foreign company (directly or through Russian or other intermediaries) of either 50 percent or more of the share capital of a Russian company engaged in strategic activities or 10 percent or more of the share capital of a Russian company holding a license to develop certain oil, gas, metal, and mineral deposits. Where the foreign company is owned or controlled in whole or in part by a foreign government, the thresholds drop to 25 percent and 5 percent, respectively. The law, however, uses the “control” concept to go beyond a simple purchase and sale of shares to
Spring 2008
In 2006, Russia amended its jointstock company act to introduce a comprehensive set of takeover laws. With these amendments in place, any purchaser who, after making an acquisition, holds more than 30 percent, 50 percent or 70 percent of the shares in a Russian open jointstock company is obligated to make
More significantly, on April 2, 2008, the State Duma adopted the law “On Procedures for Foreign Investment in Russian Commercial Entities of Strategic Importance for the National Security of the Russian Federation.” At the time this article was written, the law was waiting for the signature of Russia’s President to become effective. [Ed.’s note: the Strategic Sectors Law went into effect on May 7, 2008.]
Chemicals 4%
Russia Business Watch
Two recent developments in Russian law are worth noting for their impact on M&A transactions.
a “buy-out” offer to the remaining shareholders. The “buy-out” price is determined by mandatory guidelines, which use a share trading price formula (higher of six-month average trading price or highest price paid by an acquirer during the same sixmonth period) for public companies and fair market value as determined by an independent appraiser for private companies. The new law also provides for the possibility for minority “squeezeouts” once a 95 percent ownership threshold is reached.
TMT - 5%
sector update
table 2. industry Sector Split by value in 2007
sector update Spring 2008 Russia Business Watch
28
reach transactions and arrangements (such as designated or controlled board seats and CEO and other key executive appointment rights) where the foreign company (either directly or through Russian or other intermediaries) can be said to determine those decisions of the company that have strategic importance. The law also significantly expands the list of “strategic” sectors from 25 to 42 separate areas. As expected, Russian companies operating in the defense, cryptographic, aviation, aerospace, and nuclear industries; the production and sale of metals and alloys used in defense-related industries and the production of goods and the supply of services related to “natural monopolies” under Russian law (such as power and other utilities, railways, seaports and airports, and oil and gas pipelines) are included in the law’s list of “strategic sectors.” However, the list of strategic sectors includes many other activities, such as television, radio, dominant entities in communications, printing and publishing, major fixed-line telecom providers, fishing, the development of the Russian continental shelf, and the surveying, exploration and development of strategic oil, gas, metal, and mineral deposits. The new law on investment into strategic industries is clearly a major development on the Russian M&A landscape. Exactly what its longer term impact will be remains to be seen. Market Outlook Looking ahead, the Russian M&A market will continue to see domestic consolidation and restructurings (sometimes market-driven and, in certain key strategic industries and sectors, driven by politics) and active crossborder investments, both inbound and outbound. Significant interest
from foreign players looking to enter the market via acquisitions or joint ventures, ambitious domestic players seeking growth opportunities and geographic expansion, the continuing drive to restructure certain domestic industry areas (whether out of need or due to political will) and last, but not least, the continuing dynamic growth and expansion of the Russian economy will be the drivers for M&A activity. Natural resources, consumer industries and finance — traditional staples of Russian M&A — are likely to remain an M&A focus. In addition, mid-market M&A deals have gained pace over the last two years. This rapidly developing market segment includes media, construction and real estate, transportation, and logistics and energy. In other sectors, such as utilities, retail, telecoms and industrial enterprises, transaction levels are, in the view of most commentators, likely to remain largely in line with the levels for those sectors seen in Europe generally. Analysts have suggested that, at this time, regional banks in Russia are particularly attractive M&A targets for international bidders. For international banks and other financial organizations, the real attraction of the independent Russian regional banks is, initially, as a way to enter the Russian market with an experienced local partner and then as a platform to expand across the whole of Russia. Higher levels of banking industry competence and better regulation across the whole Russian banking sector have increased the attractiveness of this investment opportunity. As noted above, at this time the new law on foreign investments into Russian companies whose activities are strategically significant to Russia’s national security interests is a large “X” factor. The new law’s expanded
scope will sweep in many more M&A transactions, with the consequent need for Russian governmental review and approval. Time will tell whether this new law will simply add to the required steps needed to complete a Russian M&A transaction (and, in return, even give foreign investors a measure of protection once their acquisitions are approved) or proves to have been a locking of the door to certain sectors of the Russian economy for foreign investors. Will future M&A activity be affected by the current global credit difficulties? Without a doubt. Russia’s full integration with international markets means some impact from the credit crisis is unavoidable. As compared to the sharp decline in M&A activities currently being felt in other parts of the world, countervailing factors at work in Russia should make the impact much less severe. Russian M&A has not been dependent upon highly leveraged transactions fueled by debt. Many Russian M&A transactions will, at least for the near future, be driven by the basic need or political drive to restructure whole business areas and industries. In the first half of 2007, IPO offerings by Russian companies represented a staggering 20 percent of global IPOs. Future Russian M&A deals will be fueled by the on-going Russian IPO explosion, which should lead to consolidations within a number of business sectors. For the large Russian business organizations flush with cash and looking to expand their operations outside of Russia, the credit crisis and its fall-out will, in fact, present these businesses with any number of interesting acquisition opportunities. The author would like to acknowledge the assistance of Gabrielle Lynam-Smith of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP Marketing Department in London and Ekaterina Mironchuk of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP in Moscow. n
Bidder
Detail
RAO UES
$60bn (approx)
RAO UES was reorganized and sold off as separate companies. Transactions included: OGK-3 acquired by Norilsk Nickel; OGK-4 by E.ON; OGK-5 by Enel; OGK-6 by Gazprom; TGK-1 by Russian Energy Products Co; TGK-8 by IFD Capital; TGK-9 by IES.
Yukos
$20.78bn
The sale of Yukos assets continued and they were sold off in several separate transactions. Acquirers included Neft Activ; Unitex; Promregion Holding; Monte-Valle; and EniNeftegaz.Neft Activ; Unitex; Promregion Holding; Monte-Valle; and EniNeftegaz.
UC RUSAL
Norilsk Nickel
$12.63bn
United Company RUSAL acquired 25 percent and one share interest in Norilsk Nickel from Onexim Group, the Russian private investment fund.
Gazprom
Sakhalin Energy Investment Co Ltd
$7.45bn
Gazprom acquired a 50 percent stake in Sakhalin from Mitsubishi Corp and Royal Dutch Shell.
E.ON
OGK-4
$5.9bn
E.ON, Germany’s largest energy company, acquired a controlling stake in OGK-4 through a public tender process.
EniNeftegaz
Gazprom Neft (29 percent stake); Arctic Gas Co; Urengoil Inc; and Neftegaztechnologia
$5.83bn
EniNeftegaz, the Italian energy company (60 percent owned by Eni Spa and 40 percent owned by Enel Spa), acquired the energy companies from Yukos.
Norilsk Nickel
LionOre Mining International Ltd
$5.15bn
Norilsk acquired Canadian metals and mining company LionOre.
VimpelCom
Golden Telecom
$4.2bn
VimpelCom, Russia’s second-largest mobile operator, acquired Golden Telecom, Russia’s largest business telecoms company.
