Home >

Behind The Wave Of Withdrawal Of Science And Technology Innovation Board: 30% Of Enterprises Declare 7 Companies To Switch To Gem Again

2021/4/8 11:12:00 0

Science And Technology Innovation BoardWithdrawal TideEnterprisesCompaniesGem

Since the end of last year, the IPO withdrawal wave has continued to this day.

On April 6, two more enterprises applying for the science and technology innovation board withdrew their materials and terminated the examination. According to public information, as of April 6, since 2021, there have been more than 98 enterprises that have terminated the review of the science and technology innovation board (Shanghai Tuopu failed to rush to the scientific and technological innovation board twice). In addition, one enterprise failed to register and six enterprises ended the IPO process due to the termination of registration.

However, these IPO failed enterprises did not give up easily. The 21st century economic reporter collates the data and finds that many enterprises have submitted materials again after the failure of the first impact on the science and technology innovation board. Up to now, 37 enterprises (including Shanghai Tuopu) have chosen to re declare, with a re declaration rate of 35.24%. In addition to readjusting the plan and modifying the application materials, seven enterprises have changed their intended listing places and switched from the science and technology innovation board to the gem.

According to incomplete statistics of the reporter, more than half of the enterprises applying for the second time chose to restart their IPO within six months. For example, linkage technology, which withdrew materials only one week, restarted the IPO. The company's initial IPO was accepted on September 28, 2020. On March 11, this year, due to strategic planning factors, linkage technology actively submitted the withdrawal application documents of the science and technology innovation board IPO to the Shanghai Stock Exchange. However, seven days later (March 19), linkage technology was quickly registered with Guangdong securities regulatory bureau.

More than 30% of enterprises declare again

Over the past few days, a succession of IPO enterprises on the science and technology innovation board withdrew materials and re declared.

Specifically, among the 37 enterprises that have applied again, 20 of them are in the stage of listing guidance and 17 have been accepted again. Among the enterprises that have accepted the second application, 8 enterprises have passed the meeting (including 4 submitted to the CSRC and 4 accepted), and the success rate of re declaration has reached 47.06%.

"Because the pre IPO review does not control the financial indicators, but the credit quality, some IPO companies that choose to withdraw because of incomplete information will return after the information is improved. This is normal. This also shows that the current registered IPO channel is still unobstructed, the previous IPO failure is mainly due to the poor credit quality of these enterprises. The quality of the trust paper is not up to standard. Some of them are really covering up the fundamental problems of the company. Some are not fundamental problems, but there are deficiencies in information disclosure. Insufficient information to make up for the information, it is natural to submit IPO again. " Pan Helin, executive director and professor of Digital Economy Research Institute of Central South University of Finance and law, pointed out in an interview.

For the second sprint enterprises, in the process of re declaration of IPO, it is inevitable that they can not get around the question of "disclosing the relevant information of the previous declaration".

According to the 21st century economic report, the reasons for most enterprises to withdraw their declaration for the first time are "consideration of their own development strategy"; the management team or ownership structure has changed, such as "introducing external institutional investors, formulating option incentive plan", "senior executives withdrawing from operation due to their own reasons", etc.; information disclosure is not standardized or is not fully prepared; it does not conform to the positioning of relevant sectors.

In the process of the second declaration, the solution of the above problems is the key to determine the success of the second declaration. For example, the exchange will make detailed inquiries on the reasons for the withdrawal of the previous declaration and whether the relevant factors affecting the issuer's previous declaration have been eliminated; the declarant will disclose the main differences between this declaration and the previous declaration and the reasons for the differences by comparing the information disclosure contents of the previous declaration documents and the contents of the inquiry reply.

It is not difficult to find out from the current case of "passing the meeting" that whether the relevant factors of the previous declaration can be eliminated is the key to the success of the enterprise.

Taking the four enterprises that have completed the issuance as an example, Titan technology is a typical one. The results of the deliberation meeting at its first meeting showed that the Listing Committee of the science and technology innovation board failed to approve its IPO application at that time, mainly because the company failed to accurately disclose its business model and business essence, its core technology and its advancement, and its production and operation mainly relying on core technology The situation.

In the second application, Titan technology introduced its own technology gold content in detail, disclosed the corresponding core technology, divided the core technology into product technology and platform technology, respectively corresponding to the company's invention patent and software copyright, and described the corresponding product line for each core technology list. Subsequently, the company's Listing Committee did not give it After deliberation, the company's listing application was directly approved.

Seven enterprises "switch to gem"

From the perspective of re declaration plate, at present, 15 enterprises in the early stage of listing guidance have not yet disclosed the specific listing plate, but the re application for listing on the science and technology innovation board still accounts for the highest proportion, 14 enterprises still choose to apply for the science and technology innovation board, another 7 enterprises turn to the gem, and one enterprise chooses to apply for the selection layer.

In the view of industry insiders, this behavior also reflects the initial effect of the current multi-level capital market construction.

On the one hand, in February this year, the Listing Rules for the selected companies listed on the new third board were officially implemented. Market participants predicted that it would be expected to see the successful conversion of selected enterprises to the science and technology innovation board or the growth enterprise market within this year.

Zhu Weiyi, chairman of power capital, told reporters of the 21st century economic report that "speeding up the direct transfer system of selected layers will play a better role in diverting the current IPO barrier lake problem."

A strategic analyst of a large securities firm in Shanghai also pointed out in an interview: "the system of listing on the transfer board realizes the interconnection of multi-level capital markets, provides differentiated and convenient services for enterprises at different stages of development, opens up a channel for the growth and growth of small and medium-sized enterprises, and is conducive to improving the coverage of the capital market serving the real economy. At the same time, enterprises can also choose their own trading places according to their own needs, and make full use of the characteristics of different markets for their own development. "

On the other hand, the dislocation competition pattern of the science and technology innovation board and the growth enterprise market has also achieved initial results.

"Companies choose to list in any sector, all because of their own listing needs." "The industry, the stage of development, the region and the conditions of issuing and listing will affect the listing choice of enterprises," said a person from the investment banking department of a medium-sized securities firm in Beijing

"From the perspective of industry standards, for example, new business model enterprises, growth oriented innovation and start-up companies, including those with traditional industrial technology and soft ones, will probably choose the gem for listing, while hard technology enterprises, especially the six industries with clear science and technology innovation board, will mostly choose the science and technology innovation board." The aforementioned strategic analysts pointed out.

Xun Yugen, chief strategic analyst of Haitong Securities, also pointed out that "the positioning of the two sectors is somewhat different, but both are driven by innovation driven development strategies and serve the development of the real economy. Both plates are designed to support new economy enterprises to finance more efficiently and more conveniently. In the long run, the growth enterprise market and the science and technology innovation board should develop synergistically and have a positive correlation with the development trend. "

IPO can not be withdrawn

It is worth mentioning that although there are some differences in listing standards, they have the same original intention to support new economy enterprises, and there is no difference in the concept of strict audit between gem and KEB.

According to the statistics of 21st century economic report, only one of the seven enterprises that withdrew from the science and technology innovation board and applied for the gem successfully passed the meeting, while three other enterprises, papaya mobile, Frances and Xingxin new materials, withdrew their IPO applications again, and one enterprise, Tianyi medical, suspended the examination.

The reporter of the 21st century economic report noted that all the above-mentioned three enterprises had been "thoroughly inquired" by the municipal Party committee because of the "scientific and technological innovation content". A more typical example is Frances. During the rush to the gem, Frances made a summary of the reasons for the previous withdrawal of IPO application: "the main business of the issuer is not outstanding in scientific and technological innovation, the scale and volume in the reporting period is relatively small, and the company is more in line with the gem positioning."

But even so, Frances, whose main business is leasing, does not seem to meet the gem's positioning. In the second round of inquiry, the municipal Party Committee on the gem also asked it to explain whether it was in line with the provisions of gem positioning by combining the innovation, creation and creativity of its own leasing business, the competitive advantage brought by core technology, the growth of the industry and the issuers.

In fact, not long ago, the first enterprise was born on the gem because it did not conform to the gem positioning.

On March 25, the municipal Party Committee on the gem rejected Hongji energy saving's IPO application. According to the public information, the main business of Hongji energy saving is the design and construction of foundation and maintenance and reconstruction of existing buildings.

The listing committee considered that the industry of Hongji energy saving is "civil engineering construction industry", which belongs to the industry specified in Article 4 of the Interim Provisions of Shenzhen Stock Exchange on the application and recommendation of enterprises issuing and listing on GEM. In principle, it does not support listing on the gem. At the same time, the proportion of income and gross profit of new technology and new business types disclosed in the prospectus decreased from 51.94% and 60.24% in 2017 to 24.94% and 29.30% from January to June 2020 respectively, which is not in line with the gem positioning.

In addition, papaya Mobile has been questioned by the municipal Party Committee on the science and technology innovation board and the growth enterprise board because of the "non objective and inaccurate" problems exposed in the information disclosure; Xingxin new materials has been reported due to the lack of authenticity of financial data in terms of acquisition, sales and storage.

In the face of successive withdrawals, many market participants also began to call for "IPO can not be withdrawn.".

Earlier, the chairman of China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC), Yi Huiman, clearly pointed out that the planned IPO enterprises that "break through the barrier with illness" will be dealt with seriously, and it is not allowed to "withdraw them once". Recently, some local securities regulatory bureaus also said at the conference on supervision and guidance that they would not accept the voluntary withdrawal of materials by the guidance institutions after the on-site inspection of the exchange, or problems found in the on-site inspection, otherwise, they should treat the relevant sponsor institutions differently.

Pan Helin thinks: "before IPO, the regulatory authorities improve the information disclosure requirements in the period of IPO by improving the format and form of IPO information disclosure and increasing the types of IPO information disclosure. However, on the issue of information fraud found in IPO audit, we still need to increase punishment, such as banning the entry of counterfeiting enterprises and punishment, because some problems belong to the category of fraudulent listing and need to be investigated to the end. Therefore, credit fraud should not be removed before IPO, and IPO companies should be held responsible for the fraud. Even if there is no IPO success, fraudulent listing needs to be punished and severely deterred. "

 

  • Related reading

"Ai Four Little Dragons" Ignore Technology To Impact IPO Again: Total Loss Of More Than 13 Billion In Four Years, And Key Financial Data Are Inconsistent

Gem
|
2021/3/25 11:17:00
2

The Reform Of Registration System Has Been Steadily Pushed Forward

Gem
|
2021/3/23 9:47:00
10

Shenzhen Stock Exchange Main Board Medium And Small Board Merger Is Imminent, Internal Technical Transformation Has Been Basically Completed

Gem
|
2021/2/6 9:55:00
13

The IPO Audit Responsibility Of The Science And Technology Innovation Board Is Pushed Forward Again, And The Relevant Requirements Are Not Implemented Or The Listing Of Enterprises Will Be Cut Off

Gem
|
2021/2/3 15:03:00
10

The Performance Of The Science And Technology Innovation Board In 2020 Is "Sharp": The Net Profit Of Three Biomedical Enterprises Has Increased By More Than 10 Times, And The Big Differentiation Of The Board Has Become A Certain Trend

Gem
|
2021/1/28 9:45:00
9
Read the next article

Science And Technology Innovation Board Institutional Shareholding Roadmap: Big Companies In The Head Are Popular With Public Offering

In the fourth quarter of 2020 shareholding changes. According to wind data, excluding those listed in the fourth quarter of 2020, there are 111