Anatoly Chubais: “Wish me to create a Russian Apple in the nanoindustry”

Earlier, the head of Rosnano, Anatoly Chubais, told reporters that the parameters of state support for Rosnano until 2020 can be determined in spring 2016. Currently, according to him, there is clarity only with the volume of state guarantees, but they do not cover all the requirements of Rosnano in financing.

At the Open Innovations Forum , Anatoly Chubais told Kommersant in an exclusive interview about how the company would get out of the situation, as well as about his mistakes, about attracting Chinese capital, about the impact of sanctions on the development of nanoindustry in Russia and much more.

Source: gazeta.ru

')
"Megamind" leads the most interesting statements from the interview .

On the meaning of Rosnano

[Rosnano works in many areas]: from our pharmaceuticals to the unique robot we made for the post looks very nice.

The meaning of Rosnano’s activity is to create a nano industry. Moreover, in this very nanoindustry there is a very simple and easily verifiable indicator - sales. You can’t invent anything here, you don’t round out, distort it - we don’t measure, Rosstat measures. When we were created in 2007, we were given the task: in 2015, the Russian nanoindustry should have an annual volume of production and sales of 900 billion rubles. 2015 is close to completion, I can firmly say that we will be able to complete this task. The emerging new industry is what was not there before, it is new technologies, new products, the diversification of our economy, the tearing off of an oil needle.

About investment

130 billion rubles for 7 years "Rosnano" received a capital and 180 billion rubles of state guarantees, for which we took out loans, which we return in full. And if to be completely honest, the 130 billion capital needs to be compared not with 900 billion production volumes, but so far only with 300 billion - this is the production volume in those project companies in which we invested our money, because 900 is divided into 300 of our company and 600 companies independent of us. 300 billion is also a good volume, but, most importantly, not even these figures, the most important thing is the dynamics. We see that the nanoindustry in the country is growing at a rate of 12% per year.

Against the background of well-known indicators of GDP growth and industry, this is a very good dynamic indicator. Plus, we see that nanoindustry in labor productivity is about two times more than the average productivity of the manufacturing industry.

On the ratio of Russian and foreign investors of the company

We are on such an important transition, on which this proportion will change. Its essence is as follows: until recently, we invested directly from the balance in projects with partners. Of course, 80% of partners are Russian partners, I think that 20% are foreign partners, not more. At the same time, respectively, 20% of our businesses are located abroad, in Silicon Valley, including, in Korea, in China and other countries.

About a year and a half ago, we adopted a new strategy, within the framework of which we will act only and above all through investment funds. We will create investment funds or, in classical world terminology, private equity funds. Creating these private equity funds, we start with the proportions of 50 to 50, that is, 50% of our money, rosanovsky, 50% - not our money. Actually, the first funds have already been created.

If we take the fact for today, we have a planned figure for this year - we need to attract external money for 20 billion rubles. I think the proportion will be about half and half. Half of them will be Russian private money, half of them will be foreign money.

On the impact of sanctions on Rosnano

[Influenced] seriously enough, and I do not agree with someone who shrugs or proudly says: “It's even better. We will do more. ” Guys, you are not in a hurry, this is a serious topic, in which there are two components: technological and financial.

The technology component means restrictions on the supply of a variety of equipment, and in many cases it is tangible and painful, and the financial component, in essence, means the closure of the western - European, American financial markets. We got on both: the one and the other. In terms of finance, our whole concept of transition to private equity funds was made with us together with the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, with which we were to create the first private equity fund.

We have found a replacement in this case in the face of Chinese partners who are willing to invest with us in private equity funds, with which we create them, now we are creating the second one. In this sense, both the financial aspect of sanctions and the technological aspect of sanctions, being tangible, nevertheless, did not destroy us a single project. Complicated - yes, destroyed - no.

On Russia's chances of becoming a technology leader in the future

I will try to answer clearly if possible. I will begin the answer with the following: I do not know the answer to this question.
And, frankly, nobody knows him. However, there are some individual thoughts on this. There are optimistic thoughts, and there are pessimistic ones. I'll start with optimistic.

I believe that what started in the country seven years ago, called “the creation of Russian institutions for building a Russian innovative economy,” started very correctly, very timely, and is one of the most important challenges, the most important task for the country. No need to hurry, for seven years there is not a single successful country innovation model, no matter who you analyze - Israel, South Korea, Taiwan, Silicon Valley - 15-20 years. In this sense, we are still in short pants, just early.

But, in my understanding, these groundwork are potentially capable of solving the problems you are talking about. I see technological advances and in the real sector, I see IT, if I understand correctly, almost no one notices this - Russian IT has become the second export sector in the country. The first largest export high-tech sector in the country is military-technical cooperation, and the second is IT. And he moves forward.

The pessimistic answer is that there is one thing that is outside the innovation economy, but which is a prerequisite for its effectiveness - these are the fundamental foundations of a market economy, such as competition, which weighs on costs and forces them to reduce by introducing new technologies. This thing is so deep, so fundamental that the weaker it is, the weaker the original symbol in an innovative economy. And with this we have to do, to put it mildly, not very much, and this is what is holding back my unbridled optimism.

On the difference between science and innovation

Let me tell you about my own mistake exactly in this area. I started doing this new absolutely for me area, in which I simply did not know anything, in 2007, first proceeded from the fact that it is very important that scientists think about implementation, engage in implementation, focus on commercialization, on earnings and so on. . Today I think I was wrong - scientists should be engaged in science.

There is a simple definition of how science differs from innovation: science is the transformation of money into knowledge, innovation is, conversely, the transformation of knowledge into money. Different mentality, different values, different head. The task is not for scientists to commercialize their inventions, the task is for a whole class to emerge, a whole community of people, institutions, organizations, financial structures that have their legal, regulatory, legislative support, who have their support, who are engaged in the transformation of knowledge in money. And so that these two communities, scientific and innovative, find a common language - this is what needs to be done. This is a different understanding.

What Anatoly Chubais dreams of

Very little, very modestly everything: wish me to still create a Russian Apple in the nanoindustry.