Izhmeh shareholder to sell 51%

Now I’m no knowledgable business guru, but Jane’s is reporting that the state owned company that had a stake in Izhevsk, Rostec (which by the way, did you know Kalashnikov Concern also makes boats?) has now sold 51% to a company called Ural Mining and Metallurgical Company. The report states that UMMC previously bought up to 49% of Kalashnikov Concern, in addition the report specifically mentions Alexei Krivoruchko, who is the CEO of Kalashnikov Concern, and who seems to be also connected to the UMMC company. Something that could be happening is that with the sanctions, Kalashnikov Concern could be diversifying its ownership and interests into separate sectors in order to prepare for any financial disaster. Similar to how H&K has a civilian side, and a Defense/LE side with H&K Defense. So if one part of the company suffered a lawsuit or financial disaster, it wouldn’t affect the other part.

Russian state-owned industrial group Rostec is to sell a 51% stake in its civilian firearms manufacturer Izhevsk Mechanical Plant (Izhmeh), it was announced on 9 July.

The shares, which will be newly issued to facilitate the sale, will be purchased by the owners of Ural Mining and Metallurgical Company and railway company Transmashholding: Andrey Bokarev, Iskander Makhmudov, and Alexei Krivoruchko. The price of the purchase is to be determined in an “independent assessment” in the first quarter of 2016.

A similar deal announced in September 2013 saw the same group of investors take control of a 49% stake in Kalashnikov Concern, in a transaction aimed at raising funds to aid the company’s development.


Infantry Marine, based in the Midwest. Specifically interested in small arms history, development, and usage within the MENA region and Central Asia. To that end, I run Silah Report, a website dedicated to analyzing small arms history and news out of MENA and Central Asia.

Please feel free to get in touch with me about something I can add to a post, an error I’ve made, or if you just want to talk guns. I can be reached at miles@tfb.tv


  • TheNotoriousIUD

    Russian bass boat, very nice.

  • Jolly

    In Soviet Russia, boat drives you.

  • Plumbiphilious

    Does this affect getting around the sanctions for US importation at all? It’s been so long that I forget what the original stipulations were on who exactly was banned.

    • That’s an outstanding question and it didn’t occur to me to research it. Most likely yes because the Urals are in Russia, so it’s a Russian company.

  • USMC03Vet

    Allows world’s #1 state sponsor of Islamic terror a pathway for nuclear weapons.
    Bans small arms from Russia for law abidding citizens.


    • TheNotoriousIUD

      I assume you’re talking about Saudi Arabia, right?

      • HSR47

        He’s talking about Iran.

        • TheNotoriousIUD

          Then he’s not talking about the biggest sponsor of Islamic terrorism.

          • billyoblivion

            No, he’s not.

            He’s talking about the #1 *STATE* sponsor of Terrorism.

            If Michael Bloomberg spent 500 million dollars trying to get the UN to pass an enforceable law banning all private ownership of firearms would you argue that the US was doing it?

            It is not the Saudi Government that is directly funding terror attacks, and while it *is* members of the Saudi Royal Family, technically there are about 15k members with about 2k of them having large amounts of wealth and varying amounts of influence (paraphrased from wikipedia).

            So while the largest amount of money and support for Islamic Terror come from Saudi Arabia, it’s not *state* money and support. That comes out of Iran.

            Unless you’re trying to claim it’s the US that’s the largest. Then that’s not support, that’s utter incompetence by State.

          • TheNotoriousIUD

            Dude, the Saudi royal family is the government of Saudi Arabia. The country is named after them.

          • Phil Hsueh

            While that’s true, it’s not state sponsored if the money is coming from their own pockets as opposed to something from the government’s budget. I suppose that it’s splitting hairs to a certain degree if it’s something like the king of Saudi Arabia himself writing personal checks to Al Qaeda but it’s still not the same things writing checks that pull funds from government coffers. It would be like a senator (state or federal) sending his/her own personal money to Al Qaeda and saying that because of that the US is a state sponsor of terrorism.

          • TheNotoriousIUD

            I see the point you are trying to make but what im saying is that in Saudi Arabia making the distinction between Royal family money and government money is not possible due to the massive across the board corruption and outright theft that has been the norm there for decades. The majority of Royal money is siphoned directly from oil revenues and foreign weapons purchases as “commissions”. There is no transparency in accounting there. None. And it has been government policy for years to simply pay off terror groups in the hopes that they will not try to overthrow the Sauds (A major aim of UBL) who are viewed (rightly) as corrupt, whoring, thieves.
            The wife of Bandar bin Sultan (Member of the house of Saud and Saudi ambassador to the US from 1983 – 2005) sent $75,000 directly to a 9/11 accomplice in 2000.
            And I would say that the US State Departments refusal to investigate the Saudis after 9/11 and their continued support of that corrupt regime does border on US support for terror.

          • billyoblivion

            Dude, there’s 15000 memebers that family.

            The *King* runs the country with maybe 10 or 50 advisors in and out of the family. Maybe some few others have jobs in the government. Most have little influence and no power.

            That leaves approximately 1950 family members with *LARGE* amounts of time, money and korans.

            And yeah, they *do* sponsor terrorism either through financing it directly, or through funding radical madrasses, but it’s not the King’s policy as near as “we” can tell.

            Iran, however, IS. They are actively organizing and funding terrorist groups on at least 4 continents. It is done by the government and is official policy.

          • TheNotoriousIUD

            If you think there are under 2K people in Saudi capable and willing to fund terror groups you are fooling yourself. And as far as what the Kings policy is who the hell knows. The State Department sure as hell doesnt and they dont want to know because if the American people or the Saudi subjects found out what kind of stuff their tax dollars were supporting then things would go south politically very quickly.
            (Saudi subjects dont actually pay taxes, I know. The life of the common Saudi is actually greatly subsidized from free health care, interest free home loans and greatly discounted utilities. Only bad thing is these policies were instituted at 1983 oil prices.)

      • Valis InUnderland

        would murica be the first then giver their support of sa ?lulz

    • MANG

      Oh good, here I am on the New York Times website reading an article about the Iran nukes deal and… NO WAIT, I’m on TFB, and I’d just as soon be spared anyone’s thoughts on that world politics issue.

      Unless anyone wants to talk GREXIT??

      • HSR47

        Yeah, the Germans are totally the ones that need to leave the Euro….

  • Dracon1201

    Izhmeh- The one manufacturer that just couldn’t care less.