📖 ZKIZ Archives

稅收專家：國產芯片引發的集成電路產業稅收關註

近日，美國商務部宣布，因違反美國規定，將禁止美國企業向我國的中興通訊銷售零部件、商品、軟件和技術，時長7年，解禁時間為2025年3月13日。同時，還禁止美國企業向中興提供任何技術服務或技術支援。由於目前我國國產芯片的應用主要集中在消費類領域，而對穩定性和可靠性要求更高的通信、工業、醫療以及軍事的大批量的應用中，國產芯片距離國際一般水平差距較大，因此美國此次的禁令除了進一步加劇了中美貿易摩擦外，也使更多人開始關註我國的集成電路行業。

其中，有部分觀點認為，由於我國缺乏相關的稅收政策激勵，導致制約了國產集成電路行業的發展。所謂的芯片，其實質上是集成電路的載體，專業人士認為，芯片與集成電路並無本質區別。為了理清這個問題，筆者對我國集成電路行業稅收政策進行了梳理，有以下幾點認識與讀者分享。

企業所得稅大幅減免

關於集成電路行業我國相繼出臺了大量的所得稅優惠政策，早在2012年，我國財政部及國家稅務總局便出臺了相關規定，集成電路線寬小於0.8微米（含）的集成電路生產企業，經認定後，在2017年12月31日前自獲利年度起計算優惠期，第一年至第二年免征企業所得稅，第三年至第五年按照25%的法定稅率減半征收企業所得稅。集成電路線寬小於0.25微米或投資額超過80億元的集成電路生產企業，經認定後，減按15%的稅率征收企業所得稅，其中經營期在15年以上的，在2017年12月31日前自獲利年度起計算優惠期，第一年至第五年免征企業所得稅，第六年至第十年按照25%的法定稅率減半征收企業所得稅。我國境內新辦的集成電路設計企業和符合條件的軟件企業，經認定後，在2017年12月31日前自獲利年度起計算優惠期，第一年至第二年免征企業所得稅，第三年至第五年按照25%的法定稅率減半征收企業所得稅。國家規劃布局內的重點軟件企業和集成電路設計企業，如當年未享受免稅優惠的，可減按10%的稅率征收企業所得稅。

也就是說，集成電路技術水平越高的可以得到的免稅期越長，除了免稅還可以減半征收或者給予15%或10%的優惠稅率，減免稅期甚至長達10年，並且適用的企業所得稅率比標準稅率低10到15個百分點。這比美國新稅改的21%的標準稅率也低了很多，可謂優惠力度很大。

近日，我國又出臺了新政策，根據財稅〔2018〕27號文，2018年1月1日後投資新設的集成電路線寬小於130納米，且經營期在10年以上的集成電路生產企業或項目，第一年至第二年免征企業所得稅，第三年至第五年按照25%的法定稅率減半征收企業所得稅。2018年1月1日後投資新設的集成電路線寬小於65納米或投資額超過150億元，且經營期在15年以上的集成電路生產企業或項目，第一年至第五年免征企業所得稅，第六年至第十年按照25%的法定稅率減半征收企業所得稅。

根據以上規定，顯然對於新設立的集成電路企業要享受稅收優惠有著更高的技術及投資額要求，但是減免稅期的時限是一致的，旨在給予稅收優惠，激勵高技術的集成電路企業。

除此以外，新規對於原設立的沒有盈利的集成電路企業也給予了稅收優惠，例如2017年12月31日前設立但未獲利的集成電路線寬小於0.25微米或投資額超過80億元，且經營期在15年以上的集成電路生產企業，自獲利年度起第一年至第五年免征企業所得稅，第六年至第十年按照25%的法定稅率減半征收企業所得稅。

由此可見，從企業所得稅的角度看，我國對於集成電路的稅收優惠惠及各種類型的新老企業，減稅力度是有保障的。

增值稅允許留抵退稅

除了企業所得稅優惠，集成電路企業在增值稅領域有一項與其他行業相比具有相當競爭優勢的稅收優惠政策，便是增值稅允許留抵退稅。

所謂的留抵退稅，即當購進的成本所產生的增值稅進項稅金大於銷售產品所產生的銷項稅金時所形成的差額予以退稅。毫無疑問，留抵額過大會占用企業的資金成本，不利於企業的發展。

早在2011年，我國便出臺了相關規定，為解決集成電路重大項目企業采購設備引起的增值稅進項稅額占用資金問題，決定對其因購進設備形成的增值稅期末留抵稅額予以退還。由此可見，增值稅允許留抵退稅對於集成電路行業也是具有積極意義的。

在留抵退稅之前，我國還對集成電路企業出臺過增值稅退稅政策。早在2000年便出臺了相關的稅收政策，規定自2000年6月24日起至2010年底以前，對增值稅一般納稅人銷售其自行生產的集成電路產品（含單晶矽片），按17%的法定稅率征收增值稅後，對其增值稅實際稅負超過6%的部分實行即征即退政策。所退稅款由企業用於研究開發集成電路產品和擴大再生產，不作為企業所得稅應稅收入，不予征收企業所得稅。

該項政策主要有兩個針對點，一個是超稅率返回，二是返還的增值稅款還可以免企業所得稅，再加上前面的增值稅留抵額退稅，可以說對於集成電路企業的退稅還是較為齊全的。

當然，有相關的稅收優惠政策能否落到實處，還要考慮到退稅主體的財政能力。但是，原則上以上規定稅法是要求剛性執行的。

進口部分材料稅收減免

除了直接的稅收優惠，對於一些材料的進口還可以給予稅收優惠。例如規定，自2001年1月1日起，對在中國境內設立的投資額超過80億元或集成電路線寬小於0.25微米的集成電路生產企業進口本通知附件所列凈化室專用建築材料、配套系統和集成電路生產設備零、配件，免征關稅和進口環節增值稅。同時，2002年還出臺過規定，國內設計並具有自主知識產權的集成電路產品，因國內無法生產，到國外流片、加工，其進口環節增值稅超過6%的部分實行即征即退。以上兩項政策主要考慮到在集成電路產業的生產環節，一方面需要進口的原材料可以給予稅收減免，另一方面在國內設計國外的生產進口還可以給予退稅。但是，以上所提到的後者在2004年頒布了相應文件停止執行。

由此可見，雖然我國對於符合享受集成電路稅收優惠的範圍及認定管理有一定標準及限制，但至少在過去10多年間我國關於集成電路企業的稅收政策是有優惠安排的，涉及到的稅種也較為全面，尤其作為企業最為重要的增值稅、企業所得稅及進口環節的稅收，都給予了大幅減免。此外，我國對於企業科技創新也有較為完善的稅收優惠政策，並且目前正在研究完善個人創新驅動的相關稅收優惠政策。隨著對國產芯片自主研發的日益重視，相信也會有更多相關的稅收優惠的考慮。

（作者系國家稅務總局稅收科學研究所特聘研究員、北京國家會計學院財稅政策與應用研究所所長）

PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=262796

習近平考察集成電路生產線：一些重大核心技術必須靠自己攻堅克難

26日上午，習近平來到武漢新芯集成電路制造有限公司，察看集成電路生產線，了解芯片全流程智能化制造和加快國產化進程等情況。習近平說，要實現“兩個一百年”奮鬥目標，一些重大核心技術必須靠自己攻堅克難。機遇前所未有，挑戰前所未有。所有關鍵崗位、重要產業，都要有一份責任感、使命感。每個人都要在各自的崗位上，為實現中華民族偉大複興中國夢作出貢獻。

PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=263125

國開行加大集成電路支持力度，助推產業投資熱潮

國家開發銀行首席經濟學家、研究院院長劉勇10日在銀行業例行新聞發布會上介紹說，在支持我國集成電路產業發展方面，國家開發銀行起步早、支持額度大，而且對集成電路產業的發展前景有自己的判斷，將采取多種方式進行支持。

四月以來，受美國制裁中興事件的影響，我國掀起了又一波集成電路產業投資熱潮，湖南、雲南等省市，阿里巴巴、恒大等企業相繼進軍半導體產業。劉勇透露，下一步，國家開發銀行將以供給側結構性改革為主線，堅持創新驅動發展戰略，發揮開發性金融優勢和作用，加大對集成電路發展的支持力度。

總體來看，我國集成電路產業仍處在發展初期。根據ICinsights的數據，2016年我國集成電路自給率僅10.4%，按我國集成電路產值CAGR28.5%測算，2020年我國的自給率可以達到15%，仍處於較低水平。從進出口數據來看，我國集成電路進口金額長期遠高於出口金額，且差額不斷走闊。2017年，我國集成電路進口金額2601億美元，出口金額近669美元，凈進口額高達1932億美元，同比增長16.4%。從進口替代的角度來看，集成電路自主化的意願和需求都極為迫切。

集成電路產品的廣泛應用推動了電子時代的來臨，也成為現代日常生活中必不可少的組成部分。集成電路行業主要包括集成電路設計業、制造業和封裝測試業，屬於資本與技術密集型行業，業內企業普遍具備較強的技術研發能力、資金實力、客戶資源和產業鏈整合能力。從行業的發展來看技術水平持續提升、新興領域需求提升已成為未來發展的趨勢。

在政策的大力支持下，我國集成電路產業將迎來黃金發展時期。A股市場相關上市公司中東軟載波（300183.SZ）、長川科技（300604.SZ）、士蘭微（600460.SH）以及紫光國微（002049.SZ）等值得關註。

 

PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=263906

工信部推動集成電路創新，核心技術企業受益

6月2日，工信部電子科學技術委員會第二屆第一次全體大會在北京舉行。工信部副部長羅文表示，2018年，電子科技委要圍繞部中心工作，組織開展重大課題研究，關註構建信息技術領域核心技術體系的思路和路徑，重點圍繞補齊產業核心基礎環節短板，研究集成電路、智能傳感器等具有全局影響力、帶動性強的核心關鍵環節實現創新突破發展的方向和推進路徑。

我國目前擁有全球最大規模的電子信息制造業，我國手機、微型計算機、網絡通信設備、彩電等主要產品產量居全球首位。我國電子信息產業的銷售收入已達全球第一，但是2017年我國規模以上電子信息制造業利潤總額只有7000多億元，行業平均利潤率只有5.4%；具有核心知識產權競爭力的零部件主要依靠進口，高額利潤被國外上遊廠商收取。

集成電路是信息產業的基礎，被譽為“工業糧食”，我國政府早已認識到發展集成電路的重要性，近年發布了多份支持文件。除政策扶持外，還通過設立大基金提供資金支持。在政府和大基金的支持下，我國集成電路領域的投資力度正在加大。預計2018年中國本土企業半導體設備投資額度將達到58億美元。

根據相關的數據，2016年我國集成電路自給率僅10.4%，按我國集成電路產值CAGR28.5%測算，2020年我國的自給率可以達到15%，仍處於較低水平。從進出口數據來看，我國集成電路進口金額長期遠高於出口金額，且差額不斷走闊。2017年，我國集成電路進口金額2601億美元，出口金額近669美元，凈進口額高達1932億美元，同比增長16.4%。從進口替代的角度來看，集成電路自主化的意願和需求都極為迫切。

在政策的支持下，我國集成電路產業將加速發展，A股市場相關上市公司中紫光國微（002049.SZ）、中科曙光（603019.SH）、北方華創（002371.SZ）以及北京君正（300223.SZ）等值得關註。

PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=265380

IPO觀察|博通集成電路人均年薪逾40萬元，如何應對毛利率下滑？

集成電路芯片，是我國需要大力發展的一個高端產業，需要有較高的人力成本投入，才能跟領先的發達國家企業開展競爭。博通集成電路（上海）股份有限公司（“博通集成”）近日披露了招股書，即將沖擊IPO。對博通集成來說，對員工的付出可以說是“仁至義盡”，2016年人均薪酬達到42.58萬元。

如此高的人力投入，也為博通集成的股東帶來了較高的回報。不過從另一方面來看，博通集成也面臨著毛利率下滑的局面，產品一直面臨著對手企業激烈的“價格戰”競爭，如何通過新產品研發維持毛利率水平是博通集成要面對的問題；博通集成應收賬款和存貨水平都比較高，對博通集成也形成了一定的資金壓力。

人均年薪超40萬元

“公司是國內領先的集成電路芯片設計公司，”博通集成的主營業務為無線電通訊集成電路芯片的研發和銷售，具體類型分為無線數傳芯片和無線音頻芯片。公司目前產品應用類別主要包括5.8G產品、WIFI產品、藍牙數傳、通用無線、對講機、廣播收發、藍牙音頻、無線麥克風等。上述產品廣泛應用在藍牙音箱、無線鍵盤鼠標、遊戲手柄、無線話筒、車載ETC單元等終端。

“主要原因系公司所在行業平均薪酬水平較高。”在招股書當中，博通集成對自身員工薪酬較高，顯著高於當地平均工資的原因，作出了如此解釋。

公司稱，“建立了完善科學的晉升機制和激勵機制，將企業文化、價值觀及工作環境、職業發展機會等與具有競爭力的薪酬福利緊密結合，以吸引人才、留住人才，實現公司與員工的共同成長和發展。公司實行差異化薪酬，員工薪酬和福利主要由底薪、獎金構成，底薪在事先確定的各職級薪酬區間內，根據每個員工的經驗、技能和績效等確定。”

2016年博通集成員工平均薪酬42.58萬元，這超過上海職工平均薪酬7.8萬元的的五倍，也遠高於5.74萬元的全國平均水平，這也甚至高於相當部分金融企業的薪酬水平。這也比公司自身2015年的38.04萬元平均薪資提高了超過10%。

公司稱，“在未來將繼續堅持全面薪酬管理原則，並根據人才需求情況，參考市場平均水平、同行業公司薪酬水平等因素，對員工薪酬制度和薪酬水平進行動態調整。考慮到通貨膨脹、社會用工成本的普遍提高，預計未來員工整體薪酬水平將逐漸提高。”

或許集成電路設計的確需要較高的薪酬，吸引足夠多的頂尖人才，才能真正實現趕超。

博通集成稱，芯片作為機器的大腦具有舉足輕重的作用，而芯片設計作為實現功能的核心，在整個集成電路行業具有高附加值、技術含量高等特點，其毛利率相對於制造和封測廠商來講相對較高，對於環境、工作場所等的影響相對較小，也是發達國家實現技術壟斷的主要渠道之一。在世界範圍內，集成電路設計的產值占比高達56%，而集成電路封裝測試環節的份額占比只有19%。

目前我國內地集成電路產業仍然大量集中在附加值和技術含量較低的制造和封裝環節，2016年設計行業占比僅為37.9%，我國集成電路行業整體面臨轉型。另外，我國集成電路企業結構相對分散，市場集中度較低。

集成電路設計方面，中國前十大集成電路設計企業2016年市場份額占比為42.15%；而在全球市場，2016年前十大集成電路設計企業市場份額高達76.42%。從業態來看，集成電路產業具有技術密集和資本密集的屬性，行業發展趨勢有利於強者恒強。

雖然人均薪酬較高，但如此高的人力成本也為博通集成的投資者帶來高回報，2015年到2017年，博通集成加權凈資產收益率達到了40.1%、30.44%和32.83%。

毛利率下滑明顯

“A股上市公司中，除本公司外，尚無其他主營無線通訊集成電路芯片設計與研發的企業”，“目前，國內A股上市公司中，暫無與公司在業務模式、產品種類上均完全可比的競爭對手”，招股書如是說。

盡管如此，對博通集成來說，除了研發上需要突破以外，現有產品如何保持利潤也是個問題，毛利率連年不斷下滑，應收賬款和存貨的占比較高，都讓人對博通集成未來的發展打了一個問號。

“集成電路行業的特點是隨著產品的普及和市場競爭的加劇，其產品售價和毛利率將呈現下降趨勢，但公司對於新產品的開發及產品的更新換代，可以使得較高的毛利率得以維持；公司對產品在毛利率較高的應用領域的市場開拓，也有助於公司毛利率保持在較高水平。”

博通集成在招股書作出了如此表述，不過事實上博通集成的毛利率卻不斷下降，無法如上述招股書陳述所說“毛利率保持在較高水平”，招股書前後似乎出現了一定的矛盾。毛利率下滑受的則是相關產品激烈的“價格戰”拖累。

2015年、2016年和2017年，公司的毛利率分別為42.58%、36.47%、34.03%，2016年和2017年公司的毛利率水平有所下滑，主要原因系隨著各類產品更新換代；包括公司為消化存貨對部分產品選擇降價銷售策略所致；在藍牙芯片方面，市場競爭加劇，主要競爭對手的代理商通過壓低產品毛利搶奪市場份額，公司采取基於主要競爭對手價格進行定價的機制所致。

盡管面臨如此激烈的“價格戰”，招股書中博通集成並未詳細披露行業競爭對手的情況；相對於其他上市公司超過五六百頁的招股書，博通集成只有322頁的招股書，作為保薦人的中信證券做到了“惜墨如金”。

不過招股書“行業經營模式”當中，還是披露了相關情況。Fabless模式即無晶圓廠的集成電路設計企業，沒有自己的工廠，芯片的制造和封裝測試分別由產業鏈對應外包工廠完成，代表企業包括高通、清華紫光展銳等，“博通集成亦采用該模式。”

關於維持毛利率水平的辦法，博通集成稱，“公司目前正在積極拓展WIFI數傳芯片市場，隨著物聯網的發展和普及，以無線智能終端需求出發而設計的WIFI數傳芯片將有廣泛的應用場景，包括航拍、智能家居、DV數碼攝像、電視和工業控制等領域。同時公司的募集資金投資項目包括智能端口產品和衛星定位產品。”

另外，博通集成的應收賬款方面，2017年達到了1.47億元，占營業收入比例的25.96%，這遠遠高於2017年和2016年的15.13%和18.55%比例；“主要系隨著公司經營規模的逐步擴大和營業收入的增加，公司應收賬款余額相應增長。”2017年底存貨達到7678.74萬元，占總資產比例為19.89%。這些數字都讓人對博通集成的銷售回款能力有所擔憂。

PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=265449

董明珠進軍芯片行業又有新動作 格力電器10億註冊集成電路公司

多次高調宣布要做芯片後，董明珠和格力電器有了新的行動。

根據國家企業信用信息公示系統顯示，2018年8月14日，珠海零邊界集成電路有限公司成立，註冊資本為10億元，法定代表人是董明珠，公司股東為珠海格力電器股份有限公司。

系統顯示的該公司的5名管理層人員中，董明珠任董事長，李紹斌任董事兼經理，譚建明任董事，梁博任經理，廖建雄任監事。

公開信息顯示，該公司經營範圍為半導體、集成電路、芯片、電子元器件、電子產品的設計與銷售；通訊技術、物聯網技術、嵌入式軟件、計算機軟件、移動設備軟件開發與銷售；技術服務以及技術咨詢；以及上述產品的批發與進出口業務。

在今年6月份格力電器股東大會上，董明珠表示，爭取明年格力空調全部用上自己的芯片。而對於投資者擔心格力電器涉足芯片領域進行多元化布局可能影響分紅，董明珠明確表態不會受到影響，但芯片一定要做。

格力電器董秘望靖東此前曾表示，“集成電路領域我們已經做了IGBT封裝，空調內機的主芯片已能夠設計，但很多芯片設計出來通過委托加工。”

