MBS Blog

“Best kept secret in Europe!”  That is the cornerstone behind the founding of MBS Ltd.  Our philosophy is that we can help companies navigate and mitigate the pitfalls and obstacles of doing business here, to take advantage of the many opportunities. This requires vision, and a LONG TERM perspective. For those individuals and companies that have that, the rewards will be great as Ukraine is a “virgin” market, untapped and ready to be reshaped.

We believe Ukraine will at some point, break free from current restraints and “leap frog” over many of its more developed neighbors like Poland. With MBS Ltd. and very soon BOZONGO.COM, investors and entrepreneurs will have the tools they need to realize their goals here.

Hard-Core Investors Staying Put Despite Endless Crises

KIEV, Ukraine — Weak competition, high profits still make nation a promised land for some businesses. No matter what Ukraine throws at them, a small, hard-core group of foreign investors – from giant multinational corporations to lone expatriates – weathers the turbulence.

A conveyor line at the Trostyanets chocolate factory in Sumy Oblast, the biggest Kraft Foods factory in Ukraine.

They stay through crisis and boom times, “blue” and “orange” politicians, a hryvnia worth 4.6 to the dollar and a national currency that trades closer to 10.

They stay put when other foreigners get scared away by headlines of rampant corruption, a sea of bureaucratic red tape and political chaos. Who are these determined businesspeople? Do they make a lot of money here? If so, how do they manage to swim in Ukraine’s muddy waters?

“Ukraine is the best kept secret in Europe,” insisted George Logush, vice president of Kraft Foods International and area director for Ukraine, Eastern Europe and Central Asia. “The European media did a wonderful job, focusing on negative things and rarely showing positive aspects. [To them, I say]: ‘Thank you for sheltering this market for us from the competitors.”

Kraft Foods Ukraine is part of Kraft Foods, the world’s second-largest food and beverage company. It is one of the most successful investors in Ukraine, known by Ukrainians for Korona and Milka chocolate, Jacobs coffee, Lux potato chips, holding a leading position in all three categories. In 14 years, Kraft invested more than $150 million into Ukraine’s economy and increased its business by 100 percent, Logush said, a feat that “would not be possible in very many countries.” Today, the Kraft group boasts annual revenue in Ukraine of about $400 million on domestically-produced products, and more on imports, such as coffee.

The company arrived in 1995, when the economy was still reeling from the collapse of the Soviet Union four years earlier. The hryvnia, the new national currency, had not yet arrived. In its place, until 1996, Ukrainians used the karbovanets, a coupon-like form of payments.

One of the keys to Kraft’s success, Logush said, has been the company’s ability to take advantage of hard times to introduce new product lines. “Now we launch biscuits,” Logush said. “Crisis is the time when you can shake up the established order, because it’s being shaken anyway.”

Yet Kraft remains one of a relatively small number of multinational corporations and foreign investors who have ventured into Ukraine, a vast and largely untapped market of 46 million citizens.

The nation has attracted a mere $35 billion in foreign investment since independence. By comparison, nearly $200 billion has poured into neighboring Poland, a European Union member with eight million fewer citizens than Ukraine, since the Soviet Union’s collapse.

Many investors have stayed out because of corruption, red tape and political squabbles between ex-Prime Minister Victor Yanukovych’s “blue” forces and the “orange” ones led by the now-dissolved alliance of President Victor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko.

Jorge Zukoski, president of the American Chamber of Commerce, said Kraft’s success is shared by many foreign investors brave enough to tiptoe into the market. They stay, Zukoski said, because they’re generating higher profits than they might in other nations. By establishing themselves first, companies such as Kraft grew fast, faced limited competition and can look forward to high growth rates ahead.

Zukoski said it helps to be in a place for the long run.

“At the end of the day, the large strategic and institutional investors that we represent see the current global financial crisis as a short-term blip on the radar screen. They look at Ukraine as a 50- to 75-year play and understand that there are very few countries left in the world that have the potential to drive future growth for their companies.” Despite the challenges and difficulties, chamber members keep striving for a Ukraine that is “competitive and well-positioned when global growth resumes,” Zukoski said.

But for some investors, the headaches of doing business in Ukraine are simply too much. And, while normal economic cycles are manageable, sometimes Ukraine’s off-the-charts corruption is not.

“The crisis did not affect our business in Ukraine as much as the corruption,” said Hanan Mor, owner of an investment company, in an interview with Israel’s Calcalist newspaper. “That is why we are stopping any business initiatives in this country.”

But the cheerleading and individual success stories cannot hide the fact that, by many measures, Ukraine’s business climate remains unfavorable. The list of grievances is long: unstable legislation, corruption, red tape, non-transparent taxation system, raider attacks, abuse of intellectual property and auctioneer rights.

Politicians are aware of the problems, even if they seem unwilling or unable to improve the situation. As parliamentarian Nataliya Korolevska told an investors’ conference in February: “As the world investment capital reaches $1.5 trillion, Ukraine has to do everything to participate in the process under competitive terms.”

Hard-core investors say instability is part of the game.

