The crisis will affect venture financing in two ways

The crisis will be reflected in two ways. On the one hand, new investors will come who are looking for new objects for investments, for example, after a failure with real estate and banks. On the other hand, there will be a strong delay, for 2-3 years, with the withdrawal of funds from already invested projects, as it was in the crisis of 1998. As you know, the venture industry reproduces itself to a significant extent, and the delay in the exits will not allow you to use the money already allocated for the venture. So fresh money will come from outside, and those that have already been invested by funds will be delayed, i.e. internal sources will be reduced. As a result, it may turn out that the volume of supply will decrease.

- Do you agree with the comments that speculators leave the venture industry, but professionals remain in it? Was there any interest of speculators in this direction at all?I have not seen speculators in this area in our country.

Rather, most investors are enthusiasts who spent their own money earned in another business. They are – and they will remain, gradually becoming professionals.

- How successful can the next selection of management companies - applicants for state co-financing, which is being prepared by a Russian venture company, be in the current conditions?So far, judging by the officials' words, there are no risks of reducing state financing, all state corporations, including RVC (and this is, in fact, a state corporation), will operate in the same volumes.

As for private investors - potential applicants for RVC money - I am familiar with at least 4-5 companies that still want to participate in the next RVC competition. Of course, we don't have many fund managers yet, but the crisis has nothing to do with it, and there is money ready to go to the competition.

- Has the situation changed for the better with the shortage of innovative projects in which you can invest?The deficit remained.

This is a standard working condition in Russia, and it is not due to the fact that there are no ideas, but because there are not enough professionals who can turn ideas into a business model. I would not talk about improving the situation, rather, new terms come instead of new projects – the same nanotechnology, etc., but if the project is weak from the point of view of future capitalization, then whatever you call it, it will not get better.

- It turns out that the increase in government funding for R&D has not given an increase in the number of attractive projects for venture business?Over the past three years, there has been more public money, and interest in attracting private ones has decreased.

And if scientists see that they do not need private money, then they give up trying to commercialize their projects, and even more so do not think about any capitalization - it is more convenient for them to adjust to the state without thinking about the result.

- Won't the emergence of RUSNANO as a giant "state venture fund" lead to even greater competition for projects? It is known that the state corporation has already lured a number of such scarce venture managers from private business…Rather no than yes, because Rosnanotech wants the project to be both nano and at a fairly advanced stage, and with clear capitalization prospects, and there are so few such projects that there is nothing to regret.

If we talk about managers, I am not sure that working at Rosnanotech will add a significant plus to their reputation and strengthen their track record. Probably, it will be a pity for the lost years and opportunities.

Interviewed by Ivan Sterligov, "Open Economy"Portal "Eternal youth" www.vechnayamolodost.ru

13.11.2008