The decision on the possible transfer of the production of the company “Alliance” to one of the western regions matured during the almost three-month period of forced downtime. It is understandable why such intentions existed. Kryvyi Rih found itself in an area of possible direct hostilities, not to mention the enemy’s periodic shelling of the city. Moreover, part of the factory equipment had already been sent there for storage. They wanted to take precautions so that if the enemy hit the factory, not everything would be lost, and they wouldn’t have to start from scratch. There were plans to organize production there, like a temporary branch of the factory.

However, it didn’t work out. The premises on the territory of a well-known company in our industry, which it was willing to allocate to colleagues from the furniture association for these purposes, required significant investments to adapt it for production workshops. The understanding of the risks involved and the significant financial commitment prevented them from taking such a step, not to mention the inevitable staffing issues. They might have been able to hire workers, but they would still need to be trained to work with woodworking techniques. “Besides,” emphasizes Mr Sergiy, “it wouldn’t be fair to give people hope with work and then shut everything down in six months. Because that’s exactly what happened: after some time, the equipment that had been taken out was returned to Kryvyi Rih.”

As for the events unfolding in Krivoy Rih, it went like this. When it became evident that the enemy was not capable of occupying the city, a decision was made to get back to work. However, before starting, they needed to know which of the permanent employees they could count on since some might have left the city, and some men might have turned out to be front-line soldiers. And indeed, that’s how it turned out. Nevertheless, the understaffing wasn’t critical for production because the war significantly reduced its volume. Only export deliveries remained at total capacity, primarily to France, where the main international client is located.

– And what about the domestic market? Did you have to rely on it?

– In the first half of the year, we didn’t have to. Trading partners from Kharkiv froze, and seventy percent of networks in our region stopped ordering our products. It was only in the second half of last year that some market recovery started to manifest.

– Did anything change in terms of providing production with furniture materials and components during the war?

– There was no shortage and still isn’t. However, the logistics aspect of supply changed drastically. Previously, suppliers would transport their products to us, but now we have to deliver them ourselves. Needless to say, it has affected our expenses. Taking into account that transportation has become more expensive and the costs of procurement have risen, the production cost of the finished product has increased, which is not pleasing. Currency instability and significant depreciation of the hryvnia also contribute to the challenges. As a result, we worked for a certain period with virtually no profit, just to keep our employees occupied.

– Can we say that the company’s work has finally stabilized at the beginning of this year?

– It has significantly stabilized, I would say. I judge this based on the fact that there is now a need and opportunity to update our pre-war product range through the development of new furniture models. Of course, the company has its own designers, engineers, and technologists, but as the manager, I still have to set the strategy for model innovations and work out the overall concept considering current trends and the needs of both domestic and international markets.