The whole truth about what is happening with the economy in Russia
Andrey Movchan
economist, head of the economic program at the Carnegie Moscow Center
Carnegie Moscow Center nongovernmental think tank
23 years studying economics, politics and development of society in Russia and the countries of the former USSR
Past assets Executive Director of Troika Dialog
founder of the investment company "Third Rome"
“With our huge kilometers of transportation, only millions of ant entrepreneurs, and not one elephant state, can rebuild the economy. But instead of giving conditions to these millions of ants, the elephant devours them, thinking that he can do everything himself. "
There is nothing good about entrepreneurship. Only headache
- Tell us briefly about yourself?
It is very difficult for me to talk about myself, because I am not at all what I seem.
- In five minutes.
I am a physicist.
- It's better.
Muscovite with a Ukrainian surname.
- Studied in Moscow?
Yes, at Moscow University. For some time he even dealt with the missile guidance system, as was customary in Soviet times. Since 1992 I have been engaged in finance.
And then all sorts of companies like Troika-Dialogue and large banks. Then the University of Chicago. Then at Renaissance Investment Management. It was such a beautiful big project, like everything in Renaissance - beautiful and big. And the incomprehensible from the inside. It didn't end very well with the Renaissance. And before that I managed to get out of there. Then there was Renaissance Credit - Tinkov's competitor.
- Did you work there? I did not know.
I was the CEO of Renaissance Credit. He headed it.
- Come on? So we were competing?
A short period. Because I sold my shares in January 2008. I had a 2.5% package. In 2009 I left the Renaissance. He created the "Third Rome", then he also sold it.
- We are watched by many managers who dream of being entrepreneurs.
Do not. There is nothing good about that. Only a headache. I successfully sold the Third Rome at the end of 2013. Since then, I have been a humble fund manager, which holds my money and the money of my close acquaintances of clients, an honorary pensioner and head of the economic program of the Carnegie Moscow Center.
- You didn't like being an entrepreneur?
Well, yes. May be so.
- You came out on time from what you have listed, from all businesses. Renaissance, Troika and, accordingly, "Third Rome". What can you tell us about today's time?
In investment theory, it is believed that if you did not buy, then you sold. So I am not creating any business now. This expresses my point of view on business in Russia. I am generally a cautious person. The fund I run has an average return over 13 years of 8.5% per annum in dollars. This suggests that I am not taking particular risks.
- Well, yes, it's a little, I guess.
It depends. It's okay for me. It seems to me that this is a good result, precisely because I have my own sense of risks. I don’t want to lose money.
- But at the same time, you still live in Russia and do not plan to leave anywhere, right?
Well, first of all, businesses are global now. I can live in Russia and do business anywhere. What I actually do. Secondly, I speak Russian. If, say, I am even less needed by society, then my wife is a doctor, she heals people here.
People here still need to be treated, no matter what. The culture is Russian. Friends - many are still here. But not all are already, some are far away. But many are still here. I'm already an old person, I'm used to the city, I'm used to the infrastructure. I feel good here.
Andrey Movchan is a Russian economist and financier. Head of the Economic Program at the Carnegie Moscow Center since 2015. From 1997 to 2003, he was the executive director of Troika Dialog. From 2006 to 2008 - Head of Renaissance Credit Bank. In 2009 he founded the investment company "Third Rome" and was the head until 2014. Member of the honorary academic community Beta Gamma Sigma. He is married with four children.
Date of Birth: April 25, 1968Education: Moscow State University, 1992
The Central Bank pursued a policy that provokes banks to work poorly
- Earlier you said that Russian banks have no future. Can you somehow reveal this topic? We are still in the bank, we are interested in hearing this.
I remember how I was just arguing with people, a long time ago. This was before I sold the Third Rome. The dispute was that Tinkoff is not a bank. When the IPO was being prepared, everyone wrote “How so? What are these multipliers? The capital is like that, but the price is like that. " I said that Tinkoff is not a bank, but a financial institution that should be considered a multiplier to revenue, not a multiplier to assets and capital. This is not a bank, but a financial institution licensed to be allowed to operate. Just like the Renaissance Credit was not a bank. But Sberbank is really a bank.
