In Case (A), ZUIG attempted to acquire a controlling stake in Zhenxing Biochem through a tender offer but faced opposition from both its board of directors and its largest stakeholder, Zhenxing Group. The opposition parties used various tactics to fend off the tender offer, such as halting trading, filing real-name reports, and pursuing lawsuits. Zhenxing Group even transferred all of its shares to its white knights, KAISA Group Holdings Ltd. (KAISA) and Cinda Securities Shenzhen Office (Cinda Securities), but its efforts proved unsuccessful. Ultimately, ZUIG replaced Zhenxing Group as the largest shareholder in Zhenxing Biochem. In Case (B), a fierce battle broke out between ZUIG and KAISA for control of Zhenxing Biochem after the successful tender offer. Eventually, an agreement was reached, and ZUIG gained control of the company. Under ZUIG's governance, Zhenxing Biochem embarked on a new phase of development through strategic partnerships, asset restructuring, and other initiatives. This case study provides a comprehensive overview of the target company's development before the tender offer, the complex tender offer and anti-takeover measures, and the challenging integration process that followed. The entire process was characterized by ups and downs, making it a classic example of a hostile takeover that provides valuable lessons for all market participants.

Supplement to ZUIG's Tender Offer Takeover of Zhenxing Biochem (A): Barbarians at the Gate. In Case (B), a fierce battle broke out between ZUIG and KAISA for control of Zhenxing Biochem after the successful tender offer. Eventually, an agreement was reached, and ZUIG gained control of the company. Under ZUIG's governance, Zhenxing Biochem embarked on a new phase of development through strategic partnerships, asset restructuring, and other initiatives. This case study provides a comprehensive overview of the target company's development before the tender offer, the complex tender offer and anti-takeover measures, and the challenging integration process that followed. The entire process was characterized by ups and downs, making it a classic example of a hostile takeover that provides valuable lessons for all market participants.

This case series was developed around QuMei's takeover bid for Ekornes ASA, a company headquartered in Norway. QuMei, the Chinese furnishings manufacturer established in 1993 and listed on Shanghai Stock Exchange in 2015, was the promoter of the takeover bid. In the same year, it introduced its "New QuMei" strategy, pivoting from a pure furnishings supplier to a content and service supplier in the furnishings industry. The target company, Ekornes, was a prime Norwegian furnishings manufacturer with four affiliate brands, including "Stressless", known as the "most comfortable chair in the world". It also had vast market bases in Europe and America. Case A mainly discusses the reasons behind QuMei's takeover of Ekornes. First, it explores why QuMei opted for acquisition rather than organic growth. Second, having decided to take the acquisition route, how did it choose Ekornes as its target. Finally, the case examines the feasibility of the takeover and potential ensuing risks. Based on case discussions, students are given the chance to analyze the logic behind takeovers, how target companies are selected, how takeovers take different forms depending on purpose, and how to analyze and avoid potential risks that may be involved. Case (B) focuses on the transaction arrangements in QuMei's takeover of Ekornes: was Ekornes suitably valued? How would QuMei reach a consensus with the target company's shareholders regarding the reasonable consideration for takeover? Then, after valuation, how should the transaction be funded and structured? By the end of 2017, QuMei's assets were at ¥2.1 billion, while its overseas sales were a mere ¥4.87 million. In contrast, Ekornes's assets were valued at over ¥4 billion. This case therefore can be reference for practical problem-solving in acquisition of snake swallowing elephant.

This case series was developed around QuMei's takeover bid for Ekornes ASA, a company headquartered in Norway. QuMei, the Chinese furnishings manufacturer established in 1993 and listed on Shanghai Stock Exchange in 2015, was the promoter of the takeover bid. In the same year, it introduced its "New QuMei" strategy, pivoting from a pure furnishings supplier to a content and service supplier in the furnishings industry. The target company, Ekornes, was a prime Norwegian furnishings manufacturer with four affiliate brands, including "Stressless", known as the "most comfortable chair in the world". It also had vast market bases in Europe and America. Case A mainly discusses the reasons behind QuMei's takeover of Ekornes. First, it explores why QuMei opted for acquisition rather than organic growth. Second, having decided to take the acquisition route, how did it choose Ekornes as its target. Finally, the case examines the feasibility of the takeover and potential ensuing risks. Based on case discussions, students are given the chance to analyze the logic behind takeovers, how target companies are selected, how takeovers take different forms depending on purpose, and how to analyze and avoid potential risks that may be involved. Case (B) focuses on the transaction arrangements in QuMei's takeover of Ekornes: was Ekornes suitably valued? How would QuMei reach a consensus with the target company's shareholders regarding the reasonable consideration for takeover? Then, after valuation, how should the transaction be funded and structured? By the end of 2017, QuMei's assets were at ¥2.1 billion, while its overseas sales were a mere ¥4.87 million. In contrast, Ekornes's assets were valued at over ¥4 billion. This case therefore can be reference for practical problem-solving in acquisition of snake swallowing elephant.