Norilsk Nickel
OGK-3
$3.71bn
Norilsk acquired a 37.5 percent stake in OGK-3, the listed Russian energy company.
Gazprom Neft Finance
Tomskneft
$3.7bn
Gazprom Neft, the listed Russian oil distributor, through its subsidiary Gazprom Neft Finance, acquired a 50 percent stake in Tomskneft, the oil unit of Rosneft, from Neft Aktiv.
Gazprom
Beltransgaz
$2.5bn
Gazprom acquired a 50 percent stake in Beltransgaz, the Belarusian operator of gas pipelines, from the Government of Belarus.
Mechel-Invest Ltd
Yakutugol Company and Elgaugol JSC (both Russian coal mining companies)
$2.32bn
Mechel-Invest, a Russian investment holding company owned by the mining and steel group Mechel, acquired a 75 percent stake in Yakutugol and a 68.86 percent stake in Elgaugol, from the Russian Federal Property Fund.
Enel Investment Holding BV
OGK-5
$1.51bn
A Netherlands-based subsidiary of Italian energy company Enel SpA, won the auction to acquire a 25.03 percent stake in OGK-5, the listed Russian producer of electric and thermal power, from RAO UES.
Spring 2008
Value
Russia Business Watch
Target
sector update
Table 4: Largest M&A Transactions in 2007
29
sector update
СЛИЯНИЯ И ПОГЛОЩЕНИЯ В РОССИИ: ОБЗОР ЗА 2007 ГОД С. Реймонд Тиллетт, юрисконсульт по международным вопросам, «Debevoise & Plimpton LLP». Для индустрии слияний и поглощений 2007 год в России прошел отлично. В этой статье будет рассмотрено, что произошло на российском рынке слияний и поглощений в течение прошлого года, а также чего мы ожидаем в 2008 и далее, принимая во внимание скорое принятие нового российского законодательства, которое перепишет заново правила, связанные с приобретением российских компаний, деятельность которых считается имеющей стратегическое значение для российского государства. Слияния и поглощения: что произошло за последние три года
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
Чтобы полностью оценить значимость 2007 года для слияний и поглощений, следует рассмотреть его в сравнении с предшествующими двумя годами.
30
Как показано на приведенной выше диаграмме (см. Рисунок 1), в 2007 г. продолжающийся рост объема и цены сделок по слияниям и поглощениям в России достигли рекордных уровней. В каком-то смысле в этом не было ничего нового. И 2005, и 2006 г.г. установили новые ориентиры для слияний и поглощений в России. Действительно, по данным, составленным компанией «Mergermarket», число зарегистрированных сделок в 2007 г. по сравнению с 2006 г. выросло лишь незначительно (с 353 зарегистрированных сделок в 2006 г. до 376 зарегистрированных сделок в 2007 г.). Ситуация существенно отличается, если рассматривать цену
С. РейМОНд ТИллеТТ
Рисунок 1. Объем и число сделок в 2005-2007 гг.
120 100
Цена (млрд. долл. США)
80 60
376 сделок
40 20
353 280 сделки сделок
2005 2006 2007
0
Год
сделок по слияниям и поглощениям в прошлом году. По данным компании «Mergermarket», в 2007 г. объем зарегистрированных сделок по слияниям и поглощениям составил $105,31 млрд. — эта сумма более чем в два раза превысила суммарный объем за 2005 г. ($42,57 млрд.) и 2006 г. ($47,65 млрд.). В 2005 и 2006 г.г., структура российского рынка слияний и поглощений была сравнительно сбалансирована по отношению к различным отраслевым секторам. В оба этих года, на сделки в потребительском, финансовом, энергетическом и горнодобывающем секторах приходилось около 60% всего объема слияний и поглощений. В 2007 г. российский рынок слияний и поглощений начал развиваться в другом направлении. Действительно, 2007 г. можно назвать годом сделок в области энергетики. Реорганизация
энергетической монополии страны, РАО «ЕЭС России», при этом занимала ключевое место с выделением из нее ряда компаний и приватизацией ее основных активов, приведшим к созданию 25 отдельных компаний с общей стоимостью активов оцениваемой приблизительно в $60 млрд. Продолжающаяся распродажа активов бывшего «ЮКОСА» привела к заключению сделок общей стоимостью приблизительно в $20,78 млрд. Приведенные ниже секторные диаграммы (см. Рисунки 2 и 3, стр. 31), которые суммируют слияния и поглощения в 2007 г. по их цене и объему в отдельных секторах в соответствии с данными компании «Mergermarket», демонстрируют отличие 2007 г. от предшествующих двух лет и значительный рост доли сектора слияний и поглощений в энергетическом и горнодобывающем сегменте рынка.
Рисунк 3. Доли отраслевых секторов в объемном выражении, 2007 г.
финансовый сектор 11%
финансовый сектор 5% промышленность - 11%
промышленность -17% другие - 1%
энергетика и горнодобыча 55%
технологии СМИ, телеком 3%
другие - 6% энергетика и горнодобыча 63%
химия - 1% потребительский сектор - 12%
Самые крупные сделки 2007 года
Правовые вопросы
В связи с растущей финансовой стабильностью и зрелостью российского делового сообщества, в 2007 г. наметились значительные изменения в соотношении между сделками в области слияний и поглощений, направленными в Россию и направленными из России. По данным компании KPMG, в 2007 г. 70% российских сделок в области слияний и поглощений были за рубежом и 30% в России. KPMG определила, что эти данные можно сравнить с данными 2006 г., когда этот коэффи-
Следует отметить два недавних события в российском законодательстве в связи с их влиянием на сделки по слияниям и поглощениям. В 2006 г. Россия изменила свое законодательство об акционерных обществах путем введения в него обширного круга законов о поглощениях. В соответствии с этими поправками, любой покупатель, который после приобретения акций получает более 30%, 50% или 70% акций в открытом акционерном обществе, должен
сделать предложение выкупить акции остальных акционеров. Цена такого выкупа акций определяется обязательными к исполнению правилами, в основу которых положена формула, основывающаяся на рыночном курсе акций (более высокая из двух величин — средней цены акций по курсу за последние шесть месяцев или самой высокой цены, заплаченной покупателем акций в течение того же шестимесячного периода) для открытых акционерных компаний и на стоимости в текущих ценах для частных компаний. Новое законодательство также предусматривает возможность «вытеснения» миноритарных акционеров по получении 95%-ой доли в компании. Еще более важным событием являлось принятие Государственной Думой 2 апреля 2008 г. закона «О порядке осуществления иностранных инвестиций в хозяйственные общества, имеющие стратегическое значение для обеспечения обороны страны и безопасности государства». На момент написания этой статьи, этот закон ждал подписания президентом Российской Федерации чтобы вступить в силу. [Редакция RBW: Закон вступил в силу 7 мая 2008 года.]
Spring 2008
Направления тенденций сделок
химия - 4% потребительский сектор - 6%
Russia Business Watch
При рассмотрении крупнейших сделок по слияниям и поглощениям в 2007 г., влияние реорганизации РАО «ЕЭС России» и распродажи «ЮКОСа» становится еще более очевидным. Ниже приведена таблица (см. Рисунок 4, стр. 33), суммирующая крупнейшие сделки по слияниям и поглощениям 2007 года. Из перечисленных 11 сделок, выделение некоторых отдельных активов РАО «ЕЭС России» плюс одна сделка по продаже активов «ЮКОСа» являются четырьмя крупнейшими сделками 2007 года.
