Core Viewpoint - The ongoing inheritance dispute involving Zong Qinghou has reached a turning point, with the state-owned major shareholder of Wahaha finally intervening, indicating a shift from a family matter to a public interest issue affecting corporate governance [3][5]. Group 1: Major Shareholder's Change of Attitude - The major shareholder of Wahaha, a state-owned entity holding 46% of the shares, has historically remained passive, allowing Zong Qinghou to dominate operations and strategy [7][8]. - Following Zong Qinghou's death, the governance vacuum and intense succession competition have prompted the state-owned shareholder to abandon its previous silence and take action [9][10]. - The recent trademark transfer incident, where 387 trademarks were proposed to be transferred from the state-owned entity to a company controlled by Zong's daughter, signifies a significant shift in the shareholder's strategy [12][14]. Group 2: Financial Performance and Shareholder Returns - Wahaha has shown strong financial performance, with sales exceeding 50 billion annually, and a projected revenue of 70 billion for 2024, reflecting a year-on-year increase of approximately 200 million [17][18]. - Despite the robust revenue, the state-owned shareholder has received minimal dividends, with Wahaha Group's net profit at only 18.71 million, compared to the significantly higher profits of its external companies [19][20]. - The lack of fair dividend distribution has raised questions about the governance and financial arrangements within Wahaha, especially as the state-owned shareholder has not signed preferential agreements with the local government since 2008 [22][23]. Group 3: Complexity of Shareholding Structure - The shareholding structure of Wahaha has become increasingly complex, with the potential for further complications due to ongoing inheritance disputes among Zong's heirs [28][34]. - The historical context of Wahaha's shareholding, including the transition from full state ownership to a mixed structure, has contributed to the current governance challenges [30][31]. - The state-owned shareholder's recent intervention may be aimed at clarifying ownership and restructuring governance to regain control over the increasingly chaotic shareholding landscape [35][36].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the increasing scrutiny and criticism surrounding Oliver Blume's dual role as CEO of both Volkswagen Group and Porsche, highlighting concerns over potential conflicts of interest and governance issues [3][5][31]. Group 1: Background and Context - Oliver Blume is the first CEO in Volkswagen Group's history to hold dual positions as CEO of both Volkswagen and Porsche [10]. - The controversy over Blume's dual role began when he took over as CEO of Volkswagen Group, with initial concerns raised by a minority of investors [14][18]. - Following Porsche's IPO in September 2022, Blume's leadership has come under greater scrutiny as both companies face declining performance [18][30]. Group 2: Financial Performance and Market Response - Porsche's performance has been declining, with a 3% drop in global deliveries in 2024 and a significant 28% decline in the Chinese market [27][28]. - As of early 2025, Porsche's stock price has fallen to €43.46, nearly halving from its IPO price of €82.5 [30]. - Financial forecasts for Porsche indicate a projected revenue of €37-38 billion for 2025, down from €40 billion the previous year [66]. Group 3: Governance and Shareholder Concerns - Shareholders have increasingly called for Blume to choose one CEO position, citing governance structures that are unprecedented in both Volkswagen and the broader German corporate landscape [9][32]. - Concerns have been raised about the potential for conflicts of interest and weakened accountability due to Blume's dual role [48][49]. - Some family members of the Porsche-Piëch family, who control a significant voting stake in Volkswagen, have expressed differing views on Blume's dual role, with some advocating for a clearer separation of responsibilities [40][54]. Group 4: Blume's Justification and Strategic Vision - Blume defends his dual role as a strategic advantage, allowing for resource integration and unified decision-making across both companies [56][57]. - He emphasizes the importance of scale in negotiations and the ability to implement necessary reforms across both brands [60][61]. - Blume believes that his leadership can help navigate the complexities of the automotive industry's transition to electric vehicles [59][63]. Group 5: Future Outlook and Strategic Adjustments - Volkswagen plans to launch 30 new models in China over the next two years, with a focus on localizing research and development [63][64]. - The company is also restructuring its dealer network in China, aiming to reduce the number of dealerships by one-third by 2027 [69].

近日，北京市房山区人民法院对外通报2022年以来该院涉公司内部治理引发与员工纠纷案件的审理情 况。其中，新入职员工挂名担任"董监高"（公司董事、监事、高级管理人员）的情形逐年增多。刚参加 工作的职场新人担任"董监高"往往成为公司内部管理失控后的"背锅侠"，容易因挂名而遭遇纠纷和损 失。 被推上虚职岗位的员工往往对企业经营毫不知情，却在公司陷入危机时，首当其冲担上责任。由于自证 难、维权难，他们不仅要承担民事赔偿风险，还可能因企业失信行为影响个人征信。即便在企业正常运 营、"相安无事"时，解除挂名也困难重重——企业鲜少配合变更登记，如果通过诉讼解除职务，挂名者 也面临复杂的举证责任，很难证明是否真正自愿、是否知情等。 公司利用年轻人挂名"董监高"本就是钻空子，这暴露出部分企业投机取巧、缺乏社会责任感等问题，本 质上是对社会信用体系的破坏。 "董监高"设立的初衷是构建权责分明的治理架构，以保障公司健康有序经营。然而，部分经营状况不佳 的公司将其异化为逃避责任的工具，以"流程需要""走个形式"等说辞诱导职场新人签署相关文件。许多 新员工法律意识淡薄，轻信承诺，加之部分代办机构推波助澜，形成"代持高管""挂名服务"等 ...