Table of Contents

​

​

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

​

FORM 20-F

​

(Mark One)

​

​

Date of event requiring this shell company report:

Commission file number 001-34541

​

​

​

​

​

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

​

​

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act.

​

​

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act:

Table of Contents

​

On March 31, 2022, the issuer had 121,551,075 ordinary shares outstanding.

​

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

​

☐ Yes ⌧ No

​

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

☐ Yes ⌧ No

​

Note – Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from their obligations under those Sections.

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

⌧ Yes ☐ No

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).

⌧ Yes ☐ No

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or an emerging growth company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

​

​

If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards† provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

​

† The term “new or revised financial accounting standard” refers to any update issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board to its Accounting Standards Codification after April 5, 2012.

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report.

☒ Yes ☐ No

​

Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:

​

​

*If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow.

☐ Item 17 ☐ Item 18

​

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

☐ Yes ⌧ No

​

(APPLICABLE ONLY TO ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS)

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and reports required to be filed by Sections 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court.

☐ Yes ☐ No

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

​

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

i

Table of Contents

​

​

​

ii

Table of Contents

​

CERTAIN INFORMATION

​

1

Table of Contents

2

Table of Contents

Unless otherwise indicated, all references to “our business” and “our operations” refer collectively to our businesses and operations in Beijing municipality, Guangdong province and Zhejiang province and do not address the business or operations of Cellenkos, its financial results or the relevant regulatory environment in the United States applicable to it.

​

The financial statements included in this report has been prepared in accordance with United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, or “U.S. GAAP”. All references to “Renminbi”, “RMB” or “yuan” are to the legal currency of China, all references to “U.S. dollars”, “dollars”, “US$” or “$” are to the legal currency of the United States, all references to “HK$” are to the legal currency of Hong Kong and all references to “AUD” are to the legal currency of Australia. This report contains translations of Renminbi amounts into U.S. dollars at specified rates solely for the convenience of the reader. Unless otherwise noted, all translations from Renminbi to U.S. dollars were made at the noon buying rate in the City of New York for cable transfers in Renminbi per U.S. dollar as certified for customs purposes by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, or the noon buying rate, as of March 31, 2022. We make no representation that the Renminbi or U.S. dollar amounts referred to in this report could have been or could be converted into U.S. dollars or Renminbi, as the case may be, at any particular rate or at all. On March 31, 2022, the noon buying rate was RMB6.3393 to US$1.00.

​

This report contains statistical data relating to the healthcare industry in China that we obtained from various institutions’ publicly available publications. These publications generally indicate that they have obtained their information from sources believed to be reliable, but do not guarantee the accuracy and completeness of their information. Although we believe that these publications are reliable, we have not independently verified their statistical data. These statistical data may not be comparable to similar statistics collected for the industry in the United States and other countries.

​

​

3

Table of Contents

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

​

This report contains forward-looking statements that are based on our current expectations, assumptions, estimates and projections about us and our industry. All statements other than statements of historical fact in this report are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements can be identified by words or phrases such as “may”, “will”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “estimate”, “plan”, “believe”, “is/are likely to” or other similar expressions. The forward-looking statements included in this report relate to, among others:

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

These forward-looking statements involve various risks and uncertainties. Although we believe that our expectations expressed in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that our expectations will turn out to be correct. Our actual results could be materially different from our expectations. Important risks and factors that could cause our actual results to be materially different from our expectations are generally set forth in the sections entitled “Item 3. Key Information—D. Risk Factors”, “Item 4. Information on the Company” and “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—A. Operating Results—Factors Affecting Our Financial Condition and Results of Operations” sections and elsewhere in this report.

​

This report also contains data related to the cord blood banking industry. These market data include projections that are based on a number of assumptions. The cord blood banking market may not grow at the rate projected by market data, or at all. The failure of this market to grow at the projected rate may have a material adverse effect on our business and the market price of our ordinary shares. Furthermore, if any one or more of the assumptions underlying the market data turns out to be incorrect, actual results may differ from the projections based on these assumptions. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements.

​

The forward-looking statements made in this report relate only to events or information as of the date on which the statements are made in this report. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which the statements are made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

​

​

4

Table of Contents

PART I

​

ITEM 1.IDENTITY OF DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND ADVISERS

​

Not required.

​

ITEM 2.OFFER STATISTICS AND EXPECTED TIMETABLE

​

Not required.

