You have in one article two kinds of businessmen mixed up:
First are the owners of small- (and medium-) scale businesses which they built by themselves.
Second are the owners of companies which were previously state-owned during USSR and then they were suddently privatized and "somehow" landed into a hands of very select few.
I don't think it's correct to call the latter group "enterpreneurs". I think it's bad for the former group to have both groups mixed together in one article. What you really have is using some real and ugly problems of the first group to pitch some ongoing cases featuring persons from the second group.
Those cases being ugly too not makes this spin a good thing.
My mother owns a small cloth shop, she has quite a few problems as a small business owner, but I doubt she wants to be used as a lever in the favour of Hodorkovsky or Kozlov. She might sympathise them, she might not. She's NOT on the same field anyway.
First are the owners of small- (and medium-) scale businesses which they built by themselves.
Second are the owners of companies which were previously state-owned during USSR and then they were suddently privatized and "somehow" landed into a hands of very select few.
I don't think it's correct to call the latter group "enterpreneurs". I think it's bad for the former group to have both groups mixed together in one article. What you really have is using some real and ugly problems of the first group to pitch some ongoing cases featuring persons from the second group.
Those cases being ugly too not makes this spin a good thing. My mother owns a small cloth shop, she has quite a few problems as a small business owner, but I doubt she wants to be used as a lever in the favour of Hodorkovsky or Kozlov. She might sympathise them, she might not. She's NOT on the same field anyway.