Core Viewpoint - The controversy surrounding Giant Bio's product "Recombinant Collagen Essence" has raised questions about its collagen content, leading to a significant decline in the company's stock price following allegations of false labeling and exaggerated claims [1][6]. Group 1: Product Allegations - Beauty blogger "Big Mouth Doctor" (Hao Yu) reported that the collagen content in Giant Bio's "Recombinant Collagen Essence" was only 0.0177%, which is below the national standard of 0.1% for non-trace components [1]. - The report also indicated that the core amino acid "glycine," essential for collagen, was not detected in the product, suggesting potential false labeling and exaggeration of claims [1]. Group 2: Company Response - In response to the allegations, Giant Bio issued a statement denying the claims, asserting that multiple self-test results showed collagen content greater than 0.1%, contradicting the reported data [1]. - The company emphasized that its testing methods adhered to the "Pharmacopoeia of the People's Republic of China" and industry standards, and it has commissioned a third-party organization for retesting [1]. Group 3: Stock Market Impact - Following the allegations, Giant Bio's stock price experienced a continuous decline over four days, indicating a significant market reaction to the controversy [6]. - The situation was exacerbated by a lengthy article from Huaxi Bio, which criticized Giant Bio's marketing strategies and its comparison of collagen to hyaluronic acid [8]. Group 4: Connections and Recommendations - There are notable connections between Huaxi Bio and Big Mouth Doctor, as both have indirect stakes in Shanghai Liuye Medical Technology Service Co., Ltd., suggesting potential conflicts of interest [8]. - Big Mouth Doctor has previously recommended products from Huaxi Bio, indicating a possible bias in the ongoing criticism of Giant Bio [9].

Core Viewpoint - The public relations battle between Huaxi Biological and Juzhi Biological has led to a significant market value loss for Juzhi Biological, amounting to 17.4 billion yuan in just 10 days [4]. Group 1: Public Relations Battle - Huaxi Biological publicly criticized the capital market's behavior of favoring collagen while disparaging hyaluronic acid, directly naming Juzhi Biological and several brokerage firms [3][4]. - Juzhi Biological's market value dropped from 90.9 billion yuan to 73.5 billion yuan within 10 days, a decrease of 17.4 billion yuan [4]. - The negative publicity may impact consumer sentiment and Juzhi Biological's performance during the upcoming 618 promotional event [4]. Group 2: Controversial Testing Methods - The primary controversy revolves around the testing methods used to assess the collagen content in Juzhi Biological's products [5][6]. - A beauty blogger claimed that the actual collagen content in Juzhi Biological's product was only 0.0177%, significantly below the stated standard of ≥0.1% [9]. - Juzhi Biological defended its testing methods, stating that the blogger's approach lacked industry standards and that they were involved in formulating these standards [11]. Group 3: Timeline of Events - On May 17, Huaxi Biological published a critical article targeting Juzhi Biological and brokerage firms [18]. - Juzhi Biological did not respond initially, leading to perceptions of a "pillow fight" in the public relations battle [18]. - The timeline of events suggests a coordinated effort by the blogger to raise questions about Juzhi Biological's products, particularly before the 618 sales event [22][23]. Group 4: Industry Implications - The incident serves as a cautionary tale for other beauty and skincare brands regarding the importance of protecting their core assets, particularly product ingredients and their efficacy [33]. - Companies are urged to establish robust standards and testing methods to safeguard against potential public relations crises [34]. - The need for a credible third-party testing framework is emphasized, as the absence of such standards can lead to consumer distrust and brand damage [30].

