Recently, the fake expert event broke out again in the teleconference of securities companies.
An expert allegedly from Hangzhou Biotest Biotech Co.Ltd(688767) claimed in the teleconference of securities companies that " Andon Health Co.Ltd(002432) test kit is not reliable, and the United States is ready to cancel the authorization for emergency use of ihealth products". The stock price of the latter plunged 9.48% due to crazy market rumors. On that day, many investors asked the company whether the information was true on the interactive platform, and Andon Health Co.Ltd(002432) clearly responded that it was a rumor. As a competitor of Andon Health Co.Ltd(002432) company, Hangzhou Biotest Biotech Co.Ltd(688767) also denied that the expert was a member of the company and said that he had not participated in the rumor Zheshang Securities Co.Ltd(601878) Research Institute also responded afterwards, but did not disclose the identity of the experts attending the meeting, only indicating that the information or opinions expressed by the experts in the teleconference belong to their personal views and do not represent the views of the Research Institute.
After the incident, the relevant parties removed their respective responsibilities, and the identity of experts causing great controversy has been a mystery. Only the anger of investors continues to ferment on major platforms. Throughout this incident, no matter what the expert's identity is, it is a fact that the relevant information claimed affected the market and caused stock price fluctuations.
For this incident, the author believes that it should be viewed from the two dimensions of nature and consequences. First of all, from the key information expressed by the expert in the teleconference, it is a factual description that " Andon Health Co.Ltd(002432) test kit is not reliable and the United States is ready to cancel the emergency use authorization of ihealth products", which is not a personal view based on facts. On such a professional and formal occasion as the telephone analysis conference of securities companies, if the information disclosed is inconsistent with the facts, it can be regarded as rumor, which has nothing to do with the identity of experts and should bear legal responsibility at the same time.
Secondly, as the sponsor, such exchanges of securities companies will have a direct impact on the operation of institutions. There should be a basic verification process for the identity of experts, and take the minimum responsibility and responsibility, rather than cutting things off on the basis of personal views afterwards. In the long run, such exchanges will be alienated into the source of information divergence and even false information, which will inevitably affect the institutional professional attributes and credibility of securities companies. The author believes that if this news is identified as false, then no matter whether the organizer is negligent or informed concealment, it objectively assists the existence and spread of false experts and false news, and should at least bear joint and several liability.
The occurrence of fake experts in the teleconference of securities companies is not an isolated case in the industry. Afterwards, the relevant penalties will also affect securities companies. At the beginning of 2020, the media team of Huachuang Securities Research Institute held a teleconference to invite the so-called "Yuanwang network experts" to participate in the discussion, but it was exposed on the spot by the Yuanwang network secretary who accessed the teleconference: the identity of the experts was fake and the introduction was untrue. The results of the post regulatory investigation showed that pan, a researcher, was indeed invited to participate in roadshows and teleconferences for many times when he knew that the identity of the "expert" was untrue. Guizhou securities regulatory bureau took administrative regulatory measures to issue a warning letter to Huachuang securities and identified pan as an inappropriate candidate.
Referring to the case of Huachuang securities, the author believes that Zheshang Securities Co.Ltd(601878) this incident should have clear responsibilities and rights after the regulatory intervention. However, different from the case of Huachuang securities, this incident directly caused fluctuations in the Andon Health Co.Ltd(002432) share price of "lying gun". It will be a new problem who should bear the losses of investors. At the same time, if the relevant personnel of the host securities firm know the identity of experts, but allow them to be rated as competitors of Listed Companies in the teleconference, is this behavior appropriate? Or does it constitute a conflict of interest? This is also worthy of reflection by regulatory authorities or industry associations. The author believes that after the facts are clearly identified, in addition to the due punishment, there should also be a corresponding complaint and compensation mechanism for the losses of investors, otherwise we can't make an example.
The capital market is changing rapidly, and the fairness of transactions is based on real market information. As participants, both institutions and individuals should strive to maintain the openness and fairness of market information. Speculation such as fabricating false information and arbitrage should not be allowed to become popular without intervention, otherwise they may suffer in the next step. Even with luck, the market is the ultimate victim, and no one can be spared.
