声称亏损兜底收益分成！港股“合作打新”陷阱多｜港美股看台

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the resurgence of the Hong Kong IPO market since 2025, leading to the rise of collaborative IPO subscription models that promise higher winning rates, profit sharing, and loss guarantees, but these models carry significant risks for investors [1][2]. Group 1: Market Context - Since 2025, the Hong Kong IPO market has significantly recovered, with a notable decrease in the rate of stock price drops after listing, enhancing the profitability of new stocks [4]. - The enthusiasm of retail investors for subscribing to new stocks has increased, but the winning rates have declined, with 22 new stocks having a winning rate of less than 1% since 2025 [4]. - The introduction of the FINI system in 2023 and the new pricing mechanism in August 2025 have made it more challenging for retail investors to win subscriptions, limiting them to only 10% of the overall allocation [4]. Group 2: Collaborative IPO Subscription Models - Collaborative IPO subscription has emerged as a new strategy where teams or self-media groups organize retail investors to pool resources and manage multiple accounts to increase winning probabilities [4]. - These groups often promise profit-sharing arrangements, such as a 50-50 split between the team and the investors, and may offer services like "team directives" and "account management" [4][5]. - Some individuals actively recruit partners for collaborative IPO subscriptions, requiring a minimum investment of 150,000 HKD and offering loss guarantees while sharing profits [5]. Group 3: Risks and Legal Concerns - The collaborative IPO subscription models are fraught with risks, including compliance issues and potential loss of funds, as many of these operations lack proper legal frameworks [2][10]. - There have been instances of significant losses, such as one investor reportedly losing 1.85 million HKD due to a failed IPO subscription, highlighting the dangers of relying on unregulated entities [10]. - Legal experts warn that such collaborative practices may violate securities laws, and agreements promising loss guarantees may be deemed invalid, complicating investor recourse in case of disputes [10][11].