证券代码：688363 证券简称：华熙生物 华熙生物科技股份有限公司 2024 年年度股东大会会议资料 华熙生物科技股份有限公司 2024 年年度股东大会会议资料 华熙生物科技股份有限公司 2024 年年度股东大会会议资料 华熙生物科技股份有限公司 为保障华熙生物科技股份有限公司（以下简称"公司"）全体股东的合法权 益，维护股东大会的正常秩序，保证股东大会的议事效率，确保本次股东大会如 期、顺利召开，根据《中华人民共和国公司法》《华熙生物科技股份有限公司章 程》《华熙生物科技股份有限公司股东大会议事规则》等相关规定，特制定公司 一、为保证股东大会的有序进行，切实维护股东的合法权益，现场出席会议 的股东及股东代理人需进行会议登记，以核实股东资格。会议开始后，现场会议 登记将终止，会议主持人将宣布现场出席会议的股东和代理人人数及所持有表决 权的股份总数。为了顺利参加股东大会，建议股东提前半小时到达会议现场，并 按规定出示会议登记所需资料办理会议登记。 二、为保证股东大会的正常秩序，除出席会议的股东及股东代理人、公司董 事、监事、高级管理人员、公司聘请的律师及董事会邀请的其他人员外，公司有 权拒绝其他无关人员进入会 ...

华熙生物科技股份有限公司 2024年年度股东大会会议资料 证券代码：688363 证券简称：华熙生物 2024 年年度股东大会会议资料 2025 年 6 月 华熙生物科技股份有限公司 2024年年度股东大会会议资料 2024 年年度股东大会会议资料目录 | 华熙生物科技股份有限公司 年年度股东大会会议须知 2024 | | | 2 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 华熙生物科技股份有限公司 | 年年度股东大会会议议程 2024 | | 4 | | 议案一 | 关于审议公司 年年度报告及其摘要的议案 2024 | | 6 | | 议案二 | 关于审议 年度董事会工作报告的议案 2024 | | 7 | | 议案三 | 关于审议 年度监事会工作报告的议案 2024 | | 18 | | 议案四 | 关于 2025 年度公司董事、监事薪酬方案的议案 | | 23 | | 议案五 | 关于公司 2024 年度财务决算报告的议案 | | 24 | | 议案六 | 关于公司 2024 年度利润分配预案的议案 | | 33 | | 议案七 | 关于取消监事会、修订《公司章程》并办理工商变更登记的议 ...

2 中国1至4月规模以上工业企业利润同 公布，前值0.8%◇ 3 5月27日上午10:00，国务院新闻办公 务院政策例行吹风会, 请商务部副部长亲 谈判副代表凌激和生态环境部、市场监管 负责人介绍深化国家级经济技术开发区改 关举措,并答记者问 5 美国5月达拉斯联储商业活动指数将公 值-26.1, 前值-35.8 1 中共中央办公厅 国务院办公厅关于完善中国特色现代企业制度的意见 每经编辑｜张喜威 王晓波 ↓ 今日央行有3570亿元7天期逆回购到1 5月26日，中共中央办公厅、国务院办公厅印发《关于完善中国特色现代企业制度的意见》。主要目标是：经过5年左右，推动具备条件的企业普遍建立适合 国情、符合实际、满足发展需要的中国特色现代企业制度，企业党的建设全面加强，治理结构更加健全，市场化运营机制更加完善，科学管理水平进一步提 高，推动自主创新、支撑产业升级、履行社会责任等作用充分发挥。到2035年，中国特色现代企业制度更加完善，企业国际竞争力全面提升，为加快建设世 界一流企业奠定坚实基础。（新华社） 2 隔夜市场 美股5月26日（周一）因假期休市一日。 4 财政部回应穆迪维持我主权信用评级：是对中国经济向好前景 ...

