登录新浪财经APP 搜索【信披】查看更多考评等级 声 明 中国证监会、交易所对本次发行所作的任何决定或意见，均不表明其对申请文件及所披露信息的真实 性、准确性、完整性作出保证，也不表明其对发行人的盈利能力、投资价值或者对投资者的收益作出实 质性判断或保证。任何与之相反的声明均属虚假不实陈述。 根据《证券法》的规定，证券依法发行后，发行人经营与收益的变化，由发行人自行负责。投资者自主 判断发行人的投资价值，自主作出投资决策，自行承担证券依法发行后因发行人经营与收益变化或者证 券价格变动引致的投资风险。 重大事项提示 公司聘请中证鹏元为本次发行的可转换公司债券进行了信用评级，天准科技主体信用级别为AA-，本次 可转换公司债券信用级别为AA-，评级展望为稳定。 本次发行的可转换公司债券存续期内，评级机构将每年至少进行一次跟踪评级。如果由于外部经营环 境、公司自身情况或评级标准变化等因素，导致本次可转换公司债券信用评级降低，将会增大投资者的 投资风险，对投资者的利益产生一定影响。 三、关于公司本次发行可转换公司债券的担保事项 本次向不特定对象发行可转债不设担保。敬请投资者注意本次可转换公司债券可能因未设定担保而存在 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai Stock Exchange has approved Suzhou Tianzhun Technology Co., Ltd.'s issuance of convertible bonds, confirming that it meets the necessary issuance and listing conditions as well as information disclosure requirements [1] Group 1: Issuance Details - The total amount of the proposed convertible bonds to be issued is up to RMB 872 million, which will be used for various R&D and industrialization projects [3] - The projects include: - Industrial vision equipment and precision measurement instruments with a total investment of RMB 401.54 million, of which RMB 400 million will be funded by the raised capital - Semiconductor measurement equipment with a total investment of RMB 308.64 million, with RMB 278 million from the raised capital - Intelligent driving and embodied intelligent controllers with a total investment of RMB 201.10 million, with RMB 194 million from the raised capital [4] - The bonds will be issued at a face value of RMB 100 each and will have a term of 6 years from the date of issuance [4] Group 2: Market and Financial Considerations - The company was questioned about the market competition landscape and the rationality of capacity planning and benefit estimation for the fundraising projects, emphasizing the need for objective evidence regarding strong downstream customer demand and sufficient order reserves [2] - There was also an inquiry regarding the significant discrepancy between net cash flow from operating activities and net profit during the reporting period, requiring clarification on the rationale behind this difference [2]