Не хватает прав доступа к веб-форме.

Записаться на семинар

Отмена

Звездочкой * отмечены поля,
обязательные для заполнения.

Как определить свою систему среди чужих? Тренинг системного мышления

Do Russian banks succeed in building effective service business model of small and medium enterprise?

The article is written by:

Alexander Kaltyrin, vice-president, chief of executive office of JSC “Bank Uralsib”, Doctor of Economics


Serguey Antonchikov, adviser of executive office of JSC “Bank Uralsib”, NFP “NISSE” expert


Small and medium enterprise’s significance is widely discussed nowadays. It interests both trading banks and state pecuniary institutions. Speaking about G20 it can be mentioned that none of the banks regard business sector as unattractive for a certain bank in particular as well as for Russian economy on the whole.

It should be noticed that under conditions of deceleration of economic growth Russian government also regards that sector’s potential as one of the sources to overcome recession and restore the economy. Different measures are taken to support SMEs, in simplifying financing as well.

The way it affects small and medium enterprise’s access to money supplies is partly shown in statistics data of the Bank of Russia and in the results of some researches.

The facts given below let us assume that despite rather a long period of work with SMEs and strong rivalry on the market of bank servicing business model used by Russian banks in work with small and medium enterprises still needs to be updated and improved.

Researches and surveys of small and medium enterprise’s representatives of recent years show that credit availability continues to be one of the factors that influence considerably on business climate and enterprise development.

Thus, according to conclusions made by competent DoingBusiness-2013, steep rise of Russia in the rating on the whole has not increased credit availability. Despite the fact of significant improvement of the position of Russia from the 112 place in 2012 to the 92 last year, according to the index “Lending” the country moved from the 105 to the 109 position.

Lending dynamics of small and medium enterprise also demonstrates smooth deceleration. According to the data of the Bank of Russia index to SMEs debts growth for the last four years was the following: 22% in 2010, 19% in 2011, 17% in 2012, 14% for 10 months in 2013.

Thus, we can say that the question of availability of loan proceeds for small and medium enterprise is left urgent.

The loan pricing of economic enterprises of all categories and of entrepreneurs in particular is the problem that was actively discussed last year and has even gained extra currency as a result of some famous politicians’ statements about the necessity of reducing the loan pricing and bank community‘s responsibility.

It should be noticed that in the course of study of Russians’ attitude towards small and medium enterprises conducted by “Public Opinion Foundation” in 2013 it was discovered that the bigger obstacle for enterprise development is considered to be not high cost of loans (1% of questioned), but taxes (15% of questioned) and the absence of support from the government.

Nevertheless, banking sector representatives share authorities’ opinion about the necessity of reducing the loan pricing as it will positively influence on the economic growth. Although, many of them think that management of SMEs crediting interest rate is the sphere of joint responsibility of both banks and government.

This point of view can be explained if interest of credit is regarded as the sum of components in the number of which there is cost of funds attracted by banks from different resources, risk component of credit cost of SMEs sector in the conditions of developing Russian economy and bank margin which is bank’s direct income.

Speaking about sharing responsibility for final quantity of rate of interest banks, first of all, proceed from limited possibilities of their influence on all the components of credit cost at the same time. For example, monetary institutions don’t have possibilities to manage in full such a component of bank interest as interbank lending cost which is based on the cost of financial resources determined on basis of supply and demand. Managing money supply, by refinancing banks as well, is the function of central banks. One of the chief guidelines that influence on value of money in economy is inflation, rate of which respective government agencies of the country are charged with.

The cost of risk that banks put into the credit cost is the source of defrayment of losses from non-performing loan granting. It considers all kinds of risk related to lending: country and industry risks including their political, legislative and judicial components, as well as risk of lending of the direct borrower. It is obvious that banks can control neither country, nor industry risks. They can just identify them in order to take them into account in case of eventual losses. Magnitude of these kinds of risks depends on economic situation of the country, its business climate, effectiveness of functioning of legislative and judicial branches of government.

Thus, it is marginal constituent of interest that is really regulated by bank. It ensures yield on capital formed by bank holders. It should be added that rate of profit acceptable in the market lets banks attract new investors and, thus, is the source of their development, as well as undistributed profits earned by a bank. It should be noticed that realized profit often goes to bidders for an increase in nominal capital of banks.

The structured approach to consideration of cost of credit lets appraise correctly banks’ potential in reducing rates of interest, as well as government’s responsibility and prerogatives in managing this process.

Мнение редакции сайта и коллектива НИСИПП может не совпадать с мнением автора.

Учебник "Национальная экономика"

Поделиться

Подписаться на новости