“For two years NIBULON has built 4.5 mln tons of elevators, constructs ports, barges and the company is doing the right thing”, said Mykola Azarov at the meeting of the  Federation of Employers of Ukraine on November 27, 2012. In Mykolayiv mass-media there was published the article “Open letter to NIBULON’s General Director O.Vadaturskyy” in which the management of the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” and Chernomorskyy Shipbuilding Yard accused Oleksiy Vadaturskyy of non-patriotism and doubted NIBULON’s social responsibility. The reason for offence was the fact that NIBULON is constructing its floating crane in Romania, “a constant competitor of Ukraine’s shipbuilding”. Oleksiy Vadaturskyy has commented on claims against NIBULON. – Firstly, I allow myself to doubt that this “Open letter” was written by the shipyards. After this letter had been published in the Vechirniy Mykolayiv, I called the President of the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” Volodymyr Myhailyuk, whose surname was mentioned in the open letter, to ask whether he was familiar with this it. Volodymyr Myhailyuk answered he had not read the letter and saw it for the first time. It was strange for me to notice the surname of the President of the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” with whom we have been carrying out complicated negotiations as to construction of two tugs. But if there are questions to NIBULON, I will answer them. I would like to note the situation specificity: in Ukraine a lot of famous businessmen, public persons purchase and build companies abroad, develop their business there and everybody takes it for granted, their decisions do not draw a wide response, and they are not accused of non-patriotism. Not only businessmen but also officials have cars of non-domestic production, wear expensive suits made abroad. And everybody takes it for granted because people realize we must improve our production in order not to be ashamed of using things made in Ukraine. Patriotism consists in improvement of our production. Competition of producers to attract a buyer does well both to buyers and to producers who have to improve themselves. It is a normal market approach. In this case we are not demonstrated a market approach, but they force us to make decisions against company’s interests. Besides, they want to force exactly us because the companies of maritime and economic complex constructed and continue to construct their own vessels abroad. In particular, last year Mariupol Sea Port constructed a dredger and an ice class tug in Romania, Mykolayiv SE Delta-Pilot constructed 5 search and rescue vessels and a tug in Estonia and also a dredger in Romania, Chernomorneftegaz constructed drilling platforms in Singapore, Odesa Sea Port built its tugs in China and etc. And nobody asks any questions. When in 2009 NIBULON announced the beginning of its own fleet construction, we received a lot of proposals for cooperation. We received attractive and profitable proposals from foreign companies. With prejudice to NIBULON’s interests but proceeding from good and patriotic motives we decided to build 24 non-self-propelled vessels in Mykolayiv city, at the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean”. In this case our patriotism ran into money taking into account waste of money, forces and time. Without NIBULON’s orders this shipyard would not operate over the past three years, because during several years we remained the only customers. Due to our serial orders, the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” operated quite successfully. – And after all this you are being accused that “on cooperation completion of the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” with NIBULON, the state tax inspection charged about UAH 11.6 mln of additional tax liabilities for difference between prime cost and contract price, and also UAH 8.7 mln of fines. “. – It is nonsense. Taking into account such a series and such technologies the vessels can not be unprofitable. Besides, I have an expert report of Ukrvneshekspertiza performed by the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” order and dated February 11, 2010. According to it the vessels of such a class can be built in Ukraine for UAH 1.24-1.4 mln. We paid UAH 1.5 mln per vessel and that is higher price than a price range existing in the market. We can image the prime cost of one vessel if all 24 vessels would be built simultaneously at 3 Mykolayiv shipyards. – Why? – It is very expensive to keep a shipyard in working condition even if it does not have any orders. If there is one customer, he has to cover all the expenses. Consequently, taking into account an existing scheme of the prime cost calculation and absence of other orders, if we placed 24 orders to 3 shipyards simultaneously, thus, we would pay expenses of three shipyards. It is clear that the prime cost would exceed the shipbuilding contract price. One customer can not cover all the  production and other expenses of all shipyards. Our orders would become unprofitable immediately, and the tax authorities would charge additional tax liabilities not only to the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” but also to two other companies. It is possible to create a situation when expenses for motor boat construction will be similar to expenses for aircraft carrier construction. Will the quantity of customers