19日证监会公布第二批上市公司股权分置改革试点公司名单，通过Asia Business Intelligence 看到财经有篇英文文章

以下是引用片段：The conduct of the SASAC has left some analysts pessimistic about whether the CSRC’s plan will ultimately survive: “the SASAC has made many statements supporting [the floating of untradeable state shares], but with no concrete action. The CSRC, on the other hand, could resort to one desperate last measure, slamming more restrictions on the future fundraising efforts of those companies who haven’t solved their untradeable shares problem,” said one analyst from Boshi Fund Management. 'The CSRC appears to be pushing aggressively, but it is doubtful whether a unilateral action would succeed.'”

Asia Business Intelligence 则评价说：证监会简单的选择了资本主义概念市场，并且以现在的阵痛换取未来的成长，要么是在国务院的支持下有仔细的分析和计划，要么就是纯粹的有勇无谋

以下是引用片段： Is it possible that some firms will divest their non-tradeable state shares and others will not? That aside, the market -- at least the Chinese financial media -- appears to understand that an intractable inter-agency dispute at the highest levels may ultimately affect the execution of CSRC's share sale plan. Why a continuing dispute over an issue of major proportions? The issue is this: who, if anyone, will compensate investors when share lots of gargantuan proportions come on the market? Perhaps no one can offer anything near a satisfactory answer. It is a hot potato question that everyone fears and few career bureaucrats would dare to touch. No wonder the inter-agency dispute. Despite this, it appears that the CSRC has thrown down the gauntlet, having decided -- forgive my mixed metaphors -- to blaze a trail. It could be that the CSRC, having failed to come to terms with SASAC, has simply opted for the capitalistic notion that the market must take the pain now for future benefit. It is a decision based either on careful planning and analysis, complemented by a dose of courage and the support of some on the State Council -- or sheer foolhardy cheek. Given the extraordinarily intelligent and well-trained Chinese peppering the ranks of the bureaucracy, I would tend towards the former. But knowing that the ranks can be otherwise salted, the latter remains a distinct possibility.