責編：羅懿

PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=267555

孵化自己的臺積電 江蘇籌建集成電路工藝研究所

臺灣積體電路制造股份有限公司（下稱“臺積電”）開創了晶圓代工（foundry）模式，目前已成為全世界最大的專業積體電路制造服務公司。如今，江蘇省也想孵化出自己的“臺積電”。

“臺灣工研院當年孵化出了臺積電，我們就是想通過這種模式來創新發展集成電路產業，走出一條新路子，孵化出我們自己的臺積電。”8月24日，在江蘇南通舉行的2018集成電路產業技術研討會上，江蘇省產業技術研究院黨委書記、副院長胡義東介紹了目前正在籌建中的江蘇省集成電路工藝技術研究所（下稱“工藝技術研究所”）設立的緣起與初衷。

胡義東對第一財經記者表示，目前工藝技術研究所建設所需的幾個條件，包括資金、團隊、地點的初步遴選、運行機制、基本框架都已經擬訂。今年年內會確定工藝技術研究所在哪里落地。

今年3月江蘇省半導體行業協會公布的數據顯示，2017年江蘇省集成電路產業銷售總收入為1687.68億元，同比增長17.82%。

根據中國半導體行業協會數據，2017年中國集成電路產業銷售額為5411.3億元。按此計算，2017年江蘇省集成電路銷售額在全國占比為31.19%，占據相當重要的位置。

然而目前，江蘇省1700億的產值中有一半是封測產值，還存在產業結構失衡問題。數據顯示，2017年江蘇省集成電路三業中，設計業占比18.65%、封測業占比66.59%，明顯偏重於封測業。

胡義東表示，江蘇省要發展集成電路構建完整的產業鏈，就需要更大力地發展前端的IC設計和制造產業，工藝技術研究所正是希望通過構建一個8英寸的中試線制造平臺，來帶動江蘇省集成電路產業發展。

目前，蘇州、南京、無錫、南通等地在遴選競爭中各有優勢。

無錫市是江蘇省甚至全國集成電路產業的重要城市，為國家微電子產業南方基地。2017年無錫集成電路三業總量占全國總量的12.39%，占全省總量的50.83%。

無錫已基本形成了包括設計、制造、封測、材料、設備等較為完整的集成電路產業鏈，其中封測行業規模位列全國第二。

南京市是中國主要電子信息產業基地之一，2016年江北新區被列為江蘇省級集成電路產業發展基地。

2015年臺積電宣布將於南京江北新區浦口經濟開發區建設12寸晶圓廠，引來自世界各地百余家集成電路企業安家江北新區，涵蓋芯片設計、晶圓制造、封裝測試、終端制造等產業鏈上下遊全部環節。

蘇州市同樣屬國內集成電路產業基礎較好的城市之一，曾引進過英飛淩、飛兆半導體、AMD、瑞薩等一系列國際大廠。2016年蘇州位列全國集成電路產值前十大城市之一。

“現在支持力度比較大的是蘇州，我們17個研究所有11個在蘇州，蘇州力量很強。”胡義東對記者表示。

在談到南通時，胡義東對記者表示，南通現在也是江蘇省集成電路的重鎮。“南通的優勢在於：一方面南通現在有一條8寸的舊線，如果能把這條線用起來，非常好；另一方面南通現在的土地、人力和社會生活成本比較低。此外還要看政府的支持。”

如今，我國集成電路的進口值已超過原油。根據海關總署數據，我國集成電路進口額從2015年起已連續三年超過原油，且二者進口差額每年都在950億美元以上。

目前，中國集成電路市場占據全世界60%的份額。像英特爾、三星等都在中國市場紛紛布局。2014年，國務院印發《國家集成電路產業發展推進綱要》，中國也已將集成電路產業發展上升為國家戰略。目前產業布局主要集中在以北京為核心的京津冀地區、以上海為核心的長三角、以深圳為核心的珠三角及以四川、重慶、陜西、湖北、湖南、安徽等為核心的中西部地區。

“集成電路產業是現代工業里最複雜的產業。”胡義東對記者談道，這方面我國現在處於追趕狀態，要另辟蹊徑，走創新的路。

在參加2018集成電路產業技術研討會的嘉賓看來，中國集成電路產業發展或許可以走一條“柔性低成本開放工藝研究所+示範晶圓廠”的創新路。

此內容為第一財經原創。未經第一財經授權，不得以任何方式加以使用，包括轉載、摘編、複制或建立鏡像。第一財經將追究侵權者的法律責任。 如需獲得授權請聯系第一財經版權部：
021-22002972或021-22002335；[email protected]

責編：楊誌

PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=267703

中國金融發展(控股) (3623，前稱中國集成金融)專區

1 : GS(14)@2013-10-28 09:46:58

http://www.hkexnews.hk/reports/p ... 131025-Layout_c.htm
初步招股書
2 : GS(14)@2013-10-28 22:45:59

http://realforum.zkiz.com/thread.php?tid=69759
　《經濟通通訊社28日專訊》市場消息指，中國集成金融（03623）擬全球發行1億股股份，最多集資2.8億元，在本周四（31日）起招股，招股價每股介乎1.8元－2.8元，每手2000股，入場費5656.4元，預計11月13日上市。
3 : GS(14)@2013-10-28 22:46:02

　《經濟通通訊社２８日專訊》市場消息指，中國集成金融（０３６２３）擬全球發行１億股
股份，最多集資２﹒８億元，在本周四（３１日）起招股，招股價每股介乎１﹒８元－２﹒８元
，每手２０００股，入場費５６５６﹒４元，預計１１月１３日上市。
　　是次交易的安排行為第一上海、ＲａｆｆＡｅｌｌｏ　Ｓｅｃｕｒｉｔｉｅｓ（ＨＫ）。（
ａｐ）
4 : GS(14)@2013-10-28 22:46:10

《新股情報》佛山「財仔」集成周四招股 並無固定股息政策
12:11
Infocast
<匯港通訊> 又有一隻「財仔」招股。市場消息透露,於佛山市從事融擔保服務的中國集成金融集團擬於本周四,即10月31日起招股,與徽商銀行(03698)及網遊公司博雅互動撞期,集資最多約1億元,安排行有第一上海及上商等。

據其上載於港交所(00388)的初步招股文件指,其於截至今年5月31日的未分派保留盈利為6300萬元人民幣,且於可預視未來將不會分派,而公司上市後亦無固定的股息政策。

集成指,於今年6月1日起至8月31日,其提供42項新融資擔保及6項新訴訟擔保,擔保總額分別約2.62億元人民幣及1.586億元人民幣,又稱該公司並無任何違約個案,亦無實際損失。
本文版權歸Quamnet華富財經所有，除以下授權的分享方式外，使用其他方式轉載部份或全部內容，Quamnet華富財經將保留追究權利。
5 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-10-30 21:18:22

《新股消息》集成金融(03623.HK)明起招股 下月13日掛牌
2013-10-30 15:05:20

廣東佛山融資擔保服務商中國集成金融(03623.HK)於今日舉行新股發布會，將於明日(31日)至下周二(11月5日)招股，計劃發行1億股新股，90%國際配售，10%公開發售，另設15%超額配股權。每股招股價介乎1.8-2.8元，最多集資2.8億元，每手2000股，入場費為5656.45元，計劃下月5日定價，13日上市。

該股聯席保薦人為RaffAello Capital及第一上海融資；同為全球發售的聯席全球協調人、聯席牽頭賬簿管理人及聯席牽頭經辦人。按照招股中位數2.3元計算，所得淨額為1.794億元，當中約60%用於增加資產淨值、註冊資本及/或實繳資本以提升財務實力；30%用於進行潛在併購及10%用作一般營運資金。(ji/t)

阿思達克財經新聞
網址: www.aastocks.com

http://www.aastocks.com/tc/News/HK6/65/NOW.571950.html
6 : VA(33206)@2013-10-30 21:19:17

承網遊之熱強勢招股的博雅(00434),將於明日登場,投資者已蓄勢待發認購,有券商指,已獲得一張博雅「頂頭槌」飛孖展預訂,故看其趨勢,博雅明天孖展勢搶爆;至於佛山「財仔」集成金融(03623),亦不示弱,有券商更估計,單其一間,明天借出的孖展額已可令其獲得超額認購,看來明天是博雅與集成之爭。

不過,徽商銀行(03698)走勢亦不俗,市場消息指,徽商行國際配售除於昨天已超購2倍外,今日更獲得一內地保險公司斥1.6億美元(約12.48億港元)「入飛」。

時富金融零售金融業務董事總經理鄭文彬表示,該行已獲得一張博雅的「頂頭槌」飛(約5163萬元)孖展預訂,還有其他投資者查詢博雅孖展;他預期,博雅首日孖展會熱爆。市場消息指,博雅昨天展開路演後,國際配售已迅速獲得超購,現在投行對超購倍數已不擔心,只是希望如何分貨可令投資者滿意而已。

除博雅外,「財仔」集成走勢亦「勁」,信誠證券聯席董事張智威指,該行今天已收到很多集成孖展的查詢,他估計,明天集成公開認購,單該行首日借出的孖展額已令集成超購。

另外,致富證券、輝立證券均稱,有不少投資者查詢博雅孖展。昨天已有3間券商指,會為這輪新股潮預備480億元孖展額,而部分券商亦已推出優惠,吸引投資者認購新股;如輝立為徽商行推出零息孖展及孖展融資額高達95%的優惠。


BIG 6 FANS???
7 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-10-30 21:20:13

《新股消息》集成金融(03623.HK)有意併購小額貸款公司 惟未有明確目標
2013-10-30 16:39:20

集成金融(03623.HK)主席兼執行董事張鐵偉於新股發布會上表示，目前廣東佛山有約30萬家中小企，去年所產生的GDP與越南相若，預計今年可達7,300-7,500億人民幣(下同)，估相信資金需求龐大。截至去年底，擔保責任總餘額為14.83億元，截至今年5月底已上升至15.39億元。

行政總裁兼執行董事李斌指出，上半年小額融資規模下降，但整體仍屬穩定，主要由於業務剛於去年收購，故未能完全反映財務狀況，相信今年可對公司利潤成出貢獻。再者，中央對中小企業持續支持，預計公司業務可持續發展。

被問到截至今年5月底止五個月，所獲得政府補貼僅為300萬元，財務總監梁濤指，由於補貼在期內尚未入賬，目前已完成去年60%，料補貼收入會在下半年逐步入賬。

對於截至去年5月底止五個月，公司年內溢利由1,838萬元跌至今年同期的967.9萬元，這是基於上市支出費用納入賬目，而政府補貼未入賬；撇除一次性的上市費用，連同應該入賬的政府補貼，純利按年穩定。

李氏續指，集團與地方銀行存在互惠互利的關係，中小企發展對銀行而言存在長期關係。他指，集成目前沒有具體收購對象，未來會關注中小投資企服務及小額貸款公司，以達協同效益為戰略方向。(ji/a)

阿思達克財經新聞
網址: www.aastocks.com

http://www.aastocks.com/tc/News/HK6/65/NOW.571981.html
8 : GS(14)@2013-10-30 22:41:13

呢隻概念幾獨特
9 : VA(33206)@2013-10-30 22:42:19

洗耳恭聽
10 : GS(14)@2013-10-30 22:45:00

VA在9樓提及
洗耳恭聽


幫小公司進行全方面融資的代理
11 : VA(33206)@2013-10-30 22:45:14

話時話今朝有個經紀提我留意呢隻,奇怪
12 : GS(14)@2013-10-30 22:46:06

VA在11樓提及
話時話今朝有個經紀提我留意呢隻,奇怪


等潛左先，唔急
13 : VA(33206)@2013-10-30 22:47:58

一條心博.....另一隻
14 : GS(14)@2013-10-30 22:48:21

VA在13樓提及
一條心博.....另一隻


博雅
15 : jos_spy(34148)@2013-10-30 23:21:32

個保薦人都未聽過。
16 : VA(33206)@2013-10-30 23:26:03

71
RaffAello Capital Limited
05 Jul 2012
LUI Tak Yan
TSANG Kwong Fai

http://sc-rules.sfc.hk/TuniS/www ... egWeb/listOfSponsor
17 : VA(33206)@2013-10-30 23:26:31

卡撒天嬌副牽頭經辦人
时计宝包销商
18 : GS(14)@2013-10-30 23:32:17

VA在17樓提及
卡撒天嬌副牽頭經辦人
时计宝包销商


http://webb-site.com/dbpub/adviserships.asp?p=1819300
俊知都有
19 : pcp7838(1616)@2013-10-30 23:32:46

同605有咩分別?
20 : VA(33206)@2013-10-30 23:34:30

Wa...Ping Shan Tea's......Advisor
21 : GS(14)@2013-10-30 23:36:10

pcp7838在19樓提及
同605有咩分別?


605 最多是財仔
22 : pcp7838(1616)@2013-10-30 23:41:44

一樣對像係中小企

一樣係做埋 短期融資、貸款擔保服務以及相關管理及諮詢服務.

好似好似.
23 : GS(14)@2013-10-30 23:50:49

但他多一項業務，可以幫埋他發債
24 : fishlove2001(20176)@2013-10-31 00:10:33

greatsoup在23樓提及
但他多一項業務，可以幫埋他發債


8090
25 : fishlove2001(20176)@2013-10-31 00:11:35

greatsoup在14樓提及
VA在13樓提及
一條心博.....另一隻


博雅


咁睇好博雅? 我想同期3隻都大手抽。
26 : GS(14)@2013-10-31 00:14:04

fishlove2001在24樓提及
greatsoup在23樓提及
但他多一項業務，可以幫埋他發債


8090


8090 完全是造假，不用理會，我只是沒有寫他上市中間的過程
27 : hellohk(32085)@2013-10-31 07:53:16

中國集成金融(3832)專區 >> 中國集成金融（03623），

題目改一下 NO. smiley
28 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-10-31 15:21:07

集成金融瞄準廣東中小企

來自佛山，主營融資擔保業務的金融服務供應商集成金融，是三隻新股中規模最小，集資僅2.8億元。按市場份額計，在廣東省同業中排名第7。行政總裁李斌指廣東省中小企業多，對融資需求大，未來會和同業加強合作，看好自身擔保餘額的增長。有投資者則認為，近期已有類似的新股中國匯融(1290)上市，但掛牌後表現欠佳，或會影響集成金融的招股反應。

http://www.mpfinance.com/htm/finance/20131031/news/eb_ebb1.htm
29 : VA(33206)@2013-10-31 16:23:30

Del
30 : amazingrick(36737)@2013-11-01 01:12:09

中国保监会广东监管局行政处罚决定公布（张铁伟 ）

2013年03月13日11:34  来源：保监会网站  手机看新闻
打印网摘纠错商城分享推荐       字号
　　粤保监罚〔2013〕44号

　　受处罚人：张铁伟 性别：男

　　工作单位及职务：广东集成保险经纪有限公司董事长兼总经理

　　2012 年7月至2012年11月期间，广东集成保险经纪有限公司（以下简称“集成经纪”）任命宋建冲为临时负责人，由宋建冲负责集成经纪的各项工作。截止2012年11月21日，我局对集成经纪进行检查之日，集成经纪没有向我局提交任命宋建冲为临时负责人的报告，宋建冲实际履行临时负责人的职责近5个月，超过3个月临时负责人的任职期限。

　　上述事实有现场检查事实确认书、相关人员谈话记录等证据在案证明。

　　上述行为违反了《保险经纪机构监管规定》第二十八条的规定。上述行为发生期间，你担任集成经纪董事长兼总经理，为对上述违法事实负直接负责的主管人员。

　　综上，依据《保险经纪机构监管规定》第八十六条第（八）项的规定，我局责令集成经纪改正，决定给予集成经纪警告并处罚款一千元的行政处罚。给予你警告并罚款一千元的行政处罚。

　　请在接到本处罚决定书之日起15日内将上述款项划至下述账户：

　　户 名：中国保险监督管理委员会广东监管局

　　开户行：中国建设银行广州东宝大厦支行

　　账 号：44001400115058900000

　　同时将注明被处罚人名称的划款凭证复印件抄报我局中介处存查。逾期，将每日按罚款数额的3％加处罚款。

　　如不服本处罚决定，可在接到本处罚决定之日起60日内依法向中国保监会申请行政复议或在3个月内向有管辖权的人民法院提起行政诉讼。逾期不履行处罚决定，又不申请复议或起诉的，我局将申请人民法院强制执行。行政复议和行政诉讼期间，本决定不停止执行。

(来源:保监会网站)
31 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-11-01 09:38:25

2013年11月01日

曾淵滄專欄：新股密集來怎挑選

美國聯儲局最新公佈議息結果，一切維持不變，利率保持在超低水平，政府繼續買債。
不過，美股在創新高後出現調整，這是趁好消息出貨的正常反應，消息公佈前，股市早已上升，說明這次議息結果是市場預期之內。
自從今年5月聯儲局發出退市預告後，美股就一波三折，出現三次較顯著的下跌，第一次見底是6月中，第二次見底是8月底，第三次見底是10月初。這一次不退市，遲早也一定會退市，因此，我相信今後美股依然會重複出現大型上落市，繼續受退市陰霾影響。
短期而言，美股將個別發展，視乎個別上市企業的業績而定。而本地市場焦點，短期應會集中在內地三中全會及人民銀行的貨幣供應操作，股友目前的興趣，也許會轉向新股市場。

長線投資揀徽商行
昨日又有三隻新股公開招股，集資額少則僅1.8億元，多則超過百億元，你喜歡「細細粒容易炒」的集成（3623），還是大型國企的徽商銀行（3698）？或是近日炒作熱烈的科網股博雅（434）？
作為長線投資者，我自然最喜歡徽商行，不過，從短炒角度看，博雅與集成也各有特點，值得留意。近期上市的網股表現都相當不錯，相信這股炒風不會太快平息，因此博雅有炒作價值。
集成則是一家小規模的融資擔保公司，印象中在香港並沒有同類型上市公司。為中小企向銀行貸款做擔保，然後向中小企收取擔保的佣金，聽起來風險很高，中小企倒閉，他們便得代為還債，不過根據集成招股書的資料，壞賬率僅0.07%。無論如何，集資額不足2億元的股，若有莊家看中，相信炒起不難。

曾淵滄
大學教授

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/financeestate/art/20131101/18488568
32 : GS(14)@2013-11-03 15:54:02