циент показывал соотношение 40% сделок за рубежом и 60% сделок в России. На рынке сделок с капиталовложениями в России доминирующими игроками являются западноевропейские компании. Сделки, за рубежом, более диверсифицированы — приобретения российскими компаниями в основном сосредоточены в странах СНГ, а также в Западной и Восточной Европе. По данными KPMG, трансграничные сделки в 2007 г. составляли 52% российских сделок по слияниям и поглощениям и ожидается, что этот показатель будет продолжать оставаться высоким.
технологии СМИ, телеком 5%
sector update
Рисунк 2. Доли отраслевых секторов в ценовом выражении, 2007 г.
3
sector update Spring 2008 Russia Business Watch
32
Нет ничего нового в юридическом регулировании и правовом ограничении иностранных инвестиций в российские компании, имеющими стратегическое значение. Однако этот новый закон представляет собой всесторонний пересмотр всего предшествующего законодательства. Он четко отражает мышление и политику периода руководства государства Путиным относительно целесообразности и пользы осуществления контроля над стратегическими отраслями и ресурсами. В то же время, этот закон представляет собой попытку четко определить правила игры, связанной со слияниями и поглощениями в стратегическом секторе, для иностранного инвестора. Закон налагает требование многоуровневого рассмотрения и согласования с Российским Правительством сделок, которые приведут к установлению «контроля» над российской компанией, работа которой имеет стратегическое значение для национальной безопасности России. Одной из форм такого «контроля» является приобретение иностранной компанией (напрямую или через российских или иных посредников) 50% или более акций в уставном капитале российской компании, представляющей стратегическое значение, или 10% или более акций в уставном капитале российской компании, имеющей лицензию на разработку определенных месторождений нефти, газа, металлов и минеральных ресурсов. В случаях, если иностранная компания полностью или частично принадлежит или контролируется иностранным государством, эта отметка опускается до 25% и 5% соответственно. Однако закон применяет концепцию «контроля» к более широкому диапазону вопросов, чем простое приобретение и продажа акций. Эта концепция также относится к заключению сделок или договоренностей (таких как назначения или контроль мест в совете директоров, а также права назначать Главного исполнительного
директора и лиц на занятие других основных должностей), при которых иностранная компания (либо напрямую, либо через российских или других посредников) может оказаться в положении, позволяющем ей определять решения, принимаемые компанией, имеющей стратегическое значение. Закон также значительно расширяет перечень «стратегически значимых» секторов и увеличивает их число от 25 до 42 отдельных областей. Как и ожидалось, российские компании, работающие в области обороны, криптографии, авиации, аэрокосмической и ядерной отраслях, производстве и продаже металлов и их сплавов, используемых в отраслях, связанных с обороной, а также производстве товаров и предоставлении услуг, связанных, в соответствии с российским законодательством, с «естественными монополиями» (такими как электроэнергетика и другие коммунальные сферы, железные дороги, морские порты и аэропорты, а также нефте- и газопроводы) включены законом в перечень «стратегически значимых» секторов. Однако этот перечень «стратегически значимых» секторов включает много других видов деятельности, таких как телевизионное и радиовещание, предоставление на рынке услуг субъектами, занимающими доминирующее положение в области связи, полиграфической и издательской деятельности, работу доминирующих компаний на рынке услуг фиксированной телефонной связи, рыболовство, изыскание и освоение запасов континентального шельфа, разведку и разработку стратегических запасов нефти, газа, металлов и минеральных ресурсов. Очевидно, что принятие нового закона об иностранных инвестициях в стратегически значимые отрасли является крупнейшим событием в области слияний и поглощений в России. Каким конкретно будет его долго-
срочное влияние остается вопросом будущего. Перспектива развития рынка В будущем на российском рынке слияний и поглощений ожидается продолжение внутренней консолидации и реорганизации (иногда в ответ на рыночные условия и, в определенных основных стратегических отраслях и секторах, в результате политических решений) и трансграничных инвестиций, как направленных в Россию, так и за ее пределы. Значительный интерес иностранных игроков, желающих вхождения на рынок посредством приобретения или создания совместных предприятий, энергичные местные игроки, ищущие возможности для развития и географической экспансии, а также продолжающееся поступательное движение в области реорганизации отдельных отечественных отраслей (исходя из потребностей или по политической воле), и также, что не менее важно, продолжающийся динамический рост и развитие российской экономики будут выступать в качестве движущих сил в области слияний и поглощений. Природные ресурсы, производство товаров потребления и финансовый сектор, традиционные сферы слияний и поглощений в России, скорее всего, будут оставаться в центре внимания. Помимо этого, за последние два года сделки в среднем сегменте рынка в области слияний и поглощений также набрали обороты. Этот быстро развивающийся сегмент рынка включает средства массовой информации, строительство и недвижимость, транспорт, а также логистику и энергетику. В других секторах, таких как коммунальный, розничная торговля, телекоммуникации и промышленные предприятия, уровни сделок, по мнению большинства обозревателей, в основном, вероятно останутся на
Экспертами отмечалось, что в настоящее время региональные российские банки являются особенно привлекательными целями слияний и поглощений для иностранных покупателей. Особенная привлекательность российских независимых региональных банков для иностранных банков и других финансовых организаций первоначально состоит в возможности вхождения на российский рынок с опытным местным партнером, а в последствии в получении платформы для расширения по всей России. Повышение уровня компетенции и улучшение процесса регулирования во всем банковском секторе России привели к росту привлекательности этой области для инвестиций. Как отмечалось выше, на сегодня ожидаемое принятие нового закона об иностранных инвестициях в российские компании, деятельность которых имеет стратегическое значение для интересов национальной безопасности России, является серьезным «неизвестным фактором». Расширение области применения этого закона окажет влияние на многие сделки по слияниям и поглощени-
ям, которые ранее не подпадали под регулирование таким законодательством и приведет к необходимости их рассмотрения и утверждения Российским Правительством. Время покажет, просто увеличит ли этот закон число дополнительных этапов, которые нужно пройти для совершения сделки по слияниям и поглощениям в России (и, в свою очередь, такое утверждение сделки возможно даже предоставит дополнительный уровень защиты для иностранного инвестора) или сыграет для иностранных инвесторов роль замка на дверях к определенным секторам российской экономики. Окажут ли влияние на будущее сделок по слияниям и поглощениям проблемы с кредитом, которые сегодня переживает весь мир? Без сомнения. Полная интеграция России в международный рынок означает, что ей не удастся избежать каких-то последствий кредитного кризиса. По сравнению с резким снижением уровня сделок в области слияний и поглощений, который ощущается в других частях мира, противодействующие факторы, имеющие место в России, должны сделать такие последствия гораздо менее значительными. Слияния и поглощения на российском рынке не находились
в зависимости от сделок с высокой долей заимствований, подогреваемых долгами. Многие сделки по слияниям и поглощениям в России будут, по крайней мере, в ближайшем будущем, исходить из реальных потребностей или политической воли реорганизовать целые сферы и отрасли. В первой половине 2007 г. предложения по IPO российских компаний поразительным образом представляли собой 20% всех мировых IPO. Будущие сделки по слияниям и поглощениям в России будут «подогреваться» продолжающимся взрывным развитием IPO, что должно привести к консолидации в целом ряде секторов экономики. Для крупных российских бизнесов, имеющих внушительные объемы наличных средств и желание распространить свою деятельность за пределы России, кредитный кризис и его последствия фактически предоставят целый ряд интересных возможностей для вложения их капитала.
sector update
таком же уровне, который характерен для них в Европе в целом.