Core Viewpoint - The leading domestic hyaluronic acid company, Huaxi Biological, has publicly criticized 10 research reports from 9 securities firms for containing misleading statements, highlighting the competitive dynamics between hyaluronic acid and recombinant collagen products [1][2][3] Group 1: Criticism of Research Reports - Huaxi Biological published a nearly 5000-word article accusing the reports of creating inflated expectations around recombinant collagen products at the expense of the hyaluronic acid industry [2][3] - The criticized reports include those from major firms such as Huatai Securities, Ping An Securities, and Western Securities, with specific claims of bias and contradictions in their analyses [3][5][12] - Some reports have been reportedly deleted, particularly the one from Western Securities, raising questions about the integrity of the research [5][22] Group 2: Market Dynamics and Product Comparison - The reports discussed the advantages and disadvantages of hyaluronic acid and recombinant collagen, with some showing a preference for collagen, which has led to concerns about the objectivity of the analyses [7][16] - Huaxi Biological's core product is hyaluronic acid, while the competitor, Juzhi Biological, focuses on recombinant collagen, both of which are used in medical and cosmetic applications [3][19] - The market for recombinant collagen is expected to grow rapidly, potentially surpassing that of hyaluronic acid, due to its higher technical barriers and product characteristics [20][19] Group 3: Analyst Reactions and Industry Implications - The incident has sparked discussions among analysts, with some suggesting that securities firms may feel pressured to remain silent due to their weaker position against prominent companies like Huaxi Biological [23][22] - Analysts have noted that while both products have their merits, the technical complexity of recombinant collagen is higher than that of hyaluronic acid, reflecting broader trends in consumer preferences [23][20] - Despite the criticism, several securities firms continue to issue positive ratings for Huaxi Biological, indicating a complex relationship between market perception and research integrity [22][19]

Investment Rating - The investment rating for the company is "Buy" and is maintained [7]. Core Views - In 2024, the company achieved operating revenue of 5.37 billion yuan, a year-on-year decline of 11.6%, and a net profit attributable to shareholders of 170 million yuan, down 70.6% year-on-year. In Q4 2024, the operating revenue was 1.5 billion yuan, a decrease of 19.3% year-on-year, with a net profit of -190 million yuan [2][4]. - For Q1 2025, the company reported operating revenue of 1.08 billion yuan, a year-on-year decline of 20.8%, and a net profit of 100 million yuan, down 58.1% year-on-year [2][4]. - The company is focusing on overall resource efficiency and is undergoing a phase of adjustment in its skincare business, while the raw material business is growing steadily, and the high-margin medical terminal business is expanding rapidly [9]. Summary by Sections Financial Performance - In 2024, the raw material business generated revenue of 1.24 billion yuan, up 9.5% year-on-year, with international market expansion showing a growth of 17.7%, particularly in the Americas, Europe, and Southeast Asia, where growth exceeded 20% [9]. - The medical terminal business achieved revenue of 1.44 billion yuan, a year-on-year increase of 32%, with skin-related medical products growing by 43.6% [9]. - The functional skincare business reported revenue of 2.57 billion yuan, down 31.6% year-on-year, while the nutritional science business generated 80 million yuan, up 41% year-on-year [9]. Cost and Profitability - The company's gross margin improved by 0.8 percentage points year-on-year, with the raw material, medical terminal, and functional skincare gross margins changing by 0.9, 2.3, and -1.1 percentage points respectively [9]. - The net profit margin decreased by 6.5 percentage points year-on-year due to increased management expenses and changes in the organizational structure [9]. Future Outlook - The company is expected to see improvements in revenue and profit as it continues to adjust its skincare business and launch new products. The raw material business is expected to maintain a strong market position, and the medical beauty business is gradually contributing more to overall performance [9]. - EPS forecasts for 2025-2027 are 0.95, 1.33, and 1.67 yuan per share respectively [9].

