In the midst of the Orange Revolution in the lobby of one of the Dnepropetrovsk channels belonging to the group “Privat”, set free the microphone to give all interested persons to comment on events in the country.

Randomly on the same day in office came to the channel co-owner of “Privatbank” Igor Kolomoisky. Coming out of the office director, he nearly fell into the field of view and decided to wait until the end of the next inhabitant of the city speech, campaigned against Yushchenko. “These thieves themselves orange, like everyone else — look at their cars!” — Shouted at the camera a healthy lad.

Oligarch long heard allegations against the orange and then turned to who was standing beside a friend and dryly added, “But telling the truth, they are all the same. Tretyakov and Poroshenko I bet not on the tram ride around.”

However, the fourth year, Igor Kolomoisky is unchanged sponsor orange camp of Ukrainian politicians. Not having their own political party, Kolomoisky has influence on Ukrainian politics, comparable with the degree of influence of the main sponsor of the Party of Regions Rinat Akhmetov.

Igor Kolomoisky can rightly be considered the most closed oligarch in Ukraine. Amassed a vast fortune he amassed a reputation as the most odious, cruel and cynical businessman of the country.

In the ordinary citizen, his name associated with anything but a transparent ownership structure, which boasts a co-owner of SCM. Most often, the senior partner of a group called Privat raider, cheater, cheat, and almost never — a businessman.

It is many hours of interviews, “Ukrainian Truth” recorded in the heart of the Privat Group — in the office of “Sentosa” — one of the original founders and the founders of the current “Privatbank”. In a large room with two pool tables and an aquarium on the wall of small stature tycoon went in jeans and a sweater.

On Politics

— Do you consider yourself an oligarch?

— No.

— Why? Do you have any influence on politics, and while you are a businessman.

— I have very limited influence on policy — may be more willing to influence than the opportunity to realize these desires.

— What’s your policy?

— Game. To some extent, this is going to be honest themselves in front of him — to say that I tried to do in order to see the company just as I imagined it.

— What should be the society in your view?

— Is fair.

— So, you’re a socialist?

— I think I’m not a socialist, but somewhere more social democrat. (Laughs)

— Are you happy with at least one person whom you enter into politics or support?

— I can not say that I’m someone else happy, because I did not introduce into politics.

— What are the political forces in Ukraine you will never be supported?

— The Communists and Socialists.

— And Yulia Tymoshenko?

— Maintained morally.

— Only the morally?

— Yes, more moral than material. Perhaps there was some material assistance in the field of BYuT. Our company, located in the territory of the Lviv and Ivano—Frankivsk region, do not rule out completely to cooperate with local cells of BYuT.

— But your boys Andrew Olejnik Stanislaw Portnow and went through the list of Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc in the Verkhovna Rada!

— Yes, but I can not say that they are our guys. The fact that he wrote Portnow our relationship is very close to the truth.

I agree with him periodically meet, exchange ideas, consult. But work in understanding how we worked with him when he had his lawyer’s business, no.

And I do Oleynik had not seen and not heard. In fact, since 2006, we are not working with it.

— Party of Regions did you keep?

— Never.

— A person Viktor Yanukovych?

— When were the presidential election of 2004, big business, volunteer force supported Yanukovych.

— And Viktor Yushchenko?

— Then we were not able to support Yushchenko, but now we have his moral support to 100 percent.

— How much did you spend on the Orange Revolution?

— “Privatbank” does not suffer any cost, and each of the shareholders, I think it allocates the funds for these or other events. I personally support the revolution has spent five million dollars.

— By whom the money held?

— We had a few channels from Brodsky. Today is not yet time to call them names.

— How much of “Our Ukraine” people-oriented you?

— I do believe that there are no people-oriented “Private” or to me personally.

— How and Igor Palitca?

— It can be called oriented “Ukrnafta”.

— But you’re with a club in direct contact, right?

— Yes, of course. I think Igor bat today be called a classic lobbyist … And I do not believe that someone does today can affect the “Our Ukraine”.

Maybe because it’s not so much by the number of structure. NUNS — a conglomerate of various political forces. Each of them is quite ideological, there are accomplished people, with a name that will not melt themselves to support lobbying or someone else’s private interests. Especially if it will often go against their conscience.

— A Balogh? You support him financially?

— Finance — no.

— His new project?

— He has not yet been announced. I just heard that he came out of the “Our Ukraine”.

— Balogh you personally to talk about this?

— We had discussed similar version of events. They said that it is time to form a new political entity. But I did not feel that there is Baloga deep faith in such a project and what it actually create within a limited timeframe.