From the point of view of the banking business in Russia, we have a lot of "buts". As any catastrophe is a consequence of the coincidence of many reasons, so here is the monopolization of state banks, which is going on and will continue. If state-owned banks have cheaper money and a larger scale, they will take business away. There are too many banks. Too scattered fragmented structure.
Initially, banks were built in Russia not to do banking business. Banks in Russia were built in the early 90s in order to solve three problems: vacuuming money in order to invest in financial and industrial groups, laundering money and evading taxes.
All three businesses have very high margins. Because when these businesses gradually began to end, the transition to low-margin businesses turned out to be difficult. When you have lived well, it is very difficult to live badly. You just don't know how to do it.
For at least fifteen years, the Central Bank has been pursuing a policy that provokes banks to work poorly. A huge number of bureaucratic procedures, standards, mechanisms, rules, a lot of money for the apparatus that fulfills them. The efficiency is low.
At the same time, you can take a worthless piece of land, value it a hundred times higher than on the market, put yourself in capital and feel calm. In fact, the Central Bank has been saying for 15 years “deceive me, and everything will be fine”.
I don't believe in hi-tech startups in the basement. In addition to basements, there are no places in Russia where this can be done.
- I understand that you have something to risk. You have capital, you do not want to invest it in Russia and you probably are doing the right thing. Imagine that you are now twenty years old and you are ready to take risks. What would you do?
I am a very boring person. I would try to learn. Because even now, from the height of my age, I see that a good businessman is a former top manager in a similar business. A good top manager is a good middle manager in the same business.
In general, you need to understand what you are doing. Nobody canceled the 10,000 hours that need to be spent in their area. I see a lot of young guys who are doing the project, and I understand that they are not focused on the project as a project. They cannot answer the question of who the product is intended for, where is this market, who is their audience. They cannot answer the question "where do you really earn?" Because in business you really make money not on what you usually do.
I tell the same story all the time about a friend of mine who has a carpentry business. He makes furniture, and his profit is equal to the value of the wood chips he sells to the boiler room. If he did not sell into boiler chips, then he would have worked at a loss.
The same thing happens in the vast majority of businesses. You have somewhere in some place additional small incomes, on which you live. Otherwise, the market is competitive, you will be eaten. Need to study. Then come and do business. Small, then bigger, then big. I don't believe in hi-tech startups in the basement. In addition to basements, there are no places in Russia where this can be done.
- That is, they have garages, we have basements - a good allegory.
Russia generally loves cellars, it is well known. If you do serious business, you have to do it seriously. To do this, you need, firstly, to be able to and understand well. Secondly, to be integrated into the ecosystem.
Rebuilding the economy is a titanic job that only millions of ant entrepreneurs can do, not one elephant state
In an interview with "Sekret Firmy" you said that stagnation in Russia would take many years. Are you based on the price of oil? What prompted you to make such a statement? I do not dispute it, because I do not know how to make such macroeconomic forecasts, I have no qualifications. I also do not believe that oil will rise in price, but this is intuitive. You are definitely a smarter person than me.
I am very afraid of smart people, they are often mistaken. The economy is simpler. Oil is really unlikely to rise in price. There are a lot of reasons for this. It may rise in price temporarily, a little.
- When Friedman was sitting here, he said that oil would not rise in price.
It doesn't look like it, yes.
- Everything is speculation. Anything above $ 30 is speculation.
I think that prices are much less speculative now than they were.
- He clearly explained, 10 is the cost of a barrel, 30 is its price, taking into account any transportation, any markups. Anything above 30 is all speculative expectations. And 150 are super speculative.
Okay, we can now take an hour and a half to talk about oil.
- Well, we agreed that it will not grow.
Yes, that it will not grow much, that's for sure. The Russian economy is absolutely geared towards oil. There is an illusion that we have half the budget there. No, in fact, we have the entire budget for oil, because the second part of the budget is taxes on imports, and imports are oil. And then there are income taxes, income tax - and these are oil corporations. 97% of the country's profits are from oil refineries. In fact, the entire budget is oil.
