October 29, 2015 at 15:17Will the startup ombudsman solve business problems in Russia?
The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration ( RANEPA ) sent an analytical note to the government entitled “Economic Development and Innovative Economics”. The note indicates the possible measures that the state can take to make a breakthrough in the Russian innovation sphere.
The share of innovative small enterprises receiving business angel and venture investment is negligible. According to the RANEPA, 1% of small enterprises and 7% of medium-sized enterprises are available for venture capital investments, angel investments - 1% of small enterprises and 5% of medium-sized enterprises. But world practice shows that it is necessary to finance 10 "seed" projects to obtain two of commercial interest for venture funds.
Therefore, the academy proposed to provide comprehensive support for business angel investment from the government. According to RANEPA, business angels also need help in building their positive image through the media and social networks.
A special place in the concept of RANEPA experts is occupied by the idea of introducing the position of an ombudsman for innovative entrepreneurs and venture investors. Academy experts believe that the innovation will provide fair conditions for both entrepreneurs and investors.
The director of the expert-analytical center of RANEPA, Nikolai Kalykov, explained the position of RANEPA on this issue:
“Now any such initiatives can be implemented through the Internet Development Institute. Regarding the protection of the interests and property of investors and start-ups, in the first case I don’t recall a single fact of some sort of raiding in the innovation industry, in the second - it is necessary to finalize the legislation in order to fix financial and legal relations of the parties as quickly and simply as possible, ”the manager argues partner of Russian Ventures Evgeny Gordeev.
But you can recall a recent story about how a startup did not give money to an investor. IIDF sued 1.3 million rubles from a startup that refused to give a share for the investment, they wrotetoday "Vedomosti". In September 2014, the fund invested 700,000 rubles in the Media of the Future company in exchange for 3.5% of the authorized capital. However, the company took the money, but did not give back the share. Another 600,000 rubles the fund requires for the training of the CEO of the company Alexei Semenov in the accelerator.
“Our number of authorized persons will soon become more than the number of protected ones. It seems to me that this is a dead end and not innovative way. The industry is more in need of a systematic and reasonable state policy in taxes and finances, ”says German Klimenko , head of the Internet Development Institute ( IRI ).
CEO of startup “My business” , said Izvestia that “it is necessary to organize the acquisition and incorporation of successful startups in large state-owned companies”, and here the position of the Ombudsman “would be useful”.
The share of innovative small enterprises receiving business angel and venture investment is negligible. According to the RANEPA, 1% of small enterprises and 7% of medium-sized enterprises are available for venture capital investments, angel investments - 1% of small enterprises and 5% of medium-sized enterprises. But world practice shows that it is necessary to finance 10 "seed" projects to obtain two of commercial interest for venture funds.
Therefore, the academy proposed to provide comprehensive support for business angel investment from the government. According to RANEPA, business angels also need help in building their positive image through the media and social networks.
A special place in the concept of RANEPA experts is occupied by the idea of introducing the position of an ombudsman for innovative entrepreneurs and venture investors. Academy experts believe that the innovation will provide fair conditions for both entrepreneurs and investors.
The director of the expert-analytical center of RANEPA, Nikolai Kalykov, explained the position of RANEPA on this issue:
We need a person to whom both an entrepreneur and an investor can turn for help, and who can help them. For example, during a series of interviews with entrepreneurs that we conducted in various projects for 2015, we often heard the apprehensions of beginning entrepreneurs regarding raising funds from private investors or funds, which, in their words, could subsequently take away an established business. And, perhaps, the plenipotentiary for innovators in some situations could even act as a guarantor.
“Now any such initiatives can be implemented through the Internet Development Institute. Regarding the protection of the interests and property of investors and start-ups, in the first case I don’t recall a single fact of some sort of raiding in the innovation industry, in the second - it is necessary to finalize the legislation in order to fix financial and legal relations of the parties as quickly and simply as possible, ”the manager argues partner of Russian Ventures Evgeny Gordeev.
But you can recall a recent story about how a startup did not give money to an investor. IIDF sued 1.3 million rubles from a startup that refused to give a share for the investment, they wrotetoday "Vedomosti". In September 2014, the fund invested 700,000 rubles in the Media of the Future company in exchange for 3.5% of the authorized capital. However, the company took the money, but did not give back the share. Another 600,000 rubles the fund requires for the training of the CEO of the company Alexei Semenov in the accelerator.
“Our number of authorized persons will soon become more than the number of protected ones. It seems to me that this is a dead end and not innovative way. The industry is more in need of a systematic and reasonable state policy in taxes and finances, ”says German Klimenko , head of the Internet Development Institute ( IRI ).
CEO of startup “My business” , said Izvestia that “it is necessary to organize the acquisition and incorporation of successful startups in large state-owned companies”, and here the position of the Ombudsman “would be useful”.