How GIC and Temasek are managing your money

Singapore's Temasek mulls three-way split, Bloomberg News reports​

By Reuters
August 20, 2025


Man passes a logo of state investor Temasek Holdings at their office in Singapore

A man passes a logo of state investor Temasek Holdings at their office in Singapore July 8, 2014. REUTERS/Edgar Su/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

Aug 20 (Reuters) - Singapore's Temasek (TEM.UL) is weighing a reorganisation into three investment vehicles, as the state owned investor looks to improve returns and efficiencies, Bloomberg News reported on Wednesday.

One unit would focus on the biggest local holdings such as flag carrier Singapore Airlines (SIAL.SI), opens new tab while the other would largely look at foreign investments, the report added, citing people familiar with the matter.


A third unit would include all of Temasek’s fund investments.

Temasek did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comments.

The state investor, which currently allocates responsibilities by region and asset class, is considering the revamp to allow executives to sharpen their focus and improve performance, the report said.

A decision could be unveiled in the coming months, though the plan might be rolled out earlier, according to the Bloomberg report.
Sure Huat Kah Liao :)
 

SingPost Q1 operating profit tumbles 60% to $3.4 million amid falling revenue, margin squeeze​

Revenue fell 23.8 per cent to $162.3 million compared with $213 million in the year-ago period.

Revenue fell 23.8 per cent to $162.3 million compared with $213 million in the year-ago period.

Aug 22, 2025

SINGAPORE - Singapore Post’s group operating profit for the first quarter ended June 30 came in at $3.4 million, a 60 per cent year-on-year drop from $8.4 million.

The decrease in operating profit comes on the back of increased market pressure and competition, said SingPost in a bourse filing on Aug 22.

Group revenue fell 23.8 per cent to $162.3 million compared with $213 million in the year-ago period. The decline was largely attributed to the significant reduction in international deliveries.

The drop means SingPost’s profit margin was a mere 2 per cent. S&P Global Ratings downgraded its long-term issuer credit rating on SingPost to “BBB-” from “BBB” in July due to its high fixed operating costs.

Group operating expenses declined 22.7 per cent from $204.6 million to $158.2 million following the divestment of its Australia business in March 2025.

The company is yet to appoint a new chief executive after having fired Mr Vincent Phang in 2024 over the mishandling of a whistleblower complaint.

By segments

Lower delivery volumes meant that the domestic and international delivery business recorded lower revenue, while letter mail volume contracted due to continuing electronic substitution. Domestic and international e-commerce volume also fell.

SingPost and Alibaba agreed to unwind their respective minority cross-shareholdings in Quantium Solutions International (QSI) in April, resulting in the sale of QSI’s 17.6 per cent stake in Shenzhen 4PX to Cainiao.

The group then entered into a sale and purchase agreement for the divestment of QSI in five Asia-Pacific countries and territories to Morning Global.

Property leasing revenue, mainly comprising rental income from SingPost Centre, was stable, said the group. Overall occupancy rate at the property was 97.8 per cent as at June 30, 2025, compared with 96 per cent previously.

It added that the property assets business (including SingPost Centre) is also expected to remain stable.

Earlier in August, SingPost divested 10 Housing Board shophouses for $55.5 million, after putting them up for sale and leaseback. The group said current post office services will be maintained, with the transaction still subject to the necessary approvals before completion.

The freight forwarding business recorded lower revenue amid volatility in the sea freight market. In July, the group divested its entire freight forwarding business, Famous Holdings, for $177.9 million.

As at end-June, the group had $728.1 million in cash and cash equivalents, compared with $696.4 million as at end-March.

Borrowings were flat at $349.6 million and total equity stood at $1.6 billion as at June 30, down 0.3 per cent.

Outlook

SingPost stated that it aims to become a “leaner and more focused” business, with the recent divestments in line with that plan.

The divestments have “strengthened its balance sheet, reduced debt, and enhanced its flexibility to respond to market opportunities”.

The group will now concentrate its resources on its postal and logistics business, as well as property. This will better position it to “drive operational efficiency”.

SingPost will be focusing on building market share, maximising asset utilisation and enhancing its digital capability in the domestic delivery business, it said.

The group added that it will continue to take an active approach to prioritise yield enhancement and operational efficiency of all assets.

The counter closed flat at 50 cents on Aug 21.

