According to reports, on the afternoon of January 8, Yinjiang Technology issued a "solemn statement" on the official Weibo to refute the rumors, mainly clarifying that "the company lost the judicial lawsuit and compensated 1.5 billion yuan" and "the headquarters of Yinjiang Fuyang has been emptied", but this statement was quickly deleted. On the evening of the same day, Yinjiang Technology issued a letter to disclose the announcement, saying that it received a call from investors on the same day to consult the company's production and operation and whether there are any major matters, and after the company's self-inspection, the company's current production and operation situation is normal, and there is no other material information that should be disclosed but not disclosed.
Originally, Yinjiang Technology stated in a statement that "the production and operation of the company and its subsidiaries are normal, the core team is stable, and there is no major litigation compensation".However, in the official announcement, there is no direct reply to the "rumors" involved in the litigation that investors are concerned about, and whether "there is no other material information that should be disclosed but has not been disclosed" can represent "no major litigation compensation", which seems to be a bit ambiguous, and the official announcement may not help investors solve their concerns about litigation.
At present, the information disclosure of some listed companies is still not targeted and effective. The "* Law" stipulates that the information disclosed by the disclosure obligor shall be true, accurate, complete, concise and clear, easy to understand, and there shall be no false statement. In the author's view, these provisions are mainly from the perspective of the quality of the content of the disclosure, but for the disclosure of information such as the answers of some listed companies, the pertinence and effectiveness of the disclosure should also be strengthened, and the information disclosure should be guided by the needs of investors.
For example, the Shenzhen Stock Exchange has issued guidelines for information disclosure on the "rumors and clarifications" of listed companies, and the main board has also issued the "Guidelines for the Format of Clarification Announcements of Listed Companies", which requires the explanation of "whether it is true and the specific circumstances" for the rumors, and these requirements should be said to be more detailed and specific. However, the above-mentioned Guidelines have been superseded by the Shenzhen Stock Exchange's Guidelines for the Standardized Operation of Listed Companies.
In the author's view, one of the purposes of information disclosure of listed companies is to help investors solve their doubts and present investors with the information they want to know (except for confidentiality), that is, to be guided by the needs of investors. Listed companies disclose a basket of information, or say some principled and insignificant words in general, that is, do not give direct answers to investors' questions, which may be contrary to the purpose of information disclosure.
The Administrative Measures for Information Disclosure of Listed Companies stipulate that mandatory disclosure is required if there is a major event that may have a greater impact on the listed company. At present, the market circulates from time to time a small essay about the major events of listed companies, the authenticity of this information is doubtful, if it is true, it may have a significant impact on the stock price, if it is a rumor, the stock price should not fluctuate. In the author's opinion, if a listed company discovers rumors about a major event, or if investors inquire about whether a major event has occurred through various channels, the listed company should take the initiative to issue a clarification announcement. If the scope of circulation is wide (the stock exchange can make relevant definitions such as influence), then the listed company has the obligation to compulsorily disclose the information, and if the listed company fails to clarify, the stock exchange has the right to require it to clarify and disclose the relevant rumors.
As for the format of the clarification announcement, the stock exchange should issue guidelines or templates to allow listed companies to directly answer market rumors, whether it is "true" and "specific circumstances". To this end, the listed company should understand the true situation from the relevant parties, and if necessary, should make written inquiries and clarify them after full inquiries. Of course, some information may still be in a state of uncertainty, or it is still difficult for listed companies to make judgments, which must be truthfully disclosed, and the content of the clarification announcement must of course meet the requirements of the authenticity of the letter disclosure.
In August last year, the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges issued regulatory guidelines for the evaluation of information disclosure, which included an evaluation of the effectiveness of information disclosure by listed companies, focusing on "whether the disclosed information reflects the company's situation in a targeted manner, and fully and timely warns of possible uncertainties and risks."whether the disclosed information is oriented to the needs of investors and is conducive to investors making value judgments and investment decisions". It is suggested that when evaluating the information disclosure work of listed companies, the stock exchange should focus on the clarification and disclosure of market rumors by listed companies, pay close attention to the effectiveness of their information disclosure, and whether it is guided by the needs of investors.
Written by Xiong Niu San.
Edited by Yue Caizhou.
Proofread by Liu Baoqing.