Former CTO of Cambricon's Claim Soars to 27.8 Billion Yuan as Rising Stock Price Escalates Equity Dispute
nashnova research
Cambricon's former CTO Liang Jun raised his equity-dispute claim more than fivefold — from RMB 4.29 billion to RMB 27.83 billion — driven by the company's surging share price; the case is becoming a landmark for executive-departure risk across China's AI-chip sector.
Where does the RMB 27.8 billion figure come from?
Liang pegged his claim to Cambricon's July 3, 2026 share-price peak of RMB 1,620, then applied post-bonus-issue share counts to recalculate the value of his equity entitlements.
This means → the jump is not an arbitrary demand — the stock itself rose, and the same equity-incentive package maps to a vastly larger sum at the higher price.
In plain terms = his "IOU" didn't change, but the asset behind it appreciated more than fivefold, so the claim followed.
What are the two sides actually fighting over?
Liang left Cambricon in early 2022 after serving as vice president and CTO, where he was involved in developing the company's core technology and products.
The dispute centers on post-departure equity-incentive arrangements and share buybacks: Cambricon says it initiated a buyback under "Shareholding Plan B," which Liang had signed, but Liang did not cooperate with the required corporate-registration changes — prompting the company to sue.
This means → each side tells a different story — the company says "you signed, so comply," while Liang argues his entitlements were undervalued. The RMB 27.83 billion is Liang's unilateral claim; Cambricon has not accepted it, and no court hearing has taken place.
Why does this case matter beyond two people's lawsuit?
China's semiconductor industry has been hiring aggressively in recent years, with startups and listed companies widely using employee stock-ownership plans and equity incentives to retain key talent.
As some of these companies listed and saw share prices surge, early incentive grants became worth far more than anyone anticipated when the plans were designed — fueling a rising number of post-departure disputes.
This reflects a structural risk: when a company's share price diverges dramatically from the valuation assumed at the time incentives were granted, the interpretation and enforcement of those terms can become a trigger for massive litigation.
In plain terms = equity incentives were priced for a "small company," but the company later became a "big company" — the wider the gap, the bigger the fight on departure — and this risk is especially acute in China's AI-chip sector.
市场有风险，内容仅供研究参考，不构成投资建议。