正式招股書好老土
33 : GS(14)@2013-11-03 15:54:58

1. 做中小企融資擔保同協助他們融資
2. 客好似少左
34 : GS(14)@2013-11-03 15:56:40

3. 擔保品、信貸風險、資金水平、擴張、團隊、犯法...
35 : GS(14)@2013-11-03 15:57:08

4. 個人向國家集體購回資產後增加資本歷程
36 : nhizlee(26265)@2013-11-04 11:00:06

周顯
政經密碼, 累進股息稅的後果    
工黨的李卓人向來是我最討厭的議員之一，而近來，他建議政府開徵大額股息稅，也遭到了不少網民的嚴厲批評。但我向來的做法是從不因人廢言，只是公正地評論，「give the devil his due」是我的座右銘。
就這個建議而言，我當然也不同意李卓人的說法，可是不同意是一回事，很多網民說他沒有sense，是亂說一通的，但我可不這樣認為：他所說的，雖然並不成立，至少不無一點點的道理。
李卓人的說法，是把個人股息免稅額定於25萬元，如果以現時的平均股票息率2.5%計算，必須是擁有一千萬元或以上股票資產的人，才需要繳稅。
如果純從表面上看來，這種說法是成立的，如果單論原則，連我也不去反對，因為我向來是支持平均財富，反對貧富懸殊的，前提是這種方法必須有效，對於經濟的副作用並不大。
或者說，那些網民對他的批評，大多都是不成立的，很多網民甚至誤會了，以為股息稅就是向炒股票的買賣利潤抽稅，更加是文不對題了。
如要評論，則是：股息稅是non- sense，但累進股息稅，則有一點點的道理，不過，仍然不能成立。
把股息作為收入之一，是雙重抽稅的一種，這是股息稅的最大敗筆。就這一點，已經有很多人說過了，我不去重複了。
問題在於，如果股息稅實行了之後，會有甚麼情況出現呢？我可以告訴大家答案：公司的派息率將會減低，傾向於以回購來代替減息，而公司的管理階層的薪水將會更高，因為他們不用派息了，改用薪水來補償給自己，數目也是一樣的。
換言之，如果政府抽取了股息稅，結果就是豪強和大公司的勢力會更大，因為公司放棄了派息，規模便會更大，就像是美國一樣。
我申請了幾十萬「集成金融」(3623)的I.P.O.，原因呢？
因為它的搞手RaffAello來頭極猛，當年搞過「志高空調」(449)、「瑞年國際」(2010)等，都是大升特升，我的好幾個富豪朋友，同RaffAello是拍檔，都是億億聲咁賺。
我沒有資格同它做拍檔，但這是RaffAello的第一隻I.P.O.，我當然不會執輸，搏命入飛啦！
作者為小說作家、報社主筆、股票投資者，吃喝活樂的專家
37 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-11-04 11:53:45

集成金融小注入飛
2013年11月4日

【明報專訊】我因為怕麻煩，所以很久沒有去抽IPO(新股)了。但是，我卻申請了集成金融(3623)，不單自己申請，還叫了不少老友去抽。

話說它的保薦人RaffAello是基金出身，其實做過好幾隻大世界，例如說，志高控股(0449)、瑞年國際(2010)，都是在上市之後，慢慢攀升，升了好幾倍的好股票。我有好幾個朋友，都是靠這兩隻股票賺了過億元，肥過豬頭，我都好羡慕他們﹕點解賺大錢的人不是我！

RaffAello的其中一個慣常做法，是找一些大孖沙入股，提高公司的形象，據我聽回來的消息，好像是陳國強家族也入了幾百萬股的飛，還有很多名牌，也會入股……咁我跟風，入番幾十萬，都不是太過分吧？我的想法是﹕這是它的第一隻當保薦人的股票，斷估都會操到盡，省番靚個招牌？

我是在上星期五入飛的(好像今日才是最後截飛日)，經紀問我﹕「最高是1400萬，你是不是入晒？」我說﹕「家我炒股票好細注，入幾十萬得啦。不過，我擔保幾個朋友入飛，10萬元左右，得唔得先？」經紀說﹕「你家陣個戶口不但無孖展，仲大把現金，點都得啦！」

按﹕這是我一年中罕有幾天沒有孖展的日子，所以必須標明。

周顯

http://www.mpfinance.com/htm/fin ... mnist/en30_en30.htm
38 : 鍾蛟見(41931)@2013-11-04 20:15:42

周顯是大戶合唱團的一份子吧……先前在報紙吹 #943 、 #953 等都瞬間爆升然後……
39 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-11-04 20:23:58

2013年11月04日

財智語陸：中小企生存靠貸款

三中全會將於本月9日正式展開，市場開始揣測有甚麼利好政策出台。不論有甚麼政策，新一屆政府較重視對中小企的扶持，這並非單憑中央「口號式」的支持。當然，中小企能否生存，也要看經營環境及自家實力。
要扶持中小企，除政策外，銀行貸款的支持亦非常重要，可惜並非所有銀行對中小企特別照顧，因而令「影子銀行」及民間貸款公司相繼出現，同時亦令融資擔保服務興旺起來。正在招股的中國集成金融（3623），主要業務是作為中小企向銀行貸款的擔保人，以及提供擔保前的財務顧問服務，而其主要市場為廣東省佛山市。融資擔保機構跟一般民間貸款機構不同，它們不用真金白銀借款給企業，只是當企業向銀行借款時作擔保，經營方法與本地的按揭證券公司相類似。

新股集成金融概念足
以收益計，集成目前是佛山市第二大融資擔保服務供應商，根據獨立第三者報告，廣東省七大融資擔保服務供應商佔去年市場總收益近28.7%。2007至2012年，廣東省授出的融資擔保總值由730億元人民幣，增至2,360億元人民幣，複合年增長率逾26%，該公司同期的收益複合增長亦超過27%。由於佛山市本身的中小企超過30萬間，去年GDP約6,700億元人民幣，同時受惠於廣州市發展成熟，令資金不斷向周邊城市投資，佛山市的經濟發展仍有增長勢頭，料該公司未來仍可望保持不錯的業務增長。另外，擔保公司最怕壞賬，但該公司去年違約率只有1.1%，即使在金融海嘯期間，集成亦無受任何負面打擊。由於市場未有此類股份，單以概念已可吸引新股一族垂青。

陳永陸
獨立股評人

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/financeestate/art/20131104/18492051
40 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-11-04 20:29:24

2013年11月04日,星期一

黃德几 投資得機 持盈與較勁

新股熱潮接近尾聲，股價表現更加「冰冷」。上周上市新股當中，即使超額認購數十倍，累計首周股價表現，五隻新股全告「潛水」。徽商銀行(3698)、手機遊戲開發博雅互動(434)、以及從事融資擔保業務的中國集成金融(3623)的招股期更加完全重疊，同樣本周二截止認購。集成金融主要在廣東佛山地區向中小企提供融資擔保服務，費用視乎融資擔保期限，由貸款金額0.5%至7.5%，截至5月底，擔保責任餘額15.39億元人民幣，違約率約0.3%，政府補貼30萬元人民幣。以招股價範圍1.8元至2.8元計，每股有形資產淨值1.68至1.93元，市帳率1.07至1.45倍，若以中間偏下限定價，估值則相對吸引。三新股同場較勁，僧多粥少在所難免，持盈保泰未嘗不可。

黃德几 (逢周一至周五見報)
筆者為金利豐證券研究部
執行董事，申報未持有以上股份

http://www.metrohk.com.hk/?cmd=detail&id=222538
41 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-11-04 21:10:35

周顯跟唔跟得過?



42 : VA(33206)@2013-11-04 21:22:14

Done
43 : GS(14)@2013-11-04 22:10:18

bbaeric在41樓提及
周顯跟唔跟得過?





信他半成好，太多人吹，包括六叔
44 : GS(14)@2013-11-04 22:10:31

鍾蛟見在38樓提及
周顯是大戶合唱團的一份子吧……先前在報紙吹 #943 、 #953 等都瞬間爆升然後……


他媽的接埋啦
45 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-11-04 23:49:05

轉貼 from discuss:

"盤數最靚 : 集誠"

儍仔, 最易做假數就係呢啲做文件公司, 空手入白刃, product 都無得你睇  

今年頭5個月得九百萬盈利, 今年隨時全年盈利倒退六成, PE變40倍

公司得50人, 集資2億8千萬, 簡直發達

仲有 price range $1.8-$2.8, 濶到唔恨, 博到佢就發達, 認購價係 extra 55% difference
price range 佢不如狼到盡要 $1.8-$3.6
拿, 教咗你睇新股 la
46 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-11-05 10:31:36

05/11/2013 09:34

集成金融(3623)上市長遠前景樂觀，可小注現金認購

股份推介
集成金融 (03623)

理 由　：
　　中國集成金融(3623)主要於內地提供融資擔保、非融資擔保、以及財務顧問服務。公司計劃公開發售1億股，招股價介乎1.8至2.8元，集資最多2.8億元。是次集資所得的60%用於提升財務實力，30%將用於尋求業內潛在併購機會，10%用於一般營運。
　　公司主要於佛山市向國內企業，特別是中小企業提供綜合財務服務。訂立融資擔保交易後，公司會就貸款機構向客戶提供的貸款提供還款擔保，並就所提供的擔保服務收取擔保費。而作為擔保的抵押，公司會要求客戶或第三方向集團提供多類反擔保。融資擔保業務並不參與直接貸款，而是與貸款銀行合作，公司向客戶收取的融資擔保費按協議擔保額的一定比例收取，為期不超過12個月的擔保通常介乎擔保額的0.5%至4%，13至24個月的擔保則為4.5%至6%，25至36個月的擔保則為5.5%至7.5%。
　　除擔保服務外，公司於2011年開始提供財務顧問服務，向客戶提供訂製的財務顧問服務，給出不同的融資產品建議，及協助客戶申請融資。公司目前與14家金融機構建立長期合作關係，協助中小企業融資。公司去年更參股小貸公司，將業務拓展至小額貸款。
　　風險管理方面，每個專案均需多層審批，對客戶還款能力及抵押品價值有充份了解，大大降低風險，公司去年的違約率及實際損失率分別只有1.1%及0.07%。今次上市後有助進一步推動業務表現，長遠前景樂觀，可考慮小注現金認購。

http://www.etnet.com.hk/www/tc/n ... il.php?expert=10090
47 : 培少(3241)@2013-11-05 16:23:57

可能抽都抽唔到一手
借個老媽先
48 : 太平天下(1234)@2013-11-05 20:58:13

greatsoup在43樓提及
bbaeric在41樓提及
周顯跟唔跟得過?





信他半成好，太多人吹，包括六叔


其實我覺得跟得過，雖則我無跟....有些少hesitation 已deadline
49 : porteryau(2825)@2013-11-05 23:41:24

greatsoup在43樓提及
bbaeric在41樓提及
周顯跟唔跟得過?


信他半成 雙目失明


信他半成好，太多人吹，包括六叔
50 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-11-08 21:18:14

2013-11-08

另外，市場消息指，融資擔保公司集成金融（3623）公開發售獲20倍超購，將以近招股價範圍1.8至2.8元的上限定價，下周三（13日）掛牌。

消息又指，已故華懋集團主席龔心如旗下的華懋基金亦有入飛，惟因機構投資者反應熱烈，華懋基金未能悉數購入預訂的認購數目。華懋公司高層時有出席一些新股推介會，惟近期並無入飛任何新股。

http://std.stheadline.com/yesterday/fin/1108do06.html
51 : VA(33206)@2013-11-13 19:48:54

新股追蹤：集成金融(3623)全日炒高近5% 每手賺260元
16:34
QuamNews
新股集成金融(03623)首日掛牌，高見2.94元，較招股價2.68元炒高近10%；午後買家出貨，股價逐步回落，收市報2.81元，較招股價高4.85%，成交額1.32億元。不計手續費，每手2000股帳面賺260元。


http://www.quamnet.com/newsconte ... d=3219603&view=NEWS
52 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-11-13 19:53:49

政經密碼 - 周顯
習李新政的必然性
2013年11月13日

上星期玩抽新股，申請了幾十萬「集成金融」(3623)，誰知只是獲得了幾萬，今天將會上板。
不過，這股票玩的是長線，按照其保薦人的往績，可能要搞上幾年，才能夠到達目標價，所以我也根本不心急，甚至是寧願它的股價下跌，也沒有所謂，因為可以慢慢的去繼續買。
「集成金融」只是一隻地方性的金融股，和整個中國的金融大勢沒有關係，我之所以買它，一來是因為相信其保薦人的實力，二來只是因為它細細隻，容易炒，很有可能有很高的利潤，如此而已。
如果說到全國性的金融政策，那又該怎麼去看呢？
我的看法是，在新的習李體制之下，未來的政策已經是很明顯的了：在政治上，它將會進一步收緊，換言之，那是又走回了「毛派」的路線，大家又一次的希望中國走上民主之路，只怕會又一次落空了。
今後的中國政治，只會比現在更左。但這當然不是完全沒有好處，例如說，把地方的司法權，收歸中央，司法制度將會更加完善，至少不會繼續出現老百姓在地方司法上受了冤屈，上訪不遂，求救無門的情況。
但是，在經濟上，中國卻會走上更為開放的路線。開放市場，亦會同時開放金融，貨幣市場也會進一步開放。
換言之，在未來的十年，中國將會在政治上向左走，在經濟上向右走，至於這種新政能不能夠行得通呢？民主派人士自然認為，這是不可能的，中共這樣走，是遲早玩完的。
但是，我的看法卻是：這是一種從來沒有施行過的新政策，既然沒有行過，沒有歷史往績去作參考，那究竟行不行得通，那就難說得很了。
畢竟，中共政權從文化大革命開始，以至於八九民運，很多人都認定，它是必倒無疑的了，但是反而愈玩愈好，令到大部分的評論員大跌眼鏡，這一次，它的變革又令到大部分的人再跌一次眼鏡，也不是甚麼奇事。
至於中共的走這一步，也是有著其必然性。因為經濟發展到了今日，如不搞繼續開放，它已經沒有招數可以刺激經濟繼續走上去，但是，經濟自由化，政治控制就會難免變得薄弱，所以非得用上加倍的力量，才能夠維持得到共產黨的政權。
所以說，習近平李克強的新政，是有著其實用的必然性的。
作者為小說作家、報社主筆、股票投資者，吃喝活樂的專家/逢周一、三、四刊出

http://www.am730.com.hk/column-181036

2013年11月13日

投資一周：成交細變優點

近日我買了兩隻股票，一隻叫利基控股（240），另一隻叫香港教育國際（1082）。
如果論基本因素，利基控股是無懈可擊的：市值只有兩億元，而且還有實質的生意、實質的盈利。
買了利基控股，便可以等其股價爆發，因為市價低、基數也低，升幾多都可以；萬一不升，現價已低於殼價，還有盈利支持，幾乎沒有缺點，那麼還要怕甚麼呢？
（買利基控股的缺點是可能在一年之間，盈利變成了虧蝕，兼且市場上的殼價大跌，兩樣衰嘢一齊來，但是可能性很低。）

流通量低　升幅更可觀

它的成交不大，但這也可以視為優點，因為成交小，雖然流通量欠佳，難以沽出，但是小成交的股票，潛在升幅才大。因此我買了幾十萬，等候它上升。
香港教育國際的成交就比較大，證明很多散戶在玩。它的市值比利基控股還要低，只有一億多元，而且看得出正在大展拳腳，前景比利基控股好得多，以這個市值，爆升一倍也不是難事，所以我買了之後，本來是想作為中線投資的。
由於香港教育國際的成交太大，短期而言，已經變成了一隻炒股，所以正確的策略，還是炒番一轉先講。
不過，因為香港教育國際的基本因素很好，所以是一隻缺點不大的炒股，對於炒家而言，這自然是有利的因素。所以我的策略，也從中期投資變成炒它一炒，反正其優點大於缺點，不怕博也。
此外，我近期罕有地申請新股，結果集成金融（3623）只中了幾萬，不過不要緊，它的保薦人RaffAello的往績是慢火煎魚。
當年的志高（449）和瑞年國際（2010）都沒有急升，而是以年為單位慢慢造上，買這種股票，又何必心急呢？

周顯
投資者、八卦公、知識分子

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/financeestate/art/20131113/18505418
53 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-11-13 19:56:46

13/11/2013 10:01

《新股掛牌》集成金融：上市料成示範作用，未評三中對集團影響

《經濟通通訊社１３日專訊》中國集成金融（０３６２３）主席張鐵偉於上市儀式後表示，
作為首個以擔保為主要業務的公司上市，將會成為業界的示範作用，預計會刺激更多同類公司上
市。
　　對於中共中央三中全會昨日結束，並公布深化金融改革，張氏認為，隨著中國改革，將會對
各行業有利好作用，但無詳細表達哪種措施會特別對集團有影響。
　　張鐵偉補充指出，民營銀行開放，將會對內地民企的發展起促進作用，相信有企業會等侍機
會發展民營銀行，但他無評論集團會否參與。（ｄｌ）

http://www.etnet.com.hk/www/tc/s ... newsid=ETN231113436

集成金融(03623.HK)：上市助走向國際資本市場 為同業起帶頭作用
2013-11-13 10:12:41  
  
廣東佛山融資擔保服務商中國集成金融(03623.HK) 今日於港交所(00388.HK) -0.800 (0.645%) 主板掛牌。主席張鐵偉於上市儀式上未有正面回應三中全會涉及的金融改革如何利好公司未來發展，僅強調中國市場巨大，相信公司會隨著中國市場的發展繼續壯大。

他又指，佛山市內的中小企業一直支持公司的穩定經營和發展，是次上市有助公司走向國際資本市場，但未透露會否發展佛山以外的市場；又認為由於公司是首批來港上市的內地擔保公司，於本港上市料可為當地同業起「先行先試」作用，預期會有更多同業來港上市。

對於中央支持民營銀行的發展，他認為是民企開發金融市場的好表現，但未談及該公司的有關時間表，只表示所有民企對此均有興趣。(ce/t)

阿思達克財經新聞
網址: www.aastocks.com

http://www.aastocks.com/tc/News/HK6/65/NOW.574540.html
54 : bbaeric(38257)@2013-11-13 19:58:59

13/11/2013 16:03

《新股掛牌》集成金融（３６２３）收２﹒８１元，每手賺２６０元

《經濟通通訊社１３日專訊》集成金融（０３６２３）今日首掛，收報２﹒８１元，較招股
價２﹒６８元高４﹒９％，成交股數約４６８１萬股，涉資約１﹒３２億元。最日最高位為
２﹒９４元，最低曾見２﹒７６元。
　　　投資者若認購及獲分配一手２０００股，不計及交易費用，以收市價計帳面賺２６０元。
（ｐｌ）

http://www.etnet.com.hk/www/tc/s ... newsid=ETN231113203
55 : MrYeung(15476)@2013-12-29 14:11:19

3623
56 : GS(14)@2013-12-31 00:08:34

3623
57 : greatsoup38(830)@2014-01-04 18:04:50

搞大生意
58 : pcp7838(1616)@2014-03-11 23:27:50

又一上市即刻盈警實錄, 我們此等散戶孰能分辨？只有讓歷史教訓我們。

小心留意此股是做中小企貸款的。
59 : GS(14)@2015-02-17 02:17:35

盈喜
60 : GS(14)@2015-04-21 18:21:38

盈利增2倍，至1,750萬，2.1億現金
61 : GS(14)@2015-04-24 12:34:26

http://www.mpfinance.com/htm/finance/20150424/news/ww_ww2.htm
【明報專訊】於2013年11月上市的集成金融(3623)在截至去年底的財年收入按年增一成至約5900萬元，去年6月集成在前海成立融資租賃公司，去年對公司收入貢獻約5.5%。現時內地中小企的資金需求高，而在香港成立的集成金融享受全外資公司的境外借外幣額度，可利用中港兩地利差在該業務獲得更高利潤，料今年對公司的收入貢獻可升至三成。
62 : GS(14)@2015-04-27 19:14:33

http://www.mpfinance.com/htm/finance/20150427/news/eb_ebb1.htm
集成金融：內地企業融資轉易
2015年4月27日

