This article is a part of Poland Unpacked. Weekly intelligence for decision-makers
Grzegorz Nawacki, XYZ: We are a little over two weeks on from the announcement of the offer to acquire all InPost shares by a consortium in which you are involved. How is the transaction progressing? Has anything material happened since then?
Rafał Brzoska, founder and CEO of InPost Group:
Do you know the one question I dreamed of hearing during all the days since we made this public – and never did? “Mr. Brzoska, do you believe in your InPost even more now?”
I’m laughing, but that is precisely the point of this strategic move. With a single step, we will achieve three objectives. First, we will secure the capital we need to play not in the domestic league, not the European one, but in the global league of logistics and e-commerce—technological, built on ultra-modern artificial-intelligence solutions on the one hand, and still—on the other—on the highest standards of customer service. That requires enormous financial outlays.
Second, we are safeguarding the fact that InPost will remain a Polish company. Our headquarters will stay here. Our managers will stay here. Our key functions – including IT – will stay here. This is where we will pay our taxes.
Third, finally: yes, I want to devote even more of myself and my time to developing the company. And the fund I founded (A&R Investments—ed.) is investing in the company I founded and built with my team, increasing its stake by one-third.
Those who commented that “Brzoska has sold his InPost” misunderstand one thing. I have never hidden the fact that it is more to me than a company I manage. Today we are a powerful, international corporation, worth billions of euros, entering new markets and new technologies – including artificial intelligence. But in every – absolutely every – part of this corporation there is still that young boy who went to Germany to earn a few Deutsche marks working in gardens. There is the student from Kraków who started his first business. And there is the risk-taker who – when his peers were entering the job market – turned down an offer to sell the company for millions, choosing instead an unknown future and distant horizons.
In every part of InPost there are also my failures. My parents’ life savings, which I invested on the stock market and lost down to the last penny. And moments when bankruptcy stared me straight in the face. Once, because a dishonest counterparty tried to steal my company using an unlawfully filled-out promissory note. And twice, when the state tried to crush us – unable to beat us fairly.
So, briefly: I am staying. And you – please – stay with us. It is worth it.
In that long answer, I think I’ve already received the response to a question many people are asking: are you entering politics? Because there are rumors that you’re forming a party.
That is probably the strangest rumor of the past few weeks. First, they were sending me to the presidency. Now the same people are sending me to the parliament. Honestly? I no longer have the energy to deny it. Since 1999 I have been an entrepreneur, building a business. Barely a few weeks after I announced that I was part of a consortium seeking to buy out InPost shares in order to give the company a new burst of speed, someone releases such a rumor – and even journalists who should know better pick it up.
My goal is to build a genuine, global business rooted in Poland. And I will not rest until I deliver that. I will not abandon the project of my life to sit on the parliamentary benches or in a Sejm committee. Really – let’s put this to rest.
Did any of the journalists publishing these “news items” contact you before publication?
That’s precisely the point: no. They released information that has nothing to do with truth or reality. In their articles they refer to “people close to Rafał Brzoska.” That person is my wife - Omenaa Mensah. Not a single editor called her. It starts with an anonymous post on X, then journalists and politicians repeat it – and that is, unfortunately, how information circulates today. It saddens me to see the direction the media are heading.
Politicians from the Polish People’s Party (PSL) are adding fuel to the fire. Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz said you have a “political instinct,” and Piotr Zgorzelski said that “if Mr. Brzoska enters politics, he could significantly change the configuration of the Polish political scene.”
I respect the leaders of all political parties and thank them for the positive words about me – but reality should not be bent. What I can promise them is that I will support all good ideas that move Poland and Europe forward. You can count on me through business organizations in which I am involved, and through expert input.
Many people say that your wife, Omenaa Mensah, sees herself as a future first lady. So perhaps the presidency after all?
Only someone who does not know us at all – and yet pretends otherwise – could say that. None of our friends would ever formulate such a thought. Omenaa has a mission to help others, not only in Poland but also abroad – and she does so very effectively. There are few opportunities to showcase Poland’s philanthropic side in as positive a light as she does. A reflection of this is the recent award she received in San Francisco.
