Coquettish Rebirth

China Satellite TV really made a bold program. ?. .The internal standard of their program is very simple, that is, the "original sin liquidation" that needs to be "according to the law" for all kinds of violations, violations of laws and crimes in the process of property rights reform!In the program, they first criticized the remarks of a so-called law professor, and seriously criticized the legal spirit of such a so-called law professor!What is the spirit of law?That is to treat one thing as another!Even if a criminal saves a person, he cannot not be judged because of the fact that he saved a person. He still needs to be punished and rewarded. It is possible to reduce the sentence.But at least criminals have also made contributions to society. A business leader who once obtained a lot of benefits from breaking the law and crime in the process of system reform and lost a lot of state assets and people's public property, what contribution did they make to society? ?They first damage the society, and then the next thing is just normal business!In the course of normal operation, how many behaviors do they have that are beneficial to society?No!They are just making money for themselves!In this way, why should they commute their sentences?Just because they make money for themselves?After criticizing such a so-called professor in such a harsh Chinese language, China Satellite TV did not further dig into the other party's old background for further criticism.After all, it is easy to appear unreasonable for personal attacks!Personally attack others when they are justified.It even went online at every turn, just like ten years of turmoil.Such debating skills are not very popular on the Internet, let alone on TV?So Jia Hongjian and the others only point to the end, and they are more critical of such a statement itself.How to criticize tc?First of all, the program team said that there is something wrong with the MBO agreement that TC negotiated with the local government.This is the agreement that TC negotiated with the local government.That is, the local government accepts a certain degree of MBO, that is, management buyout shares, and then, the shares held by the local government must be guaranteed by the management team to increase the value of assets by 1% per year.This clause itself seems to be no problem, because it protects the state-owned assets from being lost, and the local government did not sell the shares, but only said that the management raised funds from outside to buy the shares.From this point of view.There is nothing wrong with the local government.

But the problem lies in the part beyond this 1%!Because such a contract stipulates that if the overall asset appreciation exceeds 1% every year, then the local government will not accept the excess.The local government needs 1%, no more, no less, and any more can be used by the management to reward themselves or outstanding employees!This thing is a bit strange to say!Even if the local government is not a government, but an ordinary shareholder, this shareholder requires the management to increase the value of their assets every year, which is also understandable, is the shareholder a relative? Putting 1% in general companies can be considered as a performance growth standard, and if it fails to meet the CEO, it is understandable.But if the CEO allows the company to grow by more than 1%, then the redundant shareholders need 1%, and the redundant ones will be rewarded to the management or something...

So such a share reform plan is actually from a certain point of view, a problem of loss of income from state-owned shares. It uses rewards as a signboard to transfer the value-added of state-owned assets to individuals!Of course, this is actually a bit of a nitpicking problem, but the next Haier problem is a bit of a loss of collective property. In 97 and 98, Haier Company carried out The reform of employee stock ownership was in line with the domestic trend and general trend at that time.However, if other state-owned enterprises or collective enterprises become employee-owned shares, that is only the shareholding and equity, and the majority of equity is still in the hands of the state and the collective.However, the shareholding reform of Haier Company is a bit weird-they established a company called Haier Investment, and such a company only holds a small part of the shares in the Haier Group, which is in line with the spirit of the country Yes, but such a Haier investment that only occupies a small share, that is, the Employee Stock Ownership Association, has mastered Haier's trademark and the right to purchase parts and components!

All of a sudden, Haier's employee stock ownership association has mastered the Haier brand and lifeline, and then authorized it to the Haier Group to operate under the name of Haier!Needless to say, the boss and power holder of Haier Holdings must be the boss of Haier!If a state-owned enterprise or a collective enterprise is a big family, and the management should be the housekeeper, then Haier’s situation is definitely the same as the housekeeper taking the family’s property bank as his own, and then authorizing such a big family to use it!This is simply unbelievable!

Then the third one was selected by China Satellite TV, and that was Greencool!Gu Chujun, the boss of Greencool, first opened a refrigerator factory, but he had no production qualifications at all. After being seized by the industry and commerce, he went to the capital for a few years, and inexplicably set up a Greencool company, claiming to make a profit in a year. He spent 3 yuan, and created a refrigeration formula named "Gu's formula" named after himself.Anyway, it was relying on bragging to make fake accounts, and it was actually listed in Hong Kong, and after the listing, it even bought Kelon!It's just that after such a Kelon acquisition, it lost money all the way. Such a Gu Chujun found himself cheated. All kinds of high-quality resources have been evacuated by the upper-level local government of Kelon. Being sold at a low price, there is still a bit of loss of state-owned assets!And later, this Gu Chujun also invested in Meiling Refrigerator. Of course, such a Meiling also has a lot of debts, but this Meiling is because the local government is eager to restructure, and then it is tantamount to selling it cheap!After the sale, it becomes a package of restructuring and acquisition, which seems to be a win-win situation of "mutual benefit"!

In the end, this China Satellite TV program made a summary. The program is not opposed to restructuring, and of course it must be reformed.But what is opposed is to sell state-owned assets at a low price under the banner of restructuring, which is claimed to be a way to improve efficiency. In fact, many times before the transaction, there are a lot of hidden means to violate regulations or illegally reduce the price of state-owned assets, and then sell them. Caused the loss of state-owned assets!This is obviously taking advantage of the lack of a national legal system to wantonly dump state and collective property. How is such an approach similar to Russia's privatization?And looking at the afterimages of Russia in the past few years, we know that complete privatization will not improve the economy more efficiently!

After such a program of Huaxia Hi-Tech was broadcast, the response was quite big!After all, speaking of it, this is the first person in China to question this kind of restructuring, and it is so serious that it has made this matter a bit on the line. What is the meaning of this matter?This program suddenly caused an uproar in the public opinion circles, business circles and economic theory circles!Some people in the public opinion circle say that China Satellite TV is waving the red flag to oppose the red flag, shouting that it does not oppose property rights reform and opposes property rights reform. Many people in the field of economic theory jumped out to criticize China Satellite TV.These economic theorists, some of them said that China Satellite TV’s wrong choice was too picky, a bit deliberately finding fault, and also misunderstood the general direction of reform, a bit intolerant and biased, and needed a comprehensive look at the results .As for some people, relatively speaking, they are more supportive of Jia Hongjian's doubts from China Satellite TV!

Relatively speaking, the corporate world is the strangest.All kinds of entrepreneurs in the business world who used to like to talk the most, seem to have stopped watching TV overnight and didn't understand public opinion, and they stopped talking one by one!For example, Li Dongsheng from TC was asked about his reaction, and he directly stated that he had never watched such a show or heard of it. He has been busy recently, so it is not convenient to make comments without watching it.At the same time, it seems that Haier directly said that they are not a state-owned enterprise, and then they "do not comment" on China Satellite TV's doubts.Anyway, almost all the companies shrank at once, and no one came out to quarrel!From this point of view, it seems that they really have a guilty conscience!

But most people are guilty, and there are always people who are guilty and stand up to dance.For example, an entrepreneur like Gu Chujun quickly sent a lawyer's letter to China Satellite TV, claiming that China Satellite TV has seriously damaged his reputation, and China Satellite TV needs to make a public apology as soon as possible, otherwise he will not give up legal action. Do justice to yourself!China Satellite TV still dismissed him for this!Then Gu Chujun really held a press conference in the capital, and then announced that he would file a lawsuit for damage to the right of reputation in the capital district court soon!And the defendant is China Satellite TV! )