来源丨凤凰网《风暴眼》 爆料投诉邮箱:all_cj@ifeng.com 这标志着宗馥莉在娃哈哈集团与其控制的宏胜集团之间做出了最终抉择。相比于上一次辞职后又被请回，此次宗馥莉辞职走完了全 部法定流程，也反映出在娃哈哈集团现行的股权结构下，主要股东的考量与决策。 此前，被视为宗馥莉"心腹"的宏胜集团生产中心总监严学峰因涉嫌违纪，被杭州市上城区纪律检查委员会立案审查。有媒体消息显 示，严学峰已于10月5日被解除立案审查，并已回到宏胜集团正常上班。 不过上述知情人士向凤凰网《风暴眼》提供了另一个版本的说法。据其透露， "纪委是在9月29号立的案，目前调查还没有结束，现 在网上说解除立案审查是不准确的。人算是回到了公司，可以上班，但调查还只是初步阶段，随时可以再次传唤他。" 根据此前在员工中流传的对严学峰的立案通知书，陈美飞所在的党委机构需配合执行对严学峰的出国审批、辞去公职、职务晋升等 限制措施。陈美飞为娃哈哈集团党委主要负责人、杭州娃哈哈集团有限公司基层工会联合委员会法定代表人。对于严学峰是否"解除 立案审查"，凤凰网《风暴眼》致电陈美飞，其接到电话知晓来意后即挂断电话，对求证短信亦未回复，随后，凤凰网《风暴眼》 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ongoing power struggle and brand transition within Wahaha Group, led by Zong Fuli, as she attempts to establish her authority and navigate the complexities of ownership and brand identity following the death of her father, Zong Qinghou [5][27]. Group 1: Background and Initial Actions - Zong Fuli initiated a significant move by resigning from her position, which was perceived as a "self-harming attack" to assert her leadership, ultimately leading to her becoming the chairman of Wahaha and acquiring all shares held by Zong Qinghou [6][11]. - The brand "Wahaha" is currently valued at over 90 billion, making it a crucial asset for the company, and any transition to a new brand like "Wawa Xiaozong" could erase decades of brand equity [12][21]. Group 2: Brand Transition and Challenges - A recent notification indicated that starting from the 2026 sales year, the company would transition to the new brand "Wawa Xiaozong," which has raised concerns among distributors about the brand's market acceptance [8][9]. - Distributors have expressed significant resistance to the new brand, with reports indicating that 99% of Wahaha distributors are unwilling to sell "Wawa Xiaozong" products, highlighting the challenges of brand loyalty and market trust [21][23]. Group 3: Financial Performance and Market Dynamics - In 2024, under Zong Fuli's leadership, Wahaha's revenue surged to 70 billion, a significant increase attributed to emotional consumer spending following Zong Qinghou's passing, but this growth is seen as unsustainable [24][27]. - The company has been cutting ties with underperforming distributors, which has created additional pressure on smaller distributors, leading to concerns about profitability and market stability [24][26]. Group 4: Legal and Ownership Issues - Zong Fuli's control over the Wahaha brand is complicated by ongoing legal disputes regarding employee stock ownership, which could impact her ability to fully leverage the brand [13][30]. - The inheritance dispute involving Zong Fuli and her siblings adds another layer of uncertainty, as the outcome could affect her control over Wahaha and its assets [31][32].

14岁开始隐忍布局，40岁正式反击，宗馥莉上演了一出现实版的"长公主归来复仇"短剧。 在这部短剧里，汇聚了接班受阻、遗产争夺、股权纠纷等各种要素，按照短剧的节奏，这些极端的冲突 之后，往往承接的都是高频反转的"爽点"剧情。但现实毕竟不是短剧，宗馥莉也不是爽文女主，没有超 能力buff，宗馥莉能做的也只有以身入局，并展开贴身肉搏。 去年7月，宗馥莉就曾发起过一次堪称"自伤式袭击"的战役。 当时的宗馥莉主动提出辞职，原因是其认为娃哈哈集团部分股东对其经营管理的合理性提出质疑，致使 其无法履行相关职责。 当时这事无非两种结果，第一，真辞了，那宗馥莉现在就不是娃哈哈的董事长了，第二，没辞成，其他 股东服气了。最终的结果正是第二种，宗馥莉不仅接任娃哈哈董事长，而且还接手宗庆后所持有的娃哈 哈集团公司全部股份，打了一个漂亮的翻身仗。 宗馥莉辞职一事，虽然也引发不小的风波，但却没有引发合作商们的恐慌。有经销商曾在接受采访时表 示，只要娃哈哈这个牌子还在，业务的稳定性就能得到保障。 但近期，宗馥莉又发起了袭击战，这次是直接拿"娃哈哈"品牌开刀。 在网络上流传的《关于开展2026销售年度经销商沟通工作的通知》中提到，公司决定从 ...

