A question to Varamar’s shareholders: are you aware of what Mr. Varvarenko is doing in your company’s name?

Mr. Alexander Varvarenko says he is surprised that criticism is directed at him personally rather than at the investors behind the company.

That surprise is difficult to understand.

When an undisputed brokerage commission remains unpaid for nearly three months, when the head of the business personally steps in to block payment, when he issues a so-called “fine” by WhatsApp, and when pressure is applied on the broker to publish a humiliating “letter of repentance,” this is no longer some abstract corporate matter. It becomes a matter of personal responsibility.

What is even more remarkable is that Mr. Varvarenko appears unable to see the obvious: the real reputational damage to Varamar is not being caused by those who speak openly about misconduct. It is being caused by the misconduct itself.

Let us be clear.

A WhatsApp “penalty” has no legal magic. It does not erase an unpaid obligation. It does not transform non-payment into virtue. It does not make pressure, blackmail, or ego-driven decision-making look respectable. And it certainly does not protect the reputation of the company or its shareholders.

On the contrary, it shows something far more damaging: that the payment of a lawful commission can apparently be blocked at the personal discretion of one man whose ego seems to matter more than contractual discipline, professional ethics, or the company’s standing in the market.

So the obvious question is this:

Do Varamar’s shareholders know that Mr. Varvarenko personally intervened in the commission payment process and blocked it?
Do they know that instead of resolving the issue properly, pressure was allegedly used to demand a “letter of repentance”?
Do they understand that this conduct is directly damaging both the company’s reputation and their own interests as shareholders?

Because if the leadership of a company chooses arrogance over obligation, and personal vanity over lawful payment, then the problem is not external criticism.

The problem is internal decay dressed up as authority.

And if Mr. Varvarenko truly wants to know why he is being named personally, the answer is very simple:

Because it is his ego, his decision, and his conduct that appear to have blocked the payment and damaged the reputation of Varamar most of all.