Автор хотел бы поблагодарить за помощь в работе над статьей Габриэл Линам-Смит, сотрудника Лондонского отдела маркетинга компании «Debevoise & Plimpton LLP» и Екатерину Мирончук, сотрудника компании «Debevoise & Plimpton » LLP в Москве. n
Рисунок 4. Крупнейшие сделки по слияниям и поглощениям в 2007 г. Покупатель
Объект
$60 млрд. (прибл.)
Компания РАО «ЕЭС России» была реорганизована и распродана в качестве отдельных компаний. Сделки включали следующие: ОГК-3 куплена «Норильским Никелем»; ОГК-4 куплена компанией «E.ОN»; ОГК-5 куплена компанией «ЭНЕЛ»; ОГК-6 куплена «Газпромом»; ТГК-1 куплена компанией «Русские энергетические продукты»; ТГК-8 куплена ИФД «КапиталЪ»; ТГК-9 куплена компанией «ЭНЕЛ».
$20,78 млрд.
Продолжалась распродажа активов «ЮКОСа», и они были проданы посредством нескольких отдельных сделок. Среди покупателей: ООО «Нефть-Актив»; ООО «Юнитекс»; ЗАО «Промрегион Холдинг»; ООО «МонтеВалле» и ООО «ЭниНефтегаз».
Spring 2008
«ЮКОС»
Подробности Russia Business Watch
РАО «ЕЭС России»
Цена
33
Покупатель
Объект
Цена
Подробности
«РУСАЛ»
«Норильский Никель»
$12,63 млрд.
Объединенная компания «Российский алюминий» (РУСАЛ) приобрел 25% плюс одну акцию в «Норильском Никеле» у группы «ОНЕКСИМ» — российского частного инвестиционного фонда.
ОАО «Газпром»
Сахалинская энергетическая инвестиционная компания (СЭИК)
$7,45 млрд.
«Газпром» купил 50 процентную долю в Сахалине у «Mitsubishi Corp» и «Royal Dutch Shell».
«E.ОN»
ОГК-4
$5,9 млрд.
«E.ОN», крупнейшая германская энергетическая компания, приобрела контрольный пакет в ОГК-4 в результате открытого аукциона.
ООО «ЭниНефтегаз»
ОАО «Газпром нефть» (29% доля); ОАО «Арктическая газовая компания»; ЗАО «Уренгойл Инк.» и ОАО «Нефтегазтехнология»
$5,83 млрд.
«ЭниНефтегаз», итальянская энергетическая компания (60% принадлежит «Eni Spa»и 40% принадлежит «Enel Spa»), приобрела энергетические компании у «ЮКОСа».
ГМК «Норильский никель»
«LionOre Mining International Ltd»
$5,15 млрд.
Норникель приобрел канадскую горнометаллургическую компанию «LionOre».
ОАО «ВымпелКом»
«Golden Telecom»
$4,2 млрд.
«ВымпелКом», второй по величине российский оператор мобильной связи, приобрел «Golden Telecom», крупнейшего российского оператора связи для бизнессов.
ГМК «Норильский никель»
ОГК-3
$3,71 млрд.
«Норникель» приобрел 37,5% акций в ОГК-3, зарегистрированной на бирже российской энергетической компании.
«Газпром нефть финанс»
ОАО «Томскнефть»
$3,7 млрд.
«Газпром нефть», зарегистрированный на бирже российский дистрибутор, через дочернюю компанию «Газпром нефть финанс», приобрел 50% акций в «Томскнефти», нефтяном подразделении «Роснефти», у компании «Нефть Актив».
ОАО «Газпром»
ОАО «Белтрансгаз»
$2,5 млрд.
«Газпром» купил 50% акций в «Белтрансгазе», белорусском газотранспортном предприятии, у правительства Беларуси.
ООО «Мечел-Инвест»
Российские угледобывающие компании — ОАО ХК «Якутуголь» и ОАО «Эльгауголь»
$2,32 млрд.
«Мечел-Инвест», российская инвестиционная холдинг компания, входящая в состав металлургической и горнодобывающей компании ОАО «Мечел», купила 75% акций в «Якутуголь» и 68,86% акций в «Эльгауголь», у Российского фонда федеральной собственности.
$1,51 млрд.
Нидерландская дочерняя компания итальянской энергетической компании «Enel SpA», выиграла аукцион на покупку 25,03%акций в ОГК-5, зарегистрированном на бирже российском производителе гидро- и электроэнергии, у РАО «ЕЭС России».
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
sector update
Рисунок 4. Крупнейшие сделки по слияниям и поглощениям в 2007 г. (продолжение)
34
ЗАО «ЭНЕЛ Инвестмент Холдинг Б.В.»
ОГК-5
by Almira Yusupova and Oleg Kiselev
Almira Yusupova is Doctor of Economic Sciences at the Institute of Economy and Manufacturing Organization of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Oleg Kiselev is CEO of Novosibirsk Leasing Company. History The boundaries of the Novosibirsk region were set in 1944, and the region received the status of Russian Federation subject in 1993. The region capital city is Novosibirsk, which was founded over 100 years ago after the construction of a railroad bridge across the Ob’ River in that area. During most of the 20th century, Novosibirsk region was one of the most dynamic and developed regions in Russia. Throughout the Soviet period, the energy sector, machine building, metallurgy, construction, and chemical industries in the region were intensively developed. During World War II, a large number of Russian industrial facilities were relocated to the region and continued to manufacture planes, armaments and ammunition for the war effort. The region underwent considerable changes in the 1960s, due mostly to the founding of the research center and the construction of the famous Akademgorodok (Academic City), where scientists conducted basic and applied research in many scientific fields.
regional profile
Novosibirsk Oblast
Ordzhonikidze Street, Novosibirsk
In the mid-1980s, five sectors — defense, research and education, civil machine building, agriculture, and transportation infrastructure — served as the foundation of the city’s economy. At that time, in terms of economic potential, the region was among the top 10 Russian regions and enjoyed a diversified economy, a strong research base and developed agriculture. However, the region’s potential was underutilized and started to deteriorate during the market reform period of the 1990s. In 1994, the Novosibirsk region produced 90 percent of the average Russian gross regional product (GRP) per capita; in 1996 the number fell to 87 percent, and by 2002 it was 75 percent. The greatest decline came in the
Table 1: Position of the Novosibirsk region in the Russian Federation’s economy, 2006
117.8
1%
Population as of January 1, 2007, thousand people
2,640.7
1.9%
Average annual employment in the economy, thousand people
1,221.7
1.8%
GRP, million rubles
240.8
1.3%
Capital assets, billion rubles
595.6
1.56%
Processing companies’ output, billion rubles
111.1
1.1%
Production of energy, gas, and water, billion rubles
40.2
2.2%
Agricultural production output, billion rubles
34.5
2.1%
Capital assets investments, billion rubles
47.1
1%
Retail volume, billion rubles
176.6
2%
Area, thousand sq. km.