Core Viewpoint - The company, Liangpinpuzi, is facing significant operational challenges in the first half of the year, resulting in a substantial decline in revenue and a shift to net losses due to various factors including price reductions and a decrease in store count [1][2]. Financial Performance - For the first half of 2025, Liangpinpuzi reported revenue of 2.829 billion yuan, a year-on-year decrease of 27.21% [1]. - The net profit attributable to shareholders was -93.55 million yuan, marking a shift from profit to loss compared to the previous year [1]. - The adjusted net profit after excluding non-recurring items was -119 million yuan, down from 7.4633 million yuan in the same period last year [1]. Operational Challenges - The company has been optimizing and adjusting its product offerings, which included price reductions and changes in product structure, negatively impacting gross margins [1]. - The number of stores decreased to 2,445 by the end of the first half, a net reduction of 259 stores since the beginning of the year, with 123 closures in Q1 and 136 in Q2 [1]. Strategic Initiatives - In response to the challenging environment, the company is exploring optimization of its single-store model, controlling rental costs, and strategically optimizing underperforming stores [2]. - The company is also enhancing its product structure and variety while implementing a "one product, one chain" strategy to reduce overall costs [2]. Shareholder Dispute - A notable shareholder dispute between the controlling shareholder, Ningbo Hanyi, and Guangzhou Light Industry Group has drawn market attention, with the company indicating efforts to resolve the issue amicably [2].

Core Viewpoint - Beijing Huiyuan Food and Beverage Co., Ltd. is embroiled in a power struggle involving its major shareholder, Zhuji Wenshenghui Investment Co., Ltd., questioning the legality of a recent extraordinary shareholders' meeting and the actions taken by the company's sole supervisor [2][3][4]. Group 1: Company Background and Financial Performance - Beijing Huiyuan has recently completed debt restructuring and is projected to achieve profitability in both 2023 and 2024, with net profits of 4.24 billion and 3.44 billion respectively [12]. - The company reported a revenue of 27.45 billion in 2023, with a net profit margin of 15.43% [13]. Group 2: Shareholder Disputes and Legal Issues - The conflict escalated when Zhuji Wenshenghui proposed to dismiss the chairman without notifying the board, leading to allegations of unfair practices regarding capital allocation and profit distribution [4][10]. - The company has initiated legal proceedings against Zhuji Wenshenghui and its associated entities for failing to fulfill their capital contribution obligations as per the restructuring agreement [15]. Group 3: Impact on Stakeholders - A-share listed company Guozhong Water, which invested 930 million in an attempt to gain control over Beijing Huiyuan, is now facing significant losses and has become a passive investor due to the ongoing disputes [17][21]. - The ongoing power struggle and legal disputes may adversely affect the operational recovery that Beijing Huiyuan has recently achieved, raising concerns among creditors and minority shareholders [12][24].

Core Viewpoint - The stock price of the company, Liangpinpuzi, has decreased by 2.31% to 13.13 yuan, amid a legal dispute involving its controlling shareholder [1] Group 1: Stock Performance - The stock price of Liangpinpuzi reported at 13.13 yuan, down by 0.31 yuan from the previous trading day, with a decline of 2.31% [1] - The intraday high reached 13.70 yuan, while the lowest point was 13.13 yuan, with a trading volume of 107,015 shares and a transaction amount of 143 million yuan [1] Group 2: Business Overview - Liangpinpuzi primarily engages in the research, procurement, sales, and logistics distribution of snack foods, including nuts, dried fruits, and meat snacks [1] - The company was listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange in February 2020 [1] Group 3: Legal Issues - The controlling shareholder, Ningbo Hanyi Venture Capital Partnership, is involved in a legal dispute over equity transfer with Guangzhou Light Industry and Trade Group, which has filed a lawsuit for the enforcement of a share transfer agreement and compensation for breach of contract, amounting to 1.023 billion yuan [1] - Guangzhou Light Industry has previously applied to freeze 79.76 million shares of Liangpinpuzi held by Ningbo Hanyi [1] - The company stated that the lawsuit does not have a significant impact on its current operations, but it may introduce uncertainty regarding the control transfer matters involving the controlling shareholder and Changjiang Guomao [1] Group 4: Capital Flow - On the day of the report, there was a net outflow of 7.7328 million yuan in main funds for Liangpinpuzi, with a cumulative net outflow of 9.2549 million yuan over the past five days [1]

Core Viewpoint - The lawsuit between Guangzhou Light Industry Group and Ningbo Hanyi regarding the share transfer of Liangpin Shop has seen an increase in the claimed amount from approximately 996 million yuan to about 1.023 billion yuan [1][3]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - Guangzhou Light Industry Group has adjusted its lawsuit request, now seeking not only the enforcement of the share transfer agreement but also a significant increase in the penalty for breach of contract, calculating it at 0.05% of the total transaction price from May 29, 2025, to July 31, 2025, amounting to 31.7014 million yuan [3]. - The original request involved the transfer of approximately 79.764 million shares at a price of 12.42 yuan per share, totaling 991 million yuan, along with a breach penalty of 5 million yuan [3]. Group 2: Shareholding Changes - Following the lawsuit, approximately 56.46% of the shares held by Ningbo Hanyi in Liangpin Shop have been frozen, leaving only 61.5231 million shares unfrozen [4]. - Ningbo Hanyi plans to transfer 72.2398 million shares to Changjiang International Trade Group, which is expected to hold 29.99% of Liangpin Shop's shares, changing the controlling shareholder from Ningbo Hanyi to the Wuhan Municipal Government's State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission [4]. Group 3: Company Impact - Liangpin Shop has stated that the lawsuit does not have a significant impact on its production operations or current financial results, and the court has yet to set a hearing date for the case [7]. - Ningbo Hanyi is actively seeking a resolution with Guangzhou Light Industry Group to settle the dispute amicably [7].

Core Viewpoint - The lawsuit between Guangzhou Light Industry Group and Ningbo Hanyi regarding the share transfer of Liangpin Shop has escalated, with the amount in dispute increasing from approximately 996 million yuan to about 1.023 billion yuan [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Developments - Guangzhou Light Industry Group has modified its lawsuit request, now seeking not only the enforcement of the share transfer agreement but also a significant increase in the penalty for breach of contract, calculating it at 0.05% of the total transaction price per day [2]. - The original claim involved the transfer of approximately 79.76 million shares at a price of 12.42 yuan per share, totaling around 991 million yuan, plus a breach penalty of 5 million yuan [2]. - The updated claim includes a breach penalty of approximately 31.7 million yuan for 64 days of delay, along with additional claims for litigation costs and attorney fees [2]. Group 2: Shareholding Changes - Ningbo Hanyi failed to sign the share transfer agreement by the agreed date, leading to Guangzhou Light Industry Group filing a lawsuit [3]. - Following the legal action, Ningbo Hanyi's shares in Liangpin Shop, amounting to about 79.76 million shares (approximately 56.46% of its holdings), have been frozen by the court [3][4]. - The controlling shareholder of Liangpin Shop is expected to shift from Ningbo Hanyi to Wuhan Financial Holdings Group, which plans to acquire a 29.99% stake in the company [4]. Group 3: Company Impact - Liangpin Shop has stated that the ongoing litigation does not have a significant impact on its production operations or current financial performance [6]. - The court has yet to set a hearing date for the case, and the outcome remains uncertain, potentially affecting the control transfer to Wuhan Financial Holdings [6]. - Ningbo Hanyi is actively seeking a resolution with Guangzhou Light Industry Group to expedite the settlement of the dispute [6].

Core Points - The article discusses the legal troubles faced by Zhong Dafang, a prominent Chinese scientist in innovative drug development, who was detained due to a long-standing equity dispute with a company involved in an IPO [1][2][5] - Zhong's contributions to the industry are significant, with claims that he has been involved in the development of over one-fifth of China's innovative drugs [5][6] - The dispute with the company, NuoSiGe, has escalated to criminal charges, raising concerns within the industry about the implications for scientific integrity and business practices [9][12] Group 1: Background and Contributions - Zhong Dafang is recognized as a leading figure in the field of pharmacokinetics and drug metabolism, having studied in Germany and returned to contribute significantly to China's pharmaceutical research [2][3] - He co-founded Suzhou Haike Pharmaceutical Technology Co., which has been pivotal in the development of innovative drugs in China [5][21] - Zhong's work has led to the creation of numerous patents and contributions to the industry, with his name associated with a significant portion of innovative drug research in China [5][30] Group 2: Legal Dispute and Implications - The legal conflict began in 2016 when Zhong and NuoSiGe entered into a partnership that later soured, leading to accusations of extortion and other legal issues [12][20] - NuoSiGe claims that Zhong's actions during the IPO process constituted extortion, while Zhong argues that his reports regarding the company's equity issues were legitimate concerns [14][19] - The ongoing legal battle has not only affected Zhong's career but has also raised questions about the ethical conduct of business practices in the pharmaceutical industry [29][41] Group 3: Industry Reactions and Consequences - The detention of Zhong has caused a stir in the academic and pharmaceutical communities, with many colleagues and students expressing disbelief and support for him [7][9] - The situation has led to a broader discussion about the risks associated with equity disputes in the pharmaceutical sector, particularly regarding the treatment of scientists and their contributions [41][43] - NuoSiGe's reputation may suffer as a result of the ongoing legal issues, impacting its business relationships and market perception [29][41]

Core Viewpoint - The luxury goods group Hermès, valued at €210 billion, is embroiled in a shareholding controversy following the confirmation that Nicolas Puech, the former largest individual shareholder from the family, no longer holds any shares in the company [1][2]. Group 1: Shareholding Changes - CEO Axel Dumas confirmed that the company was aware of Nicolas Puech's divestment from shares, which prompted legal actions, although he expressed doubt about recovering those shares [3]. - Nicolas Puech previously held approximately 6 million shares, valued at around €14 billion [4]. - The news marks the end of a long-standing shareholding dispute but leaves many questions unanswered [5]. Group 2: Historical Context - The controversy traces back to 2010 when LVMH's chairman Bernard Arnault acquired over 20% of Hermès shares through complex financial maneuvers, leading to a legal battle between the two luxury groups [6]. - Nicolas Puech was implicated as a key figure in assisting Arnault by transferring shares to LVMH for stock swap transactions [7]. - In 2014, LVMH was penalized for failing to disclose its shareholding and was ordered to distribute its Hermès shares to shareholders, concluding a four-year conflict [8]. Group 3: Current Legal Issues - Nicolas Puech has initiated lawsuits against his financial advisor Eric Freymond, alleging mismanagement and fraud regarding his Hermès shares, which he claims have "disappeared" [13]. - A Swiss court ruled that Puech voluntarily entrusted his affairs to Freymond and failed to prove any deception, indicating that some shares were likely sold during that period [14]. - Following the court ruling, Freymond passed away, ending a 24-year partnership with Puech [15]. Group 4: Family Control and Market Implications - The Hermès family, with over 100 members, has historically maintained control through a holding company, H51, which concentrated over 50% of shares and established a 20-year joint holding agreement to prevent hostile takeovers [8]. - Puech's exit from the shareholding structure may weaken the family's control over Hermès, raising concerns about corporate governance stability [16]. Group 5: Financial Performance - Hermès reported a revenue of €3.91 billion for the second quarter, reflecting a 9% year-on-year growth at constant exchange rates, although actual growth slowed to 5.6% [18]. - The company's market value reached €248.6 billion earlier this year, surpassing LVMH, but has since dropped back to approximately €219 billion following recent financial reports [19][20].