Kelon Unfortunately Where-.docVIP

 PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 6 Kelon Unfortunately Where? As ‘insider’, I have N reason should like other Successive Kelon directors, executives Like pairs ‘Kelon cases’ remain silent, especially in several regulators pairs ‘Kelon cases’ legal conclusions not all out time; but there a reason to make silent four years I take Ci opportunity to publicly say a few I pairs ‘Kelon cases’ part views, allowing concern Kelon friends can have more 1:00 understand true Kelon, this Almost sole reason that - today right KELON love! I want with interested Kelon friends Tan topic yes, Kelon in the end Unfortunately where? My understanding yes (Note: certainly have limitations), property rights system is cause ‘Kelon pity the’ ending One important reason not all, I think Kelon pity lies mainly three things: 1. Property institutional: Is causing ‘Kelon pity the’ ending roots from professional speaking I not understand, But Shunde appliance industry 20 years date development history told us a corporations are region cases but worth pondering empirical: Shunde home electrical appliance enterprises broadly can be divided three categories first categories yes, a beginning private property company mostly live quite good (eg 10000 and, Rong acoustic etc.); second category is Fanzhu owned or collectively owned But midway implement MBO companies are rapid growth (eg beautiful, Galanz); third categories yes Zeng genus state or collectively all but midway put stake sold ‘outsiders (inner seniority or外资法人股 East)’ Mean outcomes tragic (eg Warburg Kelon, Wanjiale). Incidentally, in Greencool with Kelon original major shareholder equity transfer formally contract before signing O’clock chairman Tie-Feng Xu Zeng convened part Kelon Gao middle management cadres meeting to discuss Guo MBO feasibility, but reportedly this proposal been original major shareholders thoroughly dismissed, materialize. 2. Corporate Governance: Kelong with other most Chinese listed companies, most cases are big sharehol