Novosibirsk Today Over the past several years, the Novosibirsk region has had successes in its economic and social development: manufacturing, services and retail growth rates have gone up and the population’s real incomes have increased; investments in the economy have expanded; the financial indicators of enterprises and organizations have improved, leading to higher income for the region; and the region has started to acquire new technology and to manufacture competitive, quality goods. (See Table 1)
Spring 2008
The region’s share in Russia
As a result of the decline in machine building, the economic focus of the Novosibirsk region changed drastically; it evolved from a strong Russian industrial center into a region that provides financial services and assists in interregional trade. It also strengthened its position as a central transportation hub. Not surprisingly, the share of services in GRP has grown from 40 percent in 1995 to 60 percent in 2005.
Russia Business Watch
Novosibirsk region
Indicator
machine building industry, which formed the base for high-tech manufacturing, instrument manufactuing, electronics, and microelectronics. By the mid-1990s, the Novosibirsk region was classified as an “economically depressed” region.
35
regional profile Spring 2008 Russia Business Watch
36
The region holds a leading position in some areas of regional economic growth. Novosibirsk ranks in the top five of Russian regions in the number of organizations involved in research and development, the number of people employed in this industry and the number of small enterprises. The region ranks among the top 10 Russian regions in number of individuals with higher education per 10,000 people; total production of grain and meat; retail volume and services provided per capita; and volume of cargo and the number Rock City Club, Novosibirsk of passengers transported by trains and The quality of development in Novosiplanes. birsk region has changed as well. StartIt is noteworthy that small businesses ing in 2001, the average rates of GRP play an important role in the region’s and industrial growth have exceeded the economy. The total number of small average for Russia by 30 percent, and the businesses has grown ten-fold since 1991 Novosibirsk region’s position in the Sito 25,560 in 2006. The mix of sectors berian Federal District has improved. where small businesses operate has also (See Table 2) changed considerably. In the early 1990s, small businesses were concentrated in Positive growth trends include the inmanufacturing, construction, science, and creased effectiveness of innovation research-related services. In 2006, over policy, stable and positive dynamics of half of all small businesses were engaged living standards (which are approaching in retail and wholesale activities. The the average for the country), and Novosibirsk region ranks sixth in Russia construction growth rates comparable to those in Moscow, St. Petersburg and in the number of small businesses. Tatarstan. Novosibirsk ranks among the top 10 key Russian regions and is the leader in However, the region ranks only in the the Siberian Federal District in terms of middle of all Russian regions based on banking services saturation. The region the main living standards indicators. A is the Siberian leader in the development considerable part of the region’s manuof IT companies: it ranks third in the facturing base is worn out and obsolete. Russian information and communication In 2006, the volume of capital asset intechnologies market based on 2004-05 vestments per capita was half of the average for the country. The region data. ranks in the middle of Russian regions in Table 2: Growth of main economic indicators from 1999 – 2006, % Growth in Novosibirsk oblast
Growth in the Russian Federation
Gross regional product
84
55
Manufacturing output
75
54
Agricultural output
29
28
Retail volume
171
103
Investments
214
108
Real disposable incomes
134
111
Indicator
terms of innovative activity and foreign economic activity. Some of the indicators of economic and social development in the region are lagging: there are a high number of people who live below the poverty level, the integrated level of regional relative creditworthiness is low, and the region lacks a sufficient number of paved roads. Development prospects The standard SWOT analysis performed to evaluate the competitiveness and special characteristics of the Novosibirsk region can easily identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and potential outside threats for Novosibirsk. The strengths include the following: • Unique research and education opportunities; • Favorable geographic location; • Developed human capital; • High and stable recent growth rates; • Diversified economy; • Clear official status of the region; • Developed legal and regulatory framework related to main economic sectors; The weaknesses include the following: • Lack of mineral resources; • Low openness to innovation; • Development imbalances between different parts of the Novosibirsk region;
Decreasing population; General condition of roads and utilities infrastructure; Worn out capital assets;
Most of the development opportunities are related to the following: • Achievement of synergy in the utilization of growth potential; • Development of interregional and international cooperation and integration; • Utilization of the status of the Federal District capital; Possible outside threats include: • Increased interregional competition for mobile resources (human and financial); • Insufficient federal support for large infrastructure projects; • Increased international competition for skilled employees; • Uncontrolled migration; • Changing priorities that guide state support; To summarize the SWOT-analysis results, we would like to underscore that the Novosibirsk region has three major competitive advantages: 1. A unique, even for the rest of the
world, research and education potential due to the concentration of the research institutions of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences and the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, as well as sectoral and university research capabilities, a network of universities, and a highly educated population in general. 2. A favorable geographical location: the region is located in the center of Russia at the intersection of important transportation networks; the status of Novosibirsk as the regional “capital city,” and the special role of the region in Russia’s federal structure. 3. A diversified economy, which includes manufacturing, agriculture, construction, and transportation. Investment plays a special role in the utilization of growth potential in any region. An analysis of existing investment offers proves that, so far, large Russian and foreign investors do not view the Novosibirsk region as a priority region for sizeable investment projects and programs. According to the information received from the Novosibirsk region administration, it views a total of 77 projects (24 of them
in manufacturing and 42 of them in services) as important development priorities. The implementation of these projects will require an investment of 443 billion rubles (USRBC: $18.46 billion) with over 45 percent of this amount to be used for the manufacturing sector. This makes the Novosibirsk region investment structure different from that of other regions within the Siberian Federal District, which place priorities with the raw materials sector. See Table 3 for a listing of the most important projects. The Novosibirsk region, as well as most other Russian regions, has developed a “Strategy for Social and Economic Development until the year 2025.” This document reflects all unique characteristics of the region and is also connected to the “Strategy for the Social and Economic Development of Siberia” and backed by the “Strategic Development Plan for the City of Novosibirsk,” as well as municipal development programs. n
regional profile
• • •
Sources: Novosibirsk Region Administration (www3.adm.nso.ru); Territorial Authority of the Federal State Statistics Service for Novosibirsk Region; and A.A. Kiselnikov and I.V. Scherbak, “Novosibirsk Region: Main Stages of Development”, Region: Ekonomika i Sotsiologia, No.3, 2007.