increase? I doubt it. On the other hand, while Chernomorskyy Shipbuilding Yard is not overloaded with orders, it is possible to image the amount of charges for one corvette construction. Will the state finance these constant charges of the shipyard, will the taxpayers’ money be used appropriately, and will the military department count the taxpayers’ money? On the other hand, all the statements about additional charge of taxes, supposedly coming from the management of the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean”, are strange. Firstly, they are not approved till now – the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” disputed them within the time limit specified by the law and continues to dispute them under cassational procedure. In July 2011 there was finished a tax audit, on October 18 Mykolayiv circuit court of appeals found illegal and annulled a decision of the state inspection as to additional charge of taxes, and on March 15 Odesa court of appeals came down in favor of the tax administration. The courts of different instances made opposite decisions concerning this issue. Consequently, according to the shipyard cassational appeal, on April 6, 2012 the Supreme Administrative Court decided to start a cassational proceeding. The decision has not been made yet, but all the abovementioned actions testify that the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” does not agree with the tax inspection activities and defends its rightness in the administrative court relying on a price review conclusion. The contract was profitable. The President of the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” Volodymyr Myhailyuk knows well about it and continues to defend the shipyard’s interests and to dispute illegal actions of the tax authorities in the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine. Could Volodymyr Myhailyuk sign this “Open letter”? I am sure he could not. There were no doubts about profitability of our orders for the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” until someone wanted to present the former director of the shipyard in a specific light. Concerning our order in Romania, there was performed preliminary work, we studied the market of producers, conditions and terms of construction, characteristics of shipyards to place this order. In order to make a decision, to find a complex answer, we have analyzed a large amount of information. Is financial situation of Mykolayiv shipyards stable? No. Is salary paid in time? No. Do the shipyards have orders comparable to their productivity? No. Are the contractual relations executed? No. Do we have better financial conditions to complete an order? No – in Ukraine we have to pay advance payment, and abroad a customer pays only on construction completion. Can at least one Ukrainian shipyard propose a bank guarantee for all advance payments in case of non-construction or slower construction as Romanian shipyards did? Is it an important difference? Yes, it is. Every Mykolayiv citizen knows the shipyards discharge the workers constantly that testifies their instability. We have analyzed whether similar orders were completed at the shipyard, when the last order was completed, in what way our previous contracts were executed in case there were such contracts. Besides, Mykolayiv shipyards are characterized by constant change of their management, there were instituted proceedings against their former directors, there were raidings, bankruptcy procedures, etc. Concerning the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean”, on October 10, 2011 there was instituted a bankruptcy proceeding. The proceeding lasted till July 3, 2012, then it was stopped because the debtor reckoned with the creditor, and on July 10 there was instituted a new bankruptcy proceeding against the shipbuilding yard. As to Chernomorskyy Shipbuilding Yard, in June 2008 there was instituted a bankruptcy proceeding which was stopped only on February 9, 2012. On February 15, there was instituted the next bankruptcy proceeding against Chernomorskyy Shipbuilding Yard which was stopped on June 1, 2012. As to the SE “Shipyard Named after 61 Communards”, the bankruptcy proceeding was started in September 2009 and it still lasts. I think all these bankruptcies are one technology directed to evasion of debt payment and based on a principle “I owe you money, I remit it”. Mykolayiv citizens know who is an initiator of these bankruptcies. It means that when NIBULON decided to construct its own floating crane all our three shipyards were in the process of bankruptcy. Due to Mykolayiv mass-media our reader knows that during the committee meeting as to repayment of wage debts, three Mykolayiv shipyards were in the list of persistent non-payers. How could NIBULON consider one of Mykolayiv shipyards to be performer of such an important order? I understand their wish to attract a responsible customer. But it seems that Mykolayiv shipyards propose NIBULON to place orders, to pay advance payments and then they will leave our company without vessel, without money, and without metal purchased for construction as it happened with the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” which did not construct two tugs for us, did not return UAH 6 mln of advance payments and did not return metal purchased by our company. That is why we had to purchase production facilities of Lyman Shipyard for further implementation