排队3年！开源证券主动撤回IPO，原计划融资40亿

Core Viewpoint - The Shenzhen Stock Exchange has terminated the IPO review of Kaiyuan Securities due to the withdrawal of the application by the sponsor, Minsheng Securities, marking the fourth failed attempt for the company to enter the A-share market [1][2][4]. Group 1: Company Background - Kaiyuan Securities, established in 2002 and headquartered in Xi'an, Shaanxi, offers services including securities brokerage, investment consulting, and financial advisory related to securities transactions [3]. - The company is significantly owned by the Shaanxi Provincial State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission through Shaanxi Coal and Chemical Industry Group and Huitong Investment, which collectively hold 64.17% of the voting rights [7]. Group 2: IPO Journey - The IPO journey of Kaiyuan Securities has spanned three years, beginning with an application to the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) in June 2022, transitioning to the Shenzhen Stock Exchange in March 2023, and ultimately leading to the termination of the IPO in June 2025 [8]. - The company aimed to raise 4 billion yuan through the IPO, with plans to enhance its traditional brokerage business, investment banking capabilities, proprietary trading, research competitiveness, asset management investments, and digital service capabilities [8]. Group 3: Regulatory Challenges - The withdrawal of the IPO application was influenced by a regulatory order from the CSRC on October 17, 2024, which suspended the company's bond underwriting qualifications for six months due to three identified issues in bond projects [9][10]. - The penalties have led to significant impacts, including the halting of 8.5 billion yuan in bond projects and a 45.89% year-on-year decline in investment banking revenue for 2024, which now constitutes only 16.23% of total revenue, the lowest in recent years [10]. Group 4: Business Performance - The company's brokerage business is under pressure due to declining commission rates, with net commission rates reported to be significantly below the industry average [10]. - In asset management, the company faced regulatory scrutiny for failing to prevent issuers from misusing funds from asset management plans, resulting in warnings issued to responsible personnel [11].