Chapter 191 On July 9, the work of state-owned shareholders was completed

The board of directors voted on Vanke's share expansion plan.The parent company voted against, but the directors representing the state-owned shares did not vote against, nor did they vote in favor, and abstained, which was consistent with the attitude of the Junwan dispute.At the special general meeting of shareholders one month later, the investment management company representing state-owned shares also abstained from voting.I understand that the reason why the investment management company abstained from voting against Vanke was to balance the relationship and not to embarrass the self-willed Boss Chen.In the intricacies of government relations, no vote is no vote.

According to the relevant laws and regulations on securities issuance, the expansion of shares of listed companies requires the board of directors to form a resolution and submit it to the general meeting of shareholders for voting. After the approval, it can be reported to the China Securities Regulatory Commission in Beijing for review, and new shares can only be issued after approval. Under this mechanism, the first hurdle is the board of directors. In 1997, Vanke's board of directors consisted of 19 directors, and the parent company had 3 seats.What made Wang Shi feel embarrassed was the decision when he voted, because he occupied the directorship of the parent company.As the chairman, he should vote for the share expansion on behalf of all shareholders; but as a representative of the parent company, he had to oppose it against his will.

However, even if the parent company's 3 votes are against it, there is no response from the other 7 directors, and it cannot prevent the share expansion plan from being submitted to the general meeting of shareholders. In 1991, Vanke expanded its shares for the second time. The parent company was unable to follow up the allotment of new shares. As a result, Shenzhen Investment Management Company bought it, and thus obtained a seat on the board of directors. In 1997, Shenzhen Investment Management Company held 2% of Vanke shares, which is no small matter.Because according to relevant securities laws and regulations, 9% of the parent company's shares are legal person shares, while 2% of Shenzhen Investment Management Company's shares are state-owned shares.If the report submitted to the Securities Regulatory Commission shows that the state-owned shares hold objections, no matter how much the shareholding ratio is, it will have a subtle negative impact on the experts participating in the joint review.

Therefore, one vote for state-owned shares has become the key, and both the pros and cons care about this symbolic vote. For the right goal and the interests of the enterprise, sometimes entrepreneurs need to win the support of shareholders, and in extreme cases, they must also do a good job of communicating with shareholders.