Table 3: The largest investment projects in the Novosibirsk region Project Industrial technical park “Akademgorodok”
Investment, billion rubles
Product
End of construction before 2015
Industrial logistics park
60
62 billion rub in goods before 2015
before 2015
International airport hub
31.9
5.5 million passengers, 300 tons of air cargo
before 2015
Renovation of the concrete plant OAO “Iskitimtsement”
4.1
1.3 million tons of cement
before 2010
5.95-11.9 billion Kilowatt/hour
before 2015
Construction of new heating plants
31.6-63.2
Development of the OAO “Sibirenergo”
18.9
20436 thousand Gcal of heat; 13.4 Kilowatt/hour
before 2015
Metal plant
14.8
1.9 million tons of rolled metal
before 2015
80-90 billion rub in goods by 2025
before 2025
Anthracite extraction volume 6 million tons
before 2012
Enterprises of energy and electric energy clusters Development of anthracite coal deposits, construction of enrichment plants within the OAO “Sibantratsit”
64-72 8.3
Spring 2008
30 billion rub in goods before 2015
Russia Business Watch
18.9
37
regional profile Spring 2008 Russia Business Watch
38
Новосибирская область
Альмира Юсупова и Олег Киселёв
Альмира Юсупова, доктор экономических
наук, Институт экономики и организации промышленного производства, Сибирское Отделение Российской Академии Наук. Олег Киселёв, СEO, «Новосибирская лизинговая компания». История развития . Границы Новосибирской области территориально обозначились в 1944 году, в 1993 она получила статус субъекта Федерации. Центральное место в области занимает город Новосибирск, которого связано с соорусоздание жением железнодорожного моста через Обь более 100 лет назад. Новосибирская область была одним из наиболее динамично развивающихся регионов России на протяжении большей части ХХ века. В советский период в регионе активно формировалась энергетическая база, машиностроение, металлообработка, строительная индустрия, металлургия, химия. В годы второй мировой войны Новосибирск был центром размещения эвакуированных предприятий, здесь развивалось производство самолетов, некоторых видов вооружений и боеприпасов. Крупные преобразования начались в 1960-е, и были связаны прежде всего с развитием научного центра, строительством всемирно известного Академгородка, в котором велись фундаментальные и прикладные исследования во многих областях науки. В середине 1980-х годов основу экономики области составляли пять отраслей: оборонный комплекс, научно-образовательный комплекс, гражданское машиностроение, аграрно-промышленный комплекс, транспортная инфраструктура. В этот период по комплексной оценке экономического потенциала Новосибирская область была в
Новосибирский Государственный Академический Театр Оперы и Балета
первой десятке регионов РСФСР и имела имидж региона с прогрессивной структурой хозяйства, с сильным научно-образовательным потенциалом и с интенсивным сельским хозяйством. В период рыночных реформ высокий потенциал региона оказался невостребованным и стал быстро разрушаться. Если в 1994 году в Новосибирской области валового регионального продукта (ВРП) на душу населения производилось около 90 процентов от среднероссийского уровня, то к 1996 году этот показатель снизился уже до 87%, а к 2002 году — до 75,6%. Особенно пострадали базовые для Новосибирской области отрасли машиностроения, составляющие основу высокотехнологичного производства — приборостроение, электроника и микроэлектроника. Новосибирская область в середине 90-х годов вошла в категорию «новых депрессивных регионов». В эти годы произошло качественное изменение специализации Новосибирской области: из мощного промышленного центра России она превратилась в регион, обслуживающий сферу обращения
и финансы, межрегиональную торговлю, усилились позиции региона как крупного транспортного центра. В результате в экономике Новосибирской области значительно выросла доля услуг в структуре ВРП — с 40,2 % в 1995 году до примерно 60 % в 2005 году. Сегодняшний день В начале XXI века в экономике региона произошли определенные структурные изменения, наметились области роста. За последние годы Новосибирская область в своем экономическом и социальном развитии добилась определенных успехов: выросли темпы роста в промышленности, сфере услуг, торговле, а также возросли реальные доходы населения; увеличивались инвестиции в реальный сектор экономики; улучшились финансовые показатели предприятий и организаций, что способствовало росту доходной базы региона; начался процесс технологического обновления и освоения производства конкурентоспособной продукции (см. Таблицу 1).
Новосибирская область
Доля области в России
Территория, тыс. кв.км
177,8
1,0%
Численность населения на 1.01.2007, тыс. чел.
2640,7
1,9%
Среднегодовая численность занятых в экономике, тыс. чел
1221,7
1,8%
ВРП, млн. руб.
240,8
1,3%
Основные фонды, млрд. руб.
595,6
1,56%
Производство продукции обрабатывающими предприятиями, млрд. руб.
111,1
1,1%
Производство электроэнергии, газа и воды, млрд. руб.
40,2
2,2%
Производство продукции сельского хозяйства, млрд. руб.
34,5
2,1%
Показатель
Таблица 2: Прирост основных экономических показателей за период с 1999 по 2006 гг., %.
Валовой региональный продукт
84
55
Объем промышленного производства
75
54
Продукция сельского хозяйства
29
28
Оборот розничной торговли
171
103
Объем инвестиций
214
108
Реальные располагаемые денежные доходы
134
111
Новосибирской области принадлежит явное лидерство в Сибири по развитию IТ-компаний: третье место на рынке российских информационных и коммуникационных технологий по итогам 2004-2005 гг. Новосибирская область — территория нового качества роста. Начиная с 2001 года, темпы роста ВРП и промышленности региона в среднем на треть превышали среднероссийские, улучшились позиции Новосибирской области в Сибирском федеральном округе (см. Таблицу 2). Можно отметить ряд положительных тенденций: заметно усилилась действенность инновационной политики; стабилизировалась положительная динамика качества жизни населения, приближаясь к средним значениям по стране; по темпам строительства Новосибирская область стоит в одном ряду с Москвой, Санкт-Петербургом и Татарстаном.
Spring 2008
Прирост по Российской Федерации
По показателю насыщенности банковской системой Новосибирск входит в десятку ведущих регионов по России и лидирует в Сибирском федеральном округе.
Russia Business Watch
Прирост по НСО
Показатель
regional profile
численности их персонала, по коли- мике области. Общее количество честву малых предприятий. малых предприятий за период 1991 г. увеличилось более чем в восемь В десятку общенациональных лидеров раз и составило в 2006 году 25,560 регион входит по следующим индика- единиц. Значительные изменения торам: числу лиц с высшим образо- претерпела и структура малого бизванием на 10,000 человек населения, неса в разрезе областей деятельЕсть сферы деятельности, по общему производству зерна и мяса, ности. Так в начале 90-х годов которым позиции области могут объему розничного товарооборота и малый бизнес был развит преимубыть названы лидирующими. Так, услуг на душу населения, объему грузо щественно в промышленности, область входит в первую пятерку и пассажироперевозок железнодорож- строительстве, науке и научном обслуживании. В 2006 году более российских субъектов Федерации по ным и авиационным транспортом. половины малых предприятий было числу организаций, занимающихся исследованиями и разработками и Следует заметить, что малый биз- сконцентрировано в сфере оптовой нес играет заметную роль в эконо- и розничной торговли. По числу малых предприятий Новосибирская Таблица 1: Новосибирская область в экономике область занимает шестое место в Российской Федерации, 2006 год Российской Федерации. В 2006 году по доле ВРП области в валовом национальном продукте (ВНП) Российской Федерации среди всех субъектов Федерации Новосибирская область занимала 18 место, по доле населения — 16.