【明報專訊】集成金融(3623)行政總裁陳暉接受本報專訪時表示，央行降息降準以來，內地小微企業融資困難的局面已明顯改善。民間融資當中的擔保行業在經歷了去年的倒閉潮後，調整已接近尾聲。儘管內地開發商經營困難，但承建商反而更值放貸。

  小微企融資改善 擔保寒冬近尾聲

擔保是指向銀行借款的小微企業提供信用擔保。陳暉介紹，以集成金融所在地佛山而言，擔保企業由原先約20家萎縮至目前的兩至三家。他相信擔保行業寒冬已近尾聲。一般收費為借款額的3%至3.5％，不過，過去幾年由於大量壞賬湧現，導致擔保企業紛紛破產。以佛山情形來看，只有風險管控嚴格的約十分之一企業挺過寒冬。

向內銀擔保成功率增

陳暉原為國開行廣東省分行副行長，他指出，從擔保業現狀看來，銀行業的壞帳「離頂不遠」且「沒有預估高」。小微企業借貸已得到明顯緩解。去年民間借貸年息36%；今年普遍降到年息24%。市場上資金也沒那麼緊張了，「我接到的緊急電話也減少了，過去借錢是明後天要用，現在可能是兩周以後」。集團為小客戶擔保向銀行貸款，去年大約有七成的成功率，今年增至八成。

集成金融現時不向房地產開發商提供借貸和擔保服務，而建築商則是集成的大客。陳暉指出，「代資興建」是常見的模式之一，當開發商資金短缺的時候，建築企業獲利會提升。開發商如果要求延期付款，建築商的談判籌碼又加大，可提高整體利潤率。

63 : GS(14)@2015-06-07 10:44:41

2.68配售6,000萬股
64 : GS(14)@2015-06-19 23:36:43

買野
65 : jj1984(29252)@2015-06-21 17:49:21

呢隻係咪同集成傘業有關係架？
66 : GS(14)@2015-07-13 10:37:05

盈喜
67 : GS(14)@2015-07-13 17:10:13

盈喜
68 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-09-01 23:03:47

盈利增8倍，至1,800萬，2.34億現金
69 : GS(14)@2015-10-18 22:10:43

搞房地產金融
70 : GS(14)@2015-10-25 13:01:44

1225 持有1019、1226、80、3623、8018
71 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-12-08 01:48:06

2015-11-30 MT
轉型房地產金融 集成誓做佛山一哥   

集成金融（03623）在廣州佛山扎根多年，並在當地擔保業處於領先地位。集團執行董事兼行政總裁陳暉直言，眼見內地擔保業正走下坡，未來將加大力度引進消費性金融業務，冀於2018年達到50%的收入佔比。他有信心新業務「房圈」將跟舊業務達成協同效應，助集團在佛山房地產金融業爭奪一哥地位。

集成金融2013年在香港上市，為內地首家擔保業上市的公司。今年上半年更交出一份亮麗的成績表，期內錄得收益4,067萬元（人民幣，下同），同比上升53.5%；溢利更較去年攀升1.3倍至1,603萬元；每股盈利為0.04元，較去年同期增長1倍。

積極轉型成效顯著

集成金融以擔保業起家，惟受內地經濟持續放緩，及信貸規模受限所影響，近年內地擔保業正步入寒冬。據廣州金融辦的數據顯示，截至去年年底，廣州融資性擔保機構53間中，有21間融資性擔保機構退出融資性擔保市場。行業淨利潤虧損達0.4億元，當中因有不少中小微企業無法歸還到期貸款，造成融資性擔保機構代償規模和代償率增加。

融資擔保行業持續低迷，以佛山而言，擔保企業由原先約20間縮減至目前的兩三間。因此亦拖累集團由2013年上市時融資擔保的收益佔總收益約78%，跌至今年上半年僅得30%。而相關收益更由去年上半年的2,000萬元，下跌37%至今年的1,260萬元。

不過，陳暉不擔心這方面收入持續倒退而影響整體收入，因集團在佛山擔保業處於領先地位，眼見行業景氣度轉差，便在融資擔保和小額貸款的業務基礎上，先後拓展出財務顧問、融資租賃等業務，發展成多元化綜合金融服務商。回看今年上半年，即使經濟欠佳，佔集團四成收入的財務顧問服業務收入亦同比大升2.7倍至1,700萬元，推動到收入和盈利雙雙攀升。

近年來，融資擔保業風險接二連三爆發，擔保公司湧現倒閉潮。因此，集團亦不能再單靠擔保業務，自上市來一直尋找機會轉型。早前便宣布與中國銀行（03988）及建設銀行（00939）佛山市分行合作，於當地發展住房按揭業務，並成立佛山市集成金融服務外包公司，從事提供房地產金融服務——「房圈」。

發展住房按揭業務

集成金融服務外包公司總經理何偉生介紹，「房圈」將專注於垂直房地產產業鏈需求，通過綫上綫下渠道，解決房產投融資難題。「『房圈』將與P2P平台合作，為二手房交易的買家和賣家提供按揭、融資等金融服務。當買家在綫下有集資需求時，便會透過綫上P2P平台進行募資。而相關APP將在12月底正式推出。」

集團開展「房圈」業務，明顯是有意進軍「互聯網+房地產金融」市場。陳暉直言，「集團過往主要為中小企業等機構服務，集團轉型後，促使業務由惠普金融延伸至個人消費板塊。新業務將與現有業務產生協同效應，發揮『1+1大於2』的戰略成果。消費金融業務剛剛起步，預期到明年或後年才有較快的增長，或將在2017年有爆發式增長，2018年可佔整體收入的50%。」

望奪佛山市佔率10%

佛山樓房需求持續，當地不論一手樓或二手樓的成交量，今年以來都有穩步上升的趨勢。何偉生指，「因佛山臨近廣州，兩地車程相距約一小時內，廣州樓價持續高企，因此吸引不少廣州人前來佛山買樓。」

「房圈」主要針對二手房的買賣交易，根據佛山市住房及城鄉建設管理局網站顯示，該市今年平均每月二手樓成交量約在4,000間至4,200間，去年則為約2,000間。集團亦看好佛山未來二手樓的交易量，所以選擇「房圈」的試點始於佛山。若「房圈」在佛山推行成功，明年業務將擴展至珠三角地區。

陳暉希望，明年在佛山市場佔有率達10%至15%，成為當地第一。而後年市佔率則可升至25%至30%，穩固當地領導地位。他再補充說，「房圈」只是消費板塊轉型的試點，未來不排除進一步發展至健康、養老、旅遊等其他的消費業務，將集團轉型升級至互聯網金融服務供應商。
72 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-01-28 13:22:16

搞P2P 金融
73 : GS(14)@2016-03-30 16:39:21

盈利增6%，至2,140萬，1.47億現金
74 : GS(14)@2016-03-30 16:45:51

拆散股票
75 : GS(14)@2016-09-02 00:45:43

不買了
76 : GS(14)@2016-09-02 04:43:19

盈利降3%，至1,250萬，2,000萬現金
77 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-09-20 03:55:45

配售9,450萬股@2
78 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-12-14 08:01:41

investment
79 : GS(14)@2017-01-26 10:30:05

合營協議
董事會欣然宣佈，於二零一七年一月二十五日（交易時段後），集成融資擔保與盛
世集成投資、盛世嘉友投資、奇雅企業管理、順德集成投資、集成金融、集成期
貨及集成小貸訂立合營協議，據此，訂約方同意(i)於中國成立合營公司及(ii)轉
讓彼等各自於該土地的權益予合營公司。
訂 約 方 預 期 將 透 過 向 其 註 冊 資 本 注 資 的 方 式 向 合 營 公 司 投 資 合 共 人 民 幣
200,000,000元。根據合營協議，集成融資擔保同意出資人民幣7,000,000元，佔
合營公司註冊資本的3.5％，包括就該土地的3.5%權益出資及向合營公司提供人
民幣158,746元現金。
成立合營公司的主要目的是提高該土地的建設及開發效率。
80 : GS(14)@2017-04-08 00:49:32

盈利降15%，至1,590萬，2.42億現金
81 : GS(14)@2017-04-09 12:52:49

董事會建議將本公司
中
文名稱由「中國集成金融集團控股有限公司」更改為「中國
金融發展（控股）有限公司」
82 : GS(14)@2017-07-03 10:17:45

董事會欣然宣佈本公司的中文名稱已由「中國集成金融集團控股有限公司」更改為
「中國金融發展（控股）有限公司」。英文名稱仍為「China Success Finance Group
Holdings Limited」。
83 : GS(14)@2017-10-31 22:53:28

董事會欣然宣佈，為配合本集團大灣區戰略踐行者的新定位，深化「恢復灣區企業
活力」佈局，以佛山為試點，本集團積極推進「企業再生計劃」，在企業再生服務中
尋找業務機會，現正就各項業務進行談判及推進。
本集團積極參與以佛山市政府為主導，以資產管理公司為通道，對暫臨困境企業的
債權盤活服務，創新企業再生服務模式。
為開展再生計劃投資業務，本集團已於佛山成立一家基金，註冊資本為人民幣100
百萬元（相當於117百萬港元），並已對該基金注資23百萬元（相當於26.9百萬港
元）。
本集團通過與銀行、企業展開多層次合作，作為顧問及協調方為企業提供包括管理
提升、工程管理、資金管理、法律財稅諮詢等多種企業再生金融服務，並獲得服務
費用。
84 : GS(14)@2018-01-26 00:33:02

1.54億CB
85 : GS(14)@2018-02-26 12:09:30

中國金融發展（控股）有限公司（「本公司」，連同其附屬公司統稱「本集團」）董事（「董
事」）會宣佈，董事意願在2018年為本集團的快速發展提供更大力度支持，其已批
准本公司薪酬委員會所建議的薪酬支付方案，據此，於二零一八年三月一日至二零
一八年十二月三十一日期間每董事薪酬的50%將會被暫緩發放。獲暫緩發放的薪酬
將僅在本集團達成其二零一八年的年度經營目標後方會支付，而倘有關年度經營目
標未獲達成則不會支付相關薪酬。
86 : GS(14)@2018-04-09 01:41:52

盈利降20%，至1,800萬，7,000萬現金
87 : GS(14)@2018-08-12 14:31:15

董事會謹此知會股東及潛在投資者，基於對本集團截至二零一八年六月三十日止
六個月的未經審核管理賬目及董事會目前可獲得的資料，而作出的初步評估，預
期與去年同期比較，本集團截至二零一八年六月三十日止六個月會錄得不超過約
165%的純利減幅，即錄得淨虧損。
88 : GS(14)@2019-03-16 09:09:59

董事會謹此知會股東及潛在投資者，基於對本集團二零一八財年的未經審核管理
賬目及董事會目前可獲得的資料，而作出的初步評估，預期與二零一七財年比
較，本集團於二零一八財年會錄得約66%的純利減幅。
本公司股東及潛在投資者於買賣本公司股份時，務請審慎行事。
本公告乃由中國金融發展（控股）有限公司（「本公司」及連同其附屬公司，統稱「本集
團」）根據證券及期貨條例（香港法例第 571章）（「證券及期貨條例」）第XIVA部項下
的內幕消息條文（定義見香港聯合交易所有限公司證券上市規則（「上市規則」））及上
市規則第13.09(2)(a)條作出。
本公司董事會（「董事會」）謹此知會本公司股東（「股東」）及潛在投資者，基於對本集
團截至二零一八年十二月三十一日止年度（「二零一八財年」）的未經審核管理賬目及
董事會目前可獲得的資料，而作出的初步評估，本集團於二零一八財年下半年的財
務表現較二零一八財年上半年整體有所改善並扭虧為盈。有關改善乃主要由於：(i)
本集團金融服務業務的業績；及 (ii)本集團持有的金融資產公允價值上升推動，本
集團預計二零一八財年會錄得純利。
然而，與截至二零一七年十二月三十一日止年度（「二零一七財年」）比較，本集團預
期二零一八財年會錄得約66%的純利減幅。董事會預期本集團二零一八財年的除稅
前溢利及年度全面收入總額較二零一七財年降幅分別約28%及22%。
有關利潤減幅的主要原因為：(i)本集團須支付於二零一八財年發行二零二零年到期
的可換股債券所產生的利息費用；(ii)本集團於二零一八財年的罰息收入及財務顧問
服務收入都較二零一七財年有所減少；及(iii)縱使本集團有新增的金融服務業務及
商業擔保業務，然而相關的收入已按照會計收入確認原則，在擔保期間內分攤，因
此目前仍有部分相關的收入被確認為遞延收益，而不能明顯提高本集團於二零一八
財年的溢利。
另一方面，基於未經審核管理賬目，於二零一八年十二月三十一日，本集團現金及
各類銀行存款較於二零一八年六月三十日增幅約 106%，以此顯示本集團財務狀況
有所改善。
本公告所載資料僅基於董事會對本集團於二零一八財年的未經審核管理賬目及目前
可獲得的資料而作出的初步評估，有關資料並未經本公司核數師審核或審閱。謹請
股東及潛在投資者注意，建議須細閱本公司於二零一八財年的年度業績公告，預期
該公告將於二零一九年三月二十九日或前後刊發。
本公司股東及潛在投資者於買賣本公司股份時，務請審慎行事。
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=283978

集成傘業(1027)專區

1 : GS(14)@2014-10-15 22:45:43

http://baike.baidu.com/view/10302908.htm

福建集成伞业集团有限公司编辑

本词条缺少名片图，补充相关内容使词条更完整，还能快速升级，赶紧来编辑吧！

福建集成伞业集团有限公司始创于1994年，集团下辖福建集成伞业有限公司·晋江集成轻工有限公司·企业主要坐落于福建省晋江市永和镇·东石镇。

中文名福建集成伞业集团有限公司

外文名无

成立时间始创于1994年

占  地250亩

目录




1企业概况






1企业概况编辑

福建集成伞业集团有限公司始创于1994年，集团下辖福建集成伞业有限公司.晋江集成轻工有限公司.企业主要坐落于福建省晋江市永和镇.东石镇。公司占地250亩，建筑面积12多万平方米，企业总资产达6亿元。[1]

福建集成具备雄厚的科研实力，有一支较为稳定的技术队伍，设有研究所并与多所院校机构合作，拥有欧美和台湾生产的全套世界一流生产设备，配套其他伞具，配件生产设备上千台，形成了环保塑料胶布制造，朔料伞，尼龙伞，洋伞，伞骨，注塑，雨衣，丝印，刺绣，伞面印刷，玻纤等十一类三十条生长线，产品主要包括各类晴雨伞，环保塑料胶布，雨衣等，其中环保塑料伞销量连续多年保持全球第一，该伞以其伞面无毒，无味，回收可降低解手到海内外消费者的喜欢。随着集团不断发展壮大，企业已具备伞具行业从原料生产，零配件制造，伞面印刷加工等全套工序的生产能力，年产值达8亿元以上。 福建集成不断引进高素质人才，培养了一大批专业化的技术骨干和现代化管理团队，现有员工30000多人，其中本科学历以上专业技术人员和管理人员300余名。公司在短短十多年时间得到迅速发展，成为了伞具行业大型骨干企业集团。2008年5月公司被列为福建省雨伞行业龙头企业，当选为第一届福建省轻工业联合会副会长单位，是中国制伞专业委员会常务理事单位，在晋江上千家伞具企业中2009年被评为“中国品牌之都领军品牌榜”唯一上榜企业。 福建集成不断加大在研究和开发的投入力度，注重品牌提升，领市场潮流之先，通过iso9001:2000国际质量体系，iso14001:2004国际环境体系，iso10012:2003计量检测体系认证。先后荣获“全国中型工业企业”，“百项名牌产品”，“福建省著名商标”，“福建省名牌商标，”中国著名品牌”，“质量管理先进企业”，“重合同守信用单位”，aaa级信用企业“等称号。 十五年岁月风雨，十五载历练精骨。福建集成已被晋江市政府列为重点“上市后备企业”，正在进行企业上市的前期准备工作。现在，集成人在秉承“以人为本，科技领先，质量第一，诚信服务”的经营理念，以“敬业，和谐，高效，创新”的企业精神，正在不断团结拼搏，开拓奋进，全力把集成打造引领行业潮流的超一流企业。[1]
2 : GS(14)@2014-10-15 22:46:19

http://www.jcumbrella.com/Item/list.asp?id=1494

集团概况
福建集成伞业集团创办于1994年，是专业从事晴雨伞、环保塑胶伞的设计研发、生产和销售的大型企业集团公司，是中国第一，亚洲最大的环保塑胶伞制造商，拥有晋江集成轻工有限公司和福建集成伞业有限公司两大生产基地，分别坐落于福建省晋江市著名侨乡—中国伞都东石镇和晋江市永和镇。
晴雨伞行业的领跑者和国家环保塑胶标准制订的主导者
集团的“集成”品牌是国内晴雨伞行业的著名商标。作为晴雨伞行业的领跑者和龙头企业，集团是中国制伞专业委员会常务理事单位，福建省轻工业联合会副会长，参与了晴雨伞多项标准的编制和起草工作，是中国塑料伞行业标准（塑料伞国家标准QB-T 4152-2010）的主起草单位。公司主要从事研发、制造并销售时尚美观、高品质的晴雨伞及提供专业化的服务，以所拥有的技术、品牌、规模、人才及资金等优势致力为国内外客户和合作伙伴成就卓越。
产品最齐全、配套最完善的环保塑胶伞制造专家
集团主营业务为生产和销售各种类型规格的晴雨伞，其中环保塑胶伞是中国制伞行业产品品种规格最齐全、配套最完善的制造基地。主要产品包括：塑胶环保伞、尼龙雨伞、女性时尚太阳伞、色彩斑斓的儿童伞、塑胶布（膜）、及晴雨伞各种配件等。公司更拥有和掌握了环保塑胶伞生产工艺一体化之先进生产设备和工序，从POE塑料粒子，再到流延膜生产加工，伞骨，组装一条龙产线齐备，行内第一。公司以齐全的产品品种和完善的配套设施提供能满足客户各种需求的晴雨伞产品、配件及服务。公司在生产过程中追求完美的产品质量，严格执行国家检测标准，全面通过ISO9001质量体系认证和产品认证、ISO14001环境管理体系认证的生产企业，并获中华人民共和国海关“AA类企业”等荣誉称号，享受通关“快速通关”待遇。
销售渠道发达客户稳定，是众多国内外优质客户的战略合作伙伴
集成伞业集团最早创立于上世纪80年代，90年代正式公司化经营，经营时间超过30年，在业内拥有极高的知名度和美誉度。经过多年的发展，公司的环保塑胶雨伞逐渐在日本、韩国、台湾及东南亚地区打开市场并热销，环保塑胶伞位列日本市场占有率第一，国内市场也稳步提升。
以研发和创新引领晴雨伞行业成长的实践者
30多年来，集团始终以研发和创新推动企业发展，坚持走工艺创新道路，坚持不懈地用新技术、新工艺改造传统产业，引领晴雨伞产业的发展方向，已拥有实用新型和外观专利30多项，陆续开发多种多款新产品。近年来更与华侨大学等建立产学研合作机制，不断改进环保塑胶伞体材料、功能和生产工艺，已成为国内技术研发实力最雄厚的晴雨伞企业之一。
恒星企业的发展远景
集团秉持永远追求完美，始终自强不息的企业经营宗旨，将继续推动企业全球化、国际化的市场战略，提升管理水平、工艺水准和研发设计体系等优势资源，引领企业向产业价值链的高端提升，努力实现产品技术和品牌附加值的升级。在确保企业稳健可持续发展的同时，立足全球，着力抢占行业技术制高点，致力超越行业传统竞争，努力实现创新价值增长。公司将通过产品经营和资本运营的双轮驱动，积极调整产业结构，培育新的增长点，力争在持续盈利能力、品牌影响力、创新发展能力上取得显著成效，实现可持续的价值成长，为客户创造价值，为股东回报利润，为社会增添福祉。
3 : GS(14)@2014-10-15 22:47:41

http://www.hkexnews.hk/APP/SEHK/ ... ls-2014101402_c.htm
招股書
4 : GS(14)@2014-10-15 22:58:39

