Chairman Tianhong formally accuses Greentown China's executives of "systematic draining of the listed company": A Ro-seng Men caused by a partnership

Ask AI · How did the partnership between Tianhong and Greentown turn from a win-win situation into a deep legal abyss?

Source | Phoenix Finance “Corporate Research Institute”

Author | Wang Di

“I just want to vent. Peers think we want to default, but we’ve never considered defaulting; owing debts and paying them back is a matter of course. I want all investors of Greentown China to know that its senior executives are embezzling their own profits.”

On March 31, 2026, Wei Guoqiu, chairman of Tianhong Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Tianhong”), stated this at a media briefing in Beijing. He raised four major questions to Greentown: “Why use a shell private company to impersonate Greentown China for signing? Why let a group of lenders with no real estate development experience control my project company? Is the fund flow suspected of off-balance sheet transfer? Is the information disclosure compliant?”

What was originally expected to be a win-win has evolved into a four-year-long tug-of-war in litigation. In recent years, the real estate industry has experienced a疯狂扩张 from “high leverage, high turnover” to concentrated liquidity crises. Projects have been sealed, halted, and listed as key supervision projects for delivery, with both parties in cooperation going to court, accusing each other of breach of contract, while hundreds of homeowners in Tangshan Guiyu Jiangnan (later renamed “Tianhong·Jiadi Guanlan”) have become the biggest victims of this capital game.

On the same day Wei Guoqiu publicly accused Greentown, Greentown released its 2025 full-year performance report. The annual report shows that Greentown’s total revenue was 154.97B yuan, down 2.3% from 158.55B yuan in 2024; net profit attributable to parent was only 71M yuan, hitting a new low.

It is understood that Tianhong has sent a risk warning letter and corresponding evidence to Ernst & Young, submitted comprehensive reports to the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission, and the Hong Kong Financial Secretary, and has been recorded by regulators.

01 How did the “strong alliance” turn into a mess?

In 2019, the Tangshan real estate market was booming. Tianhong Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. (formerly “Hebei Tianhong Real Estate Development Co., Ltd.”) acquired key local land parcels, with a land transfer fee of about 900 million yuan, aiming to create “Tangshan’s top luxury residence.” As a local SME, Tianhong actively sought cooperation with leading real estate companies, ultimately choosing “China’s top luxury brand” Greentown.

Wei Guoqiu told Phoenix Finance “Corporate Research Institute” that both sides agreed on a “financing + agency construction” model: Greentown provided 600 million yuan in loans, Greentown Management Group was responsible for agency construction, promising to achieve 90% residential sales within two years and sales proceeds of 2.18 billion yuan.

However, at the time of signing, the originally expected “direct cooperation with Greentown China” turned into two contracts: one with Greentown Management Group titled “Real Estate Project Development Entrusted Management Contract,” and another with “Shenyang Quanyun Village Construction Co., Ltd.” for investment cooperation.

“We questioned at the time, why sign with Shenyang Quanyun Village?” Wei Guoqiu said, explaining that Greentown explained “this is our internal unit,” and showed minutes from Greentown China’s investment decision meeting, which were signed by then-Executive President Zhou Lianying, Executive Director Geng Zhongqiang, and others. Out of trust, Tianhong accepted this arrangement.

Public records show that Tianhong Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. was established in 2005. In December 2019, Tianhong reached a cooperation with Greentown China, with Greentown acting as the agency for the Tangshan “Greentown Guiyu Jiangnan” project, and a related party providing a 600 million yuan loan at an annual interest rate of 16%.

According to minutes from Greentown China’s comprehensive industrial investment decision meeting provided by Wei Guoqiu, the third phase of the Phoenix Lake project in Tangshan is located in the Phoenix New City area, with a residential land area of about 90 acres, a plot ratio of 1.5, a building height limit of 45 meters ( along the river, with some buildings limited to 30 meters ), land cost of 860 million yuan, floor price of 9,600 yuan per square meter, and a peak fund of about 930 million yuan.

(Minutes from the fifth meeting of Greentown China’s comprehensive industrial investment decision, provided by interviewee)

Greentown, through equity participation in newly established project companies, provided financing in the form of shareholder loans not exceeding 600 million yuan, with a comprehensive return rate of no less than 16% per year, managed by Greentown Management Group for agency construction, with dispatched directors and finance personnel, achieving joint management of licenses, accounts, and certificates.