​

ITEM 3. KEY INFORMATION

​

Implications of Being a Foreign Private Issuer and a China-based Company

​

We are a foreign private issuer within the meaning of the rules under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and as such we are exempt from certain provisions of the securities rules and regulations in the United States that are applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. Moreover, the information we are required to file with or furnish to the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) will be less extensive and less timely compared to that required to be filed with the SEC by U.S. domestic issuers. In addition, as a company incorporated in the Cayman Islands, we are permitted to adopt certain home country practices in relation to corporate governance matters that differ significantly from the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) listing standards. These practices may afford less protection to shareholders than they would enjoy if we complied fully with the New York Stock Exchange listing standards.

​

We are exposed to legal and operational risks associated with our operations in China. We are subject to risks arising from China’s legal system, including the uncertainty in the interpretation and the enforcement of the PRC laws and regulations. In addition, rules and regulations in China can change quickly with little advance notice. Recently, Chinese regulators have announced regulatory actions targeting certain sectors of China’s economy, including the for-profit education sector and technology platforms that have a quantitatively significant number of users located in China. Although the cord blood banking services industry does not appear to be the focus of these regulatory actions, we cannot guarantee that the Chinese government will not in the future take regulatory actions that materially and adversely affect the business environment and financial markets in China as they relate to us, our ability to operate our business, our liquidity and our access to capital.

​

The PRC government may also intervene or influence our operations at any time, or may exert more control over offerings conducted overseas and/or foreign investment in China-based issuers, including us, at any time, substantial intervention and influence over the manner we operate, which could result in a material change in our operations or the value of our ordinary shares. Any actions by the PRC government to exert more oversight and control over offerings that are conducted overseas or foreign investment in China-based issuers could significantly limit or completely hinder our ability to offer or continue to offer securities to investors and cause the value of such securities to significantly decline or be worthless.

​

For example, on July 6, 2021, the General Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the General Office of the State Council jointly issued the Opinions on Severe and Lawful Crackdown on Illegal Securities Activities. These opinions emphasized the need to strengthen the administration over illegal securities activities and the supervision on overseas listings by China-based companies. These opinions proposed to take effective measures, such as promoting the construction of relevant regulatory systems, to deal with the risks and incidents facing China-based overseas-listed companies and the demand for cybersecurity and data privacy protection. These opinions and any related implementation rules to be enacted may subject us to additional compliance requirement in the future.

​

With the trend of strengthening anti-monopoly supervision around the world, the PRC government has issued a series of anti-monopoly laws and regulations since 2021, paying more attention to corporate compliance. On February 7, 2021, the Anti-monopoly Commission of the State Council of the PRC promulgated the Guidelines for Anti-monopoly in the field of Platform Economy. On November 15, 2021, the State Administration for Market Regulation of the PRC promulgated the Guidelines for the Overseas Anti-monopoly Compliance of Enterprises. We believe that these regulations currently have little impact on us, but we cannot guarantee that regulators will agree with us or that these regulations will not affect our business operations in the future.

​

5

Table of Contents

Cybersecurity and data privacy and security issues are subject to increasing legislative and regulatory focus in China. For example, the State Council of the PRC promulgated the Security Protection Regulations for Critical Information Infrastructure (the “CII Regulation”) on July 30, 2021, which took effect on September 1, 2021. This regulation requires, among others, certain competent authorities to identify critical information infrastructures. The Cybersecurity Administration of China (the “CAC”) and a number of other departments under the State Council promulgated the Measures for Cybersecurity Review on December 28, 2021, which became effective on February 15, 2022. According to this regulation, critical information infrastructure operators purchasing network products and services and network platform operators carrying out data processing activities, which affect or may affect national security, are required to conduct cybersecurity review. We believe that these regulations have little impact on us, because we are neither a critical information infrastructure operator nor a network platform operator within the meanings of these regulation. However, we cannot guarantee that the regulators will agree with us.