THE BUSINESS TIMES
 
One Temasick company is suing another.
Ownself sue ownself


Keppel building


The arbitration between Keppel and Seatrium will be conducted in Singapore, in accordance with the rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre.

Aug 27, 2025

SINGAPORE - Asset manager Keppel is starting arbitration proceedings against Seatrium for a $68.4 million claim related to Brazil’s corruption crackdown, Operation Car Wash.

In 2022, Seatrium had made provisions of $82.4 million to indemnify Keppel against claims related to Operation Car Wash. That year, Keppel Offshore & Marine merged with Seatrium, formerly known as Sembcorp Marine.

In July 2025, Seatrium announced that it would have to pay 728.9 million reals (S$172 million) to the Brazilian authorities, as part of leniency agreements related to the probe.

In a bourse filing on Aug 26, Keppel said that the $68.4 million sum was due from Seatrium upon the latter’s signing of its final leniency agreements, under the terms of the indemnity.

Later on Aug 26, Seatrium responded that it was consulting legal advisers on the notice of arbitration and would defend the claim “vigorously”.

Keppel had previously issued a notice of claim for the $82.4 million sum in 2024, which Seatrium had then contested.

Seatrium noted that the Keppel indemnity expired on Feb 28, 2025, and that there were “no binding and legally enforceable agreements signed with the Brazilian authorities before the expiry”.

Therefore, Seatrium had already reversed its $82.4 million provision in its 2024 financial year.

The arbitration will be conducted in Singapore, in accordance with the rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre.

Seatrium shares fell after the news with the counter down 2.6 per cent, or six cents, at $2.27 at 11.48am. Shares of Keppel rose 1 per cent, or eight cents, to $8.43.

THE BUSINESS TIMES
 
SWFs

The team behind Temasek’s recent performance​

In GIC, S'pore Inc, Temasek on 27/08/2025 at 4:14 am
Reminder


Not much better than the more conservatively run GIC.

So now kanna restructuring. Teo Chee Hean (next chairman, now deputy chairman) is going to kick ass?

One reason for bad performance: Placed big bets on private capital

Private equity fundraising slides as sector’s downturn deepens
Firms are struggling to raise money even as they offer discounts to attract new investors

Recent FT headline
Another reason: Were bulls on China. Reduced exposure belatedly after Americans cut and ran.

Third reason? Almost All India team. Deputy CEO is true blue S’porean: ethnic Chinese. The CEO is an ethnic Indian from M’sia, albeit now new citizen.


Seriously, I’m surprised. This almost All Indians’ team kept investing in China. They continued despite China losing its favoured haven status a few years ago.
 

Temasek restructuring, setting up three bodies to manage portfolio segments​

Temasek chief executive and executive director Dilhan Pillay speaking at the media briefing on Aug 28.

Temasek chief executive and executive director Dilhan Pillay speaking at a media briefing on Aug 28.

Aug 28, 2025

SINGAPORE - Temasek will be restructuring and setting up three entities to manage three distinct portfolio segments amid heightened global uncertainty and economic change in the macro landscape, the Singapore investment company announced on Aug 28.

The three portfolio segments will be: global direct investments; Singapore-based Temasek portfolio companies (TPCs); and partnerships, funds and asset management companies (PFAs).

To manage these three segments, Temasek will set up three wholly owned entities called Temasek Global Investments, Temasek Singapore for TPCs and Temasek Partnership Solutions for PFAs, with effect from April 1, 2026.

These will drive Temasek’s growth as the firm continues to build a resilient and forward-looking portfolio, it said.

Temasek chief executive and executive director Dilhan Pillay said at a media briefing: “The world does change from time to time, but we have had a relative time of stability over the last 30 years, especially since the World Trade Organisation came about… and so our organisation structure has been fairly stable over the last 20 years.”

But things have changed for many, whether they are governments, multinational corporations, domestic companies, and even individuals and societies, he added.

“And so we definitely need to realign our organisational structure, for this new environment that we are in and around the three portfolio entities that we have,” said Mr Pillay.

He added that the most important thing is to adapt the organisation to cater to changes that are likely to be ahead, and be more agile and nimble.

Temasek has also constantly evolved over the last 50 years, and typically when there are crises, Mr Pillay added.

“As the old adage says, never waste a crisis. We are ensuring that we are not wasting what’s happening today in the global environment,” he said.