“I’ve been here for 15 years and this country has never been stable. I wouldn’t advise anybody to stay out of Ukraine, just because they want to wait for the next election,” said Glen Willard, a 15-year business veteran in Ukraine and founder of Willard, an advertising and public relations company.

Willard admitted that the worst part of doing business in Ukraine is its unpredictability. “Other than that, business is not easy anytime, anywhere,” Willard said: “So just get over it.”

Kraft’s Logush also said Ukraine is not for the squeamish.

“If you need to find an excuse to leave the country, you’ll find it,” Logush said. “Particularly, in terms of political instability, I think people are just extremely shortsighted and purposely blind. How long has democracy been in Ukraine?”

American businessman Paul Waters is one of hundreds of expatriates who have thrived on the Ukrainian market. Since arriving 17 years ago, Waters appears to have done a little bit of everything in Ukraine and he has no intention of leaving. From steel trading to the construction business, software and solar panel systems development, Waters said that “Ukraine has been very kind to me. I could be sitting on my boat in California fishing. But in Ukraine, I am enjoying everything. It’s not a Disneyland, it is real,” Waters said.

Waters did, however, confess that it took him awhile to get accepted. He also was cheated several times by Ukrainian partners.

“When I arrived, there were all these Soviet bosses, running businesses and, certainly, they were not as open to our ideas,” Waters said. Ukrainian companies still lack efficient administrators, but they have plenty of highly educated people, computer wizards and other professional standouts to choose from, according to Waters.

Seasoned foreign investors have had success in the financial, insurance and telecommunication sectors, as well as food production and construction, according to Konstantin Stepanov, chief analyst at Sokrat investment group.

The leading individual foreign direct investment in Ukraine’s all-important metal sector came from the $4.8 billion re-sale of the former Kryvorizhstal steel mill in Kryviy Rih, the nation’s largest steelmaker, to ArcelorMittal Steel in 2005. The sale followed a scandalous purchase by a group led by Ukrainian billionaires Rinat Akhmetov and Victor Pinchuk, who bought the steel mill for six times less than what ArcelorMittal, the world’s largest steel company, paid in an open auction.

So, 18 years after independence, Ukraine still represents a big gamble with big potential payoffs – and terrible downsides. It’s a high-risk, high-reward game, Logush admitted. But many are betting that emerging economies will get out of the crisis more quickly than developed ones.

“Which of them will [foreign investors] gamble on first? The ones with the greatest multiplier effect, the largest scales, like China and Brazil. But they always want to spread the risks,” Logush said. “I think those who’ll go into the Ukrainian economy will do very well.”

(from the Kyiv Post)

This is the right way to close out 2008!! The most tumultuous year in decades was a turning point for everyone in the wake of a global economic tsunami.  As the tide recedes…the doubters, deniers, dreamers and dogmatists some of whom once thought socialism was the way forward, have begun to pillory the very system that has brought the greatest amount of wealth, prosperity and progress to humankind.  Capitalism..or at least what is referred to describe the current system-if that is possible-is again the enemy. 

On the eve of a new year, Caroline Baum writing on www.bloomberg.com , nails the manifesto-however old and tattered- to the public square of the internet for all to see. In the light of examination and reflection, her thesis stands.

Happy New Year from MBS, Ltd!

Capitalism Is Worst System Except for the Rest

Commentary by Caroline Baum

Dec. 30 (Bloomberg) — The year 2008 will be remembered as one that exposed the fatal flaws in free-market capitalism, sending it to an untimely death.

Or will it?

That capitalism’s obituary is already being written suggests the enemies of the free market were waiting to pounce.

Last week, Arianna Huffington, co-founder of the Huffington Post, wrote that laissez-faire capitalism, “a monumental failure in practice,” should be “as dead as Soviet Communism” as an ideology.

On National Public Radio, Daniel Schorr pronounced “the death of a doctrine” in his year-end review.

All I could think of was Winston Churchill’s assertion about democracy. Capitalism is surely the worst economic system, except for all the others that have been tried.

With its ideology under fire and its practice falsely maligned, it is to the defense of free markets that I devote my final column of the year.

Before you can declare free markets a failure, you have to establish that they exist, says Paul Kasriel, chief economist at the Northern Trust Co. in Chicago.

“We do not have free markets in credit in the U.S. or anywhere else that I know of,” he says. “The price of short- term credit is fixed by central banks. It would only be by accident that a central bank would fix the price of short-term credit” at the precise level that a free market would.

Chosen People

Fixing the price of any other commodity, including labor, has proven to be a failure, an affront to the inviolable invisible hand. Yet when it comes to setting the interest rate that will keep the economy on an even keel, we put our faith in a chosen few to get it right.

All sorts of unintended consequences flow forth from central bankers’ fixing of a short-term rate. Hold the rate too low, and it leads to a misallocation of capital into, say, housing or dot- com stocks. That’s what happened in the late 1990s and again in the early part of this decade.

“We are now experiencing the economic and financial market fallout from (Alan) Greenspan’s interference with the free market,” Kasriel says.

