Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
Investments in the ENCRAFT energy project of the Concorde group may carry significant risks for private investors—both due to the terms of fund recovery and because of the presence of co-investors and the personal problems of Concorde owner Ihor Mazepa. This is the finding of Serhiy Lyanets, former editor of the Economic Truth, in his analysis of the ENCRAFT investment proposal.
ENCRAFT develops distributed energy in Ukraine. The first phase includes eight gas piston units with a capacity of 18,4 MW, into which about €15 million has been invested. By the end of 2026, the company plans to build energy storage systems with 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 offering his clients to take on excessive risks? If so, the promise of high returns ... should signal danger,” writes Lyanets.
Liquidity and currency. In the author’s assessment, funds may remain in funds of the asset management company Concorde Invest for about ten years, and an early exit could mean losing part of the capital. In addition, ENCRAFT earns in hryvnias, while its income is promised in foreign currency, so devaluation and currency restrictions could substantially reduce it.
State payments. The ENCRAFT model, according to Lyanets, relies on long-term contracts with euro-denominated pricing obtained at auctions of Ukrenergo under the leadership of Volodymyr Kudrytskyi. The author compares this mechanism to a “green tariff” and believes that it creates a burden on Energoatom and on business customers. After the war, the state may revise terms or cancel the currency peg, and the mechanism itself could become the subject of investigations. “Under such a development, they may forget about 16% annual in foreign currency,” the author notes.
Mazepa’s personal risks. Lyanets writes that the businessman “is quite capable of delaying the return of money or not returning it at all.” According to the journalist’s sources, Mazepa provided a personal guarantee for Concorde Solutions LP’s obligations to a BVI company, SIFUM, which the author links to Peter Avin and Mikhail Friedman, and subsequently refused to pay. The creditor, according to Lyanets, intends to apply to an English court, which could seize Mazepa’s real estate and businesses during the proceedings—which, as the author emphasizes, would not constitute an admission of guilt.
Lyanets also recalls other episodes from Mazepa’s business history. In 2016, Concorde Bermuda Ltd signed an agreement with the SEC and paid $4,2 million in a case involving trading shares based on stolen press releases, without admitting or denying charges. In 2015, Concorde Capital became a co-investor in the forex platform PrivateFX, which later did not settle with clients. Mazepa claimed that he had up to 10% in it and did not control the company. In 2018, the National Bank of Ukraine canceled the registration of the payment system TYME, of which Mazepa was a co-owner, due to information from the Security Service about cooperation with a Russian system.
The most serious episode, the author says, is Mazepa’s arrest in January 2024 in the DBR case over the seizure of seven hectares on the Kyiv Hydroelectric Station protective dam. Subsequently, the so-called Mazepa Law was enacted, but, as Lyanets notes, the amnesty does not apply to lands of critical infrastructure, so if the investigation resumes, an investment risk will arise.
Advisors and co-investors. The ENCRAFT advisor is former Naftogaz chairman Andriy Kobolyev, a figure in the case concerning bonuses tied to the Stockholm arbitration. According to Lyanets, Mazepa’s first phase of the project appears to have been financed with money from Favbet owner Andriy Matyukha. The author also mentions Telegram posts linking Mazepa to Roosh founder Serhiy Tokarev and to gambling projects Cosmolot and Vulkan, calling Ukraine’s gambling business a “powder keg.”
The main conclusion, according to Lyanets, is that one should assess not the owner’s reputation but the concrete legal and financial structure—the terms of investment, the fund’s structure, and the possibility of recovering funds. Otherwise, as he warns, behind glossy advertising may lie another “Elite 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: Rupor.