In 2002, nearly all of Temasek’s portfolio – at 94 per cent – was in its Singapore-based TPCs, with only 4 per cent in global direct investments and 2 per cent in PFAs.

Over the decades, the portfolio allocation to global direct investments and PFAs grew. As at March 2025, Singapore-based TPCs make up 41 per cent of Temasek’s portfolio, while global direct investments make up 36 per cent and PFAs 23 per cent.

This was because Temasek wanted to become a truly global investor, Mr Pillay said, which meant not just investing in Asia and emerging markets, but also stepping up investments in America and Europe.

Mirroring Temasek’s growth in its global investments, the group now has 13 offices worldwide and 959 employees.

Mr Pillay said the target now is to keep the global direct investments and TPCs to around 40 per cent each, and 20 per cent to PFAs. But depending on the volatility of the market, Temasek can rebalance slightly among these three engines according to the opportunities it sees.


He added that when it comes to resilience and volatility, the resilient component of the portfolio – which consists of core portfolio companies, some companies globally and private credit – should be around 60 per cent. This component should deliver stable returns over time, with a narrower range of outcomes, he said.

040af0dc412bece21393f643b43014c2c4a8767ec3b0c326208042a3b5421999

Mr Dilhan Pillay added that the most important thing is to adapt Temasek to cater to changes that are likely to be ahead, and be more agile and nimble.

ST PHOTO: KUA CHEE SIONG

The remaining 40 per cent can be in a dynamic component, which includes innovation and emerging technologies, with strong growth prospects and long-term compounding potential.

In response to media questions on why Temasek decided to reorganise now, Mr Pillay said that the world today is different even from when Temasek celebrated its 50th anniversary in September 2024.

“The rules-based order that we’ve been used to, that we’ve been able to rely upon as an investment firm… is changing. The United States has got a very clear objective of ‘America first’, and other countries are now trying to figure out how to operate within that framework that they have,” he said.

“It’s never a good time to do anything. It’s just the right time. The world is changing. If we just sit back and be the way we are, it might not be the right thing.”

Ultimately, the three new segments will allow Temasek to anchor its strategy for 2030 and beyond, especially since the portfolio segments have distinct attributes, he said.

This is because global direct investments, TPCs and PFAs require different strategies and capabilities, he added.

Temasek Global Investments: To focus on world market leaders​

As at March 31, $155 billion of Temasek’s overall portfolio is in global direct investments. The value of its global direct investments has also grown more than 20 times from 2004 to 2025.

Temasek is generally a minority investor in these global investments, said Mr Pillay.

“In order to take a control position, you have to be prepared to own ‘the morning after’ of the whole company, not just the investment. That means you have to have a multitude of skill sets to be able to do it,” he said.

This differs from Temasek’s TPCs, where Temasek contributes to the firms’ business development, business model evolution and transformation. In some cases, it also has a member on the company’s board.

When it comes to global investments, growth equity is Temasek’s main focus, Mr Pillay said. It also has co-investments, sector or market funds, and public market investments.

It also still invests in early-stage investments because it believes in innovation as a driver of future growth, but Temasek is very selective in such investments in the current global environment, he added.

About a third of Temasek’s global direct investments are headquartered in the Americas. By sector, the top industry these investments are from is financial services, followed by telecommunications, media and technology.

Success drivers for global direct investments include sourcing good deals, having deep market or sectoral expertise, active portfolio management and being able to influence the outcomes.

Temasek Singapore: To enhance the value of home-grown companies​

Temasek Singapore will focus on active portfolio management to enhance the value of its Singapore-based TPCs, enabling them to be globally competitive while staying rooted in Singapore.

These companies have an aggregate revenue of about $200 billion and employ over 160,000 people in Singapore. They include firms like DBS Bank, CapitaLand, Keppel, PSA, Sembcorp, Seatrium and Singtel.

As at March 31, $180 billion of Temasek’s overall portfolio is in its TPCs.

The challenge for these companies is to be resilient and adapt to a changing world, with issues such as the disruption to business models and operations from artificial intelligence, Mr Pillay said.

“With the portfolio companies, it is not just the financial metrics. Operating metrics are critical – the way the company is building itself up… even talent becomes an issue for us to consider. We have to make sure that there are good labour relations, because everybody should prosper when the company prospers,” he said.

The underlying country exposure of the portfolio companies is still concentrated in Singapore, with 54 per cent here, 14 per cent in China, 4 per cent in India, and 15 per cent in the rest of the Asia-Pacific.

