- Joined
- Dec 30, 2010
- Messages
- 12,730
- Points
- 113
•China Minzhong fabricated sales: •The top customer in the prospectus was incorporated after the IPO track record period.
•SAIC (State Administration for Industry and Commerce) filings from customers indicate that there were no sales or cost of goods sold.
•One of the top customers was a related party and this wasn’t disclosed in the IPO prospectus.
•The top supplier’s business license was revoked before the IPO.
This is a very disturbing development in the Singapore stock market considering that GIC, under the name Tetrad Ventures, was one of the major investors in China Minzhong during the IPO period. Do the allegations in the report mean that the GIC didn’t do its due diligence prior to investing in the company? Surely not, GIC is a large government sponsored investment entity with vast resources and the ability to do sufficient due diligence on its investments.
If the allegations turn out to be true, will GIC allow the China Minzhong directors to walk away without any legal repercussions?
Tretrad recently sold its position to Indofood Sukuses earlier this year, which subsequently doubled its position to 29.3% in March. Indofood Sukuses has stated that presently, it’s not concerned and is comfortable about its investment in China Minzhong. If it is found that there are serious legal implications then Indofood should have legal recourse because of the representations made by the directors which were relied upon when Indofood Sukuses made their investment. Indofood has the resources to be able to pursue the matter if necessary.
The underwriters for the initial IPO were J.P. Morgan, Kim Eng and Macquarie – Didn’t they do channel checks on the main customers and suppliers prior to proceeding with the listing?
http://www.argutori.com/china-minzh...er-sheds-light-on-mushroom-accounting-scandal
•SAIC (State Administration for Industry and Commerce) filings from customers indicate that there were no sales or cost of goods sold.
•One of the top customers was a related party and this wasn’t disclosed in the IPO prospectus.
•The top supplier’s business license was revoked before the IPO.
This is a very disturbing development in the Singapore stock market considering that GIC, under the name Tetrad Ventures, was one of the major investors in China Minzhong during the IPO period. Do the allegations in the report mean that the GIC didn’t do its due diligence prior to investing in the company? Surely not, GIC is a large government sponsored investment entity with vast resources and the ability to do sufficient due diligence on its investments.
If the allegations turn out to be true, will GIC allow the China Minzhong directors to walk away without any legal repercussions?
Tretrad recently sold its position to Indofood Sukuses earlier this year, which subsequently doubled its position to 29.3% in March. Indofood Sukuses has stated that presently, it’s not concerned and is comfortable about its investment in China Minzhong. If it is found that there are serious legal implications then Indofood should have legal recourse because of the representations made by the directors which were relied upon when Indofood Sukuses made their investment. Indofood has the resources to be able to pursue the matter if necessary.
The underwriters for the initial IPO were J.P. Morgan, Kim Eng and Macquarie – Didn’t they do channel checks on the main customers and suppliers prior to proceeding with the listing?
http://www.argutori.com/china-minzh...er-sheds-light-on-mushroom-accounting-scandal