39
regional profile Spring 2008 Russia Business Watch
40
Ресторан «Сибирская Тройка», Центральный район, Новосибирск
Тем не менее, в целом по основным показателям уровня жизни, область находится лишь в середине списка субъектов Российской Федерации. Значительная часть производственного аппарата региона устарела как физически, так и морально. В 2006 году объем инвестиций в основной капитал, приходящихся на одного жителя области, был вдвое меньше, чем в среднем по стране. Средние по отношению к другим субъектам Федерации позиции регион занимает по уровню инновационной активности (входит в третью десятку), объему внешнеэкономической деятельности (входит в четвертую десятку). Есть определенные индикаторы экономического и социального развития, по значению которых область занимает отстающие позиции: удельный вес населения с доходами ниже прожиточного минимума; интегрированный уровень относительной кредитоспособности региона; густота автодорог общего пользования с твердым покрытием. По всем эти показателям регион входит в пятую десятку. Перспективы дальнейшего развития Оценка конкурентных позиций и специфических особенностей Новосибирской области с использованием стандартной методики SWOT-анализа позволила выявить
следующие сильные стороны, ограничения и возможности развития, а также потенциальные внешние угрозы. К сильным сторонам можно отнести следующее: • Уникальный научно-образо- вательный комплекс; • Выгодное географическое положение; • Развитый человеческий капитал; • Высокие устойчивые темпы роста в последние годы; • Диверсифицированная структура экономики; • Определенный официаль ный статус территории; • Наличие развитой законо дательной нормативно правовой и методической базы, касающейся важнейших направлений хозяйственной деятельности; Ограничениями развития являются: • Слабая ресурсно минеральная база; • Низкая восприимчивость реального сектора к инновациям; • Неравномерность развития отдельных районов Новосибирской области; • Сокращение численности населения; • Общее состояние автодорожной сети и коммунальной инфраструктуры; • Изношенность основных фондов; Основные возможности развития связаны прежде всего с: • Достижением синергетичес- кого эффекта использова- ния всех потенциальных источников роста; • Развитием межрегиональ- ной и международной
•
кооперации и интеграции; Реализацией статуса центра Федерального округа;
Возможные внешние угрозы выглядят следующим образом: • Рост межрегиональной конкуренции за мобильные ресурсы (трудовые и финансовые); • Недостаточность федераль- ной поддержки крупных инфраструктурных проектов; • Рост международной конку- ренции за квалифицирован- ный персонал; • Неконтролируемая миграция; • Изменяющиеся приоритеты государственной поддержки; Резюмируя результаты SWOTанализа можно подчеркнуть, что Новосибирская область обладает тремя основными конкурентными преимуществами: 1. уникальный даже по мировым масштабам научно-образовательный потенциал в виде концентрации научных институтов Российской Академии Наук, Российской Академии Сельскохозяйственных Наук и Росийской Академии Медицинских Наук, отраслевой и вузовской науки, сети высших учебных заведений, высоким уровнем образования населения; 2. выгодное экономико-географическое положение: расположение в центре России на пересечении важнейших транспортных коммуникаций, «столичный статус» города Новосибирска и особая роль региона в федеративной системе России; 3. диверсифицированная структура реального сектора экономики, в котором в гармоничной пропорции сочетаются промышленность, сельское хозяйство, строительство и транспорт.
По данным администрации Новосибирской области в качестве первоочередных и наиболее значимых для территории в настоящее время рассматривается 77 проектов, из них 24 относится к сфере производства, а 42 проекта — к сфере
обслуживания. Из требуемых для реализации проектов 443 млрд. рублей инвестиций более 45 % приходится на сферу производства. Этим структура инвестиций Новосибирской области значительно отличается от других регионов Сибирского федерального округа, где приоритеты отдаются развитию главным образом сырьевого сектора. В Таблице 3 приведены некоторые характеристики основных наиболее значимых проектов. В Новосибирской области, как и в большинстве субъектов Российской Федерации, разработана Стратегия социально-экономического развития на период до 20025 года. Этот
программный документ отражает все особенности и специфические характеристики территории. Он связан со стратегией социально-экономического развития Сибири, подкреплен стратегическим планом развитии города Новосибирска и программами развития муниципалитетов. n Источники: Администрация Новосибирской области (www3.adm.nso.ru), Территориальный орган Федеральной службы государственной статистики по Новосибирской области; Кисельников А.А., Щербак И.В. “Новосибирская область: основные этапы развития” — Регион: экономика и социология, №3, 2007.
regional profile
Особую роль в реализации имеющегося потенциала развития любой территории играют инвестиционные возможности. Анализ имеющихся инвестиционных предложений свидетельствует о том, что пока крупные российские и зарубежные инвесторы не рассматривают Новосибирскую область в качестве приоритетной территории для реализации крупных инвестиционных программ и проектов.
Таблица 3: Характеристики наиболее значимых инвестиционных проектов в Новосибирской области Проект
Научно-технический парк «Академгородок»
Промышленно-логистический парк
Объем инвестиций, млрд. руб.
Выпуск продукции
Окончание строительства
18,9
30 млрд. руб. товарной продукции до 2015 года
До 2015 г.
60
62 млрд. руб. товарной продукции до 2015 года
До 2015 г.
До 2015 г.
31,9
5,5 млн. пассажиров, 300 тыс. тонн авиа грузов
Реконструкция цементного завода ОАО «Искитимцемент»
4,1
1,3 млн. тонн цемента
2010 г.
31,6 - 63,2
5,95 – 11,9 млрд. кВт-ч электроэнергии
До 2015 г.
Строительство новых ТЭС
18,9
20436 тыс. Гкал. тепла, 13,4 млрд. кВт-ч электроэнергии
До 2015 г.
Электрометаллургический завод
14,8
1,9 млн. тонн проката
До 2015 г.
Предприятия энергетического и электроэнергетического кластера
64 - 72
80 - 90 млрд. руб. товарной продукции к 2025 года
До 2025 г.
8,3
Объем добычи антрацита 6 млн. тонн
До 2012 г.
Разработка месторождения антрацитных углей, строительство обогатительных фабрик ОАО «Сибантрацит»
Spring 2008
Развитие ОАО «Сибирьэнерго»
Russia Business Watch
Международный авиационный транспортный узел
41
new members
new member profiles companies by BusinessWeek. CB Richard Ellis has more than 300 offices in the world, employing over 24,000 people. Black & Veatch is a leading global engineering, consulting and construction company specializing in infrastructure development in energy, water, telecommunications, management consulting, federal, and environmental markets. Founded in 1915, Black & Veatch develops tailored infrastructure solutions that meet clients’ needs and provide sustainable benefits.
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
Solutions are provided from the broad line of service expertise available within Black & Veatch, including conceptual and preliminary engineering services, engineering design, procurement, construction, financial management, asset management, program management, construction management, environmental, security design and consulting, management consulting, and infrastructure planning. With more than $2 billion in revenue, the employee-owned company has more than 100 offices worldwide and has completed projects in more than 100 countries on six continents.
42
CB Richard Ellis is one of the leading advisers on real estate in Russia and in the world, offering a full range of services, including: real estate management, investment services, strategic consulting and valuation, construction management, agency services (office, trading and warehouse), and services to corporate clients. CB Richard Ellis was listed as one of the 100 fastest-growing companies by Fortune magazine and has the largest turnover in the commercial real estate field in the world. In 2007, the company was included on the list of the 50 best
CG/LA Infrastructure has a 20-year track record in strategic advisory on infrastructure projects, both public and private. Specifically, the company assists in the identification, structuring and financing of strategic infrastructure projects — those that substantively contribute to country or regional competitiveness over a 20-year period. Key elements of CG/LA’s success include a series of proprietary diagnostic models and databases. The firm is fast growing and strongly positioned to assist Russia in generating its share of the $41 trillion infrastructure market (2005-2030). CG/ LA has worked with some of the largest firms in Russia, and is currently planning a Russia Leadership Forum.
Discovery Communications is the number-one nonfiction media company, reaching more than 1.5 billion cumulative subscribers in over 170 countries. Discovery’s 100-plus worldwide networks are led by Discovery Channel, TLC, Animal Planet, Science Channel, Discovery Health and HD Theater, with digital media properties including HowStuffWorks.com. Discovery Communications is owned by Discovery Holding Company, Advance/ Newhouse Communications and John S. Hendricks, Discovery’s founder and Chairman.
The Walt Disney Company, together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, is a leading diversified international family entertainment and media enterprise with four business segments: media networks, parks and resorts, studio entertainment, and consumer products. Disney is a Dow 30 company, with annual revenues of over $35.5 billion in its most recent fiscal year and a market capitalization of about $64 billion as of November 16, 2007.
Dresdner Kleinwort is the investment bank of Dresdner Bank AG and a member of the Allianz Group. Headquartered in London and Frankfurt and with an international network of offices, Dresdner Kleinwort provides the full range of investment banking products and services to European and international clients through its Capital Markets and Global Banking business lines. In Russia, Dresdner Kleinwort has provided financial advice to the Russian government as well as to Russian corporations and financial institutions since 1994 through its offices in Moscow and St Petersburg.
Koppers is a global company and a leading integrated producer of chemicals, carbon compounds and treated wood products for the aluminum, steel, chemical, rubber, railroad, and utility industries. Koppers is a leading distiller of coal tar, a by-product of the transformation of coal into coke. The company distills
he has earned for the second time in four years in the annual Barron’s rankings.
the coal tar produced in many countries, including Russia, into carbon pitch, refined tar, creosote, carbon black feedstock, and chemical oils. The chemical oils resulting from distillation are used to produce naphthalene and phthalic anhydride (PAA). One of Koppers’ strategies is to partner with Russian steel producers to directly manufacture its products in Russia for both domestic and export markets.
The J. Mack Robinson College of Business at Georgia State University will offer the first Executive MBA (EMBA) to be conferred by an American school on site in Russia as part of a joint program that will be available in Moscow beginning in late 2008. The program, involving Lomonosov Moscow State University and known as Executive Leaders, will provide students the opportunity to earn a Master’s of Science in Management. The EMBA will be conferred by the Robinson College of Business at Pace Global Energy Services LLC Georgia State University while the MS provides advisory and implementation will be conferred by Lomonosov Mosservices to clients in energy intensive cow State University. market sectors. The firm provides carbon & energy management, corporate The unique dual degree program will also strategic planning, asset development, be accompanied by various other initiaasset management, regulatory advitives for students and the Russian busisory services, project valuation, market ness community, including a Moscow assessment, risk management, and price Executive Leaders forum, Roundtable forecasting services. Pace’s clients Working Groups of business leaders, include energy companies, electric utilicompany visits, access to research, newsties, financial institutions, energy proletters, and other activities and materials ject developers, and energy intensive that will prepare executives for the everindustrial companies around the world. changing challenges in global business.
Contact lucy Rojansky, Manager of Membership Affairs, USRBC
tel: 202-739-9190 rojansky@usrbc.org For Membership Application and other important information about USRBC, please visit our website at:
www.usrbc.org
Spring 2008
Third Millennium Russia Fund is a U.S. SEC-registered mutual fund focusing on the oil sector, utilities, telecom, and a broad selection of other audited, marketleading public companies. Since 1998, Third Millennium Russia Fund has been specializing in the equities of Russian public companies. It is among the top International Stock Funds in the U.S., ranking #5 for the 5-Year Period. John T. Connor, Jr., the Fund’s Portfolio Manager, was named the top manager in the U.S. in the summer of 2007, a distinction
Membership Questions?
Russia Business Watch
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) represents the country’s leading pharmaceutical research and biotechnology companies, which are devoted to inventing medicines that allow patients to live longer, healthier and more productive lives. PhRMA companies are leading the way in the search for new cures, and invested an estimated $43 billion in discovering and developing new medicines in 2006 alone. Industry-wide research and investment reached a record $55.2 billion in 2006.
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. operates WalMart discount stores, Supercenters, Neighborhood Markets and Sam’s Club locations in the United States. The company operates in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Japan, Mexico, Nicaragua, Puerto Rico, and the United Kingdom, serving more than 176 million customers weekly in 14 markets. WalMart’s securities are listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol WMT. n
new members
NEW MEMBER PROFILES
3
usrbc news
USRBC WELCOMES NEW MOSCOW EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Ritz Carlton Hotel, Moscow
nn
May 20, 2008
The Council and our Moscow-based Board Members hosted a cocktail reception on May 20 to introduce members and friends to Ilya Kuperman, the new Executive Director of the USRBC Moscow Office. Newly appointed USRBC President Edward Verona was also in attendance at the Ritz-Carlton Moscow as Ilya connected with our constituents in Russia. Ilya will spearhead the Council’s Moscow-based operations, working to augment our membership services, public relations, government relations, and membership development in Moscow. He joins the USRBC from the Modern University for the Humanities where he was Director for External Relations. Ilya has extensive experience successfully developing and managing international projects with private companies, government bodies and NGOs.
Ilya Kuperman greets RF Senator Mikhail Margelov.
Ilya holds a Ph.D. in Sociology and other advanced degrees including an M.S. in Economics from the Moscow State University of Civil Engineering and an M.S. in Management from the University of Greenwich. He can be reached at +7 495-291-2105 or kuperman@usrbc.org. n
Ilya Kuperman talks with Anatoly Godakov and Dmitry Sazhin of the Ministry of Economic Development.
Ed Verona greets reception guests.
АРдС ПРИВеТСТВУеТ НОВОГО ГлАВУ МОСКОВСКОГО ОФИСА nn
20 мая 2008 года
20 мая Американо-Российский Деловой Совет совместно с членами Совета Директоров, базирующимися в Москве провели коктейльприем, на котором членам и друзья Совета встретились с новым исполнительным директором московского офиса Совета Ильей Куперманом. Новый Президент и генеральный директор Совета Эдвард Верона также присутствовал на приеме, который проводился в гостинице «Ритц-Карлтон». Ilya Kuperman talks with Robert Drooglever, Caterpillar.
Russia Business Watch
Spring 2008
Гостиница «Ritz Carlton», Москва
From left: Bernard Suchar, Ed Verona, Patricia Verona, Robert Drooglever, Victor Sedov.
Илья возглавит деятельность Совета в Москве, концентрируя свою деятельность над расширением спектра услуг для наших членов, PR инициатив, укреплением связей с органами государственной власти и привлечением новых членов в Москве. Он пришел в Совет из Современной гуманитарной академии, где он занимал должность руководителя департамента международного сотрудничества. Илья обладает значительным опытом в области успешного развития и управления международными проектами с частными компаниями, государственными структурами и негосударственными организациями. Илья имеет степень кандидата социологических наук, а также диплом магистра экономики Московского Государственного строительного университета, и диплом магистра менеджмента университета Гринвича. С ним можно связаться по телефону +7 495-291-2105 или по электронной почте kuperman@usrbc.org. n