Mr Pillay added that companies can also think about whether they can have more exposure beyond Asia, to Europe, the Middle East and America.

Drivers for success for these companies also include continuous transformation, orienting their strategies, having a sustainability framework and communicating well with their investors.

Temasek Partnership Solutions: To scale capital, tap opportunities​

This segment will focus on managing the allocation of capital to invest in funds and build strategic relationships with these funds and other investors, Temasek said.

This will also involve working with Seviora Holdings, Temasek’s main asset management platform, to deepen relationships with partners. Seviora’s board will also be reconstituted, with Mr Pillay taking the role of chairman from Sept 1.

Temasek’s asset management companies have over $90 billion of assets under management as at March 31.

This entity will then help Temasek to scale its capital and tap a broad range of opportunities that include offering capital solutions such as private equity, private credit, public market investments, and tailored financing options.

At the end of the day, these strategies will help Temasek navigate changes in the world so it can fulfil its responsibility to the community and Singapore.


Mr Pillay noted that Temasek is very aware of its responsibility entrusted to it by the Government, alongside bodies like GIC and the Monetary Authority of Singapore.

When asked whether the reorganisation would help Temasek in its goal of maximising returns from Singapore’s reserves, Mr Pillay said it is about a long-term returns trajectory based on where Temasek invests and the outlook for equities, and how the portfolio is structured.

“And I think when you are in an environment which is changing, and if you’ve been given that responsibility to get returns over that changing environment, the ability to anticipate when you have to put more risk on and take risk off is not easy. It’s not straightforward,” he said.

Temasek added: “In a rapidly changing world, with rising geopolitical tensions and changes to the rules-based order, Temasek has to sense the changes in our operating landscape, adapt our organisational structure to support portfolio strategies for growth and returns, and perform with greater accountability and alignment.”
 
SQ owning 25 percent of Air India ...led to SQ's poor performance. Temasick is sick.
 

GIC asks to pull some cash from fund with large exposure to bankrupt First Brands: Sources​

GIC asked to pull some cash from a Jefferies Financial Group fund with large exposure to bankrupt First Brands Group, according to sources.


GIC asked to pull some cash from a Jefferies Financial Group fund with large exposure to bankrupt First Brands Group, according to sources.

Oct 16, 2025

NEW YORK - Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund GIC asked to pull some cash from a Jefferies Financial Group fund with large exposure to bankrupt First Brands Group, according to sources familiar with the matter.

GIC has been in talks to redeem some of its funds invested with Point Bonita Capital in recent weeks, said the sources. Point Bonita, a unit of Jefferies’ Leucadia Asset Management, had about a quarter of its US$3 billion(S$3.9 billion) trade-finance portfolio invested in First Brands-related receivables.

Spokespeople for GIC and Jefferies declined to comment.

Late on Oct 12, Jefferies said in a statement that following the discovery of the issues at First Brands, Leucadia communicated directly with Point Bonita fund investors and agreed it made sense for them to submit redemption requests to give them maximum flexibility as the fund worked through the circumstances.

Redemption requests become effective on Dec 31, Jefferies said. That will lead to four quarterly, pro rata redemption payments, with the last one due in October 2026, the statement said.

Jefferies, which advised First Brands for more than a decade as it raised debt in the private credit market, also defended its dealings with the auto-parts supplier, saying that the bank was not aware of any fraudulent activity and that its exposure to the company was small.

The collapse in recent weeks of auto parts supplier First Brands and subprime auto lender Tricolor Holdings has raised fears of stress in the private credit market.

First Brands filed for bankruptcy in late September after the company used private credit to run up debt of more than US$10 billion. Tricolor Holdings did the same in early September amid allegations of auto loan fraud.

Jefferies has US$43 million, or 5.9 per cent, invested in Point Bonita’s accounts receivables purchased from First Brands, the statement said.

Other Point Bonita investors seeking redemptions include BlackRock, Morgan Stanley’s asset-management arm and Texas Treasury Safekeeping Trust, Bloomberg previously reported. BLOOMBERG
 
Banks and Private Credit Clash After Dimon’s Cockroach Barb






Unmute




Blue Owl Chief Looks to Bank Loans for Dimon Cockroaches
By Sridhar Natarajan
October 16, 2025 at 2:20 AM GMT+8
Updated on
October 16, 2025 at 8:02 AM GMT+8
Save
Translate

Takeaways by Bloomberg AI​

On Wall Street, everyone’s a friendly rival until the losses start.

