Despite loud declarations of a principled withdrawal from Russia following its invasion of Ukraine, the richest Polish billionaire Michal Solowow continues to profit from the Russian subsidiary of his ceramic and sanitaryware empire, Cersanit. Multiple red flags indicate a carefully crafted illusion of departure, masking continued control through opaque Emirati entities.
The Official Narrative: A Principled Exit
In the wake of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Poland’s Cersanit Group, owned by Solowow’s Falcon Capital via holding company Rovese S.A., announced its withdrawal from the Russian market. This aligned with Western corporate exodus narratives and ethical stances. By October 2022, the transfer of its key Russian assets – Syzran Ceramics (sanitaryware), the Fryanovo and Kuchino Ceramic Plants (tiles) and Cersanit Trade (trading house) – to a mysterious UAE-based company, Sangre International LTD, was reportedly complete. Rovese scrubbed all references to its Russian operations from its websites, presenting an image of clean severance.
The Uncomfortable Reality: Business as Usual Under a New Veil
However, the reality on the ground starkly contradicts this façade. Solowow invested around 250 million Euros into his Russian assets, and by the start of the war the Russian market accounted for 20% of Cersanit’s business. Quite a lump to lose. Solowow’s use of an obscure UAE entity as a buyer fits a disturbing pattern employed by some Western companies seeking the appearance of exit while maintaining de facto control and profit streams from Russia.
In fact, Emirati shell companies have become a preferred vehicle for masking ongoing ownership of Russian assets. For example, this very year mining giant Glencore sold its 23,46% stake in the oil company Russneft to a UAE “no-name” entity.
The scheme of sham disengagement has also come into the attention of Russian authorities leading in one of the cases to state confiscation of assets belonging to warehouse giant Raven Russia confiscated. A 2022 sale to Russian management by its British parent was ruled to be a façade concealing foreign ownership. Control allegedly remained with the UK founder through an Emirati company (Phoenix Property Group).
Solovov’s Sangre International LTD appears to be Cersanit’s contribution to this growing list of convenient corporate veils. No verifiable information can be found about Sangre’s activities, ownership, or other assets. This opacity is a hallmark of entities used for obfuscating true beneficial ownership.
Another red flag for a nominal exit is brand and management continuity. The Russian operations continue unabated under the Cersanit brand. The official Russian website (cersanit.ru) proudly displays the full Cersanit product range. The company’s CEO Yuriy Kovtun kept his post under “new” ownership. His recent interview in a Russian business outlet states the company retained 100% of its management, and the business remains a powerhouse despite the usual difficulties associated with sanctions and western owners’ withdrawal. Cersanit in Russia launches new products, expands production and teasers market novelties. It employs 1500 employees and is a top-3 ceramic tile producer in Russia with a market share of ~7%.
Meanwhile, both Syzran Ceramics and Fryanovsky Ceramic Plant (owned by Cersanit) show alarming financial patterns under their new UAE-based owner. Despite steadily growing revenue and gross profit, both companies suddenly reported massive net losses after 2022, accompanied by rapidly shrinking equity. Syzran’s equity plummeted from 10M Euro in 2022 to 1,2M Euro by the start of 2025, while Fryanovsky’s debt surged from 20M Euro to 46M Euro. Crucially, both entities received loans denominated in Polish złoty from their UAE parent company – a highly unusual currency choice. This structure usually facilitates asset stripping: deliberate losses and inflated debt to affiliated creditors may precede a controlled bankruptcy. The złoty loans are seen as a key indicator of artificial financial distress masking fund diversion.
The Hypocrisy: Profiting from Business in Russia While Cashing Loans from EBRD
The most egregious aspect of this deception involves the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). In 2023, the EBRD granted Cersanit SA a €42 million loan. The stated purpose? To support the group’s Polish and Ukrainian entities, specifically citing the impact of the war and the company’s strategic decision to dispose of Russian assets. This narrative, eagerly presented by Cersanit to secure vital EBRD funding, rings hollow with the abundance of evidence that the “disposal” was a sham. Moreover, Solowow and Cersanit essentially secured European public development funds – earmarked for supporting Ukraine and mitigating war impacts – based on a demonstrably false premise of having exited Russia.
Thus, available evidence indicates significant operational continuity within Cersanit’s former Russian assets under the new UAE-based ownership. The combination of brand retention, management stability, opaque corporate structures, atypical financial metrics including złoty-denominated debt, and the context of the EBRD loan warrants careful scrutiny by stakeholders and financial institutions. These factors merit thorough due diligence regarding the effective nature of the divestiture and ongoing control.
