接盘威领股份（002667）五年时间，实控人黄达决定让出公司控制权。11月24日晚间，威领股份披露紧急停牌公告称，公司控股股东上海领亿新材料有限公 司（以下简称"上海领亿"）及黄达正在筹划重大事项，该事项可能导致公司控制权发生变更，公司股票11月25日起停牌。值得一提的是，披露停牌消息当 天，威领股份股价涨停收盘，公司内幕消息管理是否合规引发关注。黄达欲退出背后，威领股份近年来业绩承压明显，今年前三季度，公司营收同比下降超 五成，净利仍处于亏损状态。 黄达欲退出 先于易主消息，威领股份股价出现了"抢跑"情况。 拉长时间来看，威领股份近期股价涨幅也较大，经统计，在9月24日—11月24日这38个交易日，公司区间累计涨幅达53.92%，同期大盘跌幅4.08%。 中关村物联网产业联盟副秘书长袁帅表示，股价提前涨停一定程度上反映了市场对于公司潜在变动的某种预期或提前反应。从信息披露合规性角度，若存在 信息提前泄露的情况，部分投资者可能能够提前布局获取不当利益。不过，股价提前涨停也并不能完全认定公司内幕消息管理存在缺陷，这也需要企业进一 步说明。 北京商报记者注意到，因未履行信息披露义务，上海领亿曾在2024年12月收 ...

接盘威领股份（002667）五年时间，实控人黄达决定让出公司控制权。11月24日晚间，威领股份披露紧急停牌公告称，公司控股股东上海领亿新材料有限公 司（以下简称"上海领亿"）及黄达正在筹划重大事项，该事项可能导致公司控制权发生变更，公司股票11月25日起停牌。值得一提的是，披露停牌消息当 天，威领股份股价涨停收盘，公司内幕消息管理是否合规引发关注。黄达欲退出背后，威领股份近年来业绩承压明显，今年前三季度，公司营收同比下降超 五成，净利仍处于亏损状态。 黄达欲退出 先于易主消息，威领股份股价出现了"抢跑"情况。 11月24日晚间，威领股份披露公告称，公司近日收到上海领亿、黄达通知，正在筹划所持股份转让事项，拟以协议转让方式转让各方合计持有的2023.38万 股公司股份（占公司总股本的7.7646%）。股份转让完成后，受让方将成为公司第一大股东。该事项可能导致公司控制权发生变更，亦可能导致公司出现无 实际控制人情形。 北京商报记者注意到，因未履行信息披露义务，上海领亿曾在2024年12月收到深交所下发的监管函。 监管函显示，上海领亿作为威领股份控股股东，在2022年11月至2024年8月14日期间，因被动稀释、主 ...

每经头条（nbdtoutiao）——688496，被证监会立案！刚上市业绩就变脸，亏损超1亿元；核心产品受重 创：第一大客户"自产自用"，减少采购 （记者 曾健辉） 每经AI快讯，2025年11月25日，深交所向山东恒邦冶炼股份有限公司发出监管函：2025年8月12日，你 公司披露的《关于独立董事辞职的公告》显示，你公司独立董事黄健柏、焦健因连续担任公司独立董事 满六年，申请辞去公司独立董事及董事会相关专门委员会职务。因黄健柏、焦健辞职将导致公司独立董 事人数少于董事会成员的三分之一，根据《上市公司独立董事管理办法》《公司章程》等相关规定，其 辞职报告将在公司召开股东会选举产生新任独立董事后方可生效。根据相关规定，你公司应当自独立董 事提出辞职之日起六十日内完成补选。目前你公司未依规及时完成补选工作。你公司的相关行为违反了 本所《股票上市规则》第1.4条和《上市公司自律监管指引第1号——主板上市公司规范运作》第3.2.8条 第三款的规定。本所希望你公司及全体董事、高级管理人员认真吸取教训，并提醒你公司及全体董事、 高级管理人员严格遵守《证券法》《公司法》等法律法规，以及本所《股票上市规则》及相关规定，真 实、 ...

两家A股公司被立案。 聚石化学（688669）11月21日晚间公告，公司于2025年11月21日收到中国证券监督管理委员会（简称"中国证 监会"）下发的《立案告知书》，因公司涉嫌信息披露违法违规，根据《中华人民共和国证券法》《中华人民 共和国行政处罚法》等法律法规，中国证监会决定对公司立案。 公告显示，目前公司各项经营活动和业务均正常开展。立案调查期间，公司将积极配合中国证监会的相关工 作，并严格按照相关法律法规和监管要求及时履行信息披露义务。 聚石化学主要从事化工新材料的研发、生产和销售。主要产品包括改性塑料粒子、汽车型材、光显材料、电线 电缆、卫生材料、液化石油气产品、阻燃剂、磷化学品等，广泛应用于节日灯饰、汽车、新能源电池、家电、 光学显示、电线电缆、医疗卫生、汽油添加剂、防火涂料、改性塑料、电解液、颜料等领域。 业绩方面，公司2025年第三季度实现营业收入9.87亿元，同比下降0.81%；归属于上市公司股东的净利润为 289.43万元。 同日，豪尔赛（002963）公告称，公司于近日收到中国证监会下发的《立案告知书》，因涉嫌信息披露违法违 规，根据《中华人民共和国证券法》《中华人民共和国行政处罚法》 ...

Core Viewpoint - A significant equity dispute has emerged involving a Hong Kong-listed internet company, which is valued at over HKD 10 billion, stemming from a 13-year-old email that highlights the complexities of early-stage partnerships and the implications for corporate governance and compliance [2][3] Group 1: Background of the Dispute - The lawsuit was filed by Wang Ping against Liu Chunhe, the founder of the company, in September 2025, claiming a 3% equity stake in the company, valued at approximately HKD 489 million based on current market valuation [2] - The dispute traces back to a critical email from 2012, where Liu Chunhe offered Wang Ping a 3% equity gift in recognition of early support, alongside a proposal for Wang to invest an additional HKD 700,000 for a 7% stake, which Wang declined [2] Group 2: Legal and Compliance Implications - Wang Ping has accused Liu Chunhe of failing to honor the equity promise during multiple financing rounds and after the company's IPO in 2019, leading to his decision to file a lawsuit after receiving no response to his requests [3] - The lawsuit raises concerns about the company's compliance with disclosure regulations, as Wang has reported to the Hong Kong Stock Exchange that the company did not disclose this significant equity commitment in its IPO prospectus, potentially concealing legal risks [3] Group 3: Company Performance Amidst Dispute - Despite the ongoing legal issues, the company continues to experience rapid growth, with a reported 13.6% year-on-year revenue increase to HKD 2.58 billion in the third quarter of 2025, and strong performance of its core social product, SUGO, in the Middle East market [3] - The company's journey from a shell company valued at HKD 30,000 to a market capitalization exceeding HKD 19 billion underscores its rapid expansion, while the blurred lines between personal relationships and business interests from its early days now pose significant compliance challenges [3]

Core Points - The company received an administrative regulatory decision from the Ningbo Regulatory Bureau of the China Securities Regulatory Commission regarding failures to timely disclose significant event progress and inadequacies in insider information management [1] - The chairman, Lin Haifeng, and the board secretary, Xueshan Xing, were found primarily responsible for these issues due to their lack of diligence [1] - The Ningbo Regulatory Bureau has mandated corrective administrative measures for the company and has conducted regulatory discussions with Lin Haifeng and Xueshan Xing, which will be recorded in the securities and futures market integrity database [1]

Core Viewpoint - The company received an administrative regulatory measure decision from the Shandong Securities Regulatory Bureau due to a failure to announce a decrease in the shareholding ratio of its controlling shareholder, which fell from 26.08% to 25.94% following a convertible bond conversion [1] Group 1 - The controlling shareholder, Zhongxing Biotechnology, and its concerted parties' shareholding ratio decreased, triggering a regulatory requirement for announcement [1] - The company did not comply with the relevant regulations, leading to the administrative measures imposed by the regulatory authority [1] - The regulatory measures include a directive for correction and a regulatory conversation, which will be recorded in the company's integrity file [1] Group 2 - The company has acknowledged the issue and plans to enhance its understanding of relevant laws and regulations to improve operational standards and information disclosure quality [1] - The regulatory measures are not expected to impact the company's normal production and operations [1]

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing legal disputes between ST Lutong and its shareholder Wu Shichun are intensifying, focusing on issues of compliance regarding voting rights and information disclosure related to stock acquisitions [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - On October 20, a court hearing was held regarding ST Lutong's claims against Wu Shichun and others for damages related to alleged illegal actions in the shareholder meeting and information disclosure [1]. - ST Lutong is seeking compensation of 2.5 million yuan for losses incurred due to Wu Shichun's actions, which include a 3.87% illegal share increase and a request to change the board of directors [2][3]. Group 2: Compliance Issues - ST Lutong argues that Wu Shichun's acquisition actions violate compliance regulations, as the partnership intended for the acquisition was not established, and the transaction price was allegedly predetermined [3]. - The focus of the dispute includes the legality of the information disclosure regarding the acquisition and the delegation of voting rights, which ST Lutong claims was not properly disclosed [3][4]. Group 3: Shareholding and Voting Rights - As of May 26, Wu Shichun reportedly holds at least 13.86% of ST Lutong's shares, including both disclosed and undisclosed voting rights [4]. - ST Lutong contends that the voting rights associated with the shares transferred to Wu Shichun must be publicly disclosed, as per regulations governing shareholder rights [4][5]. Group 4: Regulatory Actions - Following the court proceedings, ST Lutong received regulatory notices from the Shenzhen Stock Exchange and Jiangsu Securities Regulatory Bureau for failing to timely notify shareholders about the meeting, leading to administrative measures against the company and its chairman [6].

Core Viewpoint - The legal disputes between ST Lutong and Wu Shichun, founder of Meihua Venture Capital, are escalating, focusing on shareholder rights and compliance issues related to stock acquisitions and board elections [2][3]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - The court hearings for two lawsuits involving ST Lutong and Wu Shichun commenced on October 20, addressing securities disputes and claims of damage to company interests [2]. - ST Lutong is seeking to restrict Wu Shichun and his affiliates from exercising voting rights on illegally acquired shares and is claiming damages of 2.5 million yuan for losses incurred due to improper board election proposals [3][4]. Group 2: Compliance Issues - ST Lutong alleges that Wu Shichun's acquisition actions violate compliance regulations, particularly regarding the establishment of the partnership "Meiling Partnership" and the premature locking of transfer prices [4]. - The company claims that Wu Shichun's failure to disclose relevant information regarding share acquisitions and voting rights undermines the rights of minority investors [4][5]. Group 3: Shareholding and Voting Rights - As of May 26, Wu Shichun reportedly holds at least 13.86% of ST Lutong's shares, including both disclosed and undisclosed voting rights [5]. - ST Lutong argues that the voting rights associated with the shares transferred to Wu Shichun must be publicly disclosed, as per regulations governing shareholder rights [5][6]. Group 4: Regulatory Actions - Following the court proceedings, ST Lutong received regulatory notices from the Shenzhen Stock Exchange and Jiangsu Securities Regulatory Bureau for failing to timely notify shareholders about meetings, leading to administrative corrective measures [6][7].

Core Viewpoint - The court hearing regarding the securities dispute between ST Lutong and Wu Shichun, founder of Meihua Venture Capital, has intensified the internal conflict within ST Lutong, focusing on issues of information disclosure and voting rights [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - ST Lutong is seeking compensation of 2.5 million yuan for losses incurred due to Wu Shichun's alleged illegal proposal to convene a shareholders' meeting to reorganize the board of directors [3]. - The court session highlighted the compliance issues surrounding the disclosure of information related to the acquisition and voting rights delegation agreements [3][4]. Group 2: Compliance Issues - ST Lutong claims that Wu Shichun's acquisition actions may have violated compliance regulations, as the partnership intended for the acquisition was not yet established, and the transaction price terms appeared to be predetermined [4]. - The company argues that Wu Shichun did not wait for compliance disclosure before proposing to reorganize the board, potentially harming the rights of minority investors [4]. Group 3: Voting Rights Controversy - ST Lutong asserts that Wu Shichun has acquired at least 13.86% of the company's shares through disclosed and undisclosed voting rights delegation [5]. - The focus of the dispute is on the validity of the voting rights delegation agreement, which ST Lutong claims should have been publicly disclosed [7]. Group 4: Regulatory Actions - Following the court hearing, ST Lutong received a regulatory notice from the Shenzhen Stock Exchange for failing to timely notify shareholders about the meeting [9]. - The Jiangsu Securities Regulatory Bureau has also issued corrective measures against ST Lutong and a warning to its chairman, which will be recorded in the market integrity archives [10].