A pair of blowups in the credit market have sparked a war of words over whether banks or private credit firms are better positioned to weather a broader downturn.

More From Bloomberg​

Stock Rally Fades, Bonds Drop Ahead Of Price Data
Private Credit Set to Win More Deals From Rivals, Survey Shows

Trump Threatens NYC Funding Over Mamdani After Adams Drops Out
Dimon Says ‘So Be It,’ Would Help Mamdani If He Wins NY Race

JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon Interview
Dimon’s ‘Cockroach’ Fear Revives Threat of Cracks in Credit

Key Speakers At Bloomberg Invest
Blue Owl Chief Points to Bank Loans for Dimon Cockroach Warning

JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon Interview
Dimon Calls Out Weaker Job Market, Inflation as Provisions Rise

Top Reads​


The US Is Racing to Rebuild Its Submarine Power Before China Catches Up

by Ryan Chua


The Banker Behind the Trumps’ Quick Wall Street Wins

by Annie Massa and Zachary R Mider

**DO NOT USE OUTSIDE OF BLOOMBERG OPINION AI FEATURE** Illustration: Simon Landrein for Bloomberg Opinion column on AI in China
China’s AI Dragons Must Survive ‘Involution’ to Conquer the World

by Catherine Thorbecke


Inside the Credit Card Battle to Win America’s Richest Shoppers

by Amanda Mull






HomeBTV+Market DataOpinionAudioOriginalsMagazineEvents
News
MarketsEconomicsTechnologyPoliticsGreenCryptoAI
Work & Life
WealthPursuitsBusinessweekCityLabSportsEqualityManagement & Work
Market Data
StocksCommoditiesRates & BondsCurrenciesFuturesSectorsEconomic Calendar
Explore
NewslettersExplainersPointed News QuizAlphadots GameThe Big TakeGraphicsSubmit a TipAbout Us
Terms of ServiceDo Not Sell or Share My Personal InformationTrademarksPrivacy Policy
CareersMade in NYCAdvertise
Ad Choices
Help©2025 Bloomberg L.P. All Rights Reserved.






Get uninterrupted access for just $1.99/month.
Cancel anytime.
Claim this offer
Sign InTerms of ServicePrivacy PolicyDo Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
 

Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund GIC sues Nio​


Oct 15, 2025

e59bbee78987-40.png

Nio at an Auto Show. Credit: Ifeng

Understand China EV’s Market


Real-time notifications when critical EV data is released
All important data in one place
2,000,000+ data points
Become a member
GIC, the Singaporean sovereign wealth fund, which is the world’s sixth-largest sovereign wealth fund, has filed a lawsuit against Chinese electric vehicle manufacturer Nio and its executives in a US court.

The lawsuit alleges securities fraud, marking the first instance of a sovereign wealth fund suing a Chinese company listed overseas, as reported by Chinese media outlet Caixin.
The lawsuit, filed by the Singapore Government Investment Corporation (GIC), names Nio, its CEO William Li, and former CFO Feng Wei as defendants.

According to XiakeAuto, GIC’s central accusation is that Nio, through its battery asset company “Nio Battery Asset Co. Ltd.” (hereinafter referred to as “Weineng”), established with partners like CATL, allegedly inflated its revenue and profits. The fund claims Nio concealed its actual control over Weineng, thereby misleading investors and causing GIC to suffer investment losses.
The core of GIC’s lawsuit revolves around Nio’s alleged manipulation of financial statements through Weineng. GIC claims Nio used Weineng to inflate revenue and profits by prematurely recognising battery sales revenue and obscuring its actual control over the entity.

The controversy centres on Nio’s unique “battery swap + battery rental” model, known as BaaS (Battery-as-a-Service). In this model, users can purchase a vehicle without the battery, renting the battery from Weineng instead. The crucial point is that Nio recognised the entire battery sales revenue upfront when selling batteries to Weineng.
The dispute hinges on whether, under US accounting standards, this revenue should be recognised incrementally as users pay monthly rental fees, or if it can be recognised immediately because the batteries were “sold” to Weineng.