When you look at the workforce structure, it is incredibly sluggish. The number of people who can work is falling. More than 30% work in the public sector, trade is served by about 7 million people - 10% of all labor resources.
Rebuilding the Economy? With our distances, with our huge kilometers of transportation, which cost twice as much as in Europe? Given that we consume 4 times more electricity per 1 dollar of GDP than Japan and twice as much as the world on average? This is an unreal titanic job that only millions of ant entrepreneurs can do, and one elephant state cannot do it even close. Can't even start.
But instead of sending these millions of ants here and giving them conditions, the elephant devours these ants, thinking that it will become fat and can do everything on its own. But he will not do it and will continue to poke around in our china shop, continuing to sell oil.
In 3-4 years, our production will begin to decline, since we have poor well production rates. We produce poorly, under high pressure, with a big hole in this washer, in the pipe. We run out quickly. Our production rate is 20-25%, the best result is 80-90%, and the world average is 50%.
Therefore, in the future 20 years, our production will fall by 2 times. The price of oil, I think, will fall by another 20-30% in dollars from the current one. There are no labor resources. We can forget about technology, because we do not have private science, and there will be no state science, because now it is being killed by underfunding. And we can forget about massive investments from abroad, because we behave accordingly. That's all.
- You painted a sad picture. That is, for medium and small businesses, you will not see the windows for the next few years?
Small and medium businesses are usually much more stable. Rolls are needed, you need to get a haircut, and even some local products are also needed. As for a large, almost large and very large private business, I have doubts. Because, of course, we will lose in competition. The further, the more.
Why does Poland produce 3.5 times more apples per hectare than we do in the Krasnodar Territory?
But Michael Calvey [managing partner of the Baring Vostok Capital Partners fund] often tells me: “I came to Russia 20 years ago, trams and trolleybuses did not run, people were not paid salaries. And look what now. " It is difficult to disagree with him, because for the last 20, 15, 10, even 5 years we have been moving in the right direction. You can criticize as much as you like, but the trend is positive.
Nobody argues with this. For 20 years, the GDP per person in Russia has grown.
- Tripled, in my opinion?
- People have healed, breathed.
Of course. More than $ 2 trillion in oil revenues. People are breathing, there are cars. And at the same time, during the same time, our GDP has grown two times less than the Polish one.
Here is a small country Poland, which has neither oil nor gas. It started exactly the same way in the early 90s, but it has twice the GDP per capita than we have now. Why? Why does Poland produce 3.5 times more apples per hectare than we do in the Krasnodar Territory? Are there some enchanted apples?
- And there is more sun in the Krasnodar Territory.
Yes, in Poland the climate is worse, perhaps. Why Poland provides itself with food and exports a huge amount, but we do not? Why is the economy diversifying in Poland, why is Poland now growing by 3.5% per year in terms of GDP, while we have fallen by almost 40% in terms of dollars over the past two years?
I'm not sure about the trend either. Oil had a trend and we had a trend. If you draw all the charts - oil prices, our budget, GDP per person - you will see that they are very similar. Now everything is going the same scenario.
- Good. You ask a lot of rhetorical questions and publicly criticize the authorities and the government. And you yourself have no idea to get involved in politics?
No, absolutely.
- You want to be such a critical economist.
I don't want to be a critical economist. I say what I think. I want to be a praising economist. With great pleasure I will go, I will praise someone. There would be someone.
I manage money, my task is to understand the truth. That is why I write and criticize. For example, I said that the dollar would be 60 in 2012, when everyone said the correct price for the dollar was 19. Many things are easier than they seem.
- Tell us what will happen to the ruble in two years.
Depends on inflation. Now the oil has stabilized. I don't think she will move much. Accordingly, the ruble is subject to inflation. In 2015, inflation is 20%.
- Twenty? Something you are completely pessimistic.
I think twenty. The ruble fell by half against the dollar, and we have 45% of imports in the country. In 2016, I think inflation will be 12%, because the money supply is squeezed, stagnation. Inflation will not be very high. Consumption is falling.
There are reserves for the coming years, the economy is more or less balanced, and the trade account is positive. So there is nothing to be afraid of. But inflation will eat up little by little.
When a person is born, he already becomes an entrepreneur. He has a company - himself. It can neither be sold nor shared with anyone, it can only be controlled by yourself
- Imagine that you are addressing your twenty-year-old son, who is thinking of starting his own business. So he sits and thinks whether to go to work at a bank or stir up a startup. What should he do?
I'm not the fiercest supporter of startups and businesses that young people do. When a person is born, he becomes an entrepreneur willy-nilly. He has a company - himself. He doesn't care to own and manage this company. The risks associated with this are very high, because this is the only company in life. It can neither be sold nor shared with anyone, it can only be managed by yourself.
When you think of yourself as an entrepreneur in control of your own life, just like in the economy, you need a sustainable competitive advantage. Then you start looking for it and creating it.
This is the only correct way to relate to what you are doing. The competitive advantage of a person is professionalism and experience. Unless, of course, you do not marry and marry someone rich, if you are not the son of an official and if you have not won the lottery.
Experience comes with time. Professionalism, unfortunately, too. Therefore, to the question of young people "What should I do" I try to answer: "To gain experience." If you want to create a big bank, work in a bank. Become a bank manager, bank top manager.
If you want to create a company that sends ships into space, work in the space industry for 10-15 years. If you want to create the largest retail network, work there. Earlier, by the way, in America it was like that: even the children of large entrepreneurs went to work and climbed up from the bottom to be able to lead.
Today we have a slightly different trend: young children of high-ranking officials also quickly become high-ranking officials. Unfortunately, this does not work for entrepreneurship. Therefore, my suggestion would be - despite the need for entrepreneurs in Russia, despite the attractiveness of entrepreneurship, despite the fact that entrepreneurship can make more money - not to rush. Make sure you have an edge and then start.
Education
Graduated from the Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics of Lomonosov Moscow State University, the Financial Academy under the Government of the Russian Federation and the University of Chicago Booth GSB.
Has a Certificate of Professional Competence of Supervisors and Employees of Banks and Investment Firms (Cyprus), as well as a qualification certificate from the Federal Financial Markets Service 1.0.
In 2003 he was elected a member of the honorary academic community Beta-Gamma-Sigma US.
Labor activity
For over 25 years he has been engaged in economics and management. For six years he worked as the executive director of Troika Dialog.
Founded and headed the board of the Renaissance Investment Management Group, was the Executive Director of Renaissance Credit Bank.
In 2009 he created the investment company "Third Rome" and was its managing partner, he successfully sold his brainchild in 2013.
In 2015, he headed the Economic Policy program at the Carnegie Moscow Center. In 2018, he became a visiting expert of the Economic Policy program at the Carnegie Center.
He has investments in information and technology projects. These are travel, B2C marketing resources and market places where he invests money or (more often) knowledge.
CEO of Movchan Consultants.
For his activities he was awarded a number of awards and prizes. In 2006, Forbes magazine named him the most successful head of a management company in the whole of Russia; and RBC in the same 2006 - "Person of the Year".
His project, Renaissance Investment Management, was also recognized by the finance company of the year.
Twice became the winner of the "Press Title" competition of business journalism.
Publications
He is widely known as the author of economic stories, for example, about how "Slaves ravaged Russia" or "The resource curse of Ancient Rome." He is the author of columns for Forbes, Slon.ru and Vedomosti. He regularly writes for "Snob", speaks at "Rain" and writes various essays on financial and economic topics and not only.
Family status
He is married and has four children. Wife, Olga, cardiologist. The eldest daughter is married. The Movchanov have four children, the youngest, Leo, is only 5 years old.
Parents devote almost all holidays and long weekends to the creative development of their son, showing him the world. And when the family remains in the city, they amicably go to the dacha in the village of Lesnoy Ruchey in the Chekhovsky district.
Hobbies
Favorite hobby - archery. Also do not mind playing chess or smoking cigars. As he himself admitted in an interview, from time to time he likes to get up at 5:30 and sit in his office to work, until about 9:30, until his son comes running. This is 4 hours effective time.
He does not go to clubs, prefers museums and spends a lot of time with his wife. Together with Olga, they are engaged in ballroom and sports dances: they began many years ago with classical dances, then became interested in tango, then Argentine tango.
Andrey Movchan is a Russian economist, financier, director of the Economic Policy program at the Carnegie Moscow Center.The adoption of decisions to increase budget revenues by increasing taxes and reducing social security, in fact, is already a confirmation of the fact that the government in Russia sees the economy as a distributive model. The distribution model is based on the idea of having a fixed wealth that needs to be protected and "properly" distributed. Such a system naturally gravitates towards centralization, not only because the consolidation of wealth gives power, but also because redistributing centrally is much easier and more efficient than giving redistribution at the mercy of free agents - try to imagine a polygon with millions of vertices and compare the number of diagonals, passing through the center, with the number of segments connecting any two vertices to each other.
In the distributive model, wealth is not created - it is defended: from external invaders, from internal plunderers and from careless users. The idea of increasing wealth is absurd - it's fixed. Labor, business, social economic activity have only an auxiliary purpose - they provide the state with the opportunity to share less wealth with society: "let them do at least something for themselves." If wealth is not enough, it is necessary to increase the efficiency of the use of wealth: to consolidate it even more in the hands of the state, strengthen control, increase discipline, bargain or obtain by force the best conditions for exchanging one's wealth for things necessary in the country from the outside world, maybe, if it is possible, to seize more wealth from neighbors.
If some of the people live too poorly, it is necessary to take away from others part of the wealth that has been distributed to them and redistribute it in favor of the poor. If the state does not have enough for the (presumably) necessary spending, then it is necessary to distribute less to citizens or return more back - and finance government spending; at the same time, government spending is a priority, since the state knows what to allocate funds for, but people do not. The state, which has taken upon itself such work and such responsibility, naturally becomes exaggeratedly large and expensive, receives the privilege of making decisions outside and bypassing the law, proceeding from the rational of the moment (and we are all people) out of considerations of the personal benefit of its representatives.
In Russia, with its resource dependence, with its Soviet past, when “everyone pretended to work,” it is easy to believe that only the distribution model is effective (and indeed exists). Obviously, such a belief is perfectly cultivated according to the principle of self-fulfilling prophecy. The development of the distribution system hypertrophies the state, leads to the destruction of the legal framework and effective horizontal economic relations, effective economic agents leave the game, and their place is taken by clumsy and corrupt state structures and thieving private adherents who earn half-legally on the privileges they receive.
It is easy to accept such a picture and pass it off as a proof of the theses "all businessmen are thieves", "nothing can be trusted to the people", "nothing will work out anyway, the experiment must be curtailed" and others. It is also obvious that in the presence of noticeable resources, it is beneficial for resource holders to maintain a distributive model of the economy - in it they have an unfair advantage over other agents. In these conditions, a vicious circle is formed - the power belongs to the resource holders, they benefit from the distribution model, the generative model can be easily compromised in the eyes of society. The result is called the resource curse: countries that are endowed with resources, unless they have had time to form strong institutions that prevent the consolidation of resources in the hands of the authorities, freeze in the distributive model of the economy.
This is exactly what happened to Russia. Creation of an effective community of independent economic agents does not fit into the sincere (based on both convictions and personal benefit) idea of the economy by top officials: moreover, it is perceived as a loss of control over financial flows that is dangerous for their power. In the logic of our government, the problem of a lack of money can only be solved by withdrawing the necessary money from those who have it, and if the latter do not have enough themselves, let them go and work more - not all the government has to pull (I must say that in the minds of these officials everything that is in Russia already belongs to the state, therefore even funds earned independently by a citizen are considered as received from the state, well, maybe not directly).
In this regard, it is meaningless to say that increasing the retirement age is not a solution, but a dead end, that it will have to be raised again and again, that the only way to cope with the problem is to gradually move completely to a non-state accumulative pension system within 10-15 years. , over time, starting to pay pensioners "from the state" and at the expense of taxes, regardless of length of service and merit, the same small pension, only to have enough for life. Such a system will effectively provide citizens with pensions, but it will take huge sums out of the control of officials; moreover, it will be based on the idea of economic self-organization that is inaccessible to them.
Likewise, it is meaningless to say that an increase in the tax burden (and an increase in VAT by 11% is a significant increase) will lead to a reduction in non-state consumption and a decrease in the growth rate (if any) of the economy; that it is simply stupid to seek funds for a "presidential decree" - it is necessary to create conditions under which private business will fulfill all these decrees simply in the process of developing its business; that even if you need to find money for something, you should first look for it in the bottomless credit pockets of state monopolies, for the sake of contractors from among the president's friends who are reducing their value with meaningless projects; then one could look for them in the borrowing market - in today's world of low rates, it is beneficial for states to increase the financial leverage, this allows them to catalyze the economy, and not to squeeze it with levies.
For the authorities in Russia, private business is an enemy, unless it is busy serving the authorities and has not taken an oath of allegiance, sealed by a couple of large-scale criminal cases (in case of forgetfulness); on the other hand, the contractors of state monopolies are friends, and they can be trusted: they will earn a lot, but at least they will not plunder everything; eventually at exorbitant prices, but they will build and not flee the country (especially now). There is no reason to borrow from the state - interest must be paid for the debt, the debts must be repaid, and the increase in taxes gives free money and forever.
It is noteworthy that the rise affected the VAT, in fact, the final consumption tax, which is the most sensitive for businesses with high added value (that is, non-resource, most efficient and most mobile) and businesses at an early stage of development. Neither these businesses nor consumers have a voice in Russia. The issue of raising the income tax has been removed from the agenda - of course, because the income tax is paid by officials and "effective managers" close to the authorities from their significant salaries. An increase in income tax would hit primarily resource businesses that receive high margins, and these businesses are "class-related" and are mainly controlled by the authorities. It is true that VAT is easier to collect than income tax, especially since the Russian tax authorities have been improving for many years in calculating and tracking exit schemes. But this again is the logic of a prince collecting tribute, not a leader thinking about the prosperity of the country.
Even worse, discussing the question of "how to raise or lower taxes" or "what is the correct retirement age" in Russia today is akin to discussing the question "which candy should be used by a cannibal to attract little girls, so that the latter would be more pleasant before dying." The basic problem of the current Russian state is the extremely low level of institutional trust of everyone in everyone, which is a consequence of the already mentioned disregard of power in the distribution economy for such an inconvenient thing for centralized government as the letter of the law.
The Russian government treats the law as a universal means of realizing its interests - it writes indistinctly and interprets it as it wants (often in the opposite way in two identical situations), rewrites constantly, within the framework of momentary interests and often even more indistinct, ignores it when it is convenient and requires execution. when beneficial, creates a critical volume of exceptions to any rule for its own convenience and writes a refusal procedure on informal grounds on top of any permission.
Economic agents in Russia copy power - our market is characterized by extremely low contractual discipline, the desire to fool the counterparty (including the state) or force him to accept dishonest conditions (and this is often already practiced by state-owned companies), take advantage of non-market advantages and / or join illegal conspiracy. Investments in Russia have not been going on for a long time, and capital outflow was significant all the years of the XXI century with the exception of 2006 and 2007 (when foreign speculative capital outweighed the withdrawal of funds by Russian businessmen) - what's the difference, what kind of VAT?
The direction of movement of our state became very clear (not today, but today there is a reason to say so): the generative model, which, it would seem, began to break through the historically formed distribution model in the first three to five years of the 21st century, has been completely discarded. She is left with only two roles: she can live in the barren backyard of the economy, confined to a rare small business, a small service industry, and a few "approved" high-tech business showcases; she should serve as the basis of the cargo cult of an "economic breakthrough", within which ever longer rows of dull state offices will dress up in her clothes, "mastering" the budget under the guise of developing and introducing new technologies, innovative ideas, strategic projects and other buzz-words ...