In 2019, the real estate market was still on an upward cycle. The agency construction model, as an emerging operational approach, was originally intended to achieve mutual benefit and win-win between the entrusting party and the agency builder. Unexpectedly, what was meant to be a win-win collaboration ultimately turned into a mess.

02 Who sidelined whom? The true story behind decision-making power

Regarding the cause of the project’s abandonment, Wei Guoqiu believes it was not due to market downturn: other projects in the same period and area had already sold out. He attributes the problem to the incompetence and mismanagement of the fake Greentown company, and questions whether Greentown’s illegal lending under the guise of cooperation.

“If we had managed it ourselves from the start, it wouldn’t have turned out like this,” Wei Guoqiu reflected at the briefing. “We trusted Greentown too much back then. My original words to Tianhong representatives were: ‘Speak less, listen more, watch more, learn from Greentown.’”

Wei Guoqiu revealed that out of the 600 million yuan loan, about 500 million yuan came from an interest-free internal loan from Greentown Real Estate Group, and 100 million yuan from Greentown Management Group. The project company, Tangshan Hongke, held 90% of shares, while Shenyang Quanyun Village held 10%.

According to the investment cooperation agreement, Greentown’s subsidiary Greentown Management was responsible for agency construction and sales, and Shenyang Quanyun Village was responsible for providing the 600 million yuan loan, with an annual interest rate of 16%.

However, Tianhong soon found itself deprived of all decision-making rights over the project company. According to the investment cooperation agreement, the project company had no board of directors, only one executive director appointed by Shenyang Quanyun Village, serving as the daily decision-making body. The agreement also explicitly stated that Tianhong could not unilaterally dismiss or change the authority of the executive director before full exit of equity and debt investments by Shenyang Quanyun Village.

Wei Guoqiu retrieved minutes from Greentown China’s investment decision meeting, which bore signatures from senior executives Zhou Lianying, Geng Zhongqiang, and Li Jun. The minutes clearly stated that the project was “managed by Greentown Management Group for agency construction,” that “Greentown participated in establishing a new company, dispatching an executive director.” “This is irrefutable evidence; we are cooperating with Greentown China,” Wei Guoqiu said. “It’s Greentown senior executives deliberately transferring business to an external company, using the listed company’s reputation to package a shell, then employing a group of high-interest lenders to manage the project.”

(Internal Greentown materials, provided by interviewee))

He refers to the “shell” as Shenyang Quanyun Village. Although it holds only 10% of shares, it controls the project company’s executive director seat. “The executive director is held by Left Wenhui from Greentown Financial Division, and all daily approvals are completed remotely via Greentown China’s OA system in Hangzhou. The 21 approval personnel dispatched by Shenyang Quanyun Village are all from Greentown Financial Division.” Wei Guoqiu considers this an “illegal department without a financial license, long-term social lender,” with no real estate development experience, yet occupying key decision-making positions in the project company.

“We have no rights at all, not even the right to sign with a pen,” Wei Guoqiu said. To him, the core issue of this dispute is not “agency construction,” but “the senior management of a listed company using external companies to transfer assets and embezzle profits.”

According to Wei Guoqiu, the project’s first launch in 2020 saw sales far below expectations; in 2021, about 18 million yuan was spent on promotion, with only 23 million yuan recovered. By the end of 2021, the promised 2.18 billion yuan in proceeds had been less than 5% fulfilled. With houses unsold and loans unpaid, interest snowballed.

Greentown China denied these allegations, emphasizing that Shenyang Quanyun Village is an independent entity, and that the agency team is not responsible for sales performance. They argued that poor sales are due to market conditions and Tianhong’s own operations.

03 Tug-of-war in litigation: malicious sealing or legitimate rights protection?

In February 2022, Tianhong sued Greentown in Tangshan, demanding recognition of the loan relationship and accountability for agency mismanagement. In April of the same year, Shenyang Quanyun Village sued Tianhong in Shenyang, demanding early repayment of about 390 million yuan in remaining principal and interest, and applying for pre-litigation preservation measures, sealing all land and unsold properties of the Tangshan project, causing the project to come to a halt.

