During a briefing, a Kremlin spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, framed the bankruptcy of Plastic Logic—an enterprise focused on flexible tablet technology—as a matter that lies within the government’s prerogative to address. The remark signals that the state sees this corporate insolvency as part of its broader policy and economic governance rather than a purely private or isolated corporate issue.
When a journalist pressed for clarity on how the Kremlin viewed the winding down of a company owned by Rusnano, Peskov acknowledged that the process involved significant difficulties. He indicated that such challenges do not fall entirely within the presidential administration and the Kremlin’s direct control, underscoring that the situation is shaped by a set of complex, high-level decisions with multiple stakeholders.
He explained that the events surrounding Plastic Logic are governed by difficult processes. These are not simply administrative steps but rather a mix of financial, regulatory, and strategic considerations that require government involvement and oversight. In his view, this is the prerogative of the government, reflecting the state’s role in steering critical industrial sectors and preserving national interests during corporate restructuring.
Earlier, Interfax cited the press service of the state agency as reporting that Rusnano intends to petition the Moscow Arbitration Court for Plastic Logic’s bankruptcy. This move would formalize the company’s financial distress and trigger a legal process that could restructure or liquidate assets under the supervision of the arbitration system. The public record indicates a path through which the state-affiliated investor can ensure orderly administration of the company’s obligations and liabilities.
Plastic Logic had set out to develop and commercialize flexible tablet devices, aiming to combine advanced display technology with portable form factors. By the end of 2022, the company reported a loss of 702 million rubles, a figure that underscores the financial strain of pursuing cutting-edge hardware ventures within a challenging market. The loss highlights the difficulties such ventures face, including high research and development costs, competitive pressure, and the hurdles of scaling production in a rapidly evolving technology landscape.
Plastic Logic originated in 2010 through a collaboration between Rusnano, a state-backed nanotechnology corporation, and the British firm Plastic Logic. This joint founding aligned Russia’s strategic interests in fostering domestic innovation with international industrial partnerships. The legacy of that collaboration reflects broader attempts to build a technologically ambitious ecosystem with global ties and the challenges that accompany cross-border industrial projects.
Earlier comments from Mishustin cautioned against overly optimistic projections regarding this enterprise or similar initiatives. His message likely served as a reminder that ambitious programs require careful risk assessment, disciplined execution, and transparent governance. The balance between encouraging innovation and managing risk remains a central concern as state actors, investors, and private partners navigate complex market realities and regulatory frameworks.