Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
Investing in the ENCRAFT energy project of the Concorde group may carry significant risks for private investors — both because of the terms for returning funds and because of co-investors and personal issues of Concorde owner Ihor Mazepa. This is written by former editor of Ekonomichna Pravda Serhiy Lyamets in an analysis of ENCRAFT’s investment offer.
ENCRAFT develops distributed energy in Ukraine. The first phase — eight gas piston units with a capacity of 18,4 MW, into which about €15 million was invested. By the end of 2026 the company plans to build energy storage systems of 60 MW and 240 MWh and recently invited private investors to co-finance. According to Mazepa, more than 50 investors have already joined Concorde’s energy projects with investments ranging from $100 thousand to €20 million.
“Is Mazepa asking his clients to take on excessive risk? If so, then the promise of high returns… should signal danger,” writes Lyamets.
Liquidity and currency. According to the author’s estimate, funds may remain in the asset management company Concord Invest for about ten years, and early exit would mean loss of part of the capital. In addition, ENCRAFT earns in hryvnia while promising returns in foreign currency, so devaluation and currency restrictions could significantly reduce them.
State payments. Lyamets believes ENCRAFT’s model depends on long-term euro‑indexed contracts received at Ukrenergo auctions under the leadership of Volodymyr Kudrytskyi. The author compares this mechanism to the “green tariff” and considers that it creates a burden on Energoatom and business consumers. After the war the state could revise the terms or cancel the currency indexation, and the mechanism itself could become the subject of investigations. “With such a development of events they may forget about 16% per year in foreign currency,” the author notes.
Mazepa’s personal risks. Lyamets writes that the businessman “is fully capable of delaying returns or not returning them at all.” According to the journalist’s sources, Mazepa provided a personal guarantee for the obligations of Canadian Concorde Solutions LP to the BVI company SIFUM, which the author links to Petr Aven and Mikhail Fridman, and later refused to pay. The creditor, Lyamets reports, intends to apply to an English court, which could seize Mazepa’s real estate and businesses for the duration of the proceedings — which, the author emphasizes, would not mean a finding of guilt.
Lyamets also recalls other episodes from Mazepa’s business history. In 2016 Concorde Bermuda Ltd reached a settlement with the SEC and paid $4,2 million in a case about trading on the basis of stolen press releases, without admitting or denying the allegations. In 2015 Concorde Capital became a co-investor of the forex platform PrivateFX, which later failed to pay clients. Mazepa claimed he owned up to 10% of it and did not control the company. In 2018 the National Bank of Ukraine canceled the registration of the TYME payment system, of which Mazepa was a co-owner, due to SBU information about cooperation with a Russian system.
The most serious episode, the author calls Mazepa’s arrest in January 2024 in a State Bureau of Investigation case about the misappropriation of seven hectares on the protective dam of the Kyiv HPP. Later the so‑called “Mazepa law” was adopted, but, as Lyamets notes, the amnesty does not extend to lands of critical infrastructure, so if the investigation is resumed an investment risk will arise.
Advisors and co-investors. Lyamets names former Naftogaz head Andriy Koboliev, a figure in the case about bonuses from the Stockholm arbitration, as an adviser to ENCRAFT. According to Lyamets, Mazepa appears to have financed the project’s first phase with money from Favbet owner Andriy Matyukha. The author also mentions Telegram posts linking Mazepa with Roosh founder Serhiy Tokarev and gaming projects Cosmolot and Vulkan, and calls the gambling business in Ukraine a “powder keg.”
Lyamets’s main conclusion: one should evaluate not the owner’s reputation but the specific legal and financial structure — the investment terms, the fund structure, and the possibility of recovering funds. Otherwise, he warns, behind flashy advertising there may turn out to be another “Elita-Center.”
Document: PDF proof of the original version of the news item "Експерт назвав п’ять ризиків інвестицій в енергетичний проєкт ENCRAFT Ігоря Мазепи". It records the publication content at the moment of the first scan, the preservation date and the source: Bagnet.
