Editor-in-Chief of Arts/New waves (Bkopleader)

Depending on the investor-appropriate management system of the entrepreneurship board, it would set a threshold for investors’ access, but it was not a “guard” for investors. In terms of protecting the interests of investors, the quality of the company that is perceived by the individual as the originator is paramount. In addition, infractions such as intracurrency transactions, market manipulation, etc., inventors must be severely punished.

At the opening of the first China International Imports Fair, the President of the country went on to say that the capital market infrastructure system would be continually improved through the establishment of a boarding and pilot registration system on the Shanghai Stock Exchange, in support of the Shanghai International Finance Centre and the Centre for Science and Technology Innovation. This suggests that, following the entrepreneurship of the deep city, the city will be open to the creation.

Prior to that, the idea of a strategic, emerging industrial floor had been put forward, but for various reasons, the strategic and emerging industrial floor had not been introduced. The high-level decision was to set up an incubator in the city of Java, or could be seen as an extension of the strategic emerging industry. Of course, since the introduction of the boards is certainly different from that of the original strategic nascent industries, it should be different from that of the deep market.

The establishment of the Colloquium should be a scientific and innovative enterprise with its active role. On the one hand, the creation of a boarding board would provide new exit corridors for the creation of investment funds, or would further stimulate entrepreneurship investment. On the other hand, there is no doubt that technological innovation is a good business and is conducive to promoting the development of STI enterprises. At the same time, the establishment of the CPF is also conducive to the successful transformation of our economy.

It is worth noting that the previously laudable registration system will be piloted in the creative boards. Although only on a pilot basis, once the pilot has been successful, it will eventually be replicated in deep-rooted municipalities. As a result, registration starts on a pilot basis, as well as on a side-by-side note, registration is perhaps far from being fully implemented, but investors are afraid of registration. In this regard, the regulatory authorities must be well aware.

We may wish to see whether the inventors will be created as a second entrepreneurship. However, the problems arising from the introduction of the entrepreneurship plan have to be highlighted and put on hold. Otherwise, it would be meaningless if the penis were to become the second entrepreneurship.

Once the market in Unit A has a deep-seated, deep-seated and entrepreneurship board, the introduction of the brand in the city of Penang is conducive to making Shanghai a centre for international finance and science and technology innovation. However, the roll-out of the creative boards has led individuals to believe that there are three main issues that need to be directly addressed.

Question 1: How can the quality of the company that is listed on board be ensured? While the pilot of the registration system does not mean that the registered enterprise is not subject to certification, it is also undisputed that the threshold of the plate will be reduced once the registration system is implemented. The current entrepreneurship board, which has been subject to strict scrutiny, such as the Board of Auditors, and the emergence of enterprises that have been marketed through fraudulent distribution, such as Hinta, Kimia, science and technology, is of no doubt a matter of concern whether there will be more “encompassing” electors, “Kingya science and technology” landing boards.

A step backwards, even if there is no fraudulent distribution in the boards, it is entirely possible in the context of registration that performance is poor, growth is insufficient or that there is no future business presence in the boards. If such enterprises are larger, intangibles will reduce the overall quality of the creative enterprise, and their value of investment will be reduced. Therefore, the quality of creative enterprises under registration is an inescapable issue.

Question 2: Does the creation boards become “setboards”? In the past, entrepreneurship boards, as nascent, have been retrieved by the market and, as a whole, entrepreneurship panels have been valued at a much higher level than the deep-rooted and medium-sized boards. It is also due to the higher valuation of the entrepreneurship board that triggers a large pool of shareholders in the initiator. Thus, as an exit route for the creation of funds, it would be equally worthwhile to see whether the creation of an investment grant would be massive when the shares of the listed enterprises were closed.

In order for the boards not to be turned into “setboards” like the entrepreneurship plates, first, investors do not blindly pursue bricked stock, otherwise high valuations can trigger casings for shareholders in the company concerned. Secondly, since the introduction of the board was a registration system, it would be necessary to extend the chain of holdings of shareholders in the initiator. For example, the share of holdings is less than 5 per cent, with a fixed lock of not less than three years, greater than 5 per cent, and a fixed lock not less than five years.

Question 3: How do the interests of creative investors be protected? The registration system is focused on the disclosure of information, and there should be no barriers to the registration of STIs in the creation boards as long as the issuer’s information disclosure is timely, adequate, complete and accurate. However, low-quality STI enterprises are clearly not conducive to investor-friendly protection. In particular, there are cases of fraudulent distributions such as Hinta Electrical, which, even when tickets are paid, can also be undermined by the inability to achieve full coverage of the interest-injured investors and full coverage of the investor’s loss.

Depending on the investor-appropriate management system of the entrepreneurship board, it would set a threshold for investors’ access, but it was not a “guard” for investors. In terms of protecting the interests of investors, the quality of the company that is perceived by the individual as the originator is paramount. In addition, infractions such as intracurrency transactions, market manipulation, etc., inventors must be severely punished.

(The authors of this paper: the independent financial contributors publish hundreds of articles in various media, such as the three major securities newspapers)