Continued throughout the two months of negotiations «Dalpolimetall» Russian companies have led to the fact that the company management has decided to refuse from further investments in shares «Liepaja Metallurgist» Latvian plant is said to unofficial sources.

As pointed out by all of the same unofficial sources, the main reason was that the Latvian state has not taken a very active part in the negotiations conducted, and because of this, and the decision was made.

Immediately right after the talks, an official letter to the company that consults in «Liepaja Metallurgist» plant creditors club, with the information that it was not possible to achieve the desired shape agreement with the major shareholders of the plant were sent. But according to unofficial information, in fact, the investor decided to refuse to grant the investments due to the passive attitude of the Latvian state to participate directly in the project to attract private finance to save Liepaja Metallurgical Plant.

As it became known, is the largest shareholder of the Russian company, met with the Minister of State of the Latvian economy in order to convince the Latvian representatives in their most honest and serious intentions. Especially for this was provided by a letter of guarantee that, signed by none other than the bank twenty-five million euro has been reserved for investments in Latvia transport and metallurgy, both by the vice-president of «Promsvyazbank». Also, the Bureau of the Latvian prime minister was made aware of the full readiness of the bank to start direct financing of the project.

But at the same time the representative of the Russian company said that the company wants to see much more clearly the position of the Latvian state about their proposals. As a result, he informed in his interview, the Latvian government was well aware of the fact that at their disposal already have almost everything that was necessary for the resumption of the normal functioning of the enterprise, but they did nothing.

On the part of the representatives of the Latvian state, on the contrary, other statements which reported that a letter of guarantee was not as compelling as that says the Russian side.