"Izhmash" is not the same
Barely in the information field, the news about the creation of the Kalashnikov concern died down, as it was eclipsed by the new one - they are going to hand over the brainchild of Dmitry Rogozin into private hands. True, not completely, but in the amount of 49%, the remaining shares will remain under state control. Known and buyers, and even the estimated size of the transaction. Russian oligarch Andrei Bokarev and Alexei Krivoruchko (about them later) will raise production "from their knees". The share of “Kalashnikov” will cost them 2,5 billion rubles.
Recall that the Kalashnikov concern was formed on August 13, 2013 at the suggestion of Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin on the basis of two Izhevsk armory enterprises - NPO Izhmash and OJSC Izhevsk Mechanical Plant. It is planned to include other enterprises of the industry in the concern and eventually organize a closed cycle of production of rifle complexes - from gunpowder to weapons and sights. In addition, great importance is attached to the promotion of the Kalashnikov brand, which has significant untapped potential.
However, for now these are only plans. The reality is that the main enterprises of the concern are in a deplorable state. About the many problems of "Izhmash" we wrote repeatedly.
According to the results of 2012, Izhmash suffered a net loss of 403 million rubles, while all sorts of obligations scored on 8,8 billion rubles. However, we note that this is better than the results of previous periods. Thus, at the beginning of 2011, the total liabilities amounted to 19 billion rubles, and the losses at the end of 2010 of the year - 1,7 billion rubles.
But the news of yesterday - the novelty "Izhmash" AK-12 machine gun did not pass the preliminary tests and was not allowed to the state. Instead, for the complex equipment "Warrior" selected machine factory them. Degtyarev. AK-12 designers still have a chance to correct flaws within a month, but considering that they failed to create products that meet the requirements for two years, experts estimate the prospects for the new Kalashnikov to win the order as not high.
It is noteworthy that last week the concern was visited by Vladimir Putin, where he criticized the pace of development of the combat systems of the ground forces. Probably, the state of the enterprises did not inspire the president, since the subsequent decision on the partial privatization of Kalashnikov was supported by him.
Who buys "Kalashnikov"
The names of the future owners of the shares of the concern are known. Andrei Bokarev is a Russian oligarch from the Forbes list and the number of Russia's richest businessmen. Currently he is a co-owner and president of Transmashholding, as well as a co-owner of UMMC, the closest associate of the oligarch Iskander Makhmudov. Like, perhaps, any oligarch from 90-x has a lot of questionable pages in his biography. So widely known is the quotation from his interview with the ORT channel from 2001:
“When we arrived at Kuzbassrazrezugol, we held several meetings with the directors (mines). Their meaning was in very simple things: gentlemen, if you do not want to be shot one by one, you must understand that from today you no longer make decisions on where and how coal is sold, to whom it is sold, how much it is paid for, only responsible for his prey "
According to media reports, Bokarev is also known as the organizer of numerous raider seizures of land and enterprises. In general, the typical representative of large Russian capital. However, it should be noted that Transmashholding managed by him shows good results. In recent years, production and sales have grown at an impressive pace. In this sense, despite the ambiguous reputation, it’s impossible to call Bokarev an “effective manager” in our familiar ironic intonation.
The second contender for the Kalashnikov part, Alexey Krivoruchko, has a much more modest track record. Currently, he is the head of Aeroexpress (since 2010 - CEO), previously managed sales of AvtoVAZ, worked at Rosoboronexport, as well as in the field of civil aviation.
Why privatization was needed and why exactly these people
We traditionally treat privatization as such with wariness, and double, if we are talking about defense enterprises. There are too many living examples before us, when the result of the sale of state property was its final degradation. It is even more interesting to understand the logic of the power that sells the lion's piece of the concern to private hands.
The fiscal motive disappears immediately - those 2,5 billion rubles, which investors contribute to Kalashnikov, the state could easily find on its own, even in the current difficult budgetary conditions. There remains something that is called “attracting market competencies”. Simply put, the state washes its hands, signing in the inability to independently remove the concern from the crisis. This is despite the fact that 51% of the shares will remain at the disposal of the state-owned Rostec.
That is, the competence of state managers of “Rostec” was not enough to fully improve the enterprise for several years of management. Not enough competence and previous leaders of "Izhmash", one of which, we recall, is now under investigation on charges of fraud on a large scale. So there was only hope for a private investor, who, having invested his own money, was supposed to gnaw earth with his teeth in order to return them with profit.
Note that here we do not argue about whether this is a bad or good decision, but only trying to understand the logic of power.
Based on the foregoing, it becomes clear and the choice of candidates. Actually, Bokarev will have to do the same thing that he once did, creating Transmashholding, to collect many disparate enterprises into one concern. This is his “market competence”, the desired power for Kalashnikov. There is a lot of work to be done here - earlier it was said that the concern “Progress”, the Vyatsko-Polyansky plant “Molot”, the KBAL named after Koshkin and other enterprises.
