自身债务缠身、持股不足8%，西藏珠峰大股东为何上演“失血者”输血迷局

Core Viewpoint - Despite facing significant financial difficulties, Tachen International continues to provide substantial loans to its controlling listed company, Tibet Summit, raising questions about the rationale behind this ongoing financial support [1][2][15]. Group 1: Financial Situation of Tachen International - Tachen International's operating revenue for 2024 was zero, with a net loss of 387 million yuan, and its total assets stood at 3.169 billion yuan, with net assets of 999 million yuan [1][6][16]. - The company has been in a debt crisis for an extended period, with outstanding debts amounting to 1.518 billion yuan, including significant tax liabilities [19]. - Tachen International's shareholding in Tibet Summit has drastically decreased from 38.25% in June 2021 to below 8% currently, raising concerns about its control over the company [2][21]. Group 2: Financial Support to Tibet Summit - Tachen International has provided financial support to Tibet Summit for ten consecutive years, with cumulative loans peaking at over 270 million yuan [1][4]. - The latest loan attempt in April 2024 was met with opposition but was ultimately approved by the majority of shareholders, allowing Tachen International to lend up to 200 million yuan [3][11]. - As of the end of 2024, the loan balance to Tibet Summit had increased to 122.5 million yuan, representing 15.8% of Tachen International's net assets [6][12]. Group 3: Tibet Summit's Financial Challenges - Tibet Summit is experiencing cash flow issues, with a monetary fund balance of 294 million yuan against short-term borrowings and payables totaling 926 million yuan, indicating a short-term debt repayment gap of approximately 632 million yuan [11]. - The company's revenue has declined from 1.973 billion yuan in 2022 to 1.639 billion yuan in 2024, with net profits fluctuating significantly during the same period [12]. - Major projects requiring substantial investment, such as lithium extraction initiatives, have faced funding challenges, further complicating Tibet Summit's financial situation [12][13].