1. 造傘，是全中國最大
2. 外銷為主，內銷好少
3. 銷售額都是3至4億，仲扮到好大
4. 客戶算集中，賣去日本為主
5. 福建股一隻
5 : GS(14)@2014-10-15 23:08:10

6. 風險: 集中一個客戶、集中日本及歐美、生產受影響、工人、分包商、擴張、人、競爭、原料、物流代理、融資
6 : GS(14)@2014-10-15 23:10:06

7. 都是管理層自己創業一路做大
7 : GS(14)@2014-10-15 23:36:43

8. 又話起廠要1億，2015年起好
9. 傘價升好多，營業額不動
10. 利用率極低又起廠
11. 同日本仔買料，又賣野畀日本仔
12. 研發開支得幾百萬，10幾個人
13. 有些季節性
8 : GS(14)@2014-10-15 23:38:44

14. 李奕生: 953、572、1073、1020
15. 謝家榮:8311
16. 福建family
9 : GS(14)@2014-10-15 23:40:48

17. 信永中和
18.2013年 盈利增3成，至4,900萬，2014年增3%，至3,300萬，2,000萬現金，高現金高負債
10 : GS(14)@2015-02-03 17:19:27

招股書
11 : bbaeric(38257)@2015-02-03 22:02:57

【香港財經】集成傘業受日圓貶值影響
2015-02-03 18:47

集成傘業(01027)今日起至本周五(6日)中午招股，招股價介乎1.1元至1.6元，發行1.5億股，集資最多2.4億元。每手2000股，入場費3232.25元。按中間價每股1.35元計算，集成傘業的集資淨額約1.748億元，大部份(約71.5%)用作取得必要批文後建造新工廠，約12.1%用於加強營銷活動。股份將於本周五定價，預期於本月13日掛牌。
集成傘業創辦於1994年，主要從事製造及銷售POE(聚烯烴彈性體)雨傘及尼龍雨傘，亦生產及銷售雨傘零部件，如塑料布及中棒等。公司在內地擁有兩大生產基地，分別坐落於福建省晉江市東石鎮和永和鎮。集團預期，截至去年12月底止年度，純利不少於7200萬元人民幣。

優勢
按2013年出口量計算，集成傘業是中國最大雨傘及陽傘出口商，出口總量約為3100萬把，市場份額為3.4%；若按銷售量計算，集成傘業為中國最大的塑料雨傘製造商，達20.4%的市佔率。另外，集成傘業是次集資所得，主要用於支付集團新辦公樓宇的未支付餘款，以及建造新工廠提高產能等。新工廠預計最遲於今年四月底開工，完工後公司預期產能增長約36%，有助進一步擴大市場份額。

弱勢
集成傘業的主要收入來源，是向日本出口產品。公司管理層早前於投資者推介會表示，面對日圓貶值，公司可以通過加價抵銷其負面影響。然而，日圓貶值的趨勢或會於未來數年持續，集成傘業或需加快開拓日本以外市場的新客戶。以2013年為例，公司總收入為4.84億元人民幣，當中日本業務收入為3.67億元人民幣，佔比高達75.8%，反映公司仍相當依賴日本市場。

機會
截至2013年，集成傘業的POE雨傘，定價介乎11元至16元人民幣。比較國內其他POE雨傘，平均售價則介乎6元至12元人民幣，反映公司的POE雨傘定價普遍高於國內市場相近產品的均價。集成傘業能在內地市場保持銷售量居於前列水平，可見其產品價格雖然較高，但質量較優，為中端產品，具一定競爭力。

威脅
去年集成傘業在內地的銷售大幅增加，主要是受一位新客戶的訂單帶動。該名客戶於去年11月和12月，採購金額高達2300萬元，佔公司期內在中國銷售總額的83%。然而，該名客戶將來的採購情況尚未可知，銷售風險因而增加。另外，出口退稅(目前雨傘的出口退稅率為15%)為集成傘業純利的重要來源。過去三年，退稅額分別佔公司純利98%、93%和97%。日後內地退稅如有減少，將對集成傘業的利潤率造成負面影響。
集成傘業預期，由於產生上市開支，去年及今年第一季之財務業績可能遭受重大不利影響。此外，公司能否開拓日本以外的出口市場，以及能否調高售價抵銷日圓貶值的負面影響等，亦對未來業績起著關鍵作用。投資者認購股份時，宜一併考慮上述風險。
(版權所有 : 信報財經新聞)

http://www.finet.hk/mainsite/new ... b010d7d3612657.html
12 : Wilbur(1931)@2015-02-03 23:05:36

血統優良 smiley
13 : 投機仁(34693)@2015-02-03 23:23:11

"福建"集成伞业，明白哂哈smiley
14 : x31294128(46781)@2015-02-04 00:12:39

新版本招股書李奕生唔見咗
15 : GS(14)@2015-04-23 19:59:47

rubbish
16 : GS(14)@2015-05-08 15:40:10

what news
17 : GS(14)@2015-05-10 14:46:09

拆細
18 : qt(2571)@2015-05-10 18:33:17

個個都用呢招, 創版就更加係
19 : GS(14)@2015-05-15 01:14:27

集中
20 : GS(14)@2015-05-15 01:25:43

1拆25股
21 : jj1984(29252)@2015-05-15 12:01:21

拆25，玩死你地班老散
22 : enigma0323(3470)@2015-05-15 16:19:57

埋黎睇埋黎揀, 大遮變縮骨遮, 多買冇得送
23 : GS(14)@2015-05-24 02:10:25

改名集成控股
24 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-08-05 12:22:07

http://www.mpfinance.com/htm/finance/20150805/news/eb_ebd1.htm
集成傘業上市不久即盈警
  2015年8月5日

【明報專訊】作為今年新股奇葩之一的集成傘業(1027)昨發盈警，預料截至2015年6月30日止6個月，中期業績將會由盈利轉為虧損。

集成傘業表示，虧損主要來自期內涉及授出購股權的一次性非現金購股權開支所致，預計該筆開支約為3600萬人民幣，上年同期則沒有授出購股權。若無確認非現金購股權開支，公司上半年可錄得約3600萬人民幣盈利，與去年同期相近。由於授出購股權只屬一次性開支，故公司對前景仍充滿信心。

中期業績將盈轉虧

集成傘業於今年2月上市，從事製造及銷售POE雨傘、尼龍雨傘和雨傘零部件，主要向國內銷售雨傘產品，及向日本、香港、韓國、台灣、法國及柬埔寨等地出口雨傘和零部件如塑料布及中棒等。

上市不足一年，該公司股價曾一度由招股價1.1元，升見逾20元，升幅逾17倍，市值亦由7億升至120億元，一度成為本港新股王；及後更宣布拆細，1拆25，至今再發盈警。集成傘業完成拆細後仍在高位，昨日股價跌2.5%，收報1.88元。
25 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-09-03 14:38:09

盈利3,000萬，降15%，5,500萬現金
26 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-09-11 01:53:37

3d 平台
27 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-09-28 23:18:24

Bubbles and troubles in Hong Kong
24th September 2015

As readers may recall, last year, Lerado Group (Holding) Co Ltd (Lerado, 1225) announced the proposed sale of its core business of baby strollers and infant car seats to Canadian listed firm Dorel Industries Inc (Dorel) for HK$930m. Lerado was planning to squat on most of the cash proceeds and only pay out $0.30 per share, or $228m. For this reason, we opposed the sale, because of concern that Lerado would become a cash shell trading at a discount to its net asset value. Your editor, David Webb, is a disclosed substantial shareholder currently holding over 8%. However, the sale was approved by shareholders on 16-Sep-2014 and completed on 31-Oct-2014.

Our concerns have now proven justified, culminating in current egregious proposals not just by Lerado but by other listed companies. We hope to stop them, if the regulators will require certain parties to play fairer. This article is long and complicated, and we thought about breaking it into pieces, but the picture becomes clearer if you assemble the whole jigsaw, so here it is. Apart from Lerado, this article covers transactions by numerous other listed companies in which you may have an interest, and several billion US dollars of bubbles.

So pour yourself a large coffee and let's get started.
Lerado share movements

The first sign of movement in Lerado came on 25-Nov-2014. Intelligence Hong Kong Group Ltd (IHK) is a company owned 68.27% by Lerado Chairman Henry Huang Ying Yuan (Mr Huang) and 31.73% by his wife, Jamy Huang Chen Li Chu. IHK owns 148,353,540 shares which was 19.50% of Lerado at 31-Dec-2014, before the recent dilutions. On 25-Nov-2014, our system shows those shares moving from CTBC Asia Ltd (the local subsidiary of a Taiwan bank) where they had rested since 30-Dec-2009, to Convoy Investment Services Ltd (Convoy IS), the brokerage sister of Convoy Financial Holdings Ltd (Convoy FH, 1019). Convoy IS is in the process of trying to list on the GEM in the form of CIS Holdings Ltd, which filed an application proof on 23-Mar-2015, sponsored by Quam Capital Ltd.

There can be any number of reasons for such transfers, but one possibility is that the shares are security for a loan. Banks and brokers are exempt from disclosing security interests in shares pledged to them. It wouldn't be so worrying were it not for the fact that Mark Mak Kwong Yiu (Mr Mak), CEO of Convoy FH and a director of Convoy IS, is also claimed to be an INED of Lerado since 25-Apr-2014. Mr Mak joined Convoy as CFO in 2002.

You may recall that in Some bubbles for New Year (31-Dec-2014) we warned about a bubble then called Finsoft Corporation (Finsoft, 8018), which was then trading at $1.235 (adjusted for the subsequent 2:1 split), with a market value of HK$4.94bn, or 110 times its net asset value. Convoy FH owned over 5% of Finsoft. The stock didn't stop there though. It reached a high of $2.92 on 20-May-2015, when Finsoft was valued at HK$11.68bn. Since then, it has crashed 94.8% to its close on Wednesday (23-Sep-2015) at $0.139, down a net 88.7% since our article. Finsoften aren't what they seem.

The Finsoft bubble allowed Convoy FH to book unrealised gains of HK$238.4m for 2014. It sold 40m shares (2%) of Finsoft on 20-Jan-2015 for about $73.5m (split-adjusted: $0.919 per share) and went below the 5% disclosure threshold. The sale was purportedly on-market but it was far larger than market volume that day of 1.925m shares so the disclosure must be wrong.

Returning to Lerado, another large chunk of 96,805,800 shares (12.71% at 31-Dec-2014) was held by Hwa Foo Investment Ltd (Hwa Foo), 30% controlled by Patrick Chen Chun Chieh (Mr Chen), an Executive Director and the son of the late co-founder of Lerado, and 70% by his mother. He joined the board on 3-Apr-2008 following his father's death on 14-Feb-2008. On 8-Sep-2014 those shares moved from HSBC (where they had rested since 27-Jun-2007) to UBS Securities HK Ltd , and then, more interestingly, they moved to small broker Win Fung Securities Ltd (Win Fung) on 9-Dec-2014, two weeks after IHK's holding moved to Convoy IS. So the Huangs and the Chens had moved custody of 32.21% of Lerado after leaving it untouched for years. More on Win Fung below.
Dispute with Dorel

First let's mention that on 10-Feb-2015, Lerado announced that it was in dispute with Dorel over the final net asset value of the business, which may lead to a partial repayment of the purchase price, in an unspecified "significant" amount.

On 27-Mar-2015, Lerado announced that it could not reach agreement with Dorel, so under the terms of the sale they had agreed to go to arbitration with an independent accountant, not yet appointed. In the 2014 annual results announcement on 30-Mar-2015, Lerado revealed that the disputed amount was HK$307m, which accordingly had been booked as a liability in the balance sheet. Still, Lerado ended 2014 with cash of $797m or HK$1.048 per share and no bank borrowings. The disputed amount was about $0.404 per share, so even if they have to pay all of that back, there would have been $0.644 per share of cash, and net assets of $633m or $0.832 per share.

On 20-Jul-2015, Lerado announced that it and Dorel had appointed RSM Nelson Wheeler as the independent accountant to determine the disputed items. Two months later, the result has not yet been announced. If Lerado were to win all of it, then the pro forma net asset value at 31-Dec-2014 increases to $1.236 per share.
Lerado swaps shares for property from CIFG

The day after the results, 31-Mar-2015, Lerado announced the acquisition of a property in Guangzhou from China Investment and Finance Group Ltd (CIFG, 1126) for HK$39m, but despite being flush with cash, only HK$1m was payable in cash and the rest in 76m new Lerado shares (9.49% of then existing shares) issued under the general mandate at $0.50 each, again a discount to cash and NAV per share.

The intended use of the property is as premises for the residual business of Lerado, which is mainly mobility scooters for the elderly and disabled, or what it calls "medical products". However, even if intended use of the property sounds plausible, the issue of shares at a discount to net cash and NAV was entirely inappropriate. The deal completed on 17-Apr-2015, giving CIFG a 8.59% stake in Lerado. Our system shows that CIFG deposited the shares into CCASS with Astrum Capital Management Ltd (Astrum) on 5-May-2015.

CIFG is not a regular listed company, but is a closed-end investment company listed under Chapter 21. This prohibits taking controlling positions (over 30%) in companies, and requires it to adhere to its stated investment restrictions. We asked the Stock Exchange why CIFG was allowed to invest in property in the first place. The result was this "clarification announcement" on 7-Aug-2015, admitting that investment properties were outside the scope of CIFG's Investment Policy and blaming it on the former Chairman and Vice Chairman. They had been removed by the Board on 14-Sep-2012, 6 months after becoming uncontactable.
Lerado begins money-lending and stockbroking

The "Prospects" section of Lerado's 2014 results indicated a new direction. The board had "concrete financial knowledge and background" and had decided to diversify into "securities trading, money lending business and other financial and property investment." It revealed that on 23-Feb-2015, Lerado had agreed to buy an unnamed target company, for HK$1.6m plus its net asset value. The target was a securities broker and planned to engage in margin financing business after the acquisition was completed. On 17-Apr-2015, Lerado announced that it would reallocate HK$300m of its cash pile for these activities.

On 2-Jul-2015 Lerado announced the name of the target, Yim Cheong Share Broking and Investment Co Ltd, and that the acquisition was completed that day. This was then renamed Black Marble Securities Ltd (Black Marble Securities), and Lerado intended to pump HK$200m into it. This small, nearly-dormant broker at that point had a minimal two licensed staff and minimal holdings in its CCASS account shown here.

Policy note: This highlights a defect in the Listing Rules: if you make a "Major Acquisition" (over 25% of your total assets), then you need shareholders' approval, but if you buy or establish a small company and then pump your funds into this new line of business, then this is completely exempt, even though shareholders are exposed to very new and different risks.

Lerado had also established BlackMarble Capital Ltd, incorporated 28-Jan-2015, a licensed money-lender. The application was gazetted on 27-Feb-2015 and the license was granted on 22-May-2015.
Lerado option grants

On 12-Feb-2015, Lerado granted options over 75m new shares (equivalent to 9.86% of the existing shares), of which half went to an unspecified number of employees, and half to "5 consultants". The options were exercisable for 2 years at $0.592 per share. It makes no sense whatever to be granting options which exercise at less than net cash per share, and much less than NAV per share, diluting both. Staff could have been incentivised with a restricted share purchase scheme to use the company's cash to buy stock in the market, which closed at $0.58 on the date of the option grants.

Despite being options of 2 years duration, 48m of the 75m were quickly exercised. We arranged an inspection of the share register on 14-Apr-2015 to discover who had been in such a hurry. We combined that with two filings of allotments by Lerado, which did not name the recipients. Here are the results:
Shareholder   Shares   Date entered   Status
Chu Chun Ting   7,500,000   11-Mar-2015   1 employee, 1 consultant
Kung Yiu Fai   7,500,000   11-Mar-2015
Chan Kam Fuk   7,500,000   17-Mar-2015   employee
Law Yee Man, Thomas   3,000,000   17-Mar-2015   employee
Wang Zewei   7,500,000   20-Mar-2015   consultant
Wong Sin Fai, Cynthia   7,500,000   20-Mar-2015   consultant
Kwok Wai Leung   7,500,000   2-Apr-2015   consultant
Total so far   48,000,000   14-Apr-2015   3 employees, 4 consultants

That leaves 1 more consultant who has not exercised the options. We recognise some of these names:

  Chan Kam Fuk is Dominic Chan Kam Fuk (Dominic Chan), proprietor of accountancy firm Dominic K.F. Chan & Co. He was appointed as Company Secretary of Lerado on 1-Aug-2014.
  Thomas Law Yee Man (Mr Law), an architect, is an INED of two listed companies, AcrossAsia Ltd (AcrossAsia, 8061) and Sage International Group Ltd (Sage, 8082). Here's a connection: Mr Law joined AcrossAsia on 28-May-2010, replacing Mr Mak of Convoy, who resigned as INED four days earlier. Perhaps Mr Mak helped to arrange Mr Law as his replacement at AcrossAsia. And here's another connection: Leung Tin Fu (Mr Leung), founder and Chairman of Sage until 14-Dec-2007, is also a pre-IPO holder of 10% of Convoy IS. Dominic Chan was an INED of Sage, resigning the same day as Mr Leung. We don't know what role Mr Law plays as an "employee" of Lerado.

  Cynthia Wong Sin Fai (Cynthia Wong) is a solicitor who consults for Robertsons and has been Company Secretary of Suncorp Technologies Ltd (Suncorp, 1063) since 15-Feb-2011. We'll come back to that. We don't know what role she plays as a "consultant" to Lerado.

  Wang Zewei (Mr Wang) is the name of the person who in 2014 sold 22.5% of Sincere Smart International Ltd to Hao Wen Holdings Ltd (Hao Wen, 8019) for HK$69m, valuing the business at $306.7m when it had net assets of $2.9m. Two other companies, Capital VC Ltd (Capital VC, 2324) and Unity Investments Holdings Ltd (Unity, 0913), bought 14% and 29.5% for $42.7m and $90m respectively, without naming the vendor(s). For more, see our article Hao Wen, Capital VC and Unity today. We don't know what role Mr Wang plays as a "consultant" to Lerado. He was the only mainlander on the list, and he gave an office address at 10 Gaoxin South 4th Road, Nanshan District, Shenzhen.

