论文部分内容阅读
去年岁末,广东乐百氏集团公司的创始人何伯权等五人宣布集体辞职,成为当时最受人们关注的商业新闻之一。联系起之前的王志东出局新浪网事件,人们一时间感叹资本的无情。其实,当初在与达能合资的过程中,如果何伯权先生能够很好地运用法律手段来辅助实现其商业目标的话,本来是可以避免这样遗憾的结局的。 在当初与各家跨国巨头的谈判过程中,乐百氏之所以舍雀巢而投达能,是因为达能做出两点承诺:1、维持乐百氏品牌不变;2、保持乐百氏经营班底不变。这既是何伯权选择达能的初衷,也是乐百氏与达能合资时倍受赞誉之处。然而,从事后披露的乐百氏的合资方案来看,方案实际上没有贯彻这两点原则,甚至可以说是与
At the end of last year, He Boquan, the founder of the Guangdong Robust Group Company, announced that they had resigned collectively and became one of the most popular commercial news of the time. Contacting the former Wang Zhidong out of the Sina.com event, people lamented the relentlessness of capital. In fact, in the course of the joint venture with Danone, Mr. He Boquan could have avoided such a regrettable outcome if he was able to use legal means to assist his business objectives. In the course of negotiations with various multinational giants, Robust Nestled Nestlé and voted for Danone because Danone made two promises: 1. To maintain the Robust brand identity; 2. To maintain the Robust business team. constant. This is the original intention of He Boquan’s choice of Danone, and it is also a time of praise for the joint venture between Robust and Danone. However, according to the later disclosed Robust joint venture plan, the program did not actually implement these two principles. It could even be said that