天赐材料（002709） | 证券代码：002709 | 证券简称：天赐材料 | 公告编号：2025-078 | | --- | --- | --- | | 转债代码：127073 | 转债简称：天赐转债 | | 广州天赐高新材料股份有限公司 关于修订及制定 H 股上市后适用的公司治理制度的公告 本公司及董事会全体成员保证信息披露的内容真实、准确、完整，没有虚假 记载、误导性陈述或重大遗漏。 广州天赐高新材料股份有限公司（以下简称"公司"）于 2025 年 7 月 4 日召 开第六届董事会第三十三次会议，审议通过《关于审议公司本次 H 股股票发行 上市后适用的内部治理制度的议案》。现将具体情况公告如下： 一、本次修订、制定原因及依据 根据公司拟发行境外上市外资股（H 股）并在香港联合交易所有限公司主板 上市（以下简称"本次发行"）的需要，对部分公司制度进行修订并制定部分制度。 | 序号 | 制度名称 | 类型 | 是否提交股 东大会审议 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 1 | 《广州天赐高新材料股份有限公司关联（连）交 | 修订 | 是 | | | 易管理制度（草案）》 | | | ...

天赐材料（002709） | 证券代码：002709 | 证券简称：天赐材料 | 公告编号：2025-079 | | --- | --- | --- | | 转债代码：127073 | 转债简称：天赐转债 | | 广州天赐高新材料股份有限公司 关于召开 2025 年第二次临时股东大会通知的公告 本公司及董事会全体成员保证信息披露的内容真实、准确、完整，没有虚假 记载、误导性陈述或重大遗漏。 广州天赐高新材料股份有限公司（以下简称"公司"）2025年7月4日召开的第 六届董事会第三十三次会议审议通过了《关于召开2025年第二次临时股东大会的 议案》，决定于2025年7月23日（星期三）召开2025年第二次临时股东大会，现将 召开本次股东大会的有关安排公告如下： 一、召开会议的基本情况 1、股东大会届次： 2025 年第二次临时股东大会 2、会议召集人：公司董事会。公司第六届董事会第三十三次会议于 2025 年 7 月 4 日召开，审议通过了《关于召开 2025 年第二次临时股东大会的议案》。 3、会议召开的合法、合规性：本次股东大会的召开程序符合《中华人民共 和国公司法》《上市公司股东大会规则》等法律、法规、规 ...

天赐材料（002709） | 证券代码：002709 | 证券简称：天赐材料 | 公告编号：2025-074 | | --- | --- | --- | | 转债代码：127073 | 转债简称：天赐转债 | | 广州天赐高新材料股份有限公司 第六届监事会第二十六次会议决议的公告 本公司及监事会全体成员保证信息披露的内容真实、准确、完整，没有虚假 记载、误导性陈述或重大遗漏。 2025 年 7 月 4 日，广州天赐高新材料股份有限公司（以下简称"公司"）第 六届监事会第二十六次会议在广州市黄埔区云埔工业区东诚片康达路公司办公 楼一楼会议室以现场与通讯相结合的方式召开。应参加本次会议表决的监事 3 人， 实际参加本次会议表决的监事 3 人。会议由监事会主席郭守彬先生主持，本次会 议的召集、召开程序均符合《中华人民共和国公司法》和《公司章程》的规定。 本次监事会审议并通过了相关议案，形成决议如下： 一、审议通过了《关于公司发行 H 股股票并在香港联合交易所有限公司上 市的议案》 为深入推进公司全球化战略布局，满足海外业务的持续发展需要和提质增效 要求，提升公司在国际市场的综合竞争实力，巩固行业地位，同时打造国际化 ...