Incidentally, Mr Mak was also an Executive Director of Computech Holdings Ltd, now named China Mobile Games and Cultural Investment Ltd (CMG, 8081), from 30-Jul-2008 to 28-Apr-2014, three days after he joined Lerado. In fact he was the only ED of CMG from 17-Sep-2009 to 8-Nov-2011. The Convoy FH IPO prospectus dated 29-Jun-2010 said that despite this, Mr Mak considered Convoy his main focus and "has devoted more than 80% of his time to his duties" at Convoy during 2007-2009 and he would continue to allocate a similar proportion of his time to Convoy after listing. That basically meant that CMG only had about 0.2 Executive Directors!

Win Fung acted as the placing agent for CMG in a placing on 22-Apr-2015.

The option shares were deposited into CCASS via various brokers as follows. Click on the dates to see the movements in CCASS:
Date   Broker   Number
15-Apr-2015   SBI China Capital Financial Services Ltd (SBI CCFS)   7,500,000
29-Apr-2015   Win Fung   7,500,000
8-May-2015   Gransing Securities Co Ltd (Gransing)   7,500,000
27-May-2015   Gransing   7,500,000
24-Jun-2015   Prudential Brokerage Ltd   7,500,000
4-Aug-2015   Convoy IS   3,000,000
13-Aug-2015   UOB Kay Hian (HK) Ltd   7,500,000
Total      48,000,000

It appears likely that Mr Law deposited his 3m shares with Convoy IS, as all the other deposits matched the 7.5m option grants.

Incidentally, the other pre-IPO investor in 10% of Convoy IS is Howard Jiang Qi Hang, who featured in several previous investigations on Webb-site Reports.

Gransing is a name you will see again - it has acted 4 times as a placing agent for Convoy FH, in a bond placing on 21-Jan-2015 and a bond placing on 16-Sep-2014 as well as two unannounced bond placings on 8-Jul-2014 and 14-Nov-2014 mentioned in Convoy FH's annual report. Gransing's client list in Webb-site Who's Who also shows that it has acted as placing agent for Hao Wen, Suncorp and WLS Holdings Ltd (WLS, 8021), a company which we cover below.
CIFG-Lerado cross-holding

On 22-Apr-2015, probably in response to queries from the regulators, Lerado made a "voluntary announcement" trying, and in our view failing, to justify its decision to use shares rather than cash to buy the property from CIFG.

On 21-May-2015, Lerado announced that it had agreed to subscribe for 130m shares (12.44%) of CIFG at at $0.275, or $35.75m in total, setting up a cross-holding between the two, as CIFG still held 8.59% of Lerado. This was, incidentally, highly dilutive to CIFG, a 66.9% discount to its NAV per share at 30-Apr-2015 of $0.83. This fact was omitted from the CIFG announcement. The issue completed on 2-Jun-2015. Our system indicates that Lerado deposited 70m CIFG shares with Gransing on 23-Jun-2015, and deposited 60m CIFG shares with Kingston Securities Ltd (Kingston) the next day.

On 11-Aug-2015, Lerado cut its holding in CIFG from 128.8m shares (12.32%) to 103.392m shares (9.89%), selling the shares at an average $0.196, a 29% loss. As the stake was cut below 10%, Lerado is no longer a "substantial shareholder" and "connected person" of CIFG under the Listing Rules.

Policy note: the disclosure threshold for substantial shareholdings in HK-listed companies was reduced by law from 10% to 5% on 1-Apr-2003, but the Listing Rules have never been updated to match this.
Lerado issues shares to CAID (0048)

On 26-May-2015, Lerado announced the acquisition of Brilliant Summit Ltd from China Automotive Interior Decoration Holdings Ltd (CAID, 0048), for HK$45m, but again, not using any of the cash pile. Instead, it issued 75m shares at $0.60 each, or 7.82% of the enlarged issued shares of Lerado, further diluting existing shareholders. The target was "engaged in the trading of garment accessories, such as nylon tape, polyester tape and polyester string". It had net assets of just $7.24m and a net profit in the year to 31-Mar-2015 of $0.9m.

In giving reasons, Lerado claimed that "certain fabric products and expertise knowledge of the Target Group can be utilised in the Group's business of manufacturing medial products, including but not limited to powered and non powered mobility aid, wheel chairs and other durable equipment". Stretching the polyester tape further, they claimed that the Target Group's "sizable clientele" would allow Lerado to "penetrate into a new market." This rather ignores the fact that Lerado already had its own expertise in sourcing fabrics for baby strollers, infant car seats and mobility aids over many years.

CAID had purchased Brilliant Summit from its manager, a Mr Cheung Ngai, for HK$42m on 15-May-2013. He apparently goes by the name of "Elman" and apart from Brilliant Summit (products here), he runs another company in the same line of business called San Wah Holdings Ltd. CAID, announcing the sale of Brilliant Summit to Lerado, said that "as a result of the constantly increasing costs of sales and competition, the Company is of the view that its business is not expected to grow at its current rate without further investments and developments." CAID intended to hold the Lerado shares "to achieves earnings in the form of capital appreciation."

The transaction completed on 16-Jun-2015. We can see that CAID deposited the 75m new Lerado shares with Win Fung in two batches, 40m on 23-Jun-2015 and 35m on 14-Jul-2015. Of all the brokers it could use, why this little firm, and why is this the same firm in which Mr Chen and one of the option holders also deposited their Lerado shares? The shares are positioned in the same custodian ahead of an important vote on Lerado's future. To summarise those deposits of shares with Win Fung:
Shareholder   Shares   Deposit date
Mr Chen (Hwa Foo)   96,805,800   9-Dec-2014
An exercised option holder   7,500,000   29-Apr-2015
CAID   40,000,000   23-Jun-2015
CAID   35,000,000   14-Jul-2015
Total   179,305,800   

CAID's new INED or mooncake coordinator

For some light relief, on 4-Sep-2015 CAID appointed a new INED and audit committee member, Ms Adeline Ng Li La, who "has over 10 years of experience in human resources and corporate management". She also has a Certificate of Human Resources Management from HK Baptist University and is "a senior administrative officer of a renowned international technology company in Hong Kong". Wow, she sounds highly qualified, doesn't she?

A quick search discovers her Linked In page (copy here). Since May 2015, she has been personal assistant to the General Manager of Amadeus Hong Kong Ltd - and her duties include "supervise the receptionist and the cleaning lady", "coordinate mooncake distribution", "manage pantry cabinet" and planning the Christmas party. Now this of course is all important work, but probably not that relevant to the duties of a listed company director and audit committee member. We wonder how she was introduced to CAID. This is probably not what HKEx had in mind when it started promoting board diversity, but it's what you get when as a regulator, you let controlling shareholders vote on INED elections.
CAID and Convoy

On 30-Jun-2015, CAID announced a placing via Convoy IS, listing the Financial Adviser as Opus Capital Ltd (Opus Capital) and using the full 20% general mandate of 276.48m shares at $0.485, a 19.2% discount to the closing price of $0.60. However, the price then collapsed, and on 9-Jul-2015, they cut the placing price to $0.345, a 42.5% discount to the original closing price. The placing completed on 21-Jul-2015. Our CCASS analysis shows that 125.48m shares were deposited with Astrum, only 68m with Convoy IS and 25m with Kingston, with the remaining 58m to 4 other brokers.

CAID's interim results for 30-Jun-2015 disclosed a huge unrealised gain of RMB 448.6m (HK$561m) on "held-for-trading investments" which then had a market value of RMB564.0m (HK$705m). In other words, a gain of about 389% in 6 months. No normal stock will give you that, but a bubble stock will. Net tangible assets at 30-Jun-2015 were RMB761.9m (HK$952m) or about $0.689 per share, so the investments accounted for 74% of that.

CAID's interim report contains the following statement, which we regard as false and misleading:

"At 30 June 2015, there was no significant investment held by the Group."

Policy note: Some of the listed companies which have recently reported exceptionally large percentage gains on listed securities must own bubble stocks. If you know what stocks a listed company owns, then you would be able to take the SFC's concentration warnings into account and discount those investments to what you regard as fair value, rather than relying on inflated market valuations. But unfortunately, the Stock Exchange and SFC do not require such disclosure, even when inflated listed investments make up the bulk of a companies net assets. They simply rely on the company having to announce losses as inside information after the bubble has burst, rather than telling you that they hold bubble stocks in the first place.

This is despite the fact that Listing Rules Appendix 16 paragraphs 32(4) and 40(2) (or on GEM, Rules 18.41(4) and 18.59) require that companies disclose "significant investments held, their performance during the financial [year/half-year] and their future prospects". It seems that SEHK just doesn't want to enforce this.

Although the Listing Rules which require such disclosure contain no definition of "significant", it should be seen in the context of the size of the holder's balance sheet and therefore the potential impact on shareholder value if the market value of the investments were to change. Whether the investment is "held-for-trading" or as a long-term "available for sale" asset is irrelevant to the potential impact on shareholder value, except for the fact that profits tax applies to trading.

Separately, many listed companies have avoided the notifiable transaction rules in Chapter 14 by declaring themselves to be "in the business" of trading securities. This then allows them to invest as much of their shareholders' money as they like on purchasing "held-for-trading" securities without announcing the transactions, because they are deemed transactions "of a revenue nature in the ordinary and usual course of business" under Listing Rule 14.04(1)(g). The Stock Exchange should close this loophole. Investments in securities, regardless of how they are booked, should be subject to the notifiable transaction rules.

You might wonder then why CAID did not just cash in some of its $705m of investments rather than raise $94.2m in a placing of 20% new shares, claiming that it needed the money. The results failed to identify these spectacular investments, but noted that by 31-Aug-2015, the value had decreased by 23.5% since the end of June. That's about HK$224m of loss.
CIFG and Lerado: parallel open offers

On 17-Aug-2015, Lerado announced a massive 3:1 open offer of new shares at $0.15 each, a 68% discount to the market price of $0.47, with no excess applications. The primary underwriter is Gransing, the Financial Adviser is Octal Capital Ltd (Octal Capital) and the IFA is Opus Capital, the same as the Financial Adviser to CAID.

As we've said before, deep discount open offers are a form of extortion of existing shareholders, because they are faced with the choice of either being heavily diluted economically, or putting in cash to prevent the dilution. Unlike rights issues, the holder does not have the third option of selling his entitlements to recover the discount and thereby mitigate the economic damage. For this reason, the UK Listing Rules include a limit (set decades ago) of not more than a 10% discount on open offers. Hong Kong, still in many ways a developing market, allows this extortion to continue. See UK Listing Rule 9.5.10.

Adding to this abuse is that an open offer often involves no ability for shareholders to make "excess application" for unsubscribed shares. Nor are the unsubscribed shares sold in the market to capture the premium above the issue price for the benefit of passive shareholders. This leaves the underwriter with the benefit of the discount on shares which shareholders cannot or do not subscribe. In these circumstances, the open offer in practice is a conditional placing of deeply discounted shares with the "underwriter", subject to a right of first refusal by existing shareholders pro rata to their holdings.

Gransing cannot end up as a controlling shareholder of Lerado, so it has to have sub-underwriters. From a disclosure of interest, we can see that Capital VC (mentioned above) is a sub-underwriter for 370m shares, or 9.64% of the enlarged capital. Another disclosure shows that Barry Lau Wang Chi is a sub-underwriter for 370m shares. He is a Responsible Officer of Adamas Asset Management (HK) Ltd (Adamas), which will feature below.

On 9-Sep-2015, CIFG announced a huge 8:1 open offer with no excess applicatoins, "underwritten" by Black Marble Securities, which is owned by Lerado. The Financial Adviser to CIFG is Akron Corporate Finance Ltd (Akron) and the IFA is Opus Capital, the same as Lerado's IFA and CAID's FA.

As Lerado owns less than 10% of CIFG, the underwriting is not a "connected transaction". However, it is blatantly clear that Lerado has a "material interest" in the CIFG transaction and should be prohibited from voting in the EGM of CIFG to approve the open offer. Furthermore, Lerado stands to benefit from any unsubscribed shares at the discounted offer price. As there are no excess applications, this is in effect a discounted placement with Lerado subject to clawback by existing holders.Listing Rule 2.15 states:

"Where a transaction or arrangement of an issuer is subject to shareholders' approval under the provisions of the Exchange Listing Rules, any shareholder that has a material interest in the transaction or arrangement shall abstain from voting on the resolution(s) approving the transaction or arrangement at the general meeting."

Correspondingly, we submit that CIFG should not be permitted to vote in the Lerado EGM, because obviously Lerado is engaged in a commercial transaction with CIFG to provide it with funding under the CIFG open offer.
Mr Chen's "disposal" at a 53% loss

Now, according to a disclosure of interest, on 9-Sep-2015, Mr Chen, ED of Lerado, sold his entire interest of 97,823,800 shares, including a personal holding of 1,018,000 shares and those held by Hwa Foo. Some of it was on-exchange at $0.25, but most of it was off-market at $0.22 because total market volume that day was only 7,625,800 shares. When we look at CCASS movements, on the settlement date of 11-Sep-2015 we see his personal holding of 1,018,000 shares leaving Core Pacific Yamaichi, and only 2,805,800 shares leaving Win Fung, and there have been no reductions in Win Fung's balance since then. So it appears that the other 94,000,000 shares were transferred, off market, to other clients of Win Fung and remain there.

As an ED of Lerado, Mr Chen would have been prohibited from voting in favour of the proposed open offer, so it is a matter of great concern that these shares may have been placed in friendly hands, along with the positions held by CIFG and CAID, to vote in favour (if they are not required to abstain).

This disposal, at a deep discount to cash and to net asset value, of a key block of shares, really makes no economic sense for Mr Chen. If he was unhappy with the effects of the proposed open offer, he could have joined us in voting against the proposal. He was only prohibited from voting in favour. At a purported disposal price (for most of his shares) of $0.22, he appears to have accepted a loss of 53% since the open offer was announced. We find this hard to believe. Accordingly we urge the SFC to investigate the true nature of the transactions and who has bought the shares. We would be surprised if the "buyers" had not been mentioned elsewhere in this article.

China 33 Media (8087)

There's another open offer we need to tell you about, and the background is this.

On 26-Jan-2015, China 33 Media Group Ltd (C33M, 8087) announced that its controlling shareholder, Lizhong Ltd (Lizhong), which had held 243.756m shares (43.13%) had 5 days earlier pledged 192m shares (32.00%) to a lender and on 22-Jan to 26-Jan Lizhong had sold its remaining 66.756m shares (11.13%) in the market. They didn't say who the lender was, but a subsequent disclosure of interest shows that it is funds managed by Adamas, which was mentioned above. Our analysis shows the average price received by Lizhong in the 3 days was $0.4192 per share, a total of $27.98m. Now, why did Lizhong need to sell those shares and borrow that money by pledging the remainder? Read on.

On 10-Apr-2015, CIFG, via its 100% subsidiary New Express Investment Ltd, agreed to subscribe 120m shares (16.67%) of China 33 Media Group Ltd (C33M, 8087) at $0.22, exhausting its general mandate, for a total of HK$26.4m. The deal completed on 22-Apr-2015, diluting Lizhong from 32.00% to 26.67%. Our system shows that on 6-May-2015, CIFG deposited its C33M shares with Gransing.

Three months later, on 24-Jul-2015, C33M announced a massive 7 for 1 open offer at $0.10, a 75.6% discount to the closing price of $0.41, without excess applications. The Financial Adviser was Octal Capital (the same as for Lerado's open offer), and the underwriters were Gransing, Kingston and RHB OSK Securities HK Ltd (RHB OSK). The IFA again was Opus Capital, the same as for Lerado. Lizhong undertook to take up part of its entitlement amounting to 844,799,700 shares, which to the nearest thousand is 4.4 shares for each share it owns, not 7. That would cost it $84.5m, but of course, it had already raised about $27.98m by selling shares in the market in January, so there was a funding gap of $56.5m, or about $0.294 per existing share, which it might have borrowed from Adamas funds.

If CIFG was to maintain its holding, it would have to put in another $0.70 for each share it held. It had sold a few shares but still held 113.622m (15.78%). The share price dived 26.8% on the day after the news, but the prospect strangely seemed to delight CIFG, which undertook not to sell any more and to take up all its entitlements to 795.354m shares at a cost of $79.5m. However, on 4-Aug-2015, C33M announced that it and Gransing had agreed to cut CIFG's commitment to 290m shares. As a result CIFG would be diluted to 7.01% of C33M.

Under GEM Listing Rule 10.39(1) or Main Board Listing Rule 7.24(5)(a), if an open offer is at a ratio higher than 1 for 2 then it must be approved by "independent" shareholders excluding the controlling shareholder or, if none, the executive directors and their associates. So the largest holder of C33M, Lizhong, could not vote in favour at the EGM, as it is an associate of the Chairman.

How convenient, then, that there was another "independent" shareholder who could vote in favour. Look at the EGM results on 31-Aug-2015. CIFG almost certainly voted its 113.622m shares in favour, and only 2,050 other shares voted in favour, while 28,638,000 shares voted against. The open offer was thereby approved, and the prospectus was published on 14-Sep-2015.
Update, 26-Sep-2015

The C33M open offer prospectus discloses that several sub-underwriters have been engaged. Gransing, with a commitment of 1,905,200,300 shares (33.07% of the enlarged shares), engaged SBI CCFS for 800m shares (13.89%) and 3 other unnamed sub-underwriters for a total of 540m shares (9.37%), each with less than 5% of enlarged shares. RHB OSK, with a commitment of 500m shares (8.68%) had engaged 2 unnamed sub-underwriters to take all of them.

Kingston, with an underwriting commitment of 1500m shares (26.04%), had engaged but then terminated 4 sub-underwriters to take all of it. One was Harvest Aspect International Ltd, which a filing shows is owned by William Yu Tsung Chin, for 644.64m shares (11.19%). The remaining 3 each had less than 5% but totaled 14.85%. After these 4 were terminated, Kingston engaged a single sub-underwriter for the whole lot. Guess who? Black Marble Securities (owned by Lerado).

SBI CCFS and Black Marble have each failed to file a disclosure of interest.

The denominator in the calculation of percentage for disclosure of interests under s308 of the Securities and Futures Ordinance is based on the number of "issued shares", not the number which may be in issue in the future. So in a 7:1 open offer, there are new shares equivalent to 700% of existing shares. All the filings by the underwriters and sub-underwriters in the C33M case use the wrong denominator (the number of shares which will be in issue if the open offer completes) and hence show the wrong percentage, which should be multiplied by a factor of 8. Anyone with an underwriting commitment equal to 5% or more of the existing shares (in the case of C33M, 36m shares) should make a filing, and clearly, that has not happened, with several sub-underwriters of Gransing, RHB OSK and Kingston. The SFC should require them to correct their filings and to procure filings by their sub-underwriters, including those which have now been terminated.
GreaterChina Professional Services (8193)

Now let's look at how Lerado (via Black Marble Securities) and Akron (Financial Adviser to CIFG on its open offer) have been working together in another transaction.

