Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tinci Materials


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Star  Mississippi  02:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Tinci Materials

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Non-notable company. Sources cited are routine business reporting and passing mentions. Search finds only more of the same, as well as the usual social media, directory, etc. listings, nothing even approaching RS sigcov. Fails WP:GNG / WP:ORGCRIT. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:24, 17 September 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:14, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies,  and China. DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:24, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I see some coverage in Chinese-language sources: . This is what I found with a quick search; a more thorough search for the Chinese name "天赐材料" might find more. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 09:39, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - This article does not speak for itself and does not refer to third-party significant coverage of the company. It presents what the company says about itself, which does not establish corporate notability.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  This search page lists a large number of analyst reports about Tinci Materials. From Notability (organizations and companies) (my bolding): "There has been considerable discussion over time whether publicly traded corporations, or at least publicly traded corporations listed on major stock exchanges such as the NYSE and other comparable international stock exchanges, are inherently notable. Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in this (or any other) case. However, sufficient independent sources almost always exist for such companies, so that notability can be established using the primary criterion discussed above. Examples of such sources include independent press coverage and analyst reports."  The analyst report notes from Google Translate: "Profit forecast and investment advice. The company's electrolyte will continue to maintain rapid growth, while the production capacity reserves are abundant, The cathode material business will become a new growth point for the business in the long run, optimize the company's product structure, and further enhance the company's profitability. The compound growth rate of the company's total revenue in the next three years is 54%. Considering the company's leading electrolyte status, and the future development of the company's new business, we give the company 80 times PE in 2021, the target price is 167.20 yuan. Initial coverage with a "buy" rating. Risk warning: the risk of the company's production capacity not being released as scheduled ..."  The article notes from Google Translate: "Tinci Materials (002709.SZ), the world's largest electrolyte manufacturer, reported stronger than expected results in the first half of the year, and continued to maintain high growth in its guidance for the third quarter. At the same time, it has received orders from many major manufacturers. After the results were announced, major banks worked together to hold and sing in unison that it is good. Tianci Materials was established in 2000 and entered the lithium ion electrolyte business in 2005. It is the largest electrolyte supplier of the battery leader CATL (300750.SZ), and is also the biggest competitor of CATL"  The article notes from Google Translate: "Southwest Securities released a research report on September 2, saying that it gave Tianci Materials (002709.SZ, latest price: 47.14 yuan) a buy rating. The reasons for the rating mainly include: 1) The high gross profit level of electrolytes continues; 2) The expansion of iron phosphate production has accelerated, and sales have increased significantly; 3) The prices of daily chemical materials and special chemical raw materials have risen, and the gross profit margin has been under pressure. Risk warning: The production capacity is less than expected, the downstream demand is less than expected, the industry overcapacity leads to intensified market competition, and policy risks." <li> The analyst report notes: "Considering that the company is a global electrolyte leader, and the production capacity of the key additive lithium hexafluorophosphate continues to be released and self-supplied, the company's performance is expected to increase significantly. Considering the valuation of comparable companies, we give the company 40 times PE in 2022, corresponding to the target price of 196.8 yuan, and maintain the "strong push" rating. Risk warning: global sales of new energy vehicles are lower than expected, and electrolyte prices have fallen."</li> <li> The article notes: "But not only has Cassini Resources attracted OZ Minerals to the West Musgrave Project, it also now has on its books Hong Kong-based Tinci (HK) Limited, a 100% subsidiary of Guangzhou Tinci Materials Technology. Tinci Materials is one of China's largest lithium-ion battery electrolyte manufacturers and is currently conducting a feasibility study for the production of high-quality nickel sulphate from nickel sulphide concentrate for the battery industry. Tinci participated in a recent AUD $7M placement to Asian investors."</li> <li> The article notes: "Tinci is a big provider of lithium hexafluorophosphate, a core material of battery electrolytes. ... Tinci had a 32 percent market share of battery electrolytes in China, and a 20 percent market share in the world as of December 2020, according to public information. The company's capacity was 106,000 tons of lithium-ion battery electrolytes, but it was expanding it by 350,000 tons at that time."</li> <li> The article notes from Google Translate: "Guangzhou Tinci High-tech Materials Co., Ltd. is the only company at home and abroad with the entire industry chain of lithium-ion battery electrolyte, the only designated supplier of Tesla in the world, and the main supplier of electrolyte in the Ningde era. Its products are exported to South Korea, Japan, and the United States. and many other countries. Last year, Tinci Materials had a global market share of 22% and a domestic market share of 32%."</li> <li> The article notes from Google Translate: "Since then, the performance of Tinci Materials has continued to grow rapidly, but the stock price has been stagnant. ... However, the market value was cut in half in half a year, and it fell to a market value of 100 billion. What is the reason? The growth of Tianci Materials is inseparable from the rise of the "Ning Wang" Ningde era. Last year's annual report showed that about 5.6 billion yuan in sales revenue of Tinci Materials came from CATL, accounting for half of the annual revenue. In 2020, the sales volume of Tinci Materials' largest customer is only over 1 billion yuan, and its revenue accounts for 25.56%. Therefore, every move in the Ningde era also affects the heaven-sent materials that are deeply bound to it. In the first quarter of this year, the performance of CATL declined."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Tinci Materials to pass Notability (organizations and companies), which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 06:38, 26 September 2022 (UTC) </li></ul> Relisting comment: to evaluate the sources Cunard identified Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Star   Mississippi  01:36, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Weak keep. I do not think that we should keep articles on the basis of analyst reports, as these reports serve only to communicate financial projections and price an equity and do not generally demonstrate social importance of the subject; Cunard is completely wrong about this.  However, the company is WP:LISTED and seems to have reliable sources that talk about it; I also prefer to err on the side of caution when considering foreign companies for which sourcing is harder and Wikipedia page creation for SEO is less likely.  The article is weak though, and it needs to concentrate on more than just the financial history of the company.  FalconK (talk) 22:52, 9 October 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.