— This has been discussed with you Baloga in funding the project?

— No. This has been discussed only in a friendly dinner, birthday greetings.

— How true is evidence that at one time you were willing to finance the “time”?

— We have even had talks with “Sometimes”, which I was, Korban, Filatov (lawyers—partners “Privat”) and one of the “Pora”, in my opinion, Kaskiv.

It was for help in financing the “pores” in 2006, and Boris Filatov either want to go through the list of “Pora”, or whether he offered it. But then somehow it is not grown together.

— Is it true that you are pushing the demand for political projects that will support — that there were no people Pinchuk?

— If we are talking about people Pinchuk, then tell a story. Once, in 2006 we had a conversation with Mr. Kreinin — then he was a relative of Mr Lytvyn, his son married the daughter of Lytvyn. And it came to the support of the People’s Party.

We said that we in the People’s Party allergic reaction causing a few names. First — this is Mr. Eremeev, which should have been expelled from the cashier of the block. He and I were not then in a very warm relationship. We had a divorce in Drohobych refinery, he left the company, we have visited.

And second — we have heard that the list is Mrs. Litvin Chebotarev (at that time — one of the leaders of “Interpipe”). What we said: “Only if Chebotarev exclude from the list, we can discuss this issue.” But this was said as a joke. Maybe after this, and rumors about our unwillingness to support projects in which there are people Pinchuk.

— You support the “Our Ukraine” during the two election campaigns — and 2006, and 2007?

— Supported. And the more we help no one. Is that Brodsky in the last campaign.

— Why? You knew it was no-go project?

— Brodsky us asking for help. And we have even more for his money supporting it. (Laughs.) Brodsky himself mostly coped with this problem and has funded the entire campaign individually, and we were on a safety net.

— How much does the group “Privat” has cost a past election campaign?

— We must immediately put the points over the “i”, because that’s all — my personal projects and my personal game of politics.

— But this is your support of parties and blocs affects the overall business, “Private”!

— This may affect the overall business, and in fact can not influence. Can affect negatively, positively can …

Suppose Martynov at all deeply apolitical person. A Bogoliubov a categorical opponent of political participation. So my support for this or that politician is not related to general business.

— Then tell us how much you personally have managed the election campaigns of 2006 and 2007?

— I personally would have cost the two campaigns $ 40 million.

— So, you have spent eight times more than the Orange Revolution …

— Yes. We do not spend money to make money.

— And for what? Fun?

— I am a friend of Moscow’s reaction told Berezovsky on the picture on the TV during the Orange Revolution. When he discussed the question of how much wasted money, from Berezovsky reportedly sounded the phrase: “Yes, 40 million, of course, I’m sorry, but what extras”. (Laughs)

— Do you feel the same?

— No, I have no such feelings. The fact that Berezovsky lives in London, and Ukraine may worry a little more than Georgia. Or maybe less.

— You communicate with Berezovsky?

— I do not even know him. Saw him once in my life in 1999 at the inauguration of Kuchma. It flew by, he had a halo around the suite, they all wanted him to say hello … Well, I’m part of it all looked. And so — had the honor to be represented.

— You have been a unique project — it Selyans’ka party in the 2006 elections. They were on the electoral list Martynov and Igor Palitca. Tell me, how has managed them?

— This project arose purpose. (Laughs) As far as I know, we have fond Martynov helicopter and air sports, and on this basis, he has different friends. And one of them, in my opinion, was the leader of the party, he drew Martynov at the project, wrote it in five. Maybe for some meal and they were invited to bat “warm company.” But there I have not spent a single penny they spend their own money. (Laughs.)

— Let’s talk about the legends around Kolomoisky. The phrase “suckers need to throw” — your authorship?

— No, not at all mine. Incidentally, I to the word “fuckers” very bad attitude and I think that this is not a worthy word.

If the word “nerd” in the usual sense are called consumers, the people, ordinary people, in my understanding of the word “nerd” is associated with a person who has to be cheating, throwing or somehow pull it out of his savings.

So I’m not very good at the word “nerd”, because aferizm and fraud I’m not very nice.

— The second crown phrase ascribed to you — “I do not pay taxes and do not return the debt.”

— This is the legend of Mr. Vydrin.

It can be seen when he wrote his opus, it likes to drink a glass of brandy. And then, apparently, he is dreaming and in a drunken delirium.

He has repeatedly apologized to me personally. I told him: “I personally do not, you’re in public. Because you are always printed, and phrases that you have not heard from me. It’s you supposedly gave to me, and I suspect that it did Brodsky.”

— Who is for you Brodsky? Partner, connected by spetsporucheniyam?

— He is our old friend, acquaintance, friend. Even more than companion. We know him since late 1996 and early 1997, were partners with him in “Kiev statements.”

People become friends when they were with another person rather pleasant moments spent pleasant days, received some positive emotions. And our partnership with the Brodsky began with the fact that we have negative emotions.

He and I drank so much grief, that without him in the future could not. (Laughs)

On the Media, 1 +1, “Ukrnafta”

— What media are you currently own or control?

— I know that my friend Gennady Bogolyubov talks with Mr Lozhkin, they have warm relations, and Lozhkin has some joint projects — is the magazine “Focus” and “Komsomolskaya Pravda”.

— What is a share?

— I do not think other than 50%. Less than 50% Bogolyubov would never have consented.

And I, as you know, I am a partner in the Tretyakov “Glavred”, which belongs to an UNIAN correspondent, the “profile”, some other publications. There is a managing partner of the Tretyakov. But besides this, I still have a heroic story with a “1 +1”.

— Tell us your version — as it was with the purchase of “1 +1” and the end of the story?

— I would like to postpone the story at a time. Today the company is in the CME deal with Fuksmanom and Rodnyansky. I am a member of the Board of Directors of CME I know that there is a confidentiality agreement and I would not want to hurt the deal. When all is finished, and the parties will come out of the process of buying and selling, then we can talk about it.

— Do you realize themselves as curator of “1 +1” in the CME? Not long ago, your partner Gennady Korban said that you are responsible for the Ukrainian part of the business of CME.

— I am not a curator of the Ukrainian part of the business of CME. This Korban think so, maybe so he would have liked. But Corban, unfortunately or fortunately, is neither a shareholder nor a manager of the CME. Therefore, it is not in the know, to put it mildly …

The company CME is constructed so that there is no supervisor on the board of directors of some countries. There is a board of directors, he deals with all matters, including Ukraine. And there are the direct managers who are responsible for the Ukraine.

— Did you take part in the meeting the Board of Directors of CME?

— So far I have not had a chance. Not once. Hopefully in the near future to get to a meeting of directors of CME, to be held in Bucharest.

— What would you recommend they step on the Ukrainian market?

— Only one — to quickly complete the relationship with Fuksmanom and Rodnyansky.

— Is it true that you bought the TET channel?

— Half of the property. Gone but not yet formalized. But with Surkis has already agreed. We’re friends with them in distress in the “pros.”

— What Surkis have attitude to the “1 +1”?

— And they are “pros” such as victims, as we also paid for the shares Rodniansky. The fact that the same time I paid my money and Surkis.

— What is this news? What will happen now Surkis and Rodnyansky will diverge?

— They’re all razrulit. Surkis before its involvement in this story did not advertise. It was our common project with them.

— And now you are together with Surkis own 3% of CME?

— No, separately. For shares of CME I paid my money. And when we’ll look at the whole situation, Surkis get their interest, or shares of CME, or money. But among the owners of “1 +1” will not be.

— Who assumes the role of leader of the canal TET your team?

— As we invited genprodyusera Savik Shuster. His task was to oversee the channel in order to raise the rating. He first took up with enthusiasm, and then, when he went to deal with the “Inter”, he was too busy.

— By the way, when you started the conflict with Fuksmanom and Rodnyansky, “Ukrainian Truth” rented office in the house next door to the apartment Rodnyansky. And due to the fact that you have started the friction in Rodnyansky increased protection, it is constantly circulating in the yard, checked the attic, basement. Why are people afraid of you?

— There are two possible explanations. The first — maybe they are really worried and scared. A different version — it just wants to protect Rodnyansky earn extra money, so the wind the extra work shows the importance and necessity.

— But you can not demonize a person from scratch. Something compels people to take protection in the event of a conflict with Kolomoisky?

— That “something” makes me take protection in the event of a conflict with someone.

— With whom? What was the last conflict has forced you to take the guard?

— I took it back in 1998.

— Due to a conflict with Lazarenko?

— We had no conflict with Lazarenko. Then there was this general insecurity.

— What do you know about the alleged merger talks on “Inter” and CME?

— I know that the negotiations were conducted in the second half of 2007, but came to nothing. The positions of the parties at that time were so far apart that the negotiations ended immediately.

— How relevant is the fact that part of the assets of “Inter” came under the control of Dmitry Firtash?

— That portion of the assets of “Inter” passed Firtash, long rumored. Also there were rumors that some of the assets transferred to Mr. Haiduk and Taruta. Personally, I have not seen any documents, but more inclined to a version with Firtash. That is, if someone from Khoroshkovsky something and passed, it’s probably more to Firtash than to Gaiduk and Taruta.

— And today’s advertising media war was the consequence of failure of mergers 1 +1 and “Inter”?

— Advertising war began before the talks began, that is, in the spring of last year. At the beginning of the war has affected the entry of channels into the overall program Pinchuk with “Inter” in advertising. In this connection there is not quite the market conditions that allow pressing the “1 +1” and other channels in the advertising market.

— When will a transaction between a CME and Rodnyansky, you’ll be a chief curator at a business in Ukraine?

— I think not. There is a Marina Williams in CME. Today Ukraine is engaged in the new Romanian manager. We assume a constant Lauder conduct consultations regarding Ukraine. The last time we met on Saturday evening, had dinner in London. He was interested in what’s going on in Ukraine, where we move, as the political situation? What happens to Timoshenko

— And how do you satisfy his curiosity?

— I said that Tymoshenko in its activities went beyond a little, on the one hand, the coalition agreements, and on the other side — common sense.

— When did you last see Tymoshenko?

— At the end of December. I asked him to help organize a meeting Igor Palitca wanted to talk about the situation in the oil and gas market, to know what surprises await us. We met in her office. We talked for about an hour. I left with confidence that everything is in order that there will be normal market conditions. She met me with a smile, a smile accompanied.

— Let the order of what she has gone beyond the coalition agreement?

— For example, the Cabinet of Ministers of the coalition agreement was to develop a market mechanism purchasing gas on the Ukrainian market, regardless of its origin — the Russian or Ukrainian, and in parallel develop a system of incentives, grants and subsidies for the poor. But what has happened now with the “Ukrnafta” indicates that this stipulation be ignored.

— Here, perhaps, you say self—interest?

— Each person has their own interests they say. Today I am a major shareholder “Ukrnafta”. And in due time, when he signed the coalition agreement, I Igor Palitca said that it is clearly written: gas, regardless of where it is sourced, should be sold at market prices. But today we have another result — the National Commission ordered the Energy Regulatory “Ukrnafta” to give the gas instead of $ 60 for 40 — in the market value of $ 180 per thousand cubic meters.

— How did you react to the words of Tymoshenko that “Ukrnafta” led by adventurers?

— We are extremely negatively reacted to it.

By the way, when Yulia Tymoshenko said on patrons of the “Private” in government, I would like to see she did not forget to rank as their number and of itself.

Because it is Tymoshenko praised us for assistance in returning 18% “Ukrtatnafta” and urged the government to return 38%, remaining among the Tatars. A director of “Ukrtatnafta” Ovcharenko, which it now wants to shift, Tymoshenko called “the most experienced manager of a large company.”

— But the anger Tymoshenko also to some extent justified. For example, the state has a controlling interest and “Ukrtatnafta” and “Ukrnafta”, but can not put his leadership of the company …

— Why not? Tymoshenko said that the alleged “Ukrnafta” for two years held a meeting of shareholders. So we sent her a letter to shareholders, which wrote the last time the meeting was held. This was obviously closer than two years ago.

State is represented on the supervisory board “Ukrnafta” — 11 members appointed to six there on a quota “Naftogaz”. That is, Tymoshenko has most of the supervisory board.

— However, it wants to control the current management “Ukrnafta”!

— A cabinet is not a shareholder of this company, the shareholder is a “Naftogaz”. And we have to take and compare the results when “Ukrnafta” managed “Naftogaz” to the results, when in 2003 there came Igor Palitca.

— Discover the secret of how you always manage to ugovorivat state representatives to keep your man “Ukrnafta”?

— We tried to convince the “Naftogaz” to put our director for probably three years — from 2000 to 2002. Finally, we convinced. Because in 2003 was a transitional situation, the market was not stable, the company showed no very good results was the growth kreditorki, debetorki growth, there were problems with gas.

At that stage we were able to convince Yuri Boiko, who was then the head of “Naftogaz”. They then had something to do — the gas business, the consortium, but in reality “Ukrnafta” was ownerless.

— And you gave it free?

— Were paid for this time all the taxes, was shown a huge profit. To show it, I had to earn it and sakkumulirovat. And, except for taxes, dividends have been paid to the state and all its shareholders. From 2003 to 2007 dividends were paid to two and a half billion hryvnia!

— Many believe that the situation with the leadership of “Ukrnafta” can not be explained except as a corruption of the “Private” …

— We live in Ukraine. And when they do rankings of corruption, we, unfortunately, are in positions that do not correspond to the potential of our country.

— You or your managers corrupt officials?

— No, we never corrupt officials, in particular, Boyko.

— Okay, if corrupted, would you confess?

— (Laughs) It depends on our relations with Boyko, and they have more or less good. But I want to ask another question: whether the payment of dividends, full of all taxes and increase payments to the budget of corruption? That “Naftogaz” to receive dividends, and we can do with them all that it sees fit. If necessary, he can send them to some island.

You see, there’s a fine line between corruption and public interest. Because the public interest to get more taxes. A “Ukrnafta”, earning a profit, almost did not pay taxes, but our arrival was to pay two, three or five times. And now the question is corruption for the state? If it is set private, but an effective director and began to receive more money.

— True, it’s your phrase: “corruption is an instrument of struggle against bureaucracy”?

— I think that it is not mine. I could use it, but I am not a founder. I did not come up.

— You agree with it?

— At some point, yes. If inflation is to some extent the engine of the economy and the hyperinflation it is a destroyer, then corruption can be, and is at some point in the struggle with bureaucracy, but in the end leads to even greater and more terrible bureaucracy.

O Yushchenko, Tymoshenko Akhmetov and

— You say that supported the revolution of 2004, while you keep Tymoshenko, backed Yanukovych.

— Yes, I am happy with what happened in the country after the revolution, how it develops. Maybe not at the pace and not in the way as we would like those who stood on Independence Square. I was not there. Maybe people wanted more, the expectations were too high.

But if we take today Ukrainian “Forbes” named “Focus”, we see that there year on year increase in the number of millionaires. The last time we wrote the names of 130. And how many did not write? I am in Dnepropetrovsk, Kiev, and in Western Ukraine, I can see how society develops.

If we are trying to build the economy of Ukraine on the Western model, then, in general, we build a society of consumption. So, the main indicator of consumer society — the index of consumption — the country is growing.

— At the upcoming presidential election you’ll be supporting Yushchenko?

— Yes.

— What is the advantage of Yushchenko and Tymoshenko to Yanukovych? You are a pragmatic businessman. You must like a hard head.

— On the contrary. I’m the kind of business people who understand that the economy works better than the less it touched his hands. Less than to touch it, the less it trying to steer, the better it works.

A function of the state shall consist only in regulating the function, so that no one abused the opportunities that give the market economy, did not constitute a cartel, did not violate antitrust laws.

— You are a person of the group “Privat” chose the Yushchenko as the most gentle, loyal to you and most infirm in government.

— I can not say that Yushchenko is very loyal to our concerns. If we remember 2005 and the history around the Nikopol Ferroalloy Plant, he said that “a gang tried to change to another gang.”

— For all the time it was the only one, and then, indirect, criticism of your address by Yushchenko. Look how he criticizes the Party of Regions and the rest!

— Yes, the Party of Regions — a business structure that is presented and the party and faction, and the business community!

I do not know of any country in the world where possible such a conglomerate, as the Party of Regions! It is a symbiosis between the SCM, the Party of Regions, Ukrpodshipnik, Conti … Whether they party, or faction, or the board of directors.

Even in Russia, does not. Although there is a faction “United Russia” includes more than 300 people, but there is none to 100 people sitting on the “Rusal”, and 100 people — of “Norilsk nickel”. This, they even can not imagine. And here it is possible. Other country I do not know. (Laughs)

— Why do not express such claims Rinat Akhmetov in person?

— I am expressing. I had the good fortune to meet him in 2003 and since then every time talking about it.

— And did he say?

— And he laughed.

— Where did you meet?

— In the office of Gregory Surkis. I was on business, and Rinat Akhmetov went on his own.

We then were in conflict over the Central Mining and Processing Plant. We are introduced to Gregory M.. He said: “By the way, here is Igor V., but Rinat Akhmetov, meet.” We shook hands and parted.

— As a result, Central Mining was in the hands of Akhmetov.

— Time was, therefore, by law.

— And yet, why do you like best Yushchenko, Yanukovych and Tymoshenko what? If the president will be, for example, Timoshenko, where you find yourself in such a case, you see?

— If the president will Tymoshenko, I see myself in exile.

— Where have already picked up?

— I pick up — I still have time. (Laughs.) Although, you never know, if implemented quickly what is in the process of BYuT and Party of Regions — the elimination of the post of president and two—party dictatorship — that time may be much smaller than I imagined.

Continuation of the interview: Kolomoisky: Yanukovych personally offered me to enter the list of Regions Party