No leek full sickle Wechat, the chief brokerage firm, was held accountable for his comments

 No leek full sickle Wechat, the chief brokerage firm, was held accountable for his comments

Today, a notification document from Guoxin Securities Economic Research Institute has been forwarded several times by the industry. According to the above-mentioned documents, on July 10, Guoxin Securities Economic Research Institute notified Cheng Cheng, the head of the communication group, of his inappropriate remarks and decided to take the responsibility of withholding a quarterly performance bonus.

According to insider sources, on July 10, the Chief Communications Officer made inappropriate remarks against Kechuang in his own group of microcommunications. For a while, sickles, no leek comments on the social media crazy forwarding, caused widespread concern.

On the same day, Guoxin Research Institute made urgent accountability for the parties and issued the above-mentioned notification documents.

The rapid fermentation of inappropriate remarks

Emergency Accountability of Securities Research Institute

Originally wanted to share comments to activate the Wechat community, but after repeated forwarding and exposure, it caused a great disturbance.

According to the above-mentioned analysts, At present, Kechuang has opened 3.2 million accounts, and the number of effective online subscriptions for several new shares in recent years is about 2.9 million. Considering the insufficient market value and other factors, almost all the people who enter the market are trying to find new ones. Full of sickles, no leek.

This subjective comment quickly fermented in the social media. In less than 24 hours, Guoxin Securities took note of the impact of the incident, and promptly took emergency accountability and notification measures.

In the announcement document released on the same day, the Institute said that during the daily monitoring of analyst Wechat group owners, Cheng Cheng, the head of the communication group, made improper remarks through Wechat group, violating the relevant provisions of Article 3 of the Interim Measures for the Use and Management of Network Social Media of the Institute of Economic Research.

The Research Institute believes that Cheng Cheng made improper remarks in his own micro-communication group, which violated the spirit of the superior authorities, the relevant regulations of the company and the Institute on the network social media, and had a serious negative impact on the institute.

The research institute points out that after the aforementioned incidents, the parties concerned are immediately found for questioning and serious criticism, and they are charged with serious reflection. For serious discipline, the institute decided to give Cheng Chengquan, the head of the communication group, the accountability of reporting criticism and withholding a quarterly performance bonus.

Star Analyst in Communications Industry

Wechat Group Behavior Another Lesson

In fact, Cheng Cheng, the party concerned this time, is also a star analyst in the communications industry. He has certain influence in the analyst group and the secretaries of listed companies. Therefore, a few hours after its publication, this remark in the Wechat group will quickly ferment, and triggered a wave of concern and discussion.

According to public information, Cheng Cheng joined Guoxin Securities in 2012 and has been an analyst since 2013. He is the chief analyst of the telecommunications industry and a Master of Communications Major of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Cheng Cheng was listed in New Wealth from 2013 to 2016 and got the fourth and second results in the telecommunications industry once.

Cheng Chengs comments also gave many analysts warning that as an open channel of social media, their statements also need to be cautious.

In December last year, the regulatory authorities issued a Institutional Regulatory Bulletin to various securities companies, which pointed out that a securities analyst team privately distributed industry research reports to several micro-messaging groups without company review, and finally the securities regulatory bureau took relevant regulatory measures against the securities company and its parties.

In the above-mentioned cases, the regulatory authorities mentioned that when securities analysts use Internet tools to provide services to customers, their awareness of compliance is weak. At the same time, their securities dealers have defects and loopholes in the management of securities analystsprofessional behavior. This kind of behavior actually needs to be taken seriously.

Regulatory authorities pointed out that in recent years, with the rapid development of information technology, the use of public-oriented instant messaging software, content display or sharing applications and other Internet tools to provide follow-up services for securities research reports to customers has become increasingly common in the industry. Therefore, the regulatory authorities require that the use of Internet tools and other media to publish securities research reports be standardized according to law. At the same time, securities companies are required to strengthen the management of analysts, establish internal control mechanisms that match the service model, and effectively guard against risks.

The Reform of Science Creative Board Shocks Traditional Thinking

In the past, in the issuance of new shares and stock investment, cutting leek and short-term speculation have been widely used in the market, while the deep market-oriented reform measures, the infiltration of long-term investment thinking and the increase of the proportion of institutional investment in science and technology creation board enterprises have impacted the traditional speculation thinking in all aspects.

Take the valuation of price-earnings ratio as an example, a group of newly listed companies of science and technology start-ups have fixed their prices clearly in the near future. According to the statistics of E company, the average price-earnings ratio of 25 companies that have been issued is 49.21 times.

Most institutional insiders believe that most of the companies that have fixed the issuance price basically conform to the valuation range recommended by the quoting agency, and do not exceed too many market expectations. Analysts believe that the current valuation of science and technology start-ups needs pricing and valuation from a comprehensive perspective. It is not meaningful to discuss price-earnings ratio alone. In fact, the valuation of science and technology start-ups is also impacting the traditional valuation research model.

In the past few days, the market trend has been adjusted in stages. Some people have put forward the idea of dividing market funds by scientific creation board, which has caused a wave of controversy. Huang Yanming, director of Guotai Junan Securities Research Institute, said that it was incorrect to argue that the so-called science-based stock market would divert funds and lead to the decline of the stock market. The core of scientific innovation board investment is not only the growth analysis, but also the trend change of peoples risk assessment.

In addition, in view of some points of view, it is questioned that the listed companies on the board of science and technology are over-recruited. Peoples Network commentary also points out that this is a traditional way of thinking for investors to judge, understand and treat science and technology innovation board, which shows a lack of acceptance. As long as the process of IPO pricing is achieved by a wide range of representative market-oriented institutions and individuals through fully open and transparent inquiries, and is the true expression of the intentions of both parties. Then, what price, how many shares are issued and how much funds are raised by listed companies are the results of their respective values for all parties involved in investment and financing. The comments above indicate.

Source: Liu Song_NBJ9949, Responsible Editor of China Foundation Newspaper