Install

Get the latest updates as we post them — right on your browser

. Last Updated: 07/27/2016

MAILBOX:




Middle-Class Glossy


In response to "Women's Glossy Meets Nostalgia for Old Values," Feb. 5.


Editor,


As regular readers of your newspaper, we at Krestyanka Publishing House have always regarded information published by The Moscow Times with great interest and trust.


I was therefore surprised by an article on Krestyanka magazine containing references to my opinions, which I had never offered to your publication.


Surprise gave way to bewilderment when I examined the text, which contains practically no true facts and not a single correct argument.


The first and most evident contradiction lies in the author's assertion that most subscribers are rural people.


In fact, as subscription data shows, only 2 percent of our subscribers live in rural areas. According to the 1997 readers' poll, 85 percent of our customers place themselves in the "middle class" category. Nor do we see any logic in the assertion that Krestyanka -- indeed the circulation leader among Russian magazines -- is at the same time not listed among bestsellers.


Quite incomprehensible and, in our opinion, incorrect is the attribution of Krestyanka's success to "nostalgia for old values" that was first made in the headline. Since when did health care or knitting represent "old" values and regular sex life a "new" reality as it appears from the article? It is absolutely unclear to me what exactly constitutes my purported happiness in maintaining traditions of Soviet journalism.


I was also greatly surprised to learn about our "miserly salaries." Our products (in addition to Krestyanka, our Publishing House produces four supplements to it and two more magazines) are put together by experienced professionals who are well aware of the value of their skills.


Finally, I would like to mention that I am the editor in chief not of Krestyanka magazine, but of the Publishing House.


Anastasia Kupriyanova


Generating Assets


In response to "Privatization of Energy Has Already Begun," Feb. 10.


Editor,


The article suggests that KrAZ's unorthodox ways of taking the Krasnoyarskaya hydroelectric station away from state-controlled Krasnoyarskenergo were justified by positive aims. It was argued that Krasnoyarskaya station would be "privatized," because its new owners will be fully privatized companies, including Rossiisky Kredit, one of Russia's most reputable banks.


Besides being reminiscent of more sinister times in Russia when doubtful means justified noble aims, this simple equation clearly overlooks the negative effect of the change of ownership on the Krasnoyarskaya hydroelectric station. Putting aside the blatant legal violations when removing Unified Energy Systems' controlling stake in the hydropower station (via Krasnoyarskenergo) and then diluting it further, the Krasnoyarskaya hydroelectric station's new owners look set to practice the same unfair transfer pricing practices that have turned oil holding subsidiaries into cost centers.


The aluminum smelters of KrAZ crucially depend on cheap electricity and will further reduce the hydropower station's electricity tariffs to mere survival levels. The rationale of the new owners' core business, which is aluminum production, is radically opposed to that of one of Russia's most attractive generating assets.


Nicholas Henderson-Stewart