Contrarian Corpus
short seller research note follow up
2013-11-06 · 16 pages

NQ Mobile NQ

NQ Mobile's largest purported revenue source, Yidatong, is a controlled shell whose offices, tax filings, and carrier records all contradict NQ's story — we maintain a <$1 target.

N 4 Narrative
V 2 Visual
C 1 Craft
Source URL unavailable

Thesis

Muddy Waters' follow-up maintains a sub-$1 price target on NQ Mobile, arguing that Yidatong (YDT) — NQ's largest purported revenue source at roughly $20M of 2012 billings — is a controlled related party facilitating fraud rather than an independent service provider. Physical due diligence found YDT had no signage at its purported Beijing office, reception staff had never heard of it, and seven of ten listed addresses were ghost addresses or non-commercial. YDT's 2011-2012 Business Tax payments of 3.4% of revenue imply gross revenue of only $2.9M, inconsistent with the $20M+ NQ books through it. Across 22 carrier subscriptions in 11 provinces and all three carriers, YDT never once appeared as the SP. An iFeng Finance investigation corroborates that NQ co-founder Zhou Xu is the true owner and Rong Xu is a front, and that NQ's four contradictory accounts of Rong Xu's employment suggest concealment of a related-party relationship dating to 2006.

SCQA

Situation

NQ Mobile, a US-listed Chinese mobile security company, reports that roughly 72% of its carrier-billing revenue flows through an independent service provider, Tianjin Yidatong (YDT), which NQ claims is unrelated.

Complication

Field visits, Business Tax filings, carrier SIM tests, and iFeng Finance's own investigation all show YDT has no real operations, its reported gross revenue is only $2.9M, and it is controlled by NQ co-founder Zhou Xu via front Rong Xu.

Resolution

Treat YDT as a fabricated related party and NQ's associated revenue as fraudulent; management's contradictory disclosures about Rong Xu likely constitute 17(a) and 10b-5 securities fraud.

Reward

Muddy Waters maintains a price target below $1 per share, implying near-total impairment from a stock that had recently traded well into the double digits.

The three reasons

  1. 1

    YDT offices and signage don't exist; reception staff had never heard of YDT

  2. 2

    YDT's Business Tax filings imply gross revenue of just $2.9M, not the $20M+ NQ books through it

  3. 3

    In 22 carrier SIM tests across 11 provinces, YDT never appeared as the service provider

Primary demands

  • Investors should treat Yidatong (YDT) as a fabricated related party controlled by NQ
  • Maintain <$1 price target on NQ
  • Regulators/auditors should scrutinize NQ's related-party disclosures and Rong Xu's employment timeline

KPIs cited

YDT 2012 gross revenue (implied by Business Tax)
$2.9M vs. $20.2M NQ claims to have booked through YDT
YDT Business Tax rate vs. revenue
3.4% of reported revenue, consistent with statutory 3-5% gross basis
NQ AR from YDT vs. YDT total AP
$9.4M AR vs. $3.7M AP — 2.5x mismatch
NQ DSO from YDT (end 2012)
167 days — vs. 15-45 day contractual carrier payment terms
Carrier SIM tests in which YDT was the SP
0 of 22 across 11 provinces and all three carriers
YDT share of NQ carrier billing (NQ's claim)
72.1% — implausible given zero field evidence
Interest-free loans from NQ to YDT
~$5M despite YDT's minimal overhead
Rong Xu ownership of YDT
75%

Pattern membership

Where this document fits across the library's 12 rhetorical / structural patterns.

Precedents cited

  • Muddy Waters initial NQ short report (October 24, 2013)
  • J Capital NQ short report (August 2013)
  • iFeng Finance investigation (November 3, 2013)

Notable slides (4)

Notes

Follow-up short report maintaining <$1 target, responding point-by-point to NQ's rebuttal of the original October 2013 Muddy Waters report. Format is Word-doc-style memo with section-header claims and narrative argument — no slide design, but rhetorically sharp (Santa Claus / Bowfinger analogies, four-version Rong Xu timeline chart). Embeds a translated iFeng Finance Chinese-language investigation as corroboration. Catalogs four contradictory NQ disclosures about Rong Xu's employment as potential 17(a)/10b-5 violations.