天赐材料（002709） | 证券代码：002709 | 证券简称：天赐材料 | 公告编号：2025-073 | | --- | --- | --- | | 转债代码：127073 | 转债简称：天赐转债 | | 广州天赐高新材料股份有限公司 第六届董事会第三十三次会议决议的公告 本公司及董事会全体成员保证信息披露的内容真实、准确、完整，没有虚假 记载、误导性陈述或重大遗漏。 2025 年 7 月 4 日，广州天赐高新材料股份有限公司（以下简称"公司"）第 六届董事会第三十三次会议在广州市黄埔区云埔工业区东诚片康达路公司办公 楼一楼会议室以现场与通讯相结合的方式召开。应参加本次会议表决的董事 9 人， 实际参加本次会议表决的董事 9 人。会议由董事长徐金富先生主持，公司监事和 高级管理人员列席了会议。本次会议的召集、召开程序均符合《中华人民共和国 公司法》和《公司章程》的规定。 本次董事会审议并通过了相关议案，形成决议如下： 一、审议通过了《关于公司发行 H 股股票并在香港联合交易所有限公司上 市的议案》 为深入推进公司全球化战略布局，满足海外业务的持续发展需要和提质增效 要求，提升公司在国际市场的综合竞争实 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ongoing legal disputes between Tianqi Materials and Yongtai Technology regarding alleged commercial secret infringements, highlighting the competitive and litigious nature of the lithium battery industry in China [2][10][11]. Group 1: Event Overview - The Fifth Start Point Two-Wheeled Vehicle Battery Swap Conference and Lightweight Power Battery Technology Summit will be held on July 11, 2025, in Shenzhen [2]. - The event is organized by Start Point Lithium, Start Point Sodium, and Start Point Two-Wheeled Vehicles and Battery Swap [2]. Group 2: Legal Disputes - Tianqi Materials has filed a civil lawsuit against Yongtai Technology and others for commercial secret infringement, seeking damages of 887 million yuan and 1.15 million yuan in legal fees [2][4]. - The lawsuit follows a criminal case where two individuals were sentenced for illegally obtaining Tianqi's technology, with one receiving a prison term of four years and four months [4][5]. - Yongtai Technology has countered with a lawsuit against Tianqi for defamation, claiming damages of 57.52 million yuan [7][9]. Group 3: Financial Performance - Yongtai Technology reported revenues of 4.128 billion yuan and 4.589 billion yuan for 2023 and 2024, respectively, with net losses of 619.8 million yuan and 478.4 million yuan [10]. - Tianqi Materials, while still profitable, saw significant revenue declines, with 2023 and 2024 revenues of 15.4 billion yuan and 12.52 billion yuan, down 30.97% and 18.74% year-on-year, and net profits of 1.891 billion yuan and 483.9 million yuan, down 66.92% and 74.4% [11]. Group 4: Industry Context - The legal battles reflect the intense competition and overcapacity in the lithium battery industry, exacerbated by a significant drop in the price of lithium hexafluorophosphate since 2024 [10][11]. - The ongoing disputes are indicative of the broader trend of increasing patent conflicts and the need for stronger intellectual property protections within the lithium battery sector [11].

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing legal battle between Tianqi Materials and Yongtai Technology revolves around allegations of trade secret infringement and defamation, with both companies filing lawsuits against each other, leading to a total claim amount of 944 million yuan [1][4]. Group 1: Legal Actions - Tianqi Materials has filed a civil lawsuit against Yongtai Technology and 12 related parties for trade secret infringement, with the Jiangxi Provincial High People's Court accepting the case [1][2]. - Yongtai Technology has countered by suing Tianqi Materials for defamation, seeking compensation of 57.5193 million yuan, with the courts also accepting this case [1][4]. Group 2: Allegations and Claims - Tianqi Materials accuses Yongtai Technology of illegally obtaining its lithium hexafluorophosphate production technology through a former employee, who allegedly violated confidentiality agreements [2][3]. - Yongtai Technology claims that its production processes and technologies are independently developed and that Tianqi Materials is engaging in malicious litigation to undermine its reputation and market position [5][6]. Group 3: Industry Context - Both companies operate in the competitive electrolyte materials sector, producing lithium hexafluorophosphate, which is critical for battery production [4][5]. - The legal disputes are occurring against a backdrop of intense competition in the new energy automotive market, which has seen significant fluctuations [5][6].

Investment Rating - The report maintains an "Outperform" rating for the electric equipment and new energy industry [1]. Core Insights - The photovoltaic supply-side reform is ongoing, with a focus on improving product quality and eliminating low-price competition [1][2]. - In June, the wholesale sales of new energy passenger vehicles in China reached 1.26 million units, a year-on-year increase of 29% [1][2]. - The demand for batteries and materials is expected to grow as new models of electric vehicles are launched in the second half of the year, with projections indicating high growth in domestic sales of new energy vehicles by 2025 [1]. - The solid-state battery industrialization trend is clear, with attention on related materials and equipment companies [1]. - In May, China's photovoltaic installed capacity reached 92.92 GW, a year-on-year increase of 388%, which may suppress demand for photovoltaic installations in the near term [1]. - The hydrogen energy sector is being driven by policies promoting industrialization, with a focus on companies with cost and technological advantages in electrolyzer production and hydrogen infrastructure [1]. Summary by Sections Industry Performance - The electric equipment and new energy sector rose by 1.99% this week, outperforming the Shanghai Composite Index, which increased by 1.4% [10]. - The photovoltaic sector saw a significant increase of 6.80%, while the lithium battery index rose by 3.84% [2][13]. New Energy Vehicles - Major players in the new energy vehicle market reported varying delivery figures for June, with BYD delivering 383,600 units (up 11.98% year-on-year) and Li Auto experiencing a decline of 24% [2][27]. - The report highlights the expected growth in new energy vehicle sales, driven by the introduction of new models [1][2]. Photovoltaic Sector - The central economic work conference emphasized the need to regulate low-price competition and improve product quality in the photovoltaic industry [1][2]. - The report notes the significant increase in installed capacity and the potential impact on future demand [1]. Hydrogen Energy - The approval of a large-scale green hydrogen pipeline project indicates ongoing support for the hydrogen energy sector [1][27]. Company Developments - Companies like EVE Energy and Xinwanda are planning to issue H-shares for overseas listings, indicating growth strategies in the electric equipment sector [2][28].

