This happen to be a well-reported news on the Chinese internet where I was able to find more details. And the author's own claims are dubious and sketchy. It was never a three way deal, he may have deals with a Chinese company that owns share. That maybe why he said it's a threeway deal, but it's two two-way deals. He never made any deal with Chinese officials, but another Chinese business owner who made the deal with the government. The fact he didn't say is that the company was in debt and bankrupted, whose employees are still trying to get paid for their work.
Another claim he make is that the local government did fulfill their monetary investment. The author said the money that the local government gave was not 'nearly enough', which is impossibly large tax-payer money, to build streamlined car production, but both parties agree to the deal in the beginning, it was the expectation. And the investor would of course, expect the invested to deliver the said product with said investment, which, as the author said, didn't happen.
What's more. There is an whisleblower within the company who work in the accounting department shared with the public on open internet months ago that the non-investing shareholders of the company who didn't put in any money, instead intellectual properties, take mortgage out of their shares, which would be unacceptable in most investment scenario because unless the patents are sold, it's outright stealing from the investing shareholder who put in actual money especially so when the final product weren't made and sold. The accountant told the public that those patents are bought with 2.2 million US dollar but were valued as 100 million, and 'technologies' that were included in the valuation are yet to be perfected, that can't be used in production.
This rant piece is nothing more than a shameful attempt to exploit American sentiment on Chinese 'property theft' trying to sway an on-going court judgement to the author's private financial interest.
If there are any wrong-doings should be left with the court to decide, but there are enough ground for an investigation to be launched, or at least, for the investor to be angry. If the author actually ran an successful operation, I would feel sorry for him, the evaluation issues won't be a problem, but that simply wasn't the case. It is a catastrophic waste of public money for a failed venture of the author and his partners.
I can not attest to if the author is making those claims unaware of those problems that he himself is also cheated by the other party, which is the Chinese company who mortgaged their shares and actually owns the patents. That company bought the company the author originally founded in the US, leading the private Chinese companies to own the author's patents.
I'd say the Chinese government is the fool in this scenario.
Author is an extremely successful businessman and inventor with something like 30+ years of track record running business in US without defrauding anyone.
Those business transactions could be easily verified. Had he been such a successful businessmen, why was their initiative failed so miserable as he himself acknowledged when the said fund is provided in full? He quite literally burned 100 million dollars over the course three years without the company being operational sustainable let alone profit, in what scenario would an investor be ok that their actual 100 million us dollar all turning into dust? His own operation here in the US are bankrupted as well, in what sense is that a successful business? or that he is a successful businessmen? All of those are year old material existed on the internet before his wsj piece. You should be easily able to find more. Following the bankruptcy, a company's asset will be liquidated. He also claimed the government filed patents without his consent, while it's the company he worked at filed and owned those patents, it's the company's property from the beginning, that's how it works, surprised? get a job. any financial investor would require how it should be done. Be reminded he have 100 million cash in hand to spend, while 'technology' was valued at 100 million too, with two parties each owning half of the company, which can't be said to be a bad deal.
BTW. There exsited over hundred start-up EV manufactures (who received investment) in China since around 2014. About 40 of them still exist as of today with the top 5 claiming over 90% of the market share (that does not include traditional car makers expanding their business). It is the most fiercest competition you could ever see and a powerhouse of innovation. Those information should be easily available to you had you know any VC person following this track.
Even if the author is presumably a 'sucessful businessman' by any definition. Ask how many of those failed ventures have a 'sucessful businessman' as their leader.
What's more. There is an whisleblower within the company who work in the accounting department shared with the public on open internet months ago that the non-investing shareholders of the company who didn't put in any money, instead intellectual properties, take mortgage out of their shares, which would be unacceptable in most investment scenario because unless the patents are sold, it's outright stealing from the investing shareholder who put in actual money especially so when the final product weren't made and sold. The accountant told the public that those patents are bought with 2.2 million US dollar but were valued as 100 million, and 'technologies' that were included in the valuation are yet to be perfected, that can't be used in production.
This rant piece is nothing more than a shameful attempt to exploit American sentiment on Chinese 'property theft' trying to sway an on-going court judgement to the author's private financial interest.
If there are any wrong-doings should be left with the court to decide, but there are enough ground for an investigation to be launched, or at least, for the investor to be angry. If the author actually ran an successful operation, I would feel sorry for him, the evaluation issues won't be a problem, but that simply wasn't the case. It is a catastrophic waste of public money for a failed venture of the author and his partners.
I can not attest to if the author is making those claims unaware of those problems that he himself is also cheated by the other party, which is the Chinese company who mortgaged their shares and actually owns the patents. That company bought the company the author originally founded in the US, leading the private Chinese companies to own the author's patents.
I'd say the Chinese government is the fool in this scenario.