GreaterChina Professional Services Ltd (GPS, 8193) is listed on GEM and owns Greater China Appraisal Ltd, which values real estate and other assets. On 13-Nov-2014, GPS began to deviate from its core business, by buying 80% of Golden Vault Ltd, which indirectly owns a mainland advertising business with in-elevator poster frames and LCD displays in Changshu, PRC, for HK$110m in promissory notes.

Golden Vault had turnover of RMB 7.34m in 2013 and net assets of RMB 5.73m (HK$7.16m) at 30-Sep-2014. This business was valued by Roma Appraisals Ltd at $184m, because, hey, elevators are difficult to get into - especially when they are going up. That valuer is owned by Roma Group Ltd (Roma, 8072) and the financial adviser on the profit forecast was Akron.

A disclosure of interest shows that on 11-May-2015, China Environmental Energy Investment Ltd (CEEI, 0986) increased its holding in GPS from 2.63% to 5.13%, buying 21.495m shares at $0.556 per share. From our CCASS system we see the shares deposited with Southwest Securities (HK) Brokerage Ltd (SWSHK, formerly Tanrich Securities Co Ltd).

On 8-Jul-2015, Roma announced that it had agreed to lend up to HK$58m to Brilliant One Holdings Ltd (Brilliant One) for 12 months at 12% p.a., secured by 310.85m shares in an unnamed GEM-listed company and guaranteed by persons named Ip Kwok Kwong and Wong Chi Keung, the ultimate owners of Brilliant One. That non-disclosure of the GEM company's name was silly, because it was easily determined that Brilliant One was the 36.23% controlling shareholder of GPS, which eventually announced the loan facility on 4-Aug-2015. Ip Kwok Kwong is the MD of GPS, while Wong Chi Keung (this one) is an accountant with 13 INED positions. The loan facility includes a maximum loan-to-value ratio of 65%. So if they draw the full loan, then the share price falling below $0.287 would trigger a top-up obligation. The shares were moved from Emperor Securities Ltd to Infast Brokerage Ltd on 9-Jul-2015.

On 9-Jul-2015, the day after the share pledge, GPS announced a huge proposed placing of shares under a specific mandate, 2.6bn shares at $0.10, a 74.4% discount to the market price of $0.39, via Black Marble Securities, which is owned by Lerado. The Financial Adviser is Akron (the same as for Lerado's open offer). That represents 303% of the existing shares, and they are not even bothering to make the shares available to existing shareholders by an open offer or rights issue. Simultaneously, it was proposed that SEEC Media Group Ltd (SEECM, 0205) would subscribe 1.4bn shares at the same price, a total of $140m, for 28.82% of the enlarged shares.

Policy note: As we mentioned above, open offers or rights issues larger than 1 for 2 (a 50% enlargement of issued shares) must be subject to shareholders' approval with controlling shareholders abstaining, or if there are none, then with executive directors and their associates abstaining. That does provide some small measure of protection, (unless the vote is being manipulated with warehoused shares). However, this protection is negated by the fact that a massive placing under a "specific mandate" can be approved without requiring controllers or executive directors to abstain. The Listing Rules should be amended to close the loophole so that controllers/executive directors should be required to abstain from voting in favour of any proposal to approve a "specific mandate" that enlarges the issued shares by more than 50%.

Brilliant One, which has pledged its controlling shareholding to Roma, was allowed to vote to approve this outrageous proposal.

Of the $395.1m net proceeds, GPS intends to use $100m in its money-lending subsidiary, Colbert Finance Ltd, and $150m to develop its securities brokerage business. It doesn't own a stockbroker yet, but it plans to either buy one or set one up. The EGM approved the placing on 14-Sep-2015 without objection. With an avalanche of shares due to hit the market at $0.10, it is quite impressive that the stock still closed at $0.495 on 23-Sep-2015.
SEECM (0205)

Now let's look at a fourth open offer involving Lerado (via Black Marble Securities) and Opus Capital.

SEECM is, or was, principally engaged in advertising agency, distribution of books and magazines. And securities trading, of course, like all shoddy companies should be. It announced its investment in GPS on 10-Jul-2015.

On 17-Jul-2015, SEECM announced that it had agreed to subscribe 103.02m shares (16.67%) of China New Economy Fund Ltd (CNEF, 0080) at $0.385, for a total of HK$39.66m, exhausting CNEF's general mandate. CNEF is another Chapter 21 investment company, and that was a 61.5% discount to the NAV of CNEF at 30-Jun-2015 of $1.00. As we noted in our article Some Bubbles for New Year on 31-Dec-2014, CNEF had shares in the Finsoft bubble alongside Convoy FH, and Tony Tai Man Hin, the CFO and Company Secretary of CNEF, was an INED of Finsoft. He retired from Finsoft on 5-May-2015. The CNEF announcement of the subscription named Astrum as the placing agent and did not mention the discount to NAV.

Also on 17-Jul-2015, SEECM announced that it is applying to the SFC to set up a stockbroker. Now everyone wants to be a broker. Lerado, GPS and SEECM.

On 19-Aug-2015, SEECM announced a huge open offer, 3 for 1 at $0.10, a 61.5% discount to the market price of $0.26. The Financial Adviser is Opus Capital (the FA of CAID and the IFA of C33M and Lerado), the IFA is Hercules Capital Ltd (Hercules) and the underwriter is Black Marble Securities, owned by Lerado. Again there will be no excess applications, so the "underwriter" gets the benefit of discounted unsubscribed shares. Of net proceeds of $624m, SEECM plans to use HK$365m to set up a stockbroker, $30m to set up a corporate finance advisory and asset management firm and $225m for the acquisition and operation of an unspecified e-commerce platform.

The shares dived on the news, dropping 35.4% to $0.168 the next day. But they weren't done yet. On 9-Sep-2015, they decided to increase the carnage by consolidating the shares 2:1 and then changing the offer terms to 5 new shares for each consolidated share at $0.10, equivalent to $0.05 before the consolidation. So the offer discount becomes an effective 80.8% discount to the original closing price of $0.26. This will raise a bit less though, HK$519m. This news caused another drop in the price, by 16.7% from $0.156 to $0.13 the next day. So the stock price had now halved even before putting the plan to a vote.

A circular for the capital reorganisation went out on 18-Sep-2015 for an EGM on 12-Oct-2015. We urge shareholders to vote against the resolutions. They are special resolutions that require a 75% majority to pass, so blocking it is more feasible than usual. If it passes, then a circular to propose the open offer is due out on 28-Oct-2015.
Chan Cheong Yee and CESHK

There is a common person to a number of these companies. Chan Cheong Yee (C Y Chan) is a Responsible Officer of China Everbright Securities (HK) Ltd (CESHK). CESHK is the investment manager of four Chapter 21 companies: CIFG, CNEF, China Innovation Investment Ltd (CII, 1217) and China Investment Development Ltd (CID, 0204). C Y Chan is an ED of all 4 companies, and he is also an ED of Capital VC.
CID (0204)

CID is in its own little bubble - it closed on 23-Sep-2015 at $0.157, compared with NAV of $0.024 at 31-Aug-2015.
CEEI (0986)

Now remember we mentioned CEEI, the investor in GPS? On 12-Nov-2014, CEEI announced a placing of 48,190,489 shares at $0.97 per share to raise HK$46.28m, exhausting the general mandate, followed by a huge 8:1 rights issue at $0.195 per share, an 82.4% discount to the market price of $1.11, to raise between $376m and $451m. Excess applications were allowed. At the time, CEEI had no substantial shareholders.

Win Fung was both the placing agent and the rights issue underwriter. The placing was on a best efforts basis, and on 27-Nov-2014, the placing price was cut to $0.66. The placing was completed on 3-Dec-2014, and all the shares were deposited into the CCASS account of Win Fung for its clients. Not a single share moved out of that account until after the EGM to approve the rights issue. And guess what, the EGM results on 18-Dec-2014 show that the number of shares voted in favour of the rights issue was 48,437,576, just 247,087 more than the number of placing shares.

On 12-Mar-2015, CEEI announced that it would start investing in "quality stock and other financial products", so don't say you weren't warned! On 17-Apr-2015, CEEI announced that it had bought 51m shares (0.337%) of Suncorp (mentioned above) that day in the market for HK$61.45m at an average of $1.205 after a huge run up in the share price following completion of a placing at $0.245 per share on 13-Apr-2015. The stock closed at $0.204 on 23-Sep-2015, down 83% since the purchase by CEEI. Some of the other investments by CEEI are covered below.
WLS (8021)

Now let's tell who may have benefitted from a huge bubble in the shares of WLS Holdings Ltd (WLS, 8021), a construction company.

As background, on 21-Oct-2014, WLS announced that CIFG would subscribe for 79m shares (16.67% of enlarged) at $0.177, a 0.6% premium to market, exhausting the general mandate. On the face of it, WLS had no other substantial shareholders. The deal completed on 31-Oct-2014. The shares were deposited with Fordjoy Securities and Futures Ltd (Fordjoy) on 5-Nov-2014. CIFG rapidly sold off the shares, from 12-Nov-2014, dropping below 5% on 3-Dec-2014.

WLS owns a licensed money-lender, Gold Medal Hong Kong Ltd, incorporated on 19-Mar-2014 and licensed on 26-Nov-2014.

On 21-Jan-2015, WLS announced a 5:1 share consolidation and a proposed massive placing of 540m consolidated shares (563.16% of the existing shares) at $0.30 via SWSHK (then Tanrich Securities Co Ltd). The Financial Adviser was Akron. This placing price was a 42.3% discount to the adjusted closing price of $0.52. At the 5-Mar-2015 SGM to approve the placing, votes in favour were 89,597,500, or 18.69% of the issued shares. Total turnout was only 19.00%. We suspect most of those votes in favour were shares previously held by CIFG, but we'll never know for sure.

Of the 540m shares, we know that CEEI took 63m shares (9.91% of enlarged), because it announced the subscription on 18-Mar-2015. Disclosures of interests show that Samuel Chiu Se Chung, a licensed Representative of Roofer Securities Ltd, also subscribed 9.9%. Unity, mentioned above, subscribed 31.5m shares (4.95%), as did Capital VC, mentioned above and Avant Capital Management (HK) Ltd (Avant), as asset manager. Mr Ye Ruiqiang subscribed 4.95%. As of 31-Dec-2014, he owned 6.44% of Capital VC.

There are 4 subscribers whom we cannot identify. A person named Zhang Yan subscribed 40.67m shares (6.40%) which were probably deposited with Emperor Securities Ltd, and a person named Zheng Wanying subscribed 31.33m shares (4.93%). A person named Civic Cheung Sun Kei subscribed 54m shares (8.49%) and another named Cheung Kam Hong subscribed the same number.

A person named Wong Chun Wah subscribed 23m shares (3.62%). It's a common name but we see that the same number went to the custody of Henik Securities Ltd, where there is a licensee called Wong Chun Wah. Similarly a person named Ma Kin Lung subscribed 31.0m shares (4.88%), and we see that number deposited with Get Nice Securities Ltd, where Ma Kin Lung is a licensed representative.

A person named Tam Siu Ki subscribed 54m shares (8.49%), increasing his stake to 9.28%. That may or may not be the same as Simon Tam Siu Ki, who was a representative of RHB OSK (then known as Prudence Securities Co Ltd) until his license was revoked on 30-Oct-2003 for rat-trading and other trading malpractices. In summary, then after the placing, the holdings were:
  Name   Shares   Stake %
1   CEEI (0986)   63,000,000   9.91
2   Samuel Chiu Se Chung   63,000,000   9.91
3   Tam Siu Ki   59,000,000   9.28
4   Cheung Kam Hong   54,000,000   8.49   
5   Cheung Sun Kei, Civic   54,000,000   8.49
6   Zhang Yan   40,670,000   6.40
7   Avant   31,500,000   4.95
8   Capital VC (2324)   31,500,000   4.95
9   Unity (0913)   31,500,000   4.95
10   Ye Ruiqiang   31,500,000   4.95
11   Zheng Wanying   31,330,000   4.93
12   Ma Kin Lung   31,000,000   4.88
13   Wong Chun Wah   23,000,000   3.62
  Total   540,000,000   85.71

The WLS placing completed on 27-Mar-2015 and the CCASS deposits are here. By that time, the stock had more than doubled to $1.25. Unlike the allotments after the IPO, there was no concentration warning. Yet 13 holders held 85.71% of the stock.

The price continued to climb. On 15-May-2015, with the stock at $2.26, 7.53x the placing price, WLS announced a 7:1 bonus issue. The stock spiked again and was suspended at $4.27 on 17-Jun-2015, prompting the company to announce that it was negotiating for a possible share issue. After a brief correction to $2.50, it was suspended again on 19-Jun-2015, pending announcement on 23-Jun-2015 of a "framework agreement" for possible subscriptions by Avant and Shin Kong Capital Management Inc (SKCM) of 1920m and 5760m shares (post-bonus) at $0.06875, a 78% discount to the bonus-adjusted closing price of $0.3125, to raise $528m gross and enlarge the issued shares by 151%.

While the stock was suspended, it went ex-bonus on 23-Jun-2015 and the bonus shares were distributed on 3-Jul-2015, so for 10 days straddling the half-year point, only 1/8 of the company was tradable. When trading in those shares resumed on 24-Jun-2015, the stock shot up again on heavy volume, reaching a daily high of $1.22 on 26-Jun-2015. Remember that most of the existing shares had been issued at a bonus-adjusted $0.0375, so they were now up 32.5x. WLS closed at $1.05 on 30-Jun-2015, allowing those listed companies which held the stock to book enormous "fair value gains" in their interim results. At the end of June, WLS had a market capitalisation of HK$5341m, compared with net tangible assets at 30-Apr-2015 of HK$282m ($0.055 per share), so it was trading at 18.9x NAV.

Disclosures of interest indicate that SKCM was using a vehicle called SKCM TMT I, L.P., which was 50% owned by Chiang Chun Yi and 50% by Yam Tak Cheung, and managed by SKCM TMT GP Co. Ltd, which is 40% owned by SKCM. After all that excitement, SKCM backed out of the deal on 8-Aug-2015 citing disagreement over due diligence on WLS, but Avant signed a new agreement on 12-Aug-2015 to continue to subscribe 1920m shares at $0.06875, conditional on WLS issuing at least 252m shares in a fund-raising exercise so that Avant ends up with 29.48% of less - certainly under the 30% takeover trigger.

Now this long and winding road takes us back to Lerado. On 18-Aug-2015, WLS announced two placings via Black Marble Securities, owned by Lerado. The underwritten tranche is of 360m shares (7.08% of existing shares) at $0.06875, and there is a further "best efforts" placing of 5400m shares (106.15%) at the same price, at 82.1% discount to the closing price of $0.385. Together these could raise $389.22m mostly for, you guessed it, money-lending and securities business. The shares closed on 23-Sep-2015 at $0.27, down 74.3% since the end of June, but still at 4.9x NAV.
Raise the umbrellas: China Jicheng (1027)

Perhaps the most ridiculous bubble in our market at present (although there is a lot of competition for that title) is umbrella maker China Jicheng Holdings Ltd (CJ, 1027) which listed on 13-Feb-2015. It peaked on 18-Sep-2015 at $3.18 with a market value of HK$47.7bn, compared with net tangible assets in the 30-Jun-2015 interim results of $399.6m, or $0.0267 per share. So it was trading at 119x NTA.

Adjusting for a 25:1 stock split in June, CJ's IPO priced the shares at $0.044, so was up 72.3x since the IPO. This gives new meaning to the term "umbrella movement". The initial custody positions of the 150m IPO shares (25%) are in our records here. The top 3 brokers will now be familiar to you: Gransing (8.72% of CJ), Win Fung (8.18%) and SWSHK (3.73%), a total 20.64% or 82.54% of the float.

On 14-May-2015, the SFC warned that 16 shareholders owned 24.02% of CJ, or 96.08% of the float, leaving 0.98% of CJ for everyone else. The stock closed at $13.76 the day before that warning, or $0.5504 after the stock split, so it is up 5.14x since then.

In its annual results for 31-Mar-2015, CEEI (mentioned above) disclosed a holding of 12.67m shares (2.11%) in CJ at a purchase cost of $1.10 per share, which means they were allocated in the IPO, because they have never traded that low. After the stock split that will be 316.75m shares at $0.044. So CEEI doesn't always pay bubble prices for bubble shares - it occasionally gets in at the bottom.

The controlling shareholder of CJ is its Chairman, Huang Wenji, with 11.25bn shares (75%) which, on paper, makes him a US$ umbrella multi-billionaire. We note that on 17-Sep-2015, he deposited 1.5bn shares into CCASS with Black Marble Securities, owned by Lerado. That could be preparation for a placing of existing shares and possibly a subscription of new ones, if anyone is dumb enough to buy them.

Lerado interim results show massive gain

Lerado is one of several companies which have made enormous market gains in the first half of 2015 without disclosing what stocks it bought. In the 30-Jun-2015 interim results, it disclosed "held-for-trading investments" comprising "equity securities listed in Hong Kong" of HK$702.1m. It also said that by 28-Aug-2015, the value had declined by 11%. It booked an unrealised gain of $626.5m, implying a purchase cost of $75.6m and a gain of 829% in 6 months or less. No normal stock does that. Whatever stock(s) they hold, it must be bubble paper, and investors deserve to know what it is so that they can make their own assessment of "fair value" rather than relying on an artificial market price.

After providing for $105m of profits tax on the gains, Lerado had net tangible assets at 30-Jun-2015 of $1220m, or $1.27 per share. But if those gains evaporate, then the NTA drops to $698.5m, or $0.728 per share. Both figures are before dilution from the proposed open offer. If the offer proceeds, then that NAV would be diluted to about $0.430 (with the gains) or $0.295 (without the gains). Both figures assume that Lerado loses the Dorel arbitration, which is worth $307m, which is $0.320 per share before the open offer or $0.080 per share after the open offer.
Capital VC's open offer

On 13-Mar-2015, Capital VC announced a 5:1 share consolidation to be followed by a 7:1 open offer at $0.25 per consolidated share without excess applications. That was a 76.5% discount to the adjusted closing price of $1.065 per share. The Financial Adviser was Akron, and the "underwriter" was SBI CCFS. The last published NAV at 28-Feb-2015 was an adjusted $4.821, so the issue discount to NAV was 94.8%. The stock sold off on the news, down 39.9% the next day to an adjusted $0.64.

Policy note: Chapter 21 investment companies like Capital VC have to publish their NAV monthly. This involves valuing all their listed investments at market prices, so they know what they are. Until 2002, these announcements had to be published in newspapers, so space was at a premium. Now that announcements are online for the last 13 years, this is no longer the case. Yet the Listing Rules still only require Chapter 21 companies to disclose the top 10 investments once per year in the annual report. This is ridiculous. The top 10 investments should be disclosed every month so that shareholders know what risks they are taking.

Again, investors faced the extortion of having to either see the investment heavily diluted, or put in more cash, and no excess applications were allowed, so it is really a placing with the "underwriter" subject to first refusal of existing holders pro rata. The underwriter benefits from any unsubscribed shares at a discount to market. To eliminate the possibility of SBI CCFS holding a controlling stake, it had to arrange sub-underwriters. They included Gransing, for 180m shares, Jun Yang Securities Co Ltd (Jun Yang Securities), for 152m, Avant, for 142.5m, and Fordjoy, for 80m shares.

