PhosAgro
 | |
Native name | ОАО «ФосАгро» |
|---|---|
| Public (OAO) | |
| Traded as |
MCX: PHOR LSE: PHOR |
| Industry | Chemical |
| Founded | 2003 |
| Headquarters | Moscow, Russia |
Key people |
Sven Ombudstvedt,(Chairman) Andrey A. Guryev, (CEO) |
| Products | Fertilizer |
| Revenue |
 US$ 3.4 billion (2012) |
| Profit |
US$ 677.2 million (2012) |
Number of employees | 5,001 |
| Website | www.phosagro.com |
PhosAgro is a Russian chemical holding company producing fertilizer, phosphates and feed phosphates. The company is based in Moscow, Russia, and its subsidiaries include Apatit, a company based in the Murmansk Region and engaged in the extraction of apatite rock.
Ownership
First owner of group's assets was Menatep of famous Russian billionaire Mikhail Khodorkovsky. The firesale of assets to current owners happened after court litigation against Yukos. The owners also disputed the court decisions for fines on tax avoidance. This was the first case in history of Russian court system, when the state paid compensation to the accused company. In 2011, Andrey Guryev owned 71% of PhosAgro.[1]
PhosAgro is 10% owned by Vladimir Litvinenko,[2] who oversaw Vladimir Putin's doctoral thesis in 1996.[3]
Subsidiaries
- Apatit
- Ammophos
- Cherepovetsky Azot
- BMU (Balakovskyie Mineralnyie Udobrenia)
- PhosAgro-Trans
References
- ↑ Popova, Olga (14 July 2011). "IPO yields $538m for Guryev". The Independent. Retrieved 24 May 2015.
- ↑ "Midas Touch in St. Petersburg: Friends of Putin Glow Brightly". New York Times. p. 3. Retrieved June 7, 2012.
- ↑ "It All Boils Down to Plagiarism". Cdi.org. 2006-03-31. Retrieved 2010-03-02. Clifford Gaddy: "Mr. Litvinenko -- who was directly involved in the dissertation, allegedly helped [Putin] choose the topic and was more or less the advisor for the dissertation -- is himself a member of the higher accreditation commission, which is the government-appointed body to be the watchdog over standards about degree-granting, dissertations and quality control for higher education in Russia. So it’s extra scandalous that he would be involved in this case of, at minimum, shoddiness and plagiarism, possibly something worse, which would be the literal purchase, either by money or political influence, of a dissertation by someone who didn’t actually do the work. That second point is not clear. I don’t have proof about that. All I have is proof about the plagiarism."
External links
| ||||||||||
