There Must Be A Bottom Line For The Contention Of Listed Companies.

Today, several major shareholders are still showing no signs of fighting for the control of listed companies. On the contrary, there are also related personnel attacking production sites and listed companies before the court.

Application for a series of events.

It is worth noting that in November 11th of last year, the cement competition announced that the cement price was 2 billion yuan.

In order to repay debts, the listed company announced that it would submit a liquidation application to the Cayman court and apply for the appointment of a temporary liquidator.

In fact, the so-called bankruptcy liquidation is only a matter of fact.

The "bait" that the original board throws behind, or behind it is the new version of the ownership competition game, is the related stockholder to achieve the control to the listed company "the sun".

In order to fight for control, the game between the game has gone to the point of "bankruptcy liquidation". It is really worth recollection.

In other words, according to the current situation among the major shareholders of listed companies, any side controlling the listed companies will face many problems in the future. Such a listed company is indeed worrying.

Statistics show that in 2012, the income of -2014 was 15 billion -165 billion yuan, and the annual net profit was 1 billion 500 million yuan, 1 billion yuan and 300 million yuan respectively.

Although the first half of the first half of last year was a loss, its asset liability ratio was only 60%. Moreover, shanshui cement is a company with a well recognized quality of assets, technology, scale and brand advantages. The 2 billion yuan short and short term financial default is obviously far from the point of bankruptcy liquidation.

Moreover, if bankruptcy and liquidation are really carried out, both the four largest shareholders and small and medium investors will face a pattern of losing more.

There is a competition between shareholders of listed companies, which is very popular in the current market, and is also very common.

The important thing is that when the war of share rights is fought, the game parties must follow certain principles and bottom line, otherwise, both the listed company and all shareholders will be the victims.

The author thinks that there should be at least three principles for the listed companies to fight for shares.

First, the rights of all shareholders should be respected.

Both the company law and the guidelines for corporate governance of listed companies regulate shareholders' rights.

Therefore, unless

Otherwise, listed companies should not deprive shareholders of any rights, but similar phenomena appear frequently in the market.

Such as Shanghai Xin Mei, New Huangpu and so on have appeared to do not respect the rights of the relevant shareholders.

Two, the fight for equity can not damage the interests of listed companies and investors.

When some listed companies compete for shares, their daily operations and corporate governance will be affected, which will eventually affect the performance of listed companies and the interests of investors.

Such companies often face declining performance and falling stock prices, and their negative effects are very obvious.

Three, the fight for equity can not deprive investors of trading rights.

When some listed companies fight for shares, they often deal with them by means of suspension of assets reorganization. The time of suspension is less than a month, and the length is longer than half a year, which seriously deprives investors of the right to trade.

If last year's "battle of Bao Wan" was in full swing, the listed companies had planned major issues in the afternoon of December 18th last year for emergency suspension. More than two months passed, and no sign of resumption has been achieved so far. Since then, shanshui cement has stopped trading since April 16th last year.

The investors of these listed companies are unable to trade as if they are locked in a cage, and their trading rights are also quietly deprived. This is undoubtedly unfair.