​

On September 1, 2021, the PRC Data Security Law became effective, which imposes data security and privacy obligations on entities and individuals conducting data-related activities, and introduces a data classification and hierarchical protection system. In addition, the Standing Committee of the PRC National People’s Congress promulgated the Personal Information Protection Law (the “PIPL”) on August 20, 2021, which took effect on November 1, 2021. The PIPL further emphasizes processors’ obligations and responsibilities for personal information protection and sets out the basic rules for processing personal information and the rules for cross-border transfer of personal information. On July 7, 2022, the CAC promulgated the Security Assessment Measures for Outbound Data Transfers (the “Assessment Measures”) which will be effective on September 1, 2022. According to the Assessment measures, a data processor shall declare security assessment for its outbound data transfer to the CAC through the local cyberspace administration at the provincial level under any of the following circumstances: (a) where a data processor provides critical data abroad; (b) where a critical information infrastructure operator or a data processor processing the personal information of more than one million individuals provides personal information abroad; (c) where a data processor has provided personal information of 100,000 individuals or sensitive personal information of 10,000 individuals in total abroad since January 1 of the previous year; and (d) other circumstances prescribed by the CAC for which declaration for security assessment for outbound data transfers is required. We have the opportunity to contact, obtain or be exposed to personal information of our subscribers and their close relatives. We may be required to declare security assessment once we fall under any of the aforementioned circumstances and our business operations may be restricted according to the regulations abovementioned.

​

On December 24, 2021, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (“CSRC”) published the Provisions of the State Council on the Administration of Overseas Securities Offering and Listing by Domestic Companies (Draft for Comments), and Administrative Measures for the Filing of Overseas Securities Offering and Listing by Domestic Companies (Draft for Comments), or, collectively, the Draft Overseas Listing Regulations, which set out the new regulatory requirements and filing procedures for Chinese companies seeking direct or indirect listing in overseas markets. The Draft Overseas Listing Regulations, among others, stipulate that Chinese companies that seek to offer and list securities in overseas markets must fulfill the filing procedures with and report relevant information to the CSRC, and that an initial filing must be submitted within three working days after the application for an initial public offering in an overseas market is submitted, and a second filing must be submitted within three working days after the listing is completed. Moreover, an overseas offering and listing is prohibited under circumstances if (i) it is prohibited by PRC laws, (ii) it may constitute a threat to or endanger national security as reviewed and determined by competent PRC authorities, (iii) it has material ownership disputes over equity, major assets, and core technology, (iv) in the past three years, the Chinese operating entities and their controlling shareholders and actual controllers have committed relevant prescribed criminal offenses or are currently under investigations for suspicion of criminal offenses or major violations, (v) the directors, supervisors, or senior executives have been subject to administrative punishment for severe violations, or are currently under investigations for suspicion of criminal offenses or major violations, or (vi) it has other circumstances as prescribed by the State Council. The Draft Overseas Listing Regulations, among others, stipulate that when determining whether an offering and listing shall be deemed as “an indirect overseas offering and listing by a Chinese company”, the principle of “substance over form” will be followed, and if the issuer meets the following conditions, its offering and listing will be determined as an “indirect overseas offering and listing by a Chinese company” and is therefore subject to the filing requirement: (i) the revenues, profits, total assets or net assets of the Chinese operating entities in the most recent financial year accounts for more than 50% of the corresponding data in the issuer’s audited consolidated financial statements for the same period; and (ii) the majority of senior management in charge of business operation are Chinese citizens or have domicile in PRC, and its principal place of business is located in PRC or main business activities are conducted in PRC. As advised by our PRC legal counsel, the Draft Overseas Listing Regulations were released only for soliciting public comment at this stage and their provisions and anticipated adoption or effective date are subject to changes, and thus their interpretation and implementation remain substantially uncertain. We cannot predict the impact of the Draft Overseas Listing Regulations on us at this stage.

​

6

Table of Contents

Since these regulatory actions are relatively new, it is uncertain how soon legislative or administrative regulation-making bodies will respond and what existing or new laws or regulations or detailed implementations and interpretations will be modified or promulgated, if any, or the potential impact such modified or new laws and regulations will have on our daily business operation, or our ability to accept foreign investments and listing on a U.S. or other foreign exchange. PRC laws and their interpretations and enforcement continue to develop and are subject to change, and the PRC government may adopt other rules and restrictions in the future.