In a true free market, risk-takers are punished for bad bets. Not so in the current crisis, where financial institutions — with the exception of Lehman Brothers — are deemed too big to fail and rescued, merged or recapitalized.

Army of Regulators

One supposed nail in capitalism’s coffin is the assertion that deregulation created the problems. This is curious, given that banks, which are at the root of the credit crunch, are among the most highly regulated institutions.

“There is a small army of people overseeing the banking industry,” says Paul DeRosa, a partner at Mt. Lucas Management Corp. in New York. And yet “we’ve had a banking crisis every 15 years since 1837. The number of people devoted to regulation doesn’t seem to matter.”

Regulators from the Federal Reserve, Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of the Controller of the Currency and New York State Banking Commission are “on the premises 365 days a year,” he says.

The regulatory structure may have been antiquated and overlapping. That’s no excuse for the regulators to be caught napping.

Censuring the free market is a way of deflecting blame from the true source, according to Dan Mitchell, senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington.

Compromised Overseers

“The genesis of the problem is bad government policy,” Mitchell says, pointing to everything from easy money to “affordable lending schemes” to the “corrupt system of subsidies from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac” to the tax code’s favorable treatment of debt (the interest is deductible) versus equity.

Fannie’s and Freddie’s generous campaign contributions (anywhere else, these would be called bribes) encouraged Congress to look the other way as the two housing finance agencies used their implicit government guarantee to increase their leverage and buy riskier mortgages.

Those clamoring for more regulation as a solution to the current crisis are forgetting that Congress has oversight responsibility for the regulator of those agencies.

“I have no confidence regulation will solve the problem,” says Allan Meltzer, professor of economics at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. “Lawyers and bureaucrats make regulations. Markets figure out how to circumvent the costly ones.”

Imperfect Like Us

As a case in point, Meltzer pointed to the Basel Accords, which “required banks that hold more risky assets to hold more reserves. So they held them off their balance sheet, where they went from being poorly monitored to not monitored at all.”

Capitalism has spread across the globe, lifting millions out of poverty as “a direct consequence of government stepping out of the way,” DeRosa says.

Yet critics of free-market capitalism are implicitly arguing for a bigger role for government.

Alas, government isn’t some benevolent matriarch acting in the public interest, even if it knew what that was. It is a conglomeration of politicians acting in their own self-interest, guided by payoffs from special-interest groups. That’s a poor substitute for the market’s price signals, not to mention a guarantee of inefficiency and waste.

“Capitalism is the only system that produces both growth and freedom,” Meltzer says. Unlike socialism and communism, “it doesn’t depend on someone’s ideas of perfection.”

Yes, markets are guilty of excess, greed, even corruption.

“We’re not perfect people,” Meltzer says. “Capitalism matches mankind.”

Technorati Tags: 2008, turning point, global economic crisis, capitalism, Anton Olff, socialism, MBS Ltd., Caroline Baum, www.bloomberg.com, free markets, Arianna Huffington, Huffington Pos, Soviet Union, Communism, National Public Radio, Daniel Schorr, Winston Churchill, democracy, ideology, Paul Kasriel, Northern Trust Co., Chicago, central banks, short-term credit, commodity, labor, Alan Greenspan, risk takers, Lehman Brothers, deregulation, credit crunch, banking industry, Paul DeRosa, Mt. Lucas Management Corp., New York, Federal Reserve, Securities and Excahnge Commission, Office of the Controller of the Currency, New York State Banking Commission, Dan Mitchell, Cato Institute, Washington D.C., Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, debt, equity, Congress, Allan Meltzer, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, lawyers, bureaucrats, Basel Accords, special interest groups, freedom, greed, corruption, mankind

Some of my associates have asked me why I have not posted any news about the recent reformation of the Orange Coalition within the Ukrainian Government.  Well…to be honest, I did read the news with some delight. It is not that I am a supporter of any political faction. On the contrary, my focus is business…and business craves stability and predictabilty.  The financial crisis has forced political rivals to set aside their differences and come together and address the problems facing Ukraine. MAYBE.

I hate to sound like Machiavelli here, but is there anyone out there who believes that this grand alliance will be nothing more than temporary? There are “no permanent allies, only permanent interests” to paraphrase the Renaissance philosopher.  Human nature being what it is-and it is a spectacle to behold-is not about to change because a few politicians have sheathed their metaphoric swords and embraced each other.

Ultimately, Ukraine will be stabilize when its politicians realize that they can benefit more from that stability, even if it means that they have to temper their personal ambitions to the greater good. This could come as a result of crisis, or it could come when Ukraine grows-and it will continue to do that-to the point when its politics have evolved. So far…and to its credit…Ukraine has not devolved to a command and control economy, nor has the democratic political trajectory been altered.

The bottom line for many of us who live, work and invest in Ukraine is that things will improve over the long term. Ukraine is in fact, more advanced than many of her critics want to admit-including some Western Europeans who recently used this to deny a road map to NATO.

Technorati Tags: Ukraine, Ukrainian Government, command and control economy, democracy, NATO, Western Europe, Anton Olff, politicians, Machiavelli, human nature, Orange Coalition, business, stability, predictability, political faction,