Robot Industry "Infighting": Open Battles Right After Listing - How Much Has Been Revealed?
Hello everyone, I'm your financial analyst. Recently, something quite "magical" and sensational has happened within the robotics community. In simple terms, the founder of a robotics company that had just gone public on the Hong Kong stock market started criticizing his peers on social media, directly accusing them of fabricating revenue and engaging in related-party transactions, even dragging a large company named "Galaxy General" into the spotlight.
This incident not only caused a sudden breakdown in relations between the two companies but also made the entire robotics industry (especially those with high valuations but little actual revenue) shudder. Today, I will break down the causes and consequences of this incident, the logic behind it, and its profound impact on us ordinary investors and the industry into five key aspects, helping you understand the truth behind this "verbal battle."
---
1. The Trigger: Why the Public Outcry Right After Listing?
First, we need to understand why Shao Tianlan, the founder of Meikamand, chose this moment to take action:
1. Embarrassing Situation: Stock Price Drops After Listing
Meikamand is a company that manufactures core components for robots, such as eyes, brains, and hands, and is part of the traditional robotics supply chain. It went public on the Hong Kong stock market on September 1st with an issue price of HK$101.7. However, the stock price has since plummeted, hitting a low of HK$75, and its current market value is only HK$11.9 billion.
- Implication: As a company that had just gone public, a drop in stock price must be very disheartening for the founder. It seems unfair that other companies in the industry can get high valuations by simply selling a good story, while Meikamand, which relies on selling tangible components and is still in the red, faces such challenges.
2. Changing Industry Trends: Tighter Regulations
Around the time Shao Tianlan made his accusations, there were reports that regulatory authorities were setting higher requirements for robotics companies going public (IPOs). Previously, valuations might have been based on concepts or the amount of financing raised, but now they require proof of "sustainable revenue" and "real technological innovation."
- Implication: The regulators are trying to eliminate inflated valuations. Shao Tianlan saw this as an opportunity to clear the industry of fraud and establish Meikamand's reputation as a legitimate player.
3. Motivation: More Than Just Criticism, It's About Building a Image
Shao Tianlan emphasized in an interview, "We don't want to operate our company as a game focused on market value and valuation."
- Interpretation: By publicly criticizing his peers, he aims to create an image of Meikamand as honest, pragmatic, and not involved in speculative practices. This is a strategic move in the capital market: to show investors that, despite the current drop in stock price, Meikamand is doing real business, while others with high valuations might be taking reckless risks.
---
2. The Core Accusations: What Are These "Manipulative" Companies Really Up To?
Shao Tianlan's most damning claim was the concept of "manipulative embodied intelligence companies." In simple terms, it means companies creating their own fake transactions.
1. What is "Manipulation"?
Imagine Company A, a robotics company, trying to appear profitable and busy with business. Instead of finding real customers, it sets up several companies with its own shareholders, friends, or related parties.
- Tactic 1: Data Collection Centers: Company A creates a "data collection center" to collect data for training robots. Then, it sells robots to this center or has the center purchase its services, inflating its revenue.
- Tactic 2: Rental Companies: Company A sets up a rental company to lease robots to itself or related parties.
- Tactic 3: Joint Ventures: Company A forms joint ventures with component suppliers, buying parts from them or selling robots to these ventures.
2. Why Do They Do This?
- For Listing: IPOs require attractive financial reports, especially revenue growth. Without real external customers, they rely on internal transactions to create a illusion of success.
- For Valuation: Investors look at financial reports; higher revenue and faster growth lead to higher valuations, making it easier to raise more capital or get a better price at listing.
3. Shao Tianlan's Warning: A Vicious Cycle
Shao Tianlan pointed out that this fraud is unsustainable. If a company relies on related-party transactions to generate 1 billion in revenue this year, it will need to generate 2 billion next year to maintain growth. This leads to an endless cycle of deception, and any break in the funding chain or strict regulatory scrutiny can lead to immediate collapse.
---
3. The Target: Why Galaxy General?
Although Shao Tianlan didn't name Galaxy General directly in his post, he mentioned it in the comments. Why was it chosen as a target?