​

Our financial statements contained in this annual report have been audited by KPMG Huazhen LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm that is headquartered in China. It is a firm registered with the U.S. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (the “PCAOB”), and is required by the laws of the U.S. to undergo regular inspections by the PCAOB to assess its compliance with the laws of the U.S. and professional standards. According to Article 177 of the PRC Securities Law which became effective in March 2020, no overseas securities regulator is allowed to directly conduct investigation or evidence collection activities within the territory of the PRC. Accordingly, without the consent of competent PRC securities regulators and relevant authorities, no organization or individual may provide the documents and materials relating to securities business activities to overseas parties. The Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, or the HFCA Act, was enacted on December 18, 2020. The HFCA Act states that if the SEC determines that a company has filed audit reports issued by a registered public accounting firm that has not been subject to inspection by the PCAOB for three consecutive years beginning in 2021, the SEC shall prohibit such ordinary shares from being traded on a national securities exchange or in the over-the-counter trading market in the U.S. The SEC has adopted rules to implement the HFCA Act and, pursuant to the HFCA Act, the PCAOB has issued a report notifying the Securities and Exchange Commission of its determination that it is currently unable to inspect or investigation completely accounting firms headquartered in mainland China or Hong Kong. Our auditor KPMG Huazhen LLP is subject to the determinations announced by the PCAOB on December 16, 2021. Further, the United States Senate has passed the Accelerating Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, or the AHFCA Act, which, if enacted, would decrease the number of “non-inspection years” from three years to two years, and thus, would reduce the time before our securities may be prohibited from trading or be delisted. The delisting of our ordinary shares, or the threat of them being delisted, may materially and adversely affect the value of your investment. Additionally, the inability of the PCAOB to conduct inspections deprives our investors of the benefits of such inspections.

​

As a holding company, we may rely upon dividends paid to us by our subsidiaries in the PRC to pay dividends and to finance any debt we may incur. If our subsidiaries or any newly formed subsidiaries incur debt on their own behalf in the future, the instruments governing their debt may restrict their ability to pay dividends to us. In addition, our subsidiaries are permitted to pay dividends to us only out of their accumulated profits, if any, as determined in accordance with PRC accounting standards and regulations. Under PRC laws and regulations, each of our Chinese subsidiaries are required to set aside a portion of their net income each year to fund a statutory surplus reserve until such reserve reaches 50% of its registered capital. This reserve is not distributable as dividends. As a result, our Chinese subsidiaries are restricted in their ability to transfer a portion of its net assets to us in the form of dividends, loans or advances. As an offshore holding company, we will be permitted under PRC laws and regulations to provide funding from the proceeds of our offshore fund-raising activities to our subsidiaries in China only through loans or capital contributions, subject to the satisfaction of the applicable government registration and approval requirements. Before providing loans to our PRC subsidiaries, we will be required to make filings about details of the loans with the State Administration of Foreign Exchange of the PRC (the “SAFE”) or its local branches in accordance with relevant PRC laws and regulations. Our PRC subsidiaries that receive the loans are only allowed to use the loans for the purposes set forth in these laws and regulations. Under regulations of the SAFE, Renminbi is not convertible into foreign currencies for capital account items, such as loans, repatriation of investments and investments outside of China, unless prior registration with the SAFE is made. See “—D. Risk Factors—Risks Relating to Operations in China” for more details.

​

​

​

Not required.

​

​

Not required.

​

7

Table of Contents

​

You should carefully consider all of the information in this report, including various changing regulatory, competitive, economic, political and social risks and conditions described below, before making an investment in our ordinary shares. One or more of a combination of these risks could materially impact our business, results of operations and financial condition. In any such case, the market price of our ordinary shares could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investments.

Summary of Risk Factors

Risks relating to our business include issues arising from the following matters and related adverse developments:

8

Table of Contents

Risks relating to operations in China include issues arising from the following matters and related adverse developments:

Risks to our shareholders include issues arising from the following matters and related adverse developments:

9

Table of Contents

​

Risks Relating to Our Business

​

Our business and financial results may be materially and adversely affected by the current COVID-19 pandemic outbreak.

​

Since late 2019, COVID-19 has spread across China, including our primary markets of Beijing, Guangdong, and Zhejiang. The World Health Organization declared the outbreak of COVID-19 a pandemic on March 11, 2020. As COVID-19 continues to spread, different cities in China have taken various restrictive measures, including implementing complete or partial lockdowns. For example, the 2020 Chinese Lunar New Year holidays were extended in order to curb the spread of the virus, resulting in insufficient work force and delayed production for many industries. These preventive measures have continued to impact our daily operations. The government’s efforts to control COVID-19 have placed heavy pressure on our marketing, promotional and sales activities. From time to time, part of our salesforce were unable to return to work due to lockdowns implemented in various cities, and some hospitals were restricting entrance to hospital staffs and patients only. As a result, these measures have had adverse impact on our marketing efforts and access to potential clients, rendering client conversion challenging. We focus on protecting the safety and well-being of our work force while also ensuring that no disruption occurs to the day-to-day services that we provide to existing clients. Therefore, we have increased our efforts to purchase necessary medical supplies and equipment, which has led to an increase in operating costs. In addition, the negative economic impact brought forth by the COVID-19 pandemic has affected numerous industries and further erodes already weak consumer sentiment. It is yet difficult to estimate how long it will take to restore people’s normal lives, or whether certain pandemic-control measures will become part of a new norm. These conditions, compounded by other factors, have adversely affect potential clients’ pregnancy decisions. With vaccination rate gradually increasing in China, the impact from COVID-19 may be alleviated. However, certain variants have proven to be more severe or infectious, especially the Omicron variant, which have resulted in an increase in cases globally. These or future variants of COVID-19 could also prove to be more resistant to vaccines. In addition, while the world is facing various challenges in response to COVID-19, China may continue to tighten its anti-pandemic policies and measures, which would add further headwinds to the recovery pace of China’s economy and consumer confidence. Taking into consideration the potential effects of COVID-19 on fertility, as well as the observed impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on socio-economic conditions, the number of newborns in the respective regions where we operate is expected to remain low in the near term.