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing legal battle between Tianqi Materials and Yongtai Technology over trade secret infringement has escalated, with significant financial implications for both companies, amidst a backdrop of declining performance in the lithium battery materials market [1][9]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - Tianqi Materials has filed a civil lawsuit against Yongtai Technology and 12 other defendants, claiming a total compensation of 887 million yuan for trade secret infringement related to lithium hexafluorophosphate technology [1][2]. - Yongtai Technology has denied the allegations and countersued for defamation, seeking 57.52 million yuan in damages, asserting that the technology in question was independently developed [4][5]. - The case has seen a criminal conviction against former employees for trade secret theft, with sentences including prison time and fines, but appeals are currently underway [3][6]. Group 2: Financial Performance - Yongtai Technology has reported consecutive losses over the past two years, with total revenues of 4.128 billion yuan in 2023 and 4.589 billion yuan in 2024, alongside net losses of 619.8 million yuan and 478.4 million yuan respectively [7]. - Tianqi Materials, while still profitable, has experienced significant revenue declines, reporting total revenues of 15.4 billion yuan in 2023 and 12.52 billion yuan in 2024, with net profits dropping by 66.92% and 74.4% respectively [7][8]. - Both companies are facing pressure from increased competition and fluctuating raw material prices, which could further impact their financial stability depending on the outcome of the legal dispute [8][9]. Group 3: Market Implications - The outcome of the litigation is expected to have a substantial impact on the market positions and future developments of both companies, as the lithium battery materials industry shifts from capacity expansion to technological competition [9]. - The case is seen as significant for establishing competitive rules within the emerging lithium battery sector, potentially reshaping industry standards and practices [9].

Core Viewpoint - The legal battle between Tianqi Materials and Yongtai Technology highlights the intensifying competition in the lithium battery materials industry, with both companies accusing each other of intellectual property infringement and defamation [1][4]. Group 1: Legal Disputes - Tianqi Materials has filed a civil lawsuit against 12 defendants, including Yongtai Technology, claiming a total of 887 million yuan for commercial secret infringement [1][2]. - In response, Yongtai Technology has initiated a defamation lawsuit against Tianqi Materials, seeking 57.52 million yuan in damages [1][3]. - The dispute centers around the technology for liquid lithium hexafluorophosphate, with both companies asserting their claims regarding the ownership and use of this technology [1][2]. Group 2: Company Background and Financial Performance - Both Tianqi Materials and Yongtai Technology are publicly listed companies that produce mainstream electrolyte materials, including lithium hexafluorophosphate, leading to direct competition [4]. - Tianqi Materials reported a revenue of 12.518 billion yuan for 2024, a year-on-year decline of 18.74%, and a net profit of 484 million yuan, down 74.4% [5]. - Yongtai Technology, while ending its revenue decline in 2024, still faced a net loss of 478 million yuan [5][6]. Group 3: Industry Context - The competition in the lithium battery materials sector has intensified due to fluctuations in the new energy vehicle market, leading to frequent intellectual property disputes [6]. - The price of lithium hexafluorophosphate has seen significant volatility, dropping to 84,000 yuan per ton in 2015 and rising to 590,000 yuan per ton in early 2022, before stabilizing at an average of 51,900 yuan per ton as of July 2 [6]. - The ongoing legal disputes reflect a broader trend in the new energy industry, where competition has shifted from capacity expansion to the defense of technological sovereignty and intellectual property rights [6].

Group 1 - Hoshine Silicon Industry's controlling shareholder plans to exchange part of the company's shares for ETF shares to support the ETF market and optimize the company's equity structure, with a maximum of 11.82 million shares, representing no more than 1% of the total share capital [1] - The move is seen as a positive signal reflecting the major shareholder's confidence in the company's long-term development, and the market will pay attention to the subsequent progress of the exchange and its impact on corporate governance [1] Group 2 - Yamaton announced that its stock price had deviated significantly, with a cumulative increase of over 20% in two consecutive trading days, prompting the company to clarify that recent media interviews did not disclose its production arrangements or performance forecasts [2] - The company emphasized that the interviews only covered industry dynamics and overseas investment strategies, aiming to stabilize market expectations and indicating that the stock price fluctuations may be due to market misinterpretation [2] Group 3 - Yongtai Technology and its subsidiary have filed civil lawsuits against Tianci Materials for defamation, with a total claim amount of 57.52 million yuan, and the cases have been accepted by the courts [3] - The legal action demonstrates the company's determination to protect its rights, although the impact on current and future profits remains uncertain as the cases have not yet gone to trial [3]