深交所通报2个体外资金池IPO现场督导案例、2个离职人员入股核查、2个创业板定位的典型审核案例

Group 1 - The article discusses the recent issuance of the Shenzhen Stock Exchange's latest "IPO Review Dynamics," highlighting two cases of external funding pools that were not disclosed during the IPO process [1][2] - Case 1 involves Issuer A, which had an external funding pool balance of approximately 15 million yuan, with inflows totaling about 30 million yuan and outflows of 40 million yuan during the reporting period [3][5] - Case 2 involves Issuer B, which had an external funding pool balance of 700,000 yuan, with inflows of 1.5 million yuan and outflows of 1.4 million yuan during the reporting period [3][5] Group 2 - The Shenzhen Stock Exchange emphasizes the importance of the authenticity and accuracy of financial data in the IPO review process, implementing strict regulatory measures for serious violations [2][6] - Issuer A faced severe penalties, including a one-year ban on submitting IPO application documents and public reprimands for its actual controller and certain board members [5][6] - Issuer B received a public reprimand, with disciplinary actions against its actual controller and senior management based on the severity of the situation [6] Group 3 - The article outlines the necessity for issuers to fully disclose the existence of external funding pools, their cash flows, and the impact on financial data reliability, as well as to cooperate with intermediaries during due diligence [4][5] - The cases illustrate the consequences of failing to rectify and disclose the existence of external funding pools, which significantly affects the assessment of whether issuers meet IPO conditions [5][6] Group 4 - The article presents two typical review cases regarding the involvement of departing personnel in shareholding of IPO candidates, emphasizing the need for thorough verification by intermediaries [7][8] - Case 1 involves a union shareholder where the intermediary could not obtain specific member information due to confidentiality, but confirmed no involvement of departing personnel [8][11] - Case 2 highlights challenges in tracing foreign shareholders and natural person shareholders, with intermediaries confirming no improper shareholding by departing personnel after extensive verification [9][10] Group 5 - The article discusses two typical review cases related to the positioning of the ChiNext board, with Issuer A meeting the quantitative indicators for ChiNext despite being in a traditional industry [12][15] - Issuer A's products align with consumer upgrade trends and demonstrate competitive advantages through technological innovation and process optimization [12][15] - Conversely, Issuer B, which produces lithium battery modules, faced challenges due to low innovation and significant competition, leading to the withdrawal of its IPO application [13][14][15]