1. A Typical "New Rich of 2023":
Galaxy General was founded in 2023, just as the AI and humanoid robotics sectors were booming. It completed five rounds of financing, raising approximately 6.9 billion yuan, with a valuation of 20 billion yuan.
- Comparison: Meikamand, founded 10 years earlier, went public after 15 rounds of financing with a market value of 11.9 billion yuan. Galaxy General's rapid valuation raises doubts about the solidity of its business model.
2. Management Changes and the "Mysterious" Yin Fangming
- Who is Yin Fangming? He was one of the first angel investors in Yushu Technology, another leading robotics company, and reportedly made a fortune before Yushu went public.
- Key Move: In July 2026, Galaxy General underwent a major management change, with the former chairman, Guo Xiaoliang, and 10 others stepping down, and Yin Fangming took over as chairman.
- Suspicion: The sudden change in leadership, especially with Yin Fangming, a former investor in another robotics giant, raises concerns about possible financial manipulations before the IPO.
3. The Allegations in the PDF
After Shao Tianlan's remarks, an anonymous PDF titled "Galaxy General's Hong Kong IPO Manipulation Techniques" circulated, detailing alleged fraudulent practices through complex equity structures and related-party transactions. Although Galaxy General claimed to have reported the document to the authorities, its existence further fueled public and regulatory skepticism.
4. Galaxy General's Response
- Initial Reaction: They issued a statement saying they would not engage in the debate and would focus on their work.
- Subsequent Response: Two days later, they issued a stern statement, calling the accusations "malicious rumors" and reported the matter to the authorities.
- Interpretation: Galaxy General's strong reaction indicates that the accusations hit a sensitive point. If they were innocent, they could have provided more financial details instead of just emphasizing their long-term vision and technological capabilities.
---
4. The Industry Context: Why Is This Outcry Especially Timely?
This incident is not isolated; it happens during a critical period for the robotics industry:
1. Severe Valuation Bubbles
- Data: In the first half of 2026, domestic investments in embodied intelligence exceeded 90 billion yuan, with 22 companies valued over 10 billion yuan and 8 over 20 billion yuan.
- Phenomenon: Many companies, established for just two to three years without profit or significant sales, have valuations in the tens of billions. This is similar to the internet and new energy bubbles of 2000 and 2021, where valuations were far from reality.
2. Commercialization Challenges
- Example: Yushu Technology: Although it has a market value of over 200 billion yuan, most of its revenue comes from selling robots to research institutions and universities, not to real customers.
- Question: If even leading companies rely on such sales, what supports the valuations of others with even higher valuations?
3. IPO Queue
- Over 40 robotics companies are waiting to go public. Many are eager to list after raising funds in the A+ or B rounds.
- Risk: If regulators raise the bar and require proof of sustainable revenue, companies that rely on related-party transactions will face significant challenges.
---
5. The Deep Impact: What Does This Mean for Investors and the Industry?
This "verbal battle" is not just about two companies; it has a broader impact:
1. For Investors: Be wary of companies that rely on misleading narratives. Look at real external revenue and customer bases. If a company's top five customers are related parties, and its revenue comes from internal transactions, it's likely a red flag.
2. For the Industry: It may accelerate the "clearing out" of fraudulent and speculative companies, allowing those with real technology and market potential to stand out.
3. For Regulators: The move signals that the Chinese capital market no longer favors companies based on mere concepts. IPO reviews will be more stringent, focusing on profitability and business authenticity.
4. For the Public: The robotics revolution is promising, but commercialization is a long process. Don't be misled by claims of widespread adoption; true breakthroughs take time, funding, and market validation.
---
Conclusion
Shao Tianlan's criticism may seem emotional, but it represents a wake-up call for the robotics industry and a warning to the capital market.
- Core Message: The industry cannot rely on empty promises and connections to maintain high valuations.
- Key Question: Do companies with valuations in the tens of billions actually have sustainable external revenue?
- Future Trend: The industry will undergo a period of consolidation, with only those that can solve real problems and generate genuine cash flows thriving.
For the public, this incident reminds us that in tech investing, we must not ignore common sense and financial transparency. No matter how impressive the technology, it must be backed by real commercial value.