Guoshao Ming Analyzes Stock Market: Buying In Large Quantities Or Licking Blood At Knife Edge.

The wonderful series will naturally attract many people's attention, but in my view, people should still have a little mentality of watching the Vanke competition. We should start from this incident and study some problems in depth.

Take the simplest example: unlike the Western securities market, most of the listed companies in the domestic securities market have an absolute controlling shareholder holding more than 50%, thus ensuring the stability of equity.

This "dominance" situation has also caused a lot of criticism. In fact, in the absence of supervision and self-discipline, there are indeed many disadvantages.

One of the purposes of the split share structure reform ten years ago is to allow large shareholders to float their shares, thereby changing the "single dominance".

However, although most of the major stockholders' stock can be circulated, there are not many real large scale sellers.

In the case of large shareholders' involuntary control, it is impossible to change the situation of holding power. When there is no answer from practice, Vanke's dispute has emerged.

Vanke is the first minority shareholder in the domestic stock market who has no absolute controlling power.

In the past, "positive non interventionism" has always been practised. It has also been considered as an important system guarantee for Vanke to achieve excellent business performance in the past.

Bao's system has broken the situation.

Although it is called "barbarian outside", its action also reveals the defects of Vanke's equity management mode to some extent.

Although it is difficult to draw conclusions on whether Vanke is "insider control", but first, people are beginning to pay attention to this problem. This is an improvement. Secondly, based on the current reality, people have begun to pay attention to the issue of Vanke's shareholding structure, and study the necessity and measures to maintain the stability of holding power under the background of advocating "active stockholder doctrine".

Is it more harm than good, or is the advantage outweighed the disadvantages?

Obviously, this is not a bad thing to promote the more diligent and conscientious management of the company's major shareholders, and objectively, some of the controlling shareholders of the companies will have some convergence when they sell stocks in large quantities.

In short, the controversy over Vanke inspired people to think about many problems that did not seem necessary in the past. At the same time, it also raised many new topics for legislation and rules making institutions.

Maybe not many years, no matter what the result will be, Vanke's dispute will write our business management textbook and become a classic case.

Though the parties concerned may not have realized this at the beginning.

It is worth mentioning that in the 90s of last century, Junan Securities also used to raise the number of Vanke, and put forward opinions on the work of the board of directors. The matter later ended, but the share price went through a skyrocketing and sharp drop. Many investors pursued a rise and fall and left a feather in the market.

Now, we should admit that investors are quite mature. After Vanke's dispute has been launched, people can generally treat Vanke rationally.

The trend has even exceeded the expected two placards, but there are not many follow ups in the market. Everyone is very cool with the Vanke market.

This situation is unimaginable in the past, but it is nothing more than a description of the fact that in the face of a company full of uncertainties, there are still enthusiastic people in the market, but more are rational investors.

Indeed, under the current circumstances, Vanke stock price has been very difficult to judge common sense, how many cards are available on the two sides of the dispute, and no one else knows it, so participating in its operation, especially buying a lot, has a certain blindness, which is no less than licking blood. Therefore, it is better to avoid it.

However, this does not prevent us from thinking deeply about the Vanke dispute. What we have learned from it may be very useful for the future market construction and the optimization of investment mode.