In addition, Bokarev has a successful experience of cooperation with the state. Thus, the blocking package of Transmashholding holds JSC Russian Railways, which is the main consumer of its locomotives. Something similar is supposed to be built in “Kalashnikov”.
The competence of Alexei Krivoruchko, apparently, is to establish relations with foreign partners (given the "AvtoVaz experience"). At least, he has already declared his intention to create a joint venture with foreigners for the production of cartridges and gunpowder.
Another nuance in this storieswhich we don’t tire of reminding about is the position of local authorities and elites. The permanent president of Udmurtia, Alexander Volkov, is an ardent opponent of the “visiting” leaders and is waging a long-standing struggle for the return of Izhevsk facilities to the orbit of his influence. That is, any Moscow appointee not only has to deal with production issues, but also withstand the pressure of local authorities. From this point of view, Bokarev’s uncompromising way of doing business should help to stir up the nest of endless intermediaries who put the company into debt (“gentlemen, if you don’t want you to ...”).
Now let's talk about the negative side of the decision.
Risks of Kalashnikov privatization
It is clear that the new owners will pursue a tough policy from the very first days of leadership. It is clear that Rostec is unlikely to interfere in it, because it was for this reason that they invited a private trader to do something that the state could not do. This means that the simple workers will be the first to feel the anti-crisis measures on themselves. There is no need to build any illusions: the enterprise is in a bad state - and the private owner will be cut everything that is possible.
This means that we are, for sure, waiting for new pickets, strikes, letters to Putin and complaints about the new leadership. Just be ready to meet all this in the news feeds in the near future. Moreover, the cutting off of intermediary structures simply cannot occur without their resistance, which means that the oil will be poured into the fire diligently, and it will be difficult for us to distinguish protest on real grounds from the one inspired by those suspended from the feeder. In any case, ordinary workers will suffer first.
But, let us assume that optimization will ultimately lead to the improvement of the plants and the concern’s exit to the desired level. What awaits him next?
There is a chance that the new owners of the now profitable enterprise will want to take their hands on it completely. They have experience in this matter. And the position of the authorities can be predicted already in advance: “Since business has taken the enterprise out of the crisis, let him dispose of it”. We also recall that “Rostec” itself is in the queue either for privatization, or for liquidation. In general, the risk that through 5 – 6 years, “Kalashnikov” will become completely private and float off to some kind of offshore, taking into account the entire experience of privatization, great. And this, frankly, is very disappointing.
It is even a shame not only that one of the symbols of our country could potentially fall into some Saudi sheikh, but also that state secrets will go along with it, because the concern is engaged in and will also be engaged in promising developments.
Yes, we remember that in his inaugural speech, Vladimir Putin promised that OPK enterprises would avoid complete privatization, but would anyone remember this speech, for example, in the year in 2020?
That is, it would be desirable, of course, that the government abandoned the idea of privatizing the defense sector altogether — at least partially, even completely — for even a partial one increases the likelihood of further full. But the example of “Kalashnikov” shows us that the government cannot solve the problems of enterprises on its own.
It's time to talk why.
I have no other managers for you
Probably everyone knows the historical anecdote about how Comrade. Stalin responded to the slander of one party functionary to the amoral lifestyle of the writers with the phrase: “I have no other writers for you.”
So, it seems that Vladimir Putin would answer the complaint in choosing investors for Kalashnikov in the same way: “I have no other managers for you”.
They are, however, no. Those who have enough experience and “market competence” are all from the nineties and, as a rule, work in the private sector. And try their lures in the state company. In state-owned companies, there are intelligent managers, but they are not enough for all branches of the national economy.
What to do? To keep the civil service sensible by all means, and in critical areas where there are not enough personnel, to attract the sharks of capitalism, luring fat stocks, and hope that they will not betray. I think the power now comes from these considerations.
And this is a separate problem. With 90, everything is clear - specific conditions have created specific managers. The trouble is that zero did not create anyone at all. For example, the former candidate for mayor of the capital, Navalny loves to “soak” the so-called. members of the cooperative "Lake" for their unregistered land and other excesses, apparently assuming that they unfairly take the place of young creative managers of the "new type". But there are no such managers of the “new type” as a class. Everything created by them on the patterns of trendy Western business programs in zero, did not survive the 2008 crisis of the year and either crumbled into dust or was consumed. And the managers of the “new wave” themselves have nothing left but evil tweets and a pair of trendy sneakers. They did not grow up as a class, did not take shape, and could not stand the competition with 90's sharks.
Thus, the situation around the Kalashnikov concern highlighted the main problem - the government’s lack of intelligent managers, even in the minimum necessary quantities. Therefore, if Putin would, in truth, say in this story “I have no other managers for you,” I would probably understand him. However, we must not forget that the fact that they are not there, no one but the state is to blame.