It is strange, but true - as if apologizing, the guardians of the distribution economy in Russia are trying to give the maximum number of its manifestations names that are similar to confusion with the names of manifestations of the generative economy (this was not the case in the USSR - perhaps these are the consequences of the experience of begging for money from the IMF in exchange for reforms in the 90s).
At the same time, a state itself with a sufficient volume of resources and a predominantly distributive economy can exist for a long time and sustainably. Yes, in such a state the level of inequality is very high, social institutions are weak, the majority of people live in poverty, and technologies in the areas serving the interests or ambitions of power flourish, while in the field of ensuring the overall efficiency of processes and / or ensuring the well-being of the population is hopeless behind. However, the existence of such a state depends on the amount of resources - if it is less (it is cheaper), its states "quietly" eat up and fall apart, if more (it is more expensive) - they stiffen in their system of clan bureaucracy and live for generations, supporting the impoverished existence of 95% of the population , an unstable income of 4% and luxury for 1%, an elegant showcase for the outside world, a bright picture on TV and a complete lack of opportunities inside, except for the only opportunity - to serve in the resource allocation system, enduring humiliation and deprivation in the hope of rising higher in the service hierarchy.
Renowned Russian financier, manager and investment specialist. For six years Andrey has been the executive director of Troika Dialog. He earned his first million as a top manager; eventually, however, he got bored of working for someone else - and Movchan set up his own investment company, Renaissance Investment Management. At the moment Andrey is the managing partner of the Third Rome investment group.
For his work, Andrey was awarded a number of awards and prizes. Forbes magazine named Movchan the most successful head of a management company in the whole of Russia; RBC awarded Andrey the title of "Top Manager of the Year". Movchan's project, Renaissance Investment Management, was also recognized as the financial company of the year.
Andrei never aspired to high, leading positions; in fact, by his first education, he is not an economist or a manager at all - initially Movchan was going to become a physicist. Unfortunately, this profession was not profitable enough; to support his family, Andrei was forced to change his field of activity. Of course, in the process of obtaining a master's degree in business management, Andrei learned a lot of very, very useful things; Movchan, however, has always argued that the main thing in his business is to treat the economy as a game, and not the only and most important business of his life.
Now more than 600 individual private investors alone participate in Andrey's funds; Foreign companies also use the services of Movchan's company - there are many of the largest banks and funds among Andrey's foreign investors.
Andrey and his "RIM" occupy one of the most important positions in the modern investment market - at least at the Russian level. Movchan attracts clients, first of all, by its utmost honesty - his company willingly provides investors with specific data on the current state of affairs in the stock markets. Among other things, Andrey is always
tries to educate clients as widely as possible financially - indeed, an educated investor is able to use his funds much more efficiently, which ultimately benefits the company as a whole.
Business requires maximum concentration from Andrey; the businessman, however, manages to allocate time for his family. Movchan has four children. Andrey's eldest daughter is 20 years old; she is going to become a medic and plans to continue her studies at Harvard. The second daughter is 16 years old; she enjoys music and is learning to play the saxophone. The world of art is also interesting for the third, 11-year-old daughter - she, however, is much closer to the theater; however, the girl is also quite good at exact sciences. The youngest of Andrei's children, a 9-month-old son, has not yet decided on his profession - however, Movchan is sure that the only boy will also show his talents in the future.
Andrei's wife, despite her 9-month-old baby, also works. She is a cardiologist by profession, but now she devotes much more time to a number of venture capital projects in the pharmaceutical industry and is working on creating her own medical center. It would seem that two so busy people should meet only at night, in bed; Movchan and his wife, however, always find time for one common hobby - ballroom dancing. According to Andrey, dancing is quite a useful thing for a businessman - there are not so many activities in this world that can better "saturate" you with a clean, uncomplicated idea of team activity.
