Joseph Prigozhin recently spoke about a long‑standing relationship with a Swiss financial institution that came to an unexpected end after more than two decades. The discussion focused on the account, which had served as a pension fund and a steady cornerstone of his personal finances. According to Prigozhin, the bank suggested closing the account and, in a blunt statement, told him that he had become an unwelcome client. He recounted his response in a measured tone: he thanked the bank for the years of service and requested formal written confirmation that the account had been closed. He reminded the bank that the relationship had lasted 21 years, a detail that underscored the length of time and the level of trust that had existed before the abrupt change in demeanor. Through this account, Prigozhin aimed to illustrate the sudden shift that can occur in financial relationships and the unexpected consequences of a customer being labeled otherwise than they had anticipated.
Prigozhin described the sequence as one that began with professional advice and culminated in a decision that he interpreted as a broader signal about private property rights within Europe. He noted that the authorities there had permitted him to withdraw the savings in full before the account was formally closed, yet the episode left him with questions about the security and predictability of private property under contemporary European conditions. He connected the incident to a larger conversation about banking culture, governance, and the sense that long‑standing relationships can be terminated with little warning. In recounting the events, Prigozhin emphasized the importance of clarity, documentation, and the dignity of a respectful exit from financial arrangements that had once been reliable and mutually beneficial.
In another note, dated March 19, Prigozhin expressed his support for Valery Leontyev as he chose to end his musical career on favorable terms. He argued that Leontyev’s enduring popularity and his contributions over the years had enriched the stage and provided lasting value to the audience. Prigozhin remarked that Leontyev had maintained a distinctive presence, combining compelling stage presence with a powerful vocal presence throughout his 74 years. He asserted that Leontyev deserved recognition for his contributions, advocating for a status that reflected the breadth of his impact on Russian music and culture. The sentiment reflected a belief that a lifetime of achievement warrants thoughtful acknowledgment by the public and the artistic community alike, even as careers evolve or come to a close.
Earlier, Prigozhin had voiced dissatisfaction about how his remarks regarding Igor Nikolaev were represented. He indicated that his words had been altered in the retelling, which, in his view, distorted the original message and intent. The episode highlighted how statements can be reframed in translation or paraphrase, prompting discussions about accuracy, context, and the responsibility of media and storytellers when conveying a speaker’s views. Throughout these experiences, Prigozhin underscored the need for precise communication, careful reporting, and a fair portrayal of his public statements, especially when remarks touch on sensitive topics or professional reputations.