【要闻报道】 英伟达拟再推"中国特供"芯片 据参考消息援引新加坡《联合早报》网站5月25日引述路透社消息报道，美国芯片巨头英伟达据报将为 中国市场推出一款基于Blackwell架构的人工智能（AI）芯片，售价将大幅低于先前的H20芯片，预计最 快于6月开始量产。 报道称，这款采用最新一代Blackwell架构的AI处理器，预计售价介于6500美元至8000美元之间，明显 低于H20的定价。较低的售价通常意味着芯片规格相对较弱，制造工艺也更为简化。 点评：这将是英伟达第三次为中国市场推出符合美国监管要求的降级版芯片。美国政府日前禁止英伟达 向中国销售基于Hopper架构的H20芯片。 特朗普威胁50%关税两天后改口：恢复与欧盟贸易谈判窗口期 美国总统特朗普在与欧盟委员会主席冯德莱恩通电话后表示，他将把欧盟面临50%关税的最后期限延长 至7月9日。 特朗普当地时间周日在返回华盛顿的途中对记者说："我们进行了一次非常愉快的通话，我同意将它撤 回。" 冯德莱恩稍早前在X上发文称，"欧洲已准备好迅速、果断地推进谈判"，但"达成一项好的协议需要时 间，直到7月9日"。那是特朗普暂停所谓对等关税90天的截止日。 点评：这次 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the controversy surrounding Huaxi Biological, a leading player in the medical aesthetics industry, which publicly refuted claims made by nine brokerage firms regarding the obsolescence of hyaluronic acid, asserting that these claims mislead the market and harm the industry [2][5][13]. Group 1: Industry Response - Huaxi Biological received support from two industry associations before making its statement and has reported the misleading content to the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) [2][12]. - Following Huaxi's public rebuttal, some brokerage firms have deleted their reports, and certain institutions have issued apologies to the company [2][12]. - The brokerage reports in question were primarily focused on the emerging concept of recombinant collagen, which Huaxi argues is being promoted at the expense of hyaluronic acid [5][13]. Group 2: Misleading Claims - Huaxi Biological criticized the brokerage reports for making misleading comparisons between hyaluronic acid and recombinant collagen, claiming that these reports lacked scientific basis and were driven by speculative capital [5][13]. - The company highlighted that the reports suggested hyaluronic acid was inferior to recombinant collagen in terms of safety and efficacy, which Huaxi disputes, stating that such conclusions are not supported by scientific evidence [5][31]. Group 3: Regulatory and Compliance Issues - The article raises concerns about the compliance of the brokerage reports, suggesting that they may not have adhered to the necessary standards for objectivity and scientific backing [20][21]. - Industry experts indicate that the reports should have included relevant data to support their claims, and the lack of such data could lead to regulatory scrutiny [21][22]. - The ongoing regulatory environment is described as increasingly stringent, with past instances of penalties for brokerage firms due to similar issues [26][27]. Group 4: Scientific Basis of Claims - Huaxi Biological argues that both hyaluronic acid and recombinant collagen have their unique applications and benefits, and it is inappropriate to declare one superior to the other without substantial scientific evidence [31][32]. - The company emphasizes that the existing research favors hyaluronic acid in certain applications, particularly in skin hydration and immediate filling, while recombinant collagen may have advantages in tissue repair [31][32].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the controversy surrounding Huaxi Biological's rebuttal of the claims made by nine brokerage firms regarding hyaluronic acid being "outdated" and the promotion of recombinant collagen as a superior alternative, highlighting the impact of these claims on the market and the industry [2][4][9]. Group 1: Company Actions - Huaxi Biological publicly refuted the claims about hyaluronic acid and named nine brokerage firms for misleading reports, which has led to some brokerages retracting their reports and issuing apologies [2][8]. - The company received support from two industry associations before making its statement and has reported the matter to the China Securities Regulatory Commission [2][8]. - As of May 23, three of the ten reports mentioned have been removed from public access, while the remaining seven are still available for viewing [8][9]. Group 2: Industry Context - The medical beauty industry is characterized by a high overlap between capital market participants and enterprise users, making capital evaluations significantly impactful on the competitive landscape, which explains Huaxi Biological's strong response [2][4]. - The article emphasizes that the claims made in the brokerage reports lack scientific basis and are driven by speculative capital, which could harm a key industry in China [6][9][24]. Group 3: Scientific Claims - Huaxi Biological argues that the reports promoting recombinant collagen over hyaluronic acid are misleading and lack substantial scientific evidence, asserting that both substances have their unique benefits and should not be directly compared [23][24]. - The company highlights that the regulatory approvals for hyaluronic acid products far exceed those for recombinant collagen, indicating a stronger safety profile for hyaluronic acid [25][26]. Group 4: Regulatory Environment - The article notes that the regulatory environment for brokerage reports is tightening, with recent inspections revealing issues in compliance and the need for better management of report quality and information sources [18][20]. - There is a growing concern about the potential for misleading information in brokerage reports, which could lead to regulatory actions against the firms involved if found to be in violation of established guidelines [21][22].