Incidentally, SBI CCFS is 52% owned by Cao Guo Qi, a director of several listed companies, and 48% by Zhang Xiongfeng, the current Chairman of CMG, mentioned above.

On 11-Jun-2015, Capital VC shareholders approved the consolidation and open offer without objection. Voting turnout was only 14.39% of the issued and eligible shares, probably including the 6.44% owned by Ye Ruiqiang.

Policy note: shareholders are often unaware of opportunities to protect themselves by voting against such egregious proposals, because the SFC does not require banks and brokers who hold their stock to inform them of EGMs and seek voting instructions. As a result, most banks and brokers, in the small print of the client contracts, state that they are not obliged to do so. This is a major barrier to investor participation in governance, and the SFC should act to resolve this, as we said in our submission Principles of Responsible Regulation (26-May-2015).

On 24-Jun-2015, six days before Capital VC's financial year-end, it announced that it was changing its year-end to 30-Sep-2015, so it would produce a second set of condensed "interim" results for the 12 months to 30-Jun-2015. The purported reason for this was:

"to align the Company's financial year end date with that of the Company's principal associate, CNI Bullion Limited, which is the Group's substantial investment."

This holds no water though. Remember, Capital VC is a Chapter 21 investment company, so under Rule 21.04(3)(a), it is not allowed to take "legal, or effective, management control of underlying investments" and under Rule 21.04(3)(b) it is required to maintain a "reasonable spread of investments". So there is no logical reason to align the year ends of Capital VC and any of its investments, including CNI Bullion Ltd, which only accounted for 9% of Capital VC's NAV at 31-Dec-2014.

So what was the real reason for extending the year-end? In our view, to delay the annual disclosure of the portfolio. It's so embarrassing to have to show that your castle is built on sand.

On 15-Jul-2015 Capital VC announced that its NAV at 30-Jun-2015 was $9.0782 per share, and on 27-Aug-2015 it announced the second interim results for the 12 months to June. Capital VC booked a pre-tax profit on financial assets of $1314m for the 12 months, compared with $163m in the first 6 months, so the second-half profit was $1151m. As an investment company, it does not distinguish between realised and unrealised gains, but we can deduce them from the amount of deferred tax, which is tax that is only payable when they cash out. Note 8 shows deferred tax of $132m, so as profits tax is 16.5% they have about $800m of net unrealised gains, probably in bubble stocks.

Anyway, with that NAV in mind, let's return to the open offer. 7:1 at $0.25, versus NAV of $9.0782, so the open offer would dilute NAV to $1.354 before expenses. Shareholders who did nothing would lose 85% of their net asset value. Yet, when the offer closed on 9-Jul-2015, only 23.7% of the shares were subscribed. That left the underwriters and whoever was behind them with 66.75% of the company, acquired at $0.25 per share. The market price closed that day at $0.32. Due to market losses in July, the NAV closed that month at $1.0292, and $0.8824 at the end of August. Amazingly there was nobody with a disclosed 5% shareholding after the offer closed.

Meanwhile, even in market price terms, the shareholders who did not subscribe (and most of them did not vote against the open offer) had seen the price collapse from $1.065 before the open offer to $0.32, even while Capital VC was racking up huge gains as a holder of the unnamed inflated stocks.
Jun Yang (0397)

Jun Yang Securities is owned by Jun Yang Financial Holdings Ltd (Jun Yang, 0397). Until August, this was known as Jun Yang Solar Power Investments Ltd, but that's out of fashion, so now, like everyone else, it wants to be a financial services powerhouse.

Note 24 on page 113 of Jun Yang's 2014 annual report reveals that it owned 2.49% of Tech Pro Technology Development Ltd (Tech Pro Technology, 3823) and 4.49% of Town Health International Medical Group Ltd (Town Health, 3886). Those had a market value of about HK$235m and $280m respectively, out of total listed equities of $854m. Jun Yang booked an unrealised gain on held-for-trading investments of HK$350m for 2014, without which it would have made a loss before tax of $98m.
Tech Pro Technology (3823)

This is another bubble stock, up 93.14% in 2014, and it has kept on going, up a net 22.62% this year so far. It closed on 23-Sep-2015 at $1.87, valuing the firm at HK$12.13bn. When a company includes the syllable "Tech" in its name twice, you know it is desperate for attention. The company makes LED lamps and losses. Oh and football. Yes, it has bought a French soccer club, FC Sochaux-Montbeliard SA. After all, why sponsor the shirts when you can buy the whole thing?

The interim report at 30-Jun-2015, shows net tangible assets of RMB475m (HK$594m) or about HK$0.092 per share. Turnover for the period was RMB111m, so if you annualize that you get RMB222m or HK$278m. So the shares are trading at about 20.4x NTA and about 44x turnover.

L&A (8195)

This is another bubble stock. L & A International Holdings Ltd (L&A, 8195) makes cashmere sweaters. It listed on 10-Oct-2014 after a placing at $0.06 per share (adjusted for the 10:1 split on 21-Apr-2015). In the placing, the top 10 placees received 89.74% of the float. It closed on 23-Sep-2015 at $2.92, up 48.7x since the listing. The market value is HK$11.68bn, compared with net tangible assets of HK$129m at 31-Mar-2015, or about $0.032 per share, so it trades at 90x book value. Revenue for the year was $350m, so it trades at 33x sales.

Despite this ridiculous valuation, or perhaps because of it, CEEI bought 69.384m L&A shares (1.73%) in the market from 17-Apr-2015 to 12-May-2015, spending a total of HK$112.7m or an average of $1.62 per share. This was announced on 12-May-2015. Of course, we don't know who the sellers were. Lucky them.

On 24-Jun-2015, the SFC issued a concentration warning, noting that 19 shareholders held 23.18% out of the 25% float.
Roundup

What you have seen here is a repeated pattern of abuse. The key steps in several transactions are:

  Position votes in friendly hands which are not visibly connected to controlling shareholders or executive directors, by issuance of new shares or transfer of existing shares.
  Arrange loan financing for any existing controller to take up entitlements, or even sell shares in the market with enough time gap to deter allegations of insider dealing.
  Announce either (i) a large, deep-discount open offer without excess applications; or (ii) a "special mandate" placing, which in the first case will need "independent" shareholders' approval and in the latter, just shareholders' approval.
  Use friendly votes to approve the proposal which damages the financial interests of anyone who cannot or does not put up cash (in the case of a placing, this isn't even an option).
  Complete the fund-raising and receive deeply discounted shares as the underwriter, sub-underwriter or placee of the shares.

Hong Kong deserves better if it wishes to make a claim to be a world-class financial centre.

© Webb-site.com, 2015
28 : jj1984(29252)@2015-09-28 23:35:04

點解追擊隆成變左集成?
29 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-09-28 23:43:57

成堆都是同系
30 : GS(14)@2015-10-19 02:40:32

http://webb-site.com/articles/CAID.asp
CAID (0048) gains from umbrella bubble
10th October 2015

In our article Bubbles and Troubles in Hong Kong (24-Sep-2015) we noted that there were huge unrealised investment gains in the interim results of China Automotive Interior Decoration Holdings Ltd (CAID, 0048) for the 6 months to 30-Jun-2015 and that it had failed to disclose what these investments were, claiming:

"At 30 June 2015, there was no significant investment held by the Group"

Webb-site filed complaints with SEHK (under the Listing Rules) and the SFC (under the Securities and Futures Ordinance, that this was a false and misleading statement). Last night, CAID made an announcement, noting that "errors have been found" in this binary statement. So it was false. CAID now discloses 3 investments. The largest by far is about 227.3m shares (1.52%) of umbrella-maker China Jicheng Holdings Ltd (CJ, 1027). As we noted in the article, this stock is in a huge bubble. CAID says these shares were purchased for about RMB 7.9m (HK$9.9m) which implies that they were allocated in the IPO at HK$0.044 (split-adjusted).

At 30-Jun-2015, CAID's shares in CJ were valued at RMB 371.2m, or 48.7% of CAID's net tangible assets of RMB 761.9m. The other 2 holdings disclosed yesterday were 0.7% of Suncorp Technologies Ltd (Suncorp, 1063, also mentioned in our article) and 0.8% of China Properties Investment Holdings Ltd (CPI, 0736). CPI was also in a bubble and has dropped 89.5% from $2.37 to $0.25 since 30-Jun-2015. Suncorp was a bubble but peaked at $1.51 on 5-May-2015, and was already down to $0.52 by 30-Jun. It closed on Friday at $0.222, down 57.3% since the end of June. Meanwhile the umbrella bubble is staying up. By last night, CJ had only fallen 9.6% since 30-Jun-2015 and had a market value of HK$28.2bn, or 70.6x its net tangible assets of $399.6m.

In Chinglish, the CAID announcement says:

"Although the recent weakness in the stock market, the Board expects the performance of Significant Investments will still contribute positive return to the Group in the near future"

The Board does not give any reasons for that expectation. In our view, nobody could reasonably expect a bubble to grow larger or even to stay inflated, assuming that person did not know of any plan to make that happen. CJ accounted for 65.8% of the held-for-trading investments at 30-Jun-2015, and the other two holdings are down sharply, so it is hard to see how the overall portfolio returns "in the near future" could be expected to be positive. The Stock Exchange should require CAID to either justify that statement or withdraw it.

As readers will recall, CAID also holds 75m shares (7.82%) of Lerado Group (Holding) Co Ltd (Lerado, 1225) received at $0.60 each in exchange for a business sale. At the 30-Jun-2015 closing bid price of $0.59, these were worth HK$44.25m, or RMB 35.4m. So the 4 investments together amounted to RMB 514.6m, or 91.2% of CAID's investments. Lerado closed on Friday at $0.27, down 54.2% since the end of June.
Lerado next?

So now we have identified 2 shareholders of the umbrella bubble, namely CAID with 1.52% and China Environmental Energy Investment Ltd (CEEI, 0986) with 2.11%, out of the 25% float. As we noted in the article, CEEI also bought into the Suncorp bubble. Given the other identified connection between CAID and Lerado Group (Holding) Co Ltd (1225), we suspect that Lerado's massive market gains for the first half of 2015 also involve a shareholding in CJ, but so far, they're not saying. The SFC probably knows who held the stock at 27-Apr-2015, because it announced that 16 shareholders then held 96.1% of the float.

© Webb-site.com, 2015
31 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-03-26 03:39:47

8179虧損增277%，至3,400萬，3億可變現資產，持有8195、8193、1389、736、8087、1027、8109、1063，已成康健系
32 : GS(14)@2016-03-29 02:02:24

1拆5
33 : qt(2571)@2016-03-29 21:08:28

又拆?
34 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-03-30 02:26:48

升得多都要散貨
35 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-04-04 00:00:33

盈利降78%，至1,500萬，1.36億現金
36 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-04-05 02:48:52

48轉虧5,500萬，3.32億可變現資產，持有1225，1027
37 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-07-03 15:08:34

虧損降45%，至3,800萬，986持有745、802、1027、1063、1225、2324、8021、8193、8195
38 : GS(14)@2016-08-02 17:23:20

盈喜
39 : GS(14)@2016-08-19 17:16:53

986 SELL 1027 BUY 8217 SELL 8193
40 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-08-21 05:05:49

8120 holds 8195、1389、8193、986、8087、736、1027、8217
41 : GS(14)@2016-09-13 17:07:15

轉盈2,100萬，300萬現金
42 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-01-24 03:27:51

盈警
43 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-05-15 02:54:51

轉虧100萬，輕債
44 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-06-28 05:51:22

脫離康健系:243、1389、1027
45 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-06-28 06:07:07

OH
46 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-06-28 14:05:48

745 SELL 1027
47 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-06-28 17:39:37

中國集成控股有限公司（「本公司」）董事會（「董事會」）已注意到今日本公司股份
價格下跌及成交量上升。經作出於該等情況下有關本公司之合理查詢後，董事會
確認，其並不知悉任何導致該等股價及成交量波動之原因，亦不知悉任何必須公
告以避免本公司證券出現虛假市場情況之資料或任何須根據證券及期貨條例第
XIVA部予以披露之內幕消息。
48 : GS(14)@2017-07-04 12:31:04

主要股東出售股份
董事會獲本公司主要股東Jicheng Investment Limited（「Jicheng Investment」）知會，
Jicheng Investment 已分別於二零一七年六月三十日及二零一七年七月三日於聯交
所交易平台透過市場交易按每股股份約0.0128港元及每股股份約0.0101港元之平均
代價出售30,008,000,000股股份及3,167,740,000股股份（「銷售股份」）（佔已發行股
份總數之約4.01% 及約4.22%）（「出售事項」）。Jicheng Investment 已進一步知會本
公司，就其所深知，銷售股份之買方為獨立於本公司且與本公司並無關連之第三
方（定義見上市規則）。於本公告日期，Jicheng Investment由黃文集先生（本公司董
事）全資及實益擁有。
緊隨出售事項後，Jicheng Investment於本公司之股權由約74.48%減少至約66.25%。
49 : GS(14)@2017-07-04 12:31:04

主要股東出售股份
董事會獲本公司主要股東Jicheng Investment Limited（「Jicheng Investment」）知會，
Jicheng Investment 已分別於二零一七年六月三十日及二零一七年七月三日於聯交
所交易平台透過市場交易按每股股份約0.0128港元及每股股份約0.0101港元之平均
代價出售30,008,000,000股股份及3,167,740,000股股份（「銷售股份」）（佔已發行股
份總數之約4.01% 及約4.22%）（「出售事項」）。Jicheng Investment 已進一步知會本
公司，就其所深知，銷售股份之買方為獨立於本公司且與本公司並無關連之第三
方（定義見上市規則）。於本公告日期，Jicheng Investment由黃文集先生（本公司董
事）全資及實益擁有。
緊隨出售事項後，Jicheng Investment於本公司之股權由約74.48%減少至約66.25%。
50 : GS(14)@2017-07-07 02:55:55

745持有1027、986
51 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-07-09 15:35:16

Webb 曰:
Huang Wenji cut his stake from 74.48% to 66.25%, selling 8.23% at an average $0.0115 per share, a loss of 95.9% since last Monday (26-Jun-2017), but still almost double the net assets per share of $0.0064. No word on whether any of his shares were pledged. The announcement contains a probable error - if he sold 4.01% on Friday, that is about 3,008m shares, not 30,008m shares. Total proceeds for the 2 days were about HK$71m

黃文集售出股份，把股權以1.15仙售出8.23%，由74.48%，降至66.25%，自2017年6月26日一星期，損失率達到95.9%，但仍然是一個泡沫，因每股資產值只是0.64仙。並無資料指出他的股份已抵押。這公先有一個肯定的錯誤，只有大約30.08億股，非300.08億股。這兩日套現近7,100萬。
52 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-07-09 15:38:25

Webb 曰:
Huang Wenji cut his stake from 74.48% to 66.25%, selling 8.23% at an average $0.0115 per share, a loss of 95.9% since last Monday (26-Jun-2017), but still almost double the net assets per share of $0.0064. No word on whether any of his shares were pledged. The announcement contains a probable error - if he sold 4.01% on Friday, that is about 3,008m shares, not 30,008m shares. Total proceeds for the 2 days were about HK$71m

黃文集售出股份，把股權以1.15仙售出8.23%，由74.48%，降至66.25%，自2017年6月26日一星期，損失率達到95.9%，但仍然是一個泡沫，因每股資產值只是0.64仙。並無資料指出他的股份已抵押。這公先有一個肯定的錯誤，只有大約30.08億股，非300.08億股。這兩日套現近7,100萬。
53 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-08-13 17:25:10

本公司董事會（「董事會」）謹此知會本公司股東（「股東」）及有意投資者，根據對
本集團截至二零一七年六月三十日止六個月之未經審核綜合管理賬目之初步評估，
預期本集團截至二零一七年六月三十日止六個月的綜合業績將錄得溢利較截至二
零一六年六月三十日止的相應六個月出現顯著下降。
有關溢利下降乃主要由於(i) 收益較二零一六年同期下降約24.3%，乃由於我們的
中國貿易公司客戶的銷售量受市況不佳影響而下降及(ii) 毛利較二零一六年同期
下降約32.5%，此乃主要由於收益下降及本集團的POE 雨傘產品（其具有較高的毛
利率）減少導致毛利率下降。
董事會謹此強調，本集團之財務狀況維持穩定及正面。董事會將持續審閱本集團
的策略及經營，以提升其業務表現及股東回報。
54 : GS(14)@2017-11-29 11:35:40

1027 BUY 397 FOR EXCHANGE SHARES
55 : GS(14)@2017-11-29 11:36:02

1027 BUY 397 FOR EXCHANGE SHARES
56 : GS(14)@2018-01-23 14:25:30

香港聯合交易所有限公司（「聯交所」）上市委員會（「上市委員會」）
譴責：
(1) 宏霸數碼集團（控股）有限公司（現稱中國錢包支付集團有限公司）（該公司）（股
份代號：802）未能確保於 2015 年 8 月 28 日刊發的公告所載的資訊在各重要方面
是準確完整，沒有誤導，違反了《香港聯合交易所有限公司證券上市規則》（《上市
規則》）第 2.13(2)條；
57 : GS(14)@2019-05-02 08:17:25

買造假貿易公司
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=286060

股權集中 證監警告恩達集成

1 : GS(14)@2015-05-15 11:35:25

http://www.mpfinance.com/htm/finance/20150515/news/ea_eab1.htm
【明報專訊】恩達(1480)上周五股價大起大落成市場焦點，證監會於事隔近一周後亦發公告，指近期兩大焦點股恩達與集成傘業(1027)股權高度集中，其中恩達更在上周五前一日，逾95%股權盡落7名股東之手。此外，中央結算系統顯示，恩達於本周一再大舉散貨，元大寶來持倉單日大幅減少3.75%，反之中銀香港、匯豐、渣打等散戶行則接貨最多。

恩達「其他股東」持股僅約4%

證監會昨終於「開金口」警告恩達，公告指出恩達大股東為恩達主席兼行政總裁陳榮賢，截至上周四(5月7日)，持有恩達75%股份；其中陳榮賢與陳勇為夫妻，至於恩達另外20.94%股份，則由6名股東持有，其他股東所持股份則僅為4.06%。

恩達股價「過山車」後一個交易日，即本周一時該股錄得大量股權轉移。據昨日中央結算系統顯示，元大於本周一持倉降低3.75%至9.72%，不單是當日沽盤最多，單日沽盤量亦大幅拋離僅次於元大的中國銀河，中國銀河當日僅沽盤0.44%股份。同時中銀香港持倉增加最多，持倉由0.31%增持至1.32%，僅次的匯豐持倉則由0.22%增至0.73%。

集成17股東持股99%

至於另一隻被證監會昨日警告的集成傘業，於4月27日，則由17名股東持有已發行股份99.02%，其中集成傘業主席黃文集私人公司為最大股東，持股75%，另外24.02%股份在16位股東手上，其他股東則僅持有0.98%。據證監會公告，該16名股東截至4月27日所持的1.44億股中，有1.09億股是源自11名股東在該股掛牌時配售所得，相關人士經國際配售獲分配1.28億股。另集成傘業發通告稱，建議將股份1拆25，買賣單位也由每手2000股改為5000股。
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=290375
Next Page
ZKIZ Archives @ 2019