of our shipbuilding programs and maintenance of our fleet. In the given situation I do not reproach the workers of the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” who constructed our vessels honestly and finally became an injured party. The ordinary people understand it as opposed to their management. – Oleksiy Opanasovych, the representatives of the shipyards took offence at your words when you said that NIBULON “did not see any interest in cooperation on the part of the domestic shipbuilders” during preliminary preparation for contract signing. They insist that they received the “minimum quantity” of information that prevented them from doing accurate job-costing and calculating construction terms. Therefore, they sent you preliminary calculations and were waiting for further “dialogue and clarification”. Please tell us whether you prepared different commercial sets, the minimum information for our shipyards, and the maximum information for foreign ones? – We prepared and sent absolutely similar commercial sets providing our performers (namely Ukrainian, Austrian, Estonian, Slovakian, Turkish and Romanian shipyards) with identical information. Besides, those terms for the floating crane construction specified in the “Open Letter” (4 months) and the terms specified during preparation for contract signing are different. For example, in its commercial offer  the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” claimed that it can perform our order within 9 months, Chernomorskyy Shipbuilding Yard – within 15 months, Kherson Shipyard – within 10-12 months, Zaliv Shipyard – within 12 months. By the way Zaliv Shipyard is overloaded with orders as opposed to Mykolayiv shipyards. I want to address to the real authors of the “Open letter”, “Dear sirs, if you take the responsibility for judging and reproaching, please, use true information and do not mislead the readers.” The Romanians promised us to construct the floating crane within 6 months and its construction is on schedule. Therefore we believe Romanian shipbuilders will keep their promise and the floating crane will be delivered in time. At the same time we know how our shipyards keep their promises. For example, the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” delivered the first of six tugs 4 months late, it was built for 12 months, the second tug was constructed within 16 months, it was delivered 7 months late, the third one was built within 18 months and the fourth one – during 24 months! To promise does not mean to make. As you can see the information stated in the “Open letter” does not correspond to reality. – Have the floating cranes ever been built in Mykolayiv city? – Speaking theoretically, it is not a problem for Mykolayiv shipyards to build almost any vessel both floating crane and aircraft carrier. At present Mykolayiv legendary shipbuilders Yuriy Makarov and Nodari Chanturiya would be disappointed having seen the situation at the shipyards where they were directors long ago. Today the realities are different, and the present management should face the reality and give the real promises to the customers proceeding not from historical recollections but from current condition of a shipyard. Otherwise, we will have nothing except a memory of shipbuilding. Today our shipyards have to start from the very beginning, to gain authority step by step, to restore shipbuilding step by step. Naturally, we make reasonable decisions comparing statements with the real actions. We completed to construct our last three tugs at the Shipbuilding yard “Okean” ourselves. The shipyard stopped paying debts and maintaining loans received from Raiffeisen Bank Aval earlier having acted according to a principle: “I owe the bank, and I remit”. That is why we completed construction of our tugs on a give and take basis. The shipbuilders remember well that I had to conduct meetings twice a week in order to get my own tugs. We performed our liabilities to workers by 100%. The shipyard management mocked at me several times because I was directing the construction process. But we built the tugs and I became confident and believed in NIBULON’s ability to build vessels. – In the “Open letter” you are called on not to forget that NIBULON’s specialists “obtained an experience at the Shipbuilding Yard “Okean” watching the construction of barges and tugs for NIBULON”. – Yes, such an experience cannot be forgotten. Two contracts for construction of two tugs at the Shipbuilding yard “Okean” were not executed, the agreements were terminated, but the shipyard did not return metal purchased by NIBULON. Now they are trying to make us sign a new agreement for tug construction and insist that we must purchase metal again. For 6 months there is trouble with signing of contracts for construction of two tugs. But we have our own plans. We have already received equipment to construct two tugs, and January 10 is the last term to sign the contract. It is not blackmail, it is a coercive measure. We have to do it as the term to refer to the commercial court concerning monetary claim applications to the shipyard will terminate on January 11.  