5 ms·
Simplest explanation is that they are involved in some kind of fraud. Given that Chinese companies and their financial data are notoriously difficult to obtain
by thisisit 8y ago
Simplest explanation is that they are involved in some kind of fraud.
Given that Chinese companies and their financial data are notoriously difficult to obtain, it is no surprise either.
- jpatokal 8y agoThese are companies registered in Hong Kong though, where data like this is easily available, as evinced by the website in question.
- slygent 8y agoI'm the author of this article. Unfortunately financial and officer/director data for Hong Kong private companies is hidden behind a paywall (see details here under the section Tear Down That Wall: https://webb-site.com/articles/identity2.asp https://webb-site.com/articles/identity2.asp), although at least it is available, as far as it goes, but even then, the Ultimate Beneficial Owner is not public. [This is the situation currently being litigated against Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou, who it is claimed still controlled a Hong Kong company Skycom (https://dataguru.hk/hkcompany?crno=0644842 https://dataguru.hk/hkcompany?crno=0644842) behind the scenes].
- Lordarminius 8y agoI'm the author of this article. Can you address the question of why this phenomenon exists ?
- slygent 8y agoWhich phenomenon? Being the author of an article? ;) If you mean "why are names of companies being changed every couple of months?", I really have no idea, especially given that some of these companies seem to be linked, so it's not like different groups of people are doing it. Perhaps. If you mean "why is the Hong Kong government making its Companies Registry less transparent over time?", there are some landmines involving China and tycoons that I'm not going to risk stepping on here, at least right now.
- reactor4 8y agoNo he meant “being the author of an article".
- alehul 8y agoThis is being downvoted, but plausible. Many on HN have commented on the phenomenon of how the author of the article always manages to chime in, much more frequently than somewhere like Reddit despite the relatively tiny userbase of HN. Maybe it's more welcoming here? Not sure if I'm defending someone who is joking or not, but I would be interested to know how people come across their own articles on here (along with the more obvious question re: these Hong Kong companies).
- gumby 8y ago> ...but I would be interested to know how people come across their own articles on here... You might see a spike in traffic with a HN referrer or a friend my tell you “hey, saw your article on HN” I have had friends comment privately on my comments on HN.
- Lordarminius 8y agoI meant the phenom of frequent name changes observed among some Hong Kong companies
- jpollock 8y agoA simpler reason would be that it is cheaper to change control and name of a company than it is to set one up. Then you have a market to rent the business.
- Para2016 8y agoSort of like a reverse merger?
- pixl97 8y agoWhich sounds like a great avenue for fraud.
- pliu 8y agoI recently read Billion Dollar Whale (https://www.amazon.com/Billion-Dollar-Whale-Fooled-Hollywood/dp/031643650X https://www.amazon.com/Billion-Dollar-Whale-Fooled-Hollywood...) which I enjoyed. It seemed to me to be surprisingly easy to launder money through shell companies like the ones listed here. I would speculate also that a company with many name changes would involved in some weird stuff.
- gammateam 8y agoOr a great avenue for just skipping the bullshit when a supplier requires 5 years of some administrative nuance that a new company would never have