仅有39岁的蒋凡，进入了阿里的权力核心。 2025 年6 月26 日，阿里在其年报中披露，阿里巴巴合伙人委员会成员更迭，电商事业群CEO 蒋凡首次入列。 一、来时与归去：国企VS民企 从马云到张勇，再到蔡吴搭档，以及冉冉升起的新星蒋凡，作为民企的阿里，在接班人的选择与交接上，充分开放，能者上位。 与阿里同处一城的娃哈哈，其路径却与阿里迥异——这家国资占据第一大股东的巨头，权力更迭在家族内部流动——从宗庆后到宗馥莉。 如何做好接班，是事关企业前途的关键命题，对于股权复杂的娃哈哈，尤为如此。 娃哈哈的特殊之处在于，其所有权和经营权分离，国资虽然身为第一大股东，但对于经营和接班，似乎并无足够的话语权。 虽然同处杭州，但某种程度上，阿里与娃哈哈不同源、不同路、不同命。 阿里是民企，由马云等人创立，通过风投机构获得发展资金，而后借势时代红利，跻身全球互联网巨头。 与阿里不同，虽然宗庆后是娃哈哈的精神图腾，但其实，娃哈哈并非原汁原味的民营企业。 从其改制历史来看，娃哈哈是从全民所有制，过渡改制到混合所有制。从经营体系来看，由于至今仍为第一大股东的国资充分放权，所以公司发展基本上 由宗庆后家族主导。 如何在权力交接中，既能 ...

Core Points - The transition of leadership at Wahaha has been marked by significant turmoil following the death of former chairman Zong Qinghou, with Zong Fu Li now at the helm [1][2] - The company is facing operational challenges, including forced employee relocations and production line shutdowns, which have raised concerns about its management and future direction [16][19] - The ambiguity surrounding Wahaha's status as a state-owned or private enterprise has led to ongoing debates about governance and asset management [4][11] Group 1: Leadership Transition - Zong Fu Li officially took over as the legal representative and chairman of Wahaha, indicating a complete leadership change [1] - The company has experienced a rapid decline in public trust and sales following a series of controversies surrounding Zong Fu Li's management style and decisions [2][22] - The leadership transition has been characterized by a stark contrast in management styles between Zong Fu Li and her predecessor, leading to employee dissatisfaction and operational disruptions [21][25] Group 2: Operational Challenges - Many production lines have been shut down since the Spring Festival, affecting approximately 1,500 employees and leading to significant income reductions for workers [16][19] - Employees have expressed confusion and frustration over the company's direction, questioning whether they are working for Wahaha or for Zong Fu Li personally [4][19] - The company has faced criticism for outsourcing production while its own lines remain inactive, raising quality concerns among consumers [16][19] Group 3: Corporate Structure and Governance - Wahaha's ownership structure is complex, with significant stakes held by both state-owned and private entities, leading to confusion about its classification as a state-owned or private enterprise [4][5] - The recent trademark transfer of the "Wahaha" brand has sparked debates about potential state asset losses, with legal implications still under scrutiny [11][13] - The historical context of Wahaha's establishment and its ties to state support complicate its current governance and operational strategies [6][7]