EDU浑水一潭

maybeapril

仔细读，昨天EDU自己发布的报告似乎很模糊: “no significant evidence”隐约还是有证据的。The Company does have ownership, full or partial ownership?  
========================
“‪The Special Committee’s work on the “franchise” issue uncovered no significant evidence that supports the Muddy Waters allegation mentioned above.  The evidence collected indicates that the Company does have ownership interests in its 55 schools and associated learning centers.  The activity related to the 21 third parties with whom New Oriental has entered into brand “cooperation agreements” is entirely separate, is immaterial, and in any event is properly accounted for in the Company’s financial statements. The Special Committee’s work on the tax issue uncovered no significant evidence that supports the Muddy Waters allegation mentioned above.”
=========================
如果浑水他们手里还有重料未曝光，那浑水肯定不会善罢甘休 （Muddy Waters ‘Convinced’ New Oriental Misleading Investors），那EDU就有被打到新低的危险。

源济

rightonmoney

有那家公司真的一点问题都没有的。浑水就是拿住这点了。

silicon_beaver

jerrywu

maybeapril

Two big questions behind the statement:
1) What does it mean by "no significant evidence"?
2) How much does the Company have ownership interests in its 55 schools and associated learning centers?

Read it by yourself:

The company says: ”‪The Special Committee’s work on the “franchise” issue uncovered no significant evidence that supports the Muddy Waters allegation mentioned above. The evidence collected indicates that the Company does have ownership interests in its 55 schools and associated learning centers. The activity related to the 21 third parties with whom New Oriental has entered into brand “cooperation agreements” is entirely separate, is immaterial, and in any event is properly accounted for in the Company’s financial statements. The Special Committee’s work on the tax issue uncovered no significant evidence that supports the Muddy Waters allegation mentioned above.”