高额返利资金盘骗局
Search documents
众安保险回应“百保君”爆雷:已转让全部股份
Di Yi Cai Jing· 2025-11-13 00:57
Core Viewpoint - The incident involving the high rebate scheme of Baibaokun, incubated by ZhongAn Insurance, has led to significant financial implications and ongoing investigations, with ZhongAn Insurance distancing itself from the operational management of Baibaokun [1][2]. Group 1: Company Actions - ZhongAn Insurance announced the complete transfer of shares in Baibaokun's operating company, Baibao (Shanghai) Technology Co., Ltd., following the high rebate incident [1]. - The company stated that it had not participated in the actual management of Baibao and had not received operational feedback since 2023 [1]. - ZhongAn Insurance is currently monitoring the investigation by law enforcement, claiming to be a victim in this situation [1]. Group 2: Business Model and User Impact - Baibaokun attracted customers through a model involving "purchase rights + excessive returns of JD.com gift cards + high points rewards," but is currently unable to fulfill promised returns [2]. - Users reported that the total amount involved in the Baibaokun incident could exceed 100 million yuan, although this figure has not been independently verified [2]. - The operational company, Baibao, was established in April 2021, with a registered capital of approximately 12.16 million yuan and a paid-in capital of 6.92 million yuan [2].
众安保险回应“百保君”暴雷
Di Yi Cai Jing Zi Xun· 2025-11-12 13:28
Core Viewpoint - The recent "Baibaojun high rebate incident" has led to significant developments for ZhongAn Insurance, including the transfer of all shares of Baibao Company, the operator of Baibaojun, by its subsidiary ZhongAn Technology [2][3]. Group 1: Company Actions - ZhongAn Insurance announced that it has transferred all shares of Baibao Company, which operates Baibaojun, following the high rebate incident [2]. - The company stated that it had not participated in the actual management of Baibao Company and had only invested through an intangible asset evaluation [2]. - ZhongAn Technology decided to exit Baibao Company in 2024 and signed a share transfer agreement in May 2025 [2]. Group 2: Incident Details - The Baibaojun platform utilized a model of "purchasing rights + excess return of JD.com gift cards + high reward points" to attract customers, but it is currently unable to fulfill promised returns [3]. - Reports suggest that the amount involved in the Baibaojun incident may exceed 100 million yuan, although this figure has not been independently verified [3]. - Baibao Company was established in April 2021, with a registered capital of approximately 12.16 million yuan and a paid-in capital of 6.92 million yuan [3].
众安保险回应“百保君”暴雷
第一财经· 2025-11-12 12:29
Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent "high rebate" incident involving Baibaojun, which was incubated by Zhong'an Insurance, and highlights the company's response and the ongoing investigation into the matter [3][4]. Group 1: Company Response - Zhong'an Insurance announced that its subsidiary, Zhong'an Technology, has transferred all shares of Baibao Company, the operator of Baibaojun, following the incident [3]. - The company stated that it had not participated in the actual management of Baibao Company and had not received operational feedback since 2023 [3]. - Zhong'an Insurance claims to be a victim in this situation and is monitoring the investigation by law enforcement [3]. Group 2: Incident Details - The Baibaojun platform attracted customers through a model involving "purchase rights + excessive returns of JD.com gift cards + high reward points," but it has failed to deliver promised returns [4]. - Users reported that the total amount involved in the Baibaojun incident could exceed 100 million yuan, although this figure has not been independently verified [4]. - Baibao Company was established in April 2021, with a registered capital of approximately 12.16 million yuan and only eight insured individuals in 2024 [4]. Group 3: Industry Analysis - Industry insiders suggest that the platform may have initially operated on a revenue-sharing model with partners but later shifted to a high-rebate scheme resembling a Ponzi scheme [5].