Article / 23 September 2015 at 1:32 GMT

Qihoo's call on Coolpad leaves shareholders on hold

China Watcher / Shanghai
  • Qihoo has boosted its share of the Coolpad joint venture from 49.5% to 75%
  • The US-listed Chinese software firm is acting like a private company
  • The company's ongoing privatisation bid remains up in the air
  • Qihoo needs to properly communicate its intentions to shareholders

By Neil Flynn

The issue of corporate governance among US-listed Chinese firms has reared its ugly head again, after Qihoo signalled its intention to cash out of its smartphone joint venture amid corporate disagreement, only to increase its holding from 49.5% to 75% shortly afterwards.

In December, Qihoo entered into a joint venture agreement with domestic smartphone manufacturer Coolpad in order to produce a range of smartphones called Dazen. The concept was sound, because the hardware would be built by Coolpad and the software would be developed by Qihoo, offering customers a 'best of both worlds' product. 

However, shortly after the release of several Dazen smartphones, Qihoo announced that it had activated a put option in the JV agreement that allowed the firm to sell its 49.5% stake to Coolpad. The timing of the announcement was unusual, given that the first range of phones had just been released and Qihoo had been discussing their potential in its second quarter earnings release.


Qihoo's joint venture deal with smartphone maker Coolpad was a sound concept, but ran into difficulty when online video company LeTV gained a share in the venture. Photo: iStock

Concerns about the sustainability of the joint venture arose when LeTV acquired a stake in Coolpad. LeTV is an online video platform that has since moved into smartphones, smart TVs and is currently developing an electric supercar. 

This caused a problem for Qihoo, because it has been using its proprietary technology to develop the Coolpad Dazen smartphones, which will in turn indirectly influence the development of other Coolpad smartphones that are not part of the joint venture. LeTV would not only earn a profit from this, as a shareholder, but would also likely use the technology to develop its own-branded smartphones. This is in addition to LeTV being renowned for causing rifts with other technology firms (Xiaomi and Apple, among others).

Power play

Qihoo's activated clause would have required Coolpad to buyout Qihoo’s 49.5% stake for approximately $500 million, which never looked feasible, given that Coolpad’s market capitalisation is only $700mln. It became clear that it was just a power play, with Qihoo wanting nothing more than to gain further control of the joint venture and to marginalise LeTV’s involvement in Coolpad. 

Inevitably, the rift between Qihoo and Coolpad was resolved with Qihoo now holding a 75% stake in the joint venture, leaving it ripe for an eventually takeover by Qihoo should it prove successful.

With Qihoo now holding a dominant share in the joint venture, and presumably a form of Chinese wall to make sure that LeTV can’t use any of its technology, where does this leave Coolpad and LeTV? 

Coolpad’s future growth will likely be stunted because of the joint venture with Qihoo, which will almost certainly be bought out as soon as it becomes a viable long-term business, leaving Coolpad with a sub-standard smartphone range. LeTV likely won’t be able to reap the benefits to its own smartphone range that it expected to get when it acquired a stake in Coolpad in June, and investors will now be considering whether Coolpad is a viable long-term option for LeTV any more.

Corporate governance

On a wider view, it raises concerns of the levels of corporate governance that US-listed Chinese firms have in regards to shareholder clarity. I have been forthright in my criticism of Qihoo for failing to hold an earnings conference call after the release of its second-quarter earnings, the first since the announcement of the privatization bid. 

The lack of disclosure and lack of commentary other than the generic ‘the bid is still being evaluated’ is disappointing, particularly because no investor believes that the current bid will be completed, given that the premium stands at 62.6% as of last night’s close.

With the Coolpad concerns seemingly over, it has added to my concerns about Qihoo, on top of management’s lack of clarity towards the outstanding buyout bid, which is all but dead in the water. It is, in a sense, acting like a private company, which is all well and good given that the company is clearly moving in that direction. 

But while Qihoo is still a public company, more clarity should be given to shareholders. An inability to properly communicate intentions to the shareholders will see trust evaporate, and I expect that this will have a lasting effect on the firm, at least until it is inevitably privatised. 

It would be best for all parties if management completed the privatisation bid, although this would actually mean that the firm would have to provide clarity to shareholders.

– Edited by Robert Ryan

Neil Flynn is a China watcher based in Shanghai. Follow Neil or post your comment below to engage with Saxo Bank's social trading platform.


The Saxo Bank Group entities each provide execution-only service and access to permitting a person to view and/or use content available on or via the website is not intended to and does not change or expand on this. Such access and use are at all times subject to (i) The Terms of Use; (ii) Full Disclaimer; (iii) The Risk Warning; (iv) the Rules of Engagement and (v) Notices applying to and/or its content in addition (where relevant) to the terms governing the use of hyperlinks on the website of a member of the Saxo Bank Group by which access to is gained. Such content is therefore provided as no more than information. In particular no advice is intended to be provided or to be relied on as provided nor endorsed by any Saxo Bank Group entity; nor is it to be construed as solicitation or an incentive provided to subscribe for or sell or purchase any financial instrument. All trading or investments you make must be pursuant to your own unprompted and informed self-directed decision. As such no Saxo Bank Group entity will have or be liable for any losses that you may sustain as a result of any investment decision made in reliance on information which is available on or as a result of the use of the Orders given and trades effected are deemed intended to be given or effected for the account of the customer with the Saxo Bank Group entity operating in the jurisdiction in which the customer resides and/or with whom the customer opened and maintains his/her trading account. When trading through your contracting Saxo Bank Group entity will be the counterparty to any trading entered into by you. does not contain (and should not be construed as containing) financial, investment, tax or trading advice or advice of any sort offered, recommended or endorsed by Saxo Bank Group and should not be construed as a record of ourtrading prices, or as an offer, incentive or solicitation for the subscription, sale or purchase in any financial instrument. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, would be considered as a marketing communication under relevant laws. Please read our disclaimers:
- Notification on Non-Independent Invetment Research
- Full disclaimer

Check your inbox for a mail from us to fully activate your profile. No mail? Have us re-send your verification mail