Loading…
Loading…
Sunwoda Electronic Co., Ltd. (S
Wang Mingwang and Wang Wei (co-founders, 1997) are the disclosed Controlling Shareholder / De Facto Controller pair, holding ~26.75% combined per the 2011 ChiNext IPO prospectus (pre-IPO A-share base), under a concert-party (acting-in-concert) agreement dated 2008-08-06. Not a subsidiary of any group already in this corpus. GLEIF record for LEI 836800CQGW5QDXND0Q43 confirms the entity but reports no parent (status: LAPSED -- registration not currently renewed). 2026-09-20 re-verify: the previously cited HKEXnews listing-document URL now 404s; the 2011 A-share prospectus is the live primary source for these pre-IPO stakes.
Named counterparties identified by open-source research and written only where a primary source states the relationship — never inferred from sector or co-mention. 15 suppliers, 15 customer-side. This is a partial view: it covers the relationships we could evidence, not the company's full supply base.
Prospectus p.135-140. Rank-1 customer AND rank-2 supplier (see supplier row below) in the same year — ATL is both Sunwoda's largest disclosed cell (电芯) supplier and, via a toll/customer-supplied-cell (客供电芯) arrangement plus general-mode sales, its largest disclosed customer. HK-registered, TDK-group lineage (later became CATL's related-party cell supplier per this corpus's 300750-sz dossier) — not disclosed as a Sunwoda related party.
Prospectus p.141. OPPO-brand phone/MP3 maker; relationship since 2004, ~50% of OPPO's Li-ion module demand by FY2010 per the filing's own estimate.
Prospectus p.141. Lenovo Group's mobile-phone subsidiary; relationship since 2004, ~45% of Lenovo-brand phone battery demand by FY2010 per the filing.
Prospectus p.142. Shanghai-based (est. 2008) subsidiary of Taiwan-listed Unizyx Holding Corp. (TWSE: 6170), a battery-pack OEM/ODM designer/manufacturer — also a rank-3 FY2010 supplier (see below), same dual customer/supplier pattern as ATL.
Prospectus p.142. Notebook/all-in-one PC ODM (holding company: Shenzhen Dingxing Digital Network Technology Co., Ltd.).
FY2009 comparative vintage, prospectus p.135.
FY2009 comparative vintage, prospectus p.135.
Prospectus p.135/141. Haier Group's procurement subsidiary; Sunwoda entered Haier's supply chain in 2007.
Prospectus p.135/142. BBK (步步高), Dongguan-based consumer-electronics maker whose later spinoffs became OPPO and vivo; Sunwoda entered its supply chain in 2007.
FY2009 comparative vintage, prospectus p.135.
Earliest disclosed vintage, prospectus p.135 — ATL's customer share fell 18.51% (2008) -> 12.99% (2009) -> 16.43% (2010) as Sunwoda's customer base diversified toward Lenovo/OPPO.
FY2008 comparative vintage, prospectus p.135-136.
FY2008 comparative vintage, prospectus p.136. BAK is itself a cell manufacturer and, separately, a FY2008/FY2009 top-5 SUPPLIER to Sunwoda (see below) — a peer-battery-maker cross-supply relationship, not a one-directional one.
Prospectus p.136/141-142. Core subsidiary of China Electronics Corporation (中国电子); took over Philips's global handset brand business per a 2007-02 agreement, and Sunwoda supplied its Philips-brand Li-ion modules from 2002.
FY2008 comparative vintage, prospectus p.136 — no further qualitative profile given in the filing.
Prospectus p.145 — rank-1 FY2010 supplier; no qualitative profile given in the filing (unlike the customer list, the supplier table carries no per-entity narrative).
Prospectus p.145. Cell (电芯) supplier — material-relevant: lithium-ion cells are Sunwoda's single largest input-cost line (34.34% of FY2010 production cost, p.143). See customer-side row above for the dual relationship.
Prospectus p.145. Same Unizyx Holding (TWSE: 6170) subsidiary as the FY2010 customer-side row above.
Prospectus p.145 — no qualitative profile given in the filing.
Prospectus p.145 — no qualitative profile given in the filing.
FY2009 comparative vintage, prospectus p.145. Major independent cell manufacturer (Lishen) — material-relevant, cell/electrolyte/cathode inputs.
FY2009 comparative vintage, prospectus p.145 — no qualitative profile given in the filing.
FY2009 comparative vintage, prospectus p.145. Same peer battery-maker as the FY2008 customer-side row above — cross-supply, not one-directional.
FY2009 comparative vintage, prospectus p.145.
FY2009 comparative vintage, prospectus p.145.
Earliest disclosed vintage, prospectus p.145 — rank-1 FY2008 supplier at 20.91%, falling to 9.05% (2009); no FY2010 appearance on the supplier side.
FY2008 comparative vintage, prospectus p.145.
FY2008 comparative vintage, prospectus p.145.
FY2008 comparative vintage, prospectus p.145 — no qualitative profile given in the filing.
Earliest disclosed vintage, prospectus p.145 — ATL's supplier share rose 3.40% (2008) -> 7.30% (2009) -> 8.10% (2010) as the customer-supplied-cell (客供电芯) toll model scaled.
Scope. Absence of a counterparty here is not evidence that none exists — most commercial sourcing is confidential and never becomes public. Rows without a share figure mean no share was disclosed, not that the relationship is small.
Another tracked dossier names this company as a counterparty in its own sourced disclosure — this platform never wrote these rows on this company's own page, they are read here inverted from the dossier that disclosed them. This is a partial view: 1004 additional named-counterparty rows across the corpus could not be matched to a tracked dossier by name at all (mostly non-Latin legal names), so the true count is higher than what renders here.
Lenovo's own battery-MSDS document library (notebook/ultrabook section) names Sunwoda Electronic Co., Ltd as a battery-cell supplier. No volume or spend percentage disclosed. Re-checked 2026-09-20 (wake-minerals-buyers, step 0.5): source_url still live (direct fetch 200; WebFetch tool 403'd on this PDF, direct curl did not -- tool-side limitation, not a dead link), document
Scope. This section is inverted evidence: each linked dossier wrote the original row about itself, describing its own relationship to this company. It is never a claim this company itself disclosed. Absence here is not evidence of no relationship — most of the corpus has no named-counterparty block at all yet.
Every exposure is read as a buyer dependency; the top 3 are its binding chokepoints.
As a buyer, policy pressure across its consumed materials is coverage-limited.
Descriptive trend in official policy actions on this company’s materials — a policy-pressure trend, not a price or trading signal. No forward probability is implied. Direction is measured on actions we have discovered, and discovery lags events: where the recent window is too thin to support a calm reading, the row says coverage-limited instead of easing.
No actions in the register have named or swept this company in the last 24 months.