阿里巴巴在美上市可能仍有利于香港

    两位知情人士告诉路透社（Reuters），由于未能和香港监管部门就赴港上市问题达成一致，中国电子商务公司阿里巴巴（Alibaba Group Holding Ltd）已经决定在纽约首发。

    一位了解谈判情况的阿里巴巴内部人士透露：“我们和香港方面的谈判已经结束，目前正在把重心转移到启动美国上市程序方面。”这位没有得到公开披露授权的内部人士同时还称，阿里巴巴已经聘请美国律师事务所开展相关工作，而且很快就会聘请投资银行来安排上市事宜。

    阿里巴巴高层以及香港证券交易所拒绝就此事发表评论。

    硅谷一些公司的情况已经表明，上市未必意就味着放弃控制权。虽然谷歌（Google）和Facebook的创始人不再掌握多数股权，但他们所持的股份都拥有超级表决权，让他们在行使管理权的过程中拥有超过外部投资者的话语权。

    身为中国最大网络公司的创始人，董事长马云也迫切希望保护阿里巴巴，以免那些不受欢迎的、鼓吹短期变化的外部人士影响这家公司。但港交所要求所有股东必须得到同等待遇。于是，阿里巴巴提出授权一部分高管，也就是该公司的合伙人来决定董事会多数成员的提名。如果认为被提名人不合格，外部投资者可以投反对票，但不能自行推荐候选人。

    阿里巴巴的理由是，有些香港大亨可以通过一系列部分上市的子公司来控制自己的商业帝国，和他们相比，阿里巴巴的管理结构并不排斥股东。但在香港首发上市必须通过港交所上市委员会和香港证监会的审核。监管部门的结论是，合伙人虽然只持有阿里巴巴13%的股权，但仍然拥有控制权，在这个问题上他们不能通融。

    阿里巴巴可能带来今年规模最大的IPO，失去它无疑会让香港感到痛心。但即使面对阿里巴巴这样规模庞大的企业，香港也拒绝在规则方面做出让步，从长远来看肯定会提升香港的声誉。

    同时，美国网络公司上市的门槛非常低，阿里巴巴的到来可能会提高这方面的标准。尽管合伙人制度没有直接发行两类股票那么透明，阿里巴巴并不能完全无视外部股东。只要阿里巴巴能善用这样的非常规管理结构，它选择纽约、而不是香港可能对这两座城市来说都是件好事。（财富中文网）

    译者：Charlie   

    Chinese e-commerce company Alibaba Group Holding Ltd has decided to hold an initial public offering in New York after talks with Hong Kong regulators broke down over a listing in the Asian financial hub, two sources familiar with the discussions told Reuters.

    "We've come to the end of dialogue with Hong Kong and we're pivoting to the U.S. to start the listing process," a company source familiar with the discussions said. Alibaba has engaged U.S. law firms to start working on its IPO and will soon be hiring banks to manage the listing, added the company source, who was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.

    Officials at Alibaba and the Hong Kong stock exchange declined to comment.

    Silicon Valley has shown that going public needn't mean giving up control. Though the founders of Google (GOOG) and Facebook (FB) no longer own a majority of their companies, they exercise authority through super-voting shares that give them a bigger say than outside investors.

    As the founder of China's biggest internet company, Alibaba Chairman Jack Ma is also keen to protect the company from the influence of unwanted outsiders agitating for short-term change. But the Hong Kong stock exchange requires all shareholders to be treated equally. As a result, the e-commerce group proposed giving a group of senior executives -- known as the partnership -- the right to nominate a majority of the directors on its board. Outside investors would still be able to vote against any proposed directors they felt did not meet the grade. But they would not be able to install their own candidates.

    Alibaba argued that its structure was no less shareholder-friendly than the Hong Kong tycoons who can maintain control over their empires through cascades of partially-listed subsidiaries. But Hong Kong IPOs must pass muster with the exchange's listing committee and the Securities and Futures Commission. Regulators concluded that the partnership would still exercise control despite holding just 13% of the shares, and refused to make an exception. Alibaba is now considering a listing in the United States, probably early next year.

    Losing what would have been the biggest IPO of the year is undoubtedly painful for Hong Kong. But its reluctance to bend the rules, even for a company of Alibaba's size, will only enhance its reputation in the long term.

    Meanwhile, Alibaba's approach might actually raise the very low bar for listed internet groups in the United States. Though the partnership approach is less transparent than just issuing two different classes of stock, the company cannot entirely ignore its external shareholders. As long as Alibaba uses its unorthodox structure sensibly, its preference for New York over Hong Kong may be a good outcome for both cities.