IPO Radar | Behind Qingquan Shares' high growth, doubts about the fundraising logic

Ask AI · Qingspring Co., Ltd.’s shareholding is highly concentrated—how can the rights of minority shareholders be protected?

As a nationally recognized “Little Giant” company focused on specialization, excellence, and innovation, Jiangsu Qingspring Chemical Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Qingspring Co., Ltd.”) has drawn significant market attention for its listing on the ChiNext board.

In the fields of specialty fine chemicals and specialty high-performance new materials—especially with its core products MACM and 2-MeTHF—Qingspring Co., Ltd. has already secured a certain share of the global market. This time, in its attempt to get listed on the ChiNext board, the company plans to raise RMB 492 million to expand the production capacity of its core products, thereby achieving leapfrog development.

Amid strong performance growth and the halo of “domestic substitution,” a series of issues disclosed in Qingspring Co., Ltd.’s prospectus are also drawing attention. From a highly concentrated equity structure and customer dependence, to the “retreat” of its non-food bio-based strategy and setbacks in core R&D projects, and then to the risk of volatility behind its financial data—Qingspring Co., Ltd.’s path to listing is far from smooth.

One Share Dominates

Qingspring Co., Ltd.’s equity structure shows a distinct “one-share-dominant” characteristic. The company’s actual controller, Liu Jianhua, directly holds 1.03% of the shares. Through acting-in-concert relationships with Wang Huanyong and Shao Jianhua, as well as by controlling three platforms—Zhejiang Qingspring, Taizhou Qiyuan, and Taizhou Changxing—the total voting rights in control amount to 92.91% of the company. Liu Jianhua directly and indirectly holds 32.36% of the shares outstanding before the company’s issuance.

“More than 90% of the voting rights means the actual controller can fully steer the resolutions of shareholders’ meetings. Although this ensures decision-making efficiency, under a ‘one-share-dominant’ structure, it may also cause major decisions to tilt excessively toward the will of the actual controller. Ensuring that minority shareholders’ interests are not eroded is a major test of the company’s governance level.” Lin Fanyi, a private equity investor who has long followed chemical-industry IPOs, told the reporter of Jiemian News. Although Qingspring Co., Ltd. established systems such as independent directors and an audit committee before its filing, the balance of power still overwhelmingly favors the actual controller. Liu Jianhua not only serves as a director of the company, but also concurrently serves as chairman and general manager of the controlling shareholder Zhejiang Qingspring, as well as the executive affairs partner for the employee shareholding platforms Taizhou Qiyuan and Taizhou Changxing—directly taking part in key areas such as the company’s strategic formulation, operational management, and employee incentives. More notably, among the company’s nine board seats, four directors are appointed by the controlling shareholder Zhejiang Qingspring, meaning the actual controller can steer board decisions through the controlling shareholder’s nomination rights.

Regarding questions about “how to safeguard minority investors’ right to speak,” Qingspring Co., Ltd. stated that it “has established a relatively complete corporate governance structure and internal control system,” but it did not propose specific targeted protective measures. Protections such as a cumulative voting system or separate voting mechanisms for minority shareholders are not mentioned in the prospectus.

Source: Prospectus

Even more worrying is that Qingspring Co., Ltd. has historically had governance shortcomings. In the reporting period, the company had multiple instances of noncompliant financial and internal control practices, such as “loan rollovers,” ticket/bill cashing or “making change” for bills, related-party fund borrowing, and using an individual cashier’s personal card. For example, in 2022, Qingspring Co., Ltd. conducted “loan rollover” financing through a supplier, Yancheng Xinzheng Industry and Trade Co., Ltd., involving an amount as high as several tens of millions of RMB. Although the company said it has completed rectification, these actions expose weak links in its internal controls in the past.

How “real” is the green development strategy?

As a practitioner of the “dual carbon” strategy emphasized as a key focus in its prospectus, Qingspring Co., Ltd.’s development of its non-food bio-based product business shows a trend inconsistent with its strategic statements. In the reporting period, the proportion of the non-food bio-based series products in the company’s main business revenue fell from 44.77% in 2022 to 37.13% in the first half of 2025, a decline of more than 7 percentage points over three years. In sharp contrast, the revenue share of petroleum-based products represented by the new-material monomer MACM has continued to rise. Specifically, the revenue share of the petroleum-based product MACM surged from 20.37% to 38.50%.

Source: Prospectus

This ups-and-downs trend leads one to question the “realness” of Qingspring Co., Ltd.’s green development strategy. Does this mean that, driven by real profits, the company’s strategic focus has quietly shifted toward petroleum-based products with higher gross margins and broader markets? Is the company’s green development strategy facing pressure in actual implementation?

In relation to the questions above, Jiemian News reporters contacted Qingspring Co., Ltd. for an interview. As of the time of publication, no response had been received.

The prospectus shows that the gross margin of the company’s new-material monomer-type products is higher than that of bio-based, mainly green solvent-type products. This may become an internal driver for Qingspring Co., Ltd.’s potential strategic shift in focus.

In recent years, the state has continued to increase support for the non-food bio-based materials industry. Policies such as the “Implementation Plan for Carbon Peak in Industrial Sectors” and the “Implementation Plan for Innovative Development of the Fine Chemical Industry (2024–2027)” explicitly encourage the development of bio-based materials. If Qingspring Co., Ltd. continues to weaken its bio-based business, it may miss out on policy dividends and may even face operational pressure brought by stricter environmental regulation.

Risk Resonance

Qingspring Co., Ltd.’s operating performance relies heavily on specific customers, overseas markets, and core products. Multiple layers of reliance combined create potential risk exposures in operations.

For customers, the share of sales revenue from the company’s top five customers rose from 37.69% in 2022 to 62.91% in January–June 2025, nearly doubling over two years. Among them, the company’s sales share to anonymous customer A was 28.26% in the first half of 2025, with dependence deepening continuously. Once major customers (especially customer A) reduce purchases due to poor operations, product iteration, or shifting to competitors, the company’s performance may face a severe shock.

Regarding questions about “whether there is excessive reliance on a single customer,” Qingspring Co., Ltd. stated that “a stable customer base can provide the company with stable sources of profit,” and it did not disclose specific plans for alternative customer reserves or new market expansion. Meanwhile, based on the customer structure, the company’s main customers are industry giants such as IMCD Group and Grida Group, which have strong pricing power, potentially constraining the company’s pricing authority and profit margins.

Reliance on overseas markets also cannot be ignored. In the reporting period, the proportion of Qingspring Co., Ltd.’s overseas revenue to its main business revenue was 43.40%, 51.72%, 53.97%, and 54.04%, respectively, showing a steady upward trend. The revenue is mainly concentrated in countries such as Switzerland, India, and Japan. Against the backdrop of intensifying global trade frictions and frequent exchange-rate fluctuations, this regionally concentrated overseas sales structure faces multiple uncertainties.

Source: Prospectus

In terms of product structure, Qingspring Co., Ltd. shows an “one strong, many weak” pattern. The revenue share of the core product MACM rose from 20.37% in 2022 to 38.50% in January–June 2025, serving as the revenue pillar. Revenue from pharmaceutical and pesticide intermediates was RMB 286 million in 2022 and fell to RMB 178 million in 2023. The sharp decline in products such as CHDO and CPMK is the main reason.

Sales revenue fluctuations are intense for products such as CHDO and CPMK. In particular, CPMK revenue fell from RMB 85.98 million in 2022 to RMB 4.41T in January–June 2025, with its share dropping from 12.55% to 0.27%. Qingspring Co., Ltd. explained this as a pesticide-industry de-stocking cycle in 2023. This also reveals the sensitivity of some of the company’s products to downstream industry conditions.

For this IPO, Qingspring Co., Ltd. plans to use most of the funds raised to expand production capacity for MACM and 2-MeTHF. The company’s existing production capacity is already close to saturation, so capacity expansion is intended to meet market demand. However, whether the added capacity can be effectively absorbed by the market, the company has not provided sufficient convincing explanations.

From the perspective of industry competition, products such as MACM and 2-MeTHF have already attracted international giants like BASF and MINAFIN to compete. Qingspring Co., Ltd.’s current global market shares of 28% and 19% face challenges. At the same time, if it cannot continue to consolidate technological and cost advantages while adding capacity, it may fall into a vicious cycle of “capacity expansion—price war—profit decline.”

Source: Prospectus

Source: Prospectus

The necessity of Qingspring Co., Ltd.’s plan to invest RMB 80 million to replenish working capital is also worth questioning. In the reporting period, the company’s operating cash flow remained positive throughout, at RMB 68.2041 million, RMB 164.7697 million, RMB 160.1327 million, and RMB 59.2616 million, respectively. Its asset-liability ratio declined year by year, from 44.03% at the end of 2022 to 24.63% at the end of June 2025. Overall, its financial position is relatively robust. A sponsor representative said, “With ample internal cash flow and a healthy leverage ratio, if it still allocates funds to replenish working capital as a funded project, regulators may ask about the necessity and reasonableness of the capital-raising. Companies need to further clarify exactly where the future funding gap is reflected.”