Her ambitions go far beyond what she is doing today – but certainly not in the category of being a first lady.
Omenaa sees herself rather as someone who supports any first lady, helping her navigate that role more easily and focus on issues that truly matter from the perspective of Polish society and public expectations. That is why she always keeps the door open to dialogue with first ladies of global politics – such as Jill Biden, Michelle Obama, as well as Jolanta Kwaśniewska, Agata Duda, and – hopefully – every one to come.
Looking at the reactions to this rumor, one might conclude that there is public demand for the creation of a new party.
I think there are three camps in Poland today. One supports the governing coalition and cannot imagine the world without it. The second backs the current opposition and sees no alternative. And then there is a third – apparently of a similar size to the other two, perhaps even larger – made up of people who want something fresh. This is clearly an opportunity for new circles as well: entrepreneurs, young people, NGOs, and above all those who energize their local communities.
They seem to have a real chance because – as we can see – there is strong social demand for a new way of looking at politics, at Poland and Europe, and above all at the future.
Let’s settle one more thing: the Sejm, the government: now, later, or never?
Absolutely never. That is a place for politicians – those who wanted to do politics from a young age and who want to devote their lives to it. As teenagers, they handed out leaflets; later, they ran in campaigns. Entrepreneurs should be in business. That is how the country benefits most. You don’t put your best striker in goal, and you don’t send the goalkeeper up front.
Perhaps the rumors arise because you often speak out publicly on matters of the state and reforms.
Because the debate about Poland cannot be left solely to professional politicians. Entrepreneurs have knowledge, experience, the ability to implement change, and a sense of responsibility for the country. This is not about a desire for power. It is about concern for the economy and for our competitiveness.
We are living through a period of enormous change. The world is racing ahead – artificial intelligence, robotics, new supply chains, rearmament. And meanwhile, in Poland and Europe, we are talking about who is in coalition with whom, who dislikes whom, or who will be prime minister. That is not how you win this race.
Europe and Poland need investors who are confident it is worth coming here – and citizens who do not have to clutch their wallets because they know they can afford to spend.
What is Europe’s biggest problem today?
We have lost our ambition. Europe has become a champion of regulation, not innovation. Bureaucracy is everywhere. No country has ever built its strength on an excess of rules and high taxes. European integration began with six countries and a very simple idea: fewer barriers, more trade, more competition. Economics came first, not ideology.
Today we need EEC 2.0 – a bold step backward that would at the same time be a giant leap forward. If we return to the fundamentals – economic freedom, competition, innovation – Europe can once again be a model for the world. If not, others will write our future for us.
Isn’t the problem that Europe is divided, with national interests often at odds? That’s why it cannot be compared to the United States or China.
Not all 27 countries want the same thing. Not all of them play as a team. So perhaps instead of pretending unity, we should allow those who want to move faster to do so. A two-speed union might be better – because a smaller but fast-moving group is preferable to the stagnation of 27 states.
The free movement of capital, services, people, and goods – that should be the foundation of the community: EEC 2.0, which would take the place of the European Union, rather than this or that ideology. Countries willing to accelerate would join voluntarily. The EU could remain as a political body.
The problem is that Europe lacks a leader willing to open such a debate. Poland could do it. And this would not be against Europe – on the contrary, it would be for Europe. It is increasingly clear that citizens do not want the EU in the form it has taken.
And what is Poland’s problem?
We have some of the highest energy prices in Europe. That knocks us out of the race for data centers, factories, and the chemical industry. Even in Brussels it is now being said that the ETS was a mistake and urgently needs to be redesigned.
Relying exclusively on renewables is a dead end. The sun does not always shine, and the wind does not blow nonstop. Nuclear power – both large-scale and small modular – must be a key part of the energy mix. Gas will remain a stabilizer for a long time to come. But let’s be honest: you cannot change an energy mix overnight. So if electricity is expensive today, we must specialize in activities with low energy intensity. Poland needs specialization – you cannot be a world champion at everything.
What about our strength?
Certainly our geographic location, which means we should be a natural transit hub between Asia and Europe. That is also why the construction of the Port Polska hub should accelerate. Europe imposes tariffs on Chinese products? Great. We should be the ones to take them over, package them, and distribute them onward.
Strategy is not about dreaming of being the best at everything. Strategy is about specializing where you
Aren’t you contradicting yourself? How can we build a strong European industry while at the same time relying on imports from China? Chinese electric vehicles are undermining Europe’s automotive industry.
It’s a great example. China has dominated global production of batteries for electric vehicles. If we know we cannot beat China in battery manufacturing and low-cost EVs, then why do we impose regulations on ourselves that force us to play on their field?
Forcing Europeans to buy cars that are twice as expensive simply to comply with our own regulations is economic suicide. Europeans were world leaders in efficient internal-combustion engines. Instead of abandoning those capabilities, perhaps we should be developing them further.
More efficient internal-combustion engines can deliver the same climate effect – especially when you take into account the full cost of EVs, including battery production, lifespan, and disposal.
And how do we reignite innovation? Recently, XYZ wrote that the value of startup investment in the United States in just a few days this year exceeds the total invested in Poland over all of last year. The gap is enormous.
Yes – but a significant share of the capital invested in the United States comes from Europe. And that capital is slowly coming back. It would be good to create a framework so that as much of it as possible is invested in European projects.
But are our projects as good?
And that is the crux of the matter. In China today there are around 1,500 companies focused on robotics. In the United States, about 300. In Europe – fewer than 100. By 2040, there could be 10 billion robots worldwide. The question is: will we be producing them, or merely buying them?
For now, instead of innovation and robotics, we have to spend on rearmament.
Paradoxically, rising defense spending can be a catalyst for European innovation. Historically, it has been conflicts that accelerated technological development. But others are not standing still. China is investing enormous sums in automation and AI. If we do not direct 200 percent of our attention to these areas, we will be left behind for decades.
A year has passed since the SprawdzaMy team was established. Over that time, it has submitted more than 512 proposals to the government, 138 of which have entered the legal framework. Is that a success?
I am far from declaring full success. We have implemented around 140 changes, while more than 300 received a green light. The real success will be the full implementation of those changes and the launch of a next, more systemic phase.
What matters most, however, is that deregulation becomes a process that citizens can actually feel. It is too easy to blame Brussels for regulatory overload, forgetting about so-called gold plating – adding national rules on top of what EU law already requires. If we manage to put an end to that, it will be a genuine breakthrough.
You often say that the EU itself also needs deregulation. Perhaps we should “export” SprawdzaMy. Can Poland be an example for Europe?
Not only can we – we already are. I recently attended the EU–US summit in Brussels. I was struck by the level of knowledge about Polish initiatives and the openness to discussion. Instead of limiting ourselves to briefing notes, we should move toward workshops and concrete actions. If the Polish “deregulatory sprint” can become an inspiration for systemic change in Europe, it is worth trying.
Deregulation can succeed only if it is not merely a project for civil servants. It has to be carried out jointly – by the administration, politicians, entrepreneurs, and experts – regardless of political affiliation.
Key Takeaways
- Rafał Brzoska is not entering politics. He is all-in on InPost’s global expansion. The CEO of InPost unequivocally distances himself from rumors about a move into politics. His objective is to build a truly global company rooted in Poland and to increase capital commitment to InPost in order to compete in the world’s top tier of logistics and e-commerce.
- Europe needs an “EEC 2.0” – less regulation, more competition. In Brzoska’s view, Europe’s biggest problem is regulatory overload and a loss of ambition. He calls for a return to the foundations of the single market – economic freedom, competition, and innovation – even if that means a “two-speed Europe.”
- Poland must focus on energy, specialization, and deregulation. High energy prices are undermining the country’s competitiveness, making a realistic energy policy essential – with nuclear power as a key element of the mix – and a clearer economic specialization. In parallel, deregulation, including curbing so-called gold plating, should become a tangible, felt process for entrepreneurs and citizens alike.
We wrote about this because we considered the information both important and interesting. In the interest of full transparency, we note that the RiO fund, owned by Rafał Brzoska, CEO and shareholder of InPost, is an investor in XYZ.