Lenovo's problems come down to corporate governance.

Recently, Lenovo Liu Chuanzhi's high pension caused public outcry, which also triggered a discussion on whether Lenovo's original restructuring involved the loss of state-owned assets. From the 1990s to the beginning of this century, the shareholding ratio of Chinese Academy of Sciences in Legend Holdings (that is, the holding company of Hong Kong listed companies returning to science and technology innovation board) was reduced to 29.04% through the employee stock ownership platform. Whether this involves the loss of state-owned assets depends on the system at that time, and the system of inviting, auctioning and hanging state-owned shares came later. If we want to determine the consideration of previous state-owned share transfer transactions, it is also based on the valuation of third-party institutions. Therefore, under the premise of legal procedures, there is no problem of the loss of state-owned assets (unless there is evidence to prove that the valuation is fraudulent).

As for the high retirement pension of enterprise founders, this is a corporate governance issue. As long as the board of directors and the shareholders' meeting agree according to the company's articles of association, it is no problem for Liu to obtain these benefits, which is legal and compliant. You can say that Liu controls the voting of the board of directors and shareholders' meeting, which is also a typical corporate governance problem. If Lenovo's articles of association reflect good corporate governance, then Liu's remuneration should be decided by the board of directors and the shareholders' meeting, and Liu's remuneration should be decided by the remuneration committee of the board of directors (which should be mostly independent directors) and shareholders unrelated to Liu. If this kind of voting avoids conflicts of interest, any salary result is reasonable (shareholders agree). If it is not this voting procedure, it can only be that the approval procedure for directors' remuneration is unreasonable. Opposing shareholders can choose to vote against directors' remuneration, or they can choose to throw away Lenovo's shares (Legend Holdings and Lenovo Group are both listed companies). In the final analysis, this is a corporate governance issue and has nothing to do with the loss of state-owned assets.