>

They are banned in Russia though
It's funny how there are already 2 comments who claim the Moscow Times has a Russian bias even though the paper is banned in Russia for going against the countries narrative. Google would help you guys a lot.
Edit:
On topic: what does not having left really mean, I know from a similar post on my countries subreddit that there was a bank still in Russia, but the only thing they did was collect debt payments from already outstanding loans. It would be stupid to not do that. >

None of them mentioning that the study referenced in the article comes from Switzerland… >

Are they counting firms that technically left but still have operational assets there they can't sell and won't just abandon? >

Surely you couldn't be suggesting that a collection of preprint, non peer reviewed sources may contain inaccurate, contradictory, or untruthful information. >

"In effect, many firms headquartered in these nations have resisted 
pressures from governments, the media, and NGOs to leave Russia since 
the invasion of Ukraine." >

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 77%. (I'm a bot)


Their findings reveal "a very limited retreat of EU and G7 firms from Russia, challenge the narrative that there is a vast exodus of Western firms leaving the market," St. Gallen University said in a statement Thursday.
"In effect, many firms headquartered in these nations have resisted pressures from governments, the media, and NGOs to leave Russia since the invasion of Ukraine."
The research also showed that the exiting Western firms only accounted for 6.5% of the total profit before tax of EU and G7 firms with active commercial operations in Russia.


Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Russia^#1 firms^#2 study^#3 companies^#4 divested^#5 >

Yeah I wouldn't trust a Russian source to be particularly honest on this lol