GIC’s lawsuit alleges that Nio established Weineng in August 2020 specifically to “optimise” its financial reports. This manoeuvre allowed Nio to immediately recognise substantial revenue while moving battery depreciation costs off its balance sheet. The effect was immediate: Nio’s Q4 2020 revenue doubled year-over-year, from 2.85 billion yuan (399 million USD) to 6.64 billion yuan (930 million USD).
GIC argues that if revenue had been recognised incrementally, as they believe is compliant, Nio’s performance at the time would have been significantly lower, and its stock price would not have surged to an all-time high of 62 USD in early 2021.
Nio, in turn, asserts that control over the batteries was transferred upon sale to Weineng, and its “performance obligations” were fulfilled, thus justifying the upfront revenue recognition. These revenues were recorded as vehicle sales revenue and disclosed as related-party transactions in financial reports.
Another major point of contention in the case is the extent of Nio’s control over Weineng, which involves the complex determination of a “Variable Interest Entity” (VIE).
GIC alleges that Weineng is not an independent company but rather a “shell” entity substantially controlled by Nio. If this claim holds, Nio would be required to consolidate Weineng’s financial data into its own reports, rendering the previous upfront revenue recognition invalid.
GIC provides several pieces of evidence:
  • Intricate Equity Structure: After a capital increase in August 2021, Nio held 19.84% of Weineng’s shares, just below the 20% threshold that could trigger a presumption of control. GIC suggests this demonstrates Nio’s familiarity with and intent to circumvent regulations.
  • Significant Actual Economic Interest: GIC claims that through accounts receivable and guarantees, Nio’s actual economic interest in Weineng amounted to 55%.
  • Lack of Business Autonomy: Weineng’s entire business operations are dependent on Nio. The types, quantities, and even rental prices of batteries are determined by Nio. Battery operations, maintenance, and user billing are also handled by Nio or its subsidiaries.
Currently, the GIC lawsuit against Nio has been temporarily stayed by the court in early October 2025, pending the outcome of a prior class-action lawsuit filed by US investors.
 

GIC sues EV maker Nio over alleged inflated revenue claims, shares plunge​

GIC alleged Nio made false claims about iits ties to an affiliated company called Nio Battery Asset – or Weineng in Chinese.

GIC alleged Nio made false claims about iits ties to an affiliated company called Nio Battery Asset – or Weineng in Chinese.

Oct 16, 2025

Hong Kong - Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund GIC has sued Nio in a US court, accusing the Chinese electric vehicle(EV) maker and executives of violating securities laws by inflating revenues.

The lawsuit, filed in August in the Southern District of New York, named the company, its chief executive officer Li Bin and former chief financial officer Feng Wei as defendants

Nio’s Singapore-listed shares plunged on the news on Oct 16, falling as much as 13.8 per cent to US$6.00. The stock clawed back some ground to trade 8.1 per cent down at S$6.40 as at 2.48pm.


GIC alleged the defendants made “materially false and/or misleading statements” about Nio’s ties to an affiliated company called Nio Battery Asset – or Weineng in Chinese – and failed to disclose key facts about its business and finances.

According to the complaint, those misstatements artificially inflated the value of Nio’s securities, causing GIC to suffer “significant losses.”

Nio operates a battery subscription model in which car buyers don’t have to purchase batteries outright. Instead, they can pay a recurring fee to access the company’s network of battery-swap stations.

GIC’s suit contended that Weineng’s financial records show it bought batteries upfront from Nio, allowing Nio to immediately record the full revenue from those sales – even though the end users hadn’t yet paid for the batteries. The filing argued that such income should have been recognized gradually, not all at once.

Nio didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. GIC declined to comment to Bloomberg.

The case has been stayed by a judge as it’s similar to a previous suit filed in 2022 against Nio, according to an Oct 3 filing.


Nio, founded in 2014, was once seen as a rising star in the EV industry that could eventually rival Tesla. It’s known for its battery swap technology, which allows owners to switch out a depleted battery for a new one in minutes. Buyers have the option to purchase a Nio EV without the battery and instead opt for a subscription.

But this business model is capital intensive and has required building out expensive swapping stations, and the company has faced severe liquidity crises.

A 2022 report from New York-based Grizzly Research detailed these accounting practices. Nio said in response that it would launch an independent committee to investigate the claims, according to the court filings.

That led Nio’s American depositary notes to plunge, resulting in substantial losses, GIC’s filing said. The fund is seeking compensation for all losses relating to Nio’s wrongdoing and reasonable reimbursement of its legal costs, according to the documents. BLOOMBERG
 
Back
Top