​

In light of the rapidly changing situation across different countries and regions, it remains difficult to estimate the duration and magnitude of COVID-19 impact. There is considerable uncertainty over the long-term effects of the expansionary monetary and fiscal policies that have been adopted by the central banks and financial authorities of some of the world’s leading economies to counter the negative economic impact brought forth by COVID-19. In addition, inflation has accelerated in many economies, in particular the United States, and policy actions to address inflation may slow or reverse economic growth or have other negative effects on economic conditions. These government policies and actions could have lasting effects on our business, our expansion plans and our ability to raise capital required to implement our expansion plans, the extent of which is difficult to predict. We expect this situation will continue to have a material adverse impact on our operating results in the year ending March 31, 2023 and possibly in future years depending on the length of the pandemic and its economic repercussions. We will continue to assess the related risks and impacts COVID-19 pandemic may have on our business and our financial performance.

​

10

Table of Contents

Our business and financial results may be materially and adversely affected as a result of regulatory changes in the cord blood banking industry in China.

​

We generate substantially all of our revenues by providing our subscribers with processing services, which consist of the testing and processing of cord blood units, and storage services, which consist of the storage of cord blood units in our facilities. We sometimes refer the processing services and storage services collectively as “subscription services” in this report. In addition, we are also required by the PRC government to store cord blood units donated by the public and offer matching units to patients in need of transplants, which we sometimes refer to as the “matching services” in this report. All of these revenues for the years ended March 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022 were derived in China. Due to the lack of a clear, consistent and well-developed regulatory framework, operation in the cord blood banking industry in China involves significant ambiguities, uncertainties and risks. We cannot assure you that we can continue to operate our business in the same manner for the following reasons:

​

The NHC (formerly known as NHFPC) has been following a “one license per region” policy in its regulation of cord blood banks, which precludes more than one cord blood banking license holder from operating in the same region. According to the Notice on Extension of Time Limit on Planning and Establishment of the Cord Blood Bank published by the NHFPC in December 2015, the NHFPC extended the planning and establishment timetable for cord blood banking and would not grant any new licenses before 2020 in addition to the seven existing cord blood banking licenses; meanwhile, it plans to build the National Cord Blood Bank. On November 29, 2019, the NHC announced a Notice Regarding the Issuance of Free Trade Zone “Separating Permits from Business Licenses” Healthcare Reform Implementation Plan (the “New Policy”). Under the New Policy, the LHCs are allowed to approve cord blood banking licenses in 18 pilot Free Trade Zones (“FTZs”) in China, namely Shanghai, Tianjin, Fujian, Guangdong, Liaoning, Zhejiang, Hubei, Henan, Chongqing, Sichuan, Shaanxi, Hainan, Shandong, Jiangsu, Guangxi, Hebei, Yunnan and Heilongjiang. The New Policy does not specify the implementation details, such as qualifications for applicants, license approval procedures or licensed region coverage, but it implies that the regulatory bodies could expand the current seven licensed regions for cord blood banking to up to 19 regions, including Beijing. As of September 24, 2020, this number had been increased from 18 FTZs to 21 FTZs in China, with three new FTZs including Beijing, Hunan and Anhui. Thus, the New Policy implies that the regulatory bodies could expand the current seven licensed regions for cord blood banking to up to 21 regions. On December 30, 2020, the NHC announced a Notice Regarding the Matters Related to Issuance of Cord Blood Banking License, which specified that no cord blood banking license applications shall be accepted in 2021.

​

On July 2, 2021, the NHC announced a Notice on Reform Measures for “Separating Permits from Business Licenses” in the Medical Field (the “2021 Policy”