laitimes

Ant Group can't even replace two fake vests on the market? How big is the matter at Jack Ma's stall?

author:Golden plum boiled wine Pearl River review

The latest news, Jack Ma made a major concession! Can Ant Group go public this time?

I am afraid that this matter is still not optimistic, because whether to go public or not is not a question of changing vests, let alone a problem of horses and horses, but the bottom line of rules cannot be touched.

Let's take a few minutes today to discuss it with you.

Ant Group can't even replace two fake vests on the market? How big is the matter at Jack Ma's stall?

Ant Group changed two fake vests

In recent days, Ant Group has reported major news, there are many comments and rumors, let's sort out these news, mainly two things.

The first thing was that Ma Yun gave up the actual controller, and Ant Group claimed that the company's voting rights were scattered and there was no actual controller.

According to public information, the operation behind it is that through the new agreement, Ma Yun and his concerted actors dissolve the concerted action relationship and exercise their voting rights independently.

Prior to this, Ma Yun indirectly controlled 53.46% of the voting rights of Ant Group through concerted actors. In addition, Alibaba holds 33% of the equity of Ant Group, while Alibaba is controlled by partners, and the actual controller is also Jack Ma. If this part of the voting rights is also 33%, then Ma Yun owns a total of 86.46% of the voting rights of Ant Group.

Ant Group claims that after the dissolution of the concerted actor relationship, Ma's voting rights will be adjusted from 53.46% to 6.208%.

However, anyone with a discerning eye can see that this is a fake vest! There are two problems here.

First, Alibaba Group does not mention that Alibaba Group holds a 33% stake in Ant Group. If this part of the voting rights is also 33%, then Ma Yun's actual voting rights are still as high as 39.208%, and this share can still control a company with scattered shares.

The second question is, after the concerted actors and Ma Yun break the concerted action agreement, will they openly oppose Ma Yun?

These people include Jing Xiandong, Hu Xiaoming, Jiang Fang, Shao Xiaofeng, Ni Xingjun, Zhao Ying, Wu Minzhi, etc., these people are Ma Yun's old subordinates, and there are inextricable interests, will they oppose Ma Yun?

What is the second vest we said Ant Group exchanged?

Ant Group can't even replace two fake vests on the market? How big is the matter at Jack Ma's stall?

The second fake vest exchanged by Ant Group

The second thing, that is, the second fake vest exchanged by Ant Group, is the introduction of state-owned assets to participate in shares.

Let's take Chongqing Ant Consumer Finance Co., Ltd., a subsidiary of Ant Group, as an example. As shown in the chart below, the company's shareholding structure has changed. However, how many state-owned enterprises are found to buy shares, even if they are transformed into joint-stock enterprises with state-owned participation?

If you look closely, you can understand the story behind this. The controlling shareholder of this company is still Ant Group, and the second-ranked Hangzhou Jintou Digital Technology Group Co., Ltd., which is a local state-owned enterprise in Hangzhou, it is difficult to tell that it is not the foreign aid that Ant is looking for! We believe that the local government will fully support the development of Ant Group and will fully support its listing.

The combined equity of these two companies is 60%, how can you convince others that the company Ant Group says has no actual controller?

There will certainly be objections on these two issues, so what is the crux of the matter?

Ant Group can't even replace two fake vests on the market? How big is the matter at Jack Ma's stall?

Reflect on the real reason why Ant's listing was urgently stopped

As we all know, on July 20, 2020, Ant Group announced its IPO, which is expected to have a market value of more than $200 billion and raise $20 billion, making it the largest IPO in A-share history. However, on November 3, Ant's listing was suddenly stopped. After that, Ant Group carried out a series of rectifications under the guidance of relevant national departments, but more than two years have passed and has not been relisted.

More than two years have passed, and everyone already knows that ants could not be listed in those years, and the most important thing was the national financial system and financial risks, which could not be disrupted by the sudden intrusion of private capital, or lead to unpredictable risks.

Ant Group's businesses are mainly Alipay, Alipay Wallet, Yuebao, Zhaocaibao, Ant Small Loan, Consumer Finance and MYbank. These businesses are all cross-border from the Internet, which is Alibaba's foot in the financial industry.

To put it bluntly, the most important thing is not how many real and fake vests to change, or even the problem of Ma Jack Ma, but the financial norms and the bottom line of risk cannot be broken! We believe that Ant must have done a lot of work in this regard. But in essence, private capital cannot disrupt the financial market, and this solid ice is difficult to break from the outside.

Speaking of this, can everyone understand that whether ants can change these two fake vests is not the main problem of whether they can be listed.

Ant Group can't even replace two fake vests on the market? How big is the matter at Jack Ma's stall?

The bottom line of the rules for Ant Group's listing

Some people may say that Jack Ma has already achieved this level, is this not enough? What else do you want? He has already made guarantees from the system and rules, do you still want to pull favors and unspoken rules?

This is true, but what we want to say is that whether Jack Ma controls ants is not the most fundamental issue of listing.

For Ant Group to go public, corporate governance must also be compliant, but this is not the most important thing. Then, whether Ma Yun gave up control or introduced state-owned assets to participate in shares, it is likely that he did not simply go public. In other words, perhaps Jack Ma and Ant Group did not play this trick for the sake of going public, but simply to improve the key actions of corporate governance.

Many people have a conspiracy theory view on this matter, and we can't say that they are wrong, but there is too much speculation in this regard, there is no evidence to say clearly, and it cannot be brought to the table.

We see that some people also say that the current atmosphere for private capital is better, can we relax the control and conditions? In our view, this is unlikely, because it is very important to guide the healthy and orderly development of capital and prevent financial risks at any time.

The normal operation behavior of private capital should be fully supported and less interfered with, but it should not act recklessly, blindly exploit loopholes to play the sidelines, and still less violate the law and discipline.

Some people may ask, having said all this, how do you think ants can go public? When will it be available?

Ant Group can't even replace two fake vests on the market? How big is the matter at Jack Ma's stall?

We want to say that in the final analysis, it is useless to change fake vests and play tricks, Ant Group still has to solve the problem of financial norms and risk control, which is the fundamental reason for it to go public.

While we all know that it has made a lot of efforts, it is clear that the current efforts are not enough, and it will still take time to go public. As for how long this time is? Everyone is welcome to participate in the discussion in the comment area.

Read on