“He clearly knew that our project still had nearly 2.1 billion yuan in value, and the over 300 million yuan in loans was not a problem to repay,” Wei Guoqiu said, believing this was “malicious sealing,” aimed at “blocking my liquidity and forcing me to withdraw the lawsuit.” He revealed that Greentown had once conveyed through intermediaries: “If Tianhong withdraws the claim about ‘Greentown illegally establishing a financial division and illegal lending,’ other issues can be discussed.” “I did not agree,” Wei Guoqiu said.

He stated that after more than a year of project suspension, homeowners could not receive their houses, suppliers owed over 100 million yuan, and wages for migrant workers could not be paid. In 2023, the project was listed as a key supervision project for delivery by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development.

Wei Guoqiu said that in the lawsuits in Hebei, Greentown strongly denied any relationship with Shenyang Quanyun Village, claiming “this is your own matter”; but in Liaoning, Shenyang Quanyun Village admitted that “funds came from internal group transfers,” and that it was “determined by the group” as the signing party.

He also said that in 2022, during ongoing litigation, the equity of Shenyang Quanyun Village was transferred to the Cayman Islands, and Greentown Financial Division was dissolved. “Why did they transfer equity and disband departments right after filing lawsuits? Greentown senior executives are destroying evidence.”

Since 2022, the litigation between Tianhong and Greentown has lasted four years. Currently, both parties’ cases are pending appeal in Hebei High Court and Liaoning High Court.

04 Behind the Riddle: Who is telling the truth?

Tianyancha shows that Shenyang Quanyun Village is wholly owned by Guangwei Group, with no direct equity relationship with Greentown China. However, several senior executives of Greentown, including Geng Zhongqiang, Li Jun, and Secretary of the Board Shang Shucheng, have served as its directors, and industry insiders have long regarded it as part of the “Greentown system.”

(Source: Tianyancha)

“Greentown knew that Shenyang Quanyun Village was a loss-making, unstaffed shell with no operational capacity, yet designated it as the cooperation entity. Isn’t this deliberate concealment?” Wei Guoqiu believes that, according to the Civil Code, such behavior constitutes fraud.

(Internal Greentown materials, provided by interviewee))

He presented a civil ruling from Liaoning High Court, which states that the court recognized: the funds lent by Shenyang Quanyun Village were not its own funds; 100 million yuan came from Greentown Management Group entrusted funds, and about 500 million yuan came from interest-free loans within Greentown Real Estate Group.

(Second-instance remand for retrial, provided by interviewee)

“He lent the listed company’s money interest-free to a company unrelated to itself, which then borrowed at 16% annual interest to us, with all interest flowing into external companies,” Wei Guoqiu accused. “This is systematic, large-scale hollowing out of the listed company.” The involved amount is estimated to involve over 100 billion yuan in misappropriated funds, over 10 billion yuan in profits diverted, and over 3 billion yuan in state assets lost.

Now, the Tangshan project is in ruins: construction halted, housing prices down about 40% from the initial launch, and delivery originally scheduled for the end of 2023 has not yet occurred. Tianhong estimates direct economic losses exceeding 1 billion yuan. Wei Guoqiu said, “We are forced to lower prices to sell more; originally over 20,000 yuan per square meter, now around 11,000, a 50% discount.” Buyers initially paid high prices attracted by the “Greentown” name, but now face a collapsed project.

In response, on March 31, Greentown China issued a statement: “Currently, disputes between our subsidiary and the Tangshan ‘Tianhong Jiadi Guanlan’ project (recorded as ‘Longxi Li Bihu Yuan’) developer and its actual controller Wei have entered judicial proceedings and are under court review. Greentown China and its subsidiaries’ management teams have always complied with national laws, regulations, listed company supervision rules, and corporate ethics, diligently fulfilling their duties. For malicious slander and false accusations in such videos with no factual basis, we have taken legal measures according to law.”

Regarding Wei Guoqiu’s allegations, Phoenix Finance “Corporate Research Institute” contacted Geng Zhongqiang, acting CEO of Greentown China, who quoted the announcement and said: “To avoid affecting judicial fairness, we strongly urge the public, media, and investors: do not believe or spread unverified false information and rumors. We will pursue legal responsibility for malicious dissemination of false information, defamation, and slander.”