We will find out whether we receive our metal or have to pay for it twice. Thereafter we will have to sign contract with other shipyard. I do not understand why somebody thinks that NIBULON can be blackmailed or deceived, it is possible to make us decide against NIBULON’s interests. We are ready to give preference to Mykolayiv shipyards but not to the prejudice of production quality. And in this case an experience in negotiations with Mykolayiv shipyards is priceless for us – we know what we should not do. I can say that NIBULON’s specialists construct modern elevators which are more complicated as compared with floating cranes, tugs and barges. We have a highly qualified team; the specialists can sort any difficult situation out during vessel construction. We can construct vessels, therefore, we have purchased a production complex of the Lyman Shipyard in order to start construction of fully equipped and automated vessels. We hope the best shipbuilders of Mykolayiv city and its region, knocking about the world and searching for a job, will work for our company. We will construct vessels which will become part of NIBULON’s investment project to revive navigation on the Dnipro and the Southern Bug Rivers. Within next two years at NIBULON Shipbuilding and Repair Yard, established on the basis of Lyman Shipyard production capacities, there will be built 12 shallow tugs. Besides, we are going to build 12 non-self-propelled vessels to navigate on the Southern Bug River and two large tugs. We have other long-term shipbuilding programs. So we will construct vessels in Mykolayiv city, we will prove our patriotism because we will construct responsibly and qualitatively. – Concerning responsibility, in the “Open letter” four shipbuilders, two of them are the directors of two shipyards, want “that bright speeches of Oleksiy Vadaturskyy as to “social responsibility of business” have more connection to reality”. At the same time, on New Year’s Eve, there was expressed another offence – NIBULON did not allocate funds for the square “The heart of the town”. How do you define social responsibility of business? It seems your opponents understand it partly. – By virtue of my age and experience I have realized that despite constant assistance for different projects being patronized by the authorities of our region, at one moment due to some reasons you cannot allocate funds for implementation of one of the projects, and this very moment will cross everything previously made. Instantly, all good things will be forgotten despite there were a lot of good deeds. Nonparticipation in something is enough to fall into disgrace for a long time. Other businessmen should also understand it. We have a main rule: we never allocate cash on the barrel, never allocate assets to funds, never participate in such projects. As we earn this money during hard competitive struggle. Consequently, we do not want to allocate money to funds which are controlled by the officials at their own discretion. We are accustomed to controlling funds expenditure by ourselves. If I constantly helped and help Mykolayiv emergency hospital, equipped it with modern equipment, thus, tens of thousands of people got an opportunity to be treated correctly and timely. If every year we help schools (there are four such schools in Mykolayiv city, it is possible to say that 3 thousand children are in ward of NIBULON), we contributed to creating new generation who will perceive our live and their participation in it at qualitatively new level. When we helped Mykolayiv city children’s hospital No2 to purchase necessary equipment and then we saw a lot of troubles there and we did everything in order to improve conditions for treatment and recovery. And there is no need to say anything, in such cases words are not needed. Parents see and appreciate care of their children. Responding to reproaches connected with “The heart of the town” square, I must admit that the Cathedral of Casperovska Icon of the Mother of God is a real pearl and architectural dominant which is located in those part of the city where the square is being built. On weekdays about 300 churchgoers visit the church, and on holidays – more than 30 thousand people per day. In 2012 we donated more than UAH 1.5 mln to the Cathedral of Casperovska Icon of the Mother of God to create iconostasis which placed Mykolayiv church in one row with Ukraine’s most famous churches. Due to NIBULON’s funds, there were decorated domes of another Mykolayiv church. Is it possible to reproach us for nonparticipation in the spiritual development of Mykolayiv community? Good deeds were done, are being done and will be done by NIBULON despite any criticism of separate officials and politicians. We implement our social projects not to please the officials but for the sake of the citizens of our region. We do it sincerely. Nobody recollects that in 2010-2011 NIBULON itself kept the bread price in Mykolayiv city at the assistance of the governor. Now we help Mykolayiv and the region on that point, we have met our obligations entrusting to NIBULON. In the regions where our branches operate, we grew and gave a definite share of grain to the regional resources in order the bread price was stable. Though, I am against this policy, as the agricultural producers are forced to pay UAH 1500 for the bread. There is the Agrarian Fund of Ukraine with about 1 mln tons of grain and according to the law the Agrarian Fund of Ukraine is intended for price regulation and stabilization in the regions. Nevertheless, we did not refuse to help our region and our city but always reminded that NIBULON was not the only company being engaged in grain cultivation. I would remind you that NIBULON is not the only s