Alibaba’s initial public offering (IPO) on Friday in New York was a huge success. There is no doubt that at US$21.8 billion, it was the largest-ever US-listed IPO and it is possible that the figure could rise to US$25.02 billion if underwriters exercise an option to sell more shares, which might make it the biggest IPO in the world.
However, now comes the hard part. Alibaba will have to keep its e-commerce business moving ahead to justify its high valuation and meet market expectations. Not to imply that Alibaba’s business fundamentals are poor, but the company is facing challenges, including a slowing economy in China, and ever-increasing market competition.
There was also an important issue that received little attention in the run-up to Friday: Alibaba has a complex corporate structure where the ownership of its shares does not translate to having an influence on its management and getting hold of its Chinese assets.
Alibaba shares surged as high as 40 percent on its New York debut, a sign that investors value the company’s profitability outlook more than the potential risk that its management team might exploit deficiencies in corporate governance.
No one ever said investors behave rationally.
Alibaba is among several Chinese companies listed on US stock markets, including as Baidu, Sohu and Renren, that use the so-called “variable interest entity” (VIE) corporate structure to get around China’s strict foreign investment rules and fend off potential challenges by foreign shareholders. Under Alibaba’s VIE structure, investors buying its New York-listed shares actually own stakes in a Cayman Islands-registered entity, which is controlled by a partnership through a series of shell companies.
While Alibaba investors will receive a return on their investment like other stock investors, they have little title to the company’s online platforms such as Taobao and Tmall, nor do they have title to any of the company’s other Chinese assets.
If investors want to enforce their rights or make decisions about the company’s operations, they will have to do so based on the contracts between the Cayman Islands entity and Alibaba.
This is hardly what investors expect from the Chinese retailer giant. Despite the market euphoria over a potential stock rally, Mark Mobius, emerging market chief for Franklin Templeton Investments, warned in an interview last week with CNNMoney.com that Alibaba’s complicated ownership structure could mean little legal recourse should problems emerge at the company. He said it was a “very dangerous situation” for shareholders.
Another concern about Alibaba is its unusual management structure, in which a small group of executives, including chairman Jack Ma (馬雲), can nominate the majority of the board, even though they may only have a minority interest in the company, leaving investors with virtually no influence over the management.
It is worth noting that when Ma announced he would take Alibaba private in 2012 in Hong Kong, he wanted to use the move to strengthen his control over the company. He still has no intention of relinquishing control over the company and its assets.
It is not yet clear if Alibaba’s partnership management structure will help perpetuate the company’s innovative culture, as Ma once claimed. However, it is clear that investors are making bets on the people who run the company.
Friday’s IPO does not appear to have dampened investors’ enthusiasm for Alibaba. The main reason could be that there is real demand for Chinese stocks, let alone the temptation of something the size of Alibaba’s IPO, and investors going on a buying frenzy are those with higher risk tolerance.
Nevertheless, long-term questions about the company’s corporate governance remain and Alibaba will certainly face increasing scrutiny on Wall Street over its complex corporate structure.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry