There is no evidence that the huge sums of money manipulated by the financial data

The predecessor of the Hubei Axles (000760) was the investment of Bo Ying, after the reorganization of the renamed June 27 this year issued a "major asset sales and related transactions report," plans to the original major shareholder of the Jingzhou Hengfeng agreement to transfer the holding of the 63.28% stake and Jingzhou Bridge 100% stake, The total transfer price is 171.8387 million yuan. According to the company's disclosure of the relevant asset assessment report data, Hubei axles shareholders of the total interest of the value of 193.7452 million yuan, Jingzhou axle shareholders of all rights and interests of the evaluation value is 49.2367 million yuan, however, compared to the company in 2013, the acquisition of Wuhan 100% stake in the price, Red Weekly suspected that the listed companies have low pricing, sale of assets and transfer of interest to affiliated parties. After all, in 2013, when the listed company acquired Wuhan, the price of Wuhan was appraised as high as 500 million yuan, and according to the information disclosed in the 2013 annual report, The net profit achieved by the company in that year was only 77,600 yuan; the Hubei axles and Jingzhou Bridge, which was sold in the current plan, achieved a net profit of 13.587 million yuan and 2.4692 million yuan in 2013, dozens of times times and hundreds of times times that of Wuhan, but the total value of the two companies was less than half that of Wuhans. In addition, the listed companies have previously released the acquisition information and annual report data, but also found that there are many "highlights" worth inspiring. The confusing acquisition price of Wuhan Steyr formerly known as "Wuhan Indus Silicon Valley Paradise Investment Co., Ltd.", which itself is a shell company, the only effective asset is held in Austria Steyr Motors GmbH (the Power), the main business for the provision of engine design, consulting, Production and installation of a full range of solutions. According to the information disclosed by listed companies in the "Non-public offering stock plan" issued in January 2013, at that time, the plan by 4.77 yuan/share price additional 314.4653 million shares for the acquisition of Wuhan, the acquisition of the price of 500 million yuan, and the original shareholders of the assets, that is, listed companies targeted shares, The "new superior" large shareholder of the listed companies commitment to the British steel structure, Wuhan, 2013, 2014, 2015 Annual audit deduction of non-recurrent profit and loss after the net profit is not less than 230 million yuan, 340 million yuan and 610 million yuan. The acquisition was not completed until the 4th quarter of 2013, as a result of a series of subsequent approval procedures, and the purchase price of Wuhan is still expected to be 500 million yuan, according to a report on the issue of Non-public offering shares issued on December 6, 2013 and a public announcement. But on January 16, 2014, the company issued a notice, said, "under the agreement on the transfer of shares, the transferee will be paid to the assignor to pay the price of 440 million Yuan", which was issued before the plan and bulletin content is not consistent, for this, listed companies did not do more to explain. By April 2, when the company released its 2013 annual report, it was recorded inThe parent company under the long-term equity investment subject, "Sloane Power Co., Ltd." the original value of the book is only 440.8254 million yuan, this amount and the company has paid 440 million yuan equity transfer money is not consistent, the company also did not give any explanation. According to the accounting standards in accordance with the cost method of accounting for long-term equity investment accounting requirements, the original value of the recorded investment should be the purchase amount plus the direct related cost of the acquisition, but excluding the declared and unpaid dividend on the day of purchase, and the balance of the balance sheet of the parent company of the listed company, there is no balance in the receivable dividend account, From this, it can be concluded that in the acquisition of Wuhan, there is no "announced, no dividend" of the adjustment factors. So why is this 60 million-dollar purchase that has been cut out of thin air? Not only that, but from the cash flow statement data disclosed in 2013, it contains "net cash paid by subsidiaries and other business units" The amount of the subject is only 421.2619 million yuan, not only less than 500 million yuan of the estimated purchase price, but also less than the listed company parent company into long-term equity investment in the cost amount, which is equally puzzling. The profits manipulated by the listed companies before the acquisition of Wuhan, the original holder, the current major shareholder of the public company of the British Tatsu steel structure has promised Wuhan 2013 to achieve a net profit of up to 230 million yuan, if not to meet the needs of the listed companies to compensate for the performance. In fact, however, the net profit achieved by Wuhan in 2013 is only a paltry 77,600 yuan, not a fraction of the promised amount, but the Anglo-Brazilian steel structure is still free from huge performance compensation. Because in the 2013 report also disclosed such a message: "If the Bo Ying investment in 2013 years before the completion of this non-public offering, then the steel structure will be the above-mentioned performance compensation period postponed." Commitment deadline: Performance commitment compensation period for 2014, 2015 and 2016 degrees. In other words, because the listed companies in 2013 years to complete the acquisition of Wuhan, so the original agreed 2013 years to achieve 230 million yuan net profit, was "translated" to 2014 years. What is intriguing about this is that Wuhans's ability to manipulate the net profit of the Delta is too "remarkable"? A net profit of up to $230 million, depending on the time requirement, would allow Wuhans to be available within 2013 years, or the company would be available in 2014. Wuhan's profitability is like a "doll" is generally played between the palm, was manipulated thoroughly, then this is a normal, continuous operation of the company? Why is its profitability able to move arbitrarily straddling in accordance with the wishes of its shareholders? Inconsistent subsidiary data according to the audit data disclosed in the Steyr of the asset sales report, Hubei axles the total assets at the end of 2013 was only 570.9485 million yuan, but as early as in the 2013 annual report issued by the company, the main subsidiaries disclosed in the Board reports were financiallyInformation shows that at the end of the year, the total assets of the Hubei axles amounted to 581.2671 million yuan, the two groups of data differed by tens of millions of dollars; at the same time, by comparing the two editions of Jingzhou Bridge and the related financial data of Hubei Chei in the end of 2012, it is consistent that the caliber of audit data of two edition So how does this discrepancy amount to tens of millions of dollars in asset conflicts, and how is it generated? Which version of the financial data disclosed is true? In other words, which version of the financial report disclosed Hubei axles total asset data is suspected of fraud? It is noteworthy that these two sets of data are audited data, and audit firms are ZHONGCAI Hing Guanghua accounting firm, which is really incredible! Huge revenues do not support a comparison of previous periodic financial reports by listed companies, The company achieved sales revenue of 145 million yuan in the 4th quarter of 2013, and when the quarterly sales of goods cash inflow is only 67.3723 million yuan, even if not taking into account value-added tax factors, the difference of about 80 million yuan should also form an increase in receivables. However, comparing the disclosure of the data on the balance sheet of the bill, The net value of accounts receivable at the end of the year is 237.6727 million yuan, compared with the end of the third quarter of 176.778 million yuan only increased by about 60 million yuan, while the balance of notes receivable from the end of the third quarter of 73.6301 million yuan down to the end of 66.2727 million yuan, the decline as much as nearly million yuan. The two totals led to a net increase in the amount of receivables in the 1th quarter of 2013, which was no more than 60 million yuan, but it was far from reasonable to explain the discrepancy between the company's operating income and cash flow data, up to 80 million yuan, the company's so-called huge revenues, The inability to fully support other financial data is equally worrisome. In response to the above issues, Red weekly in the form of an e-mail interview with the company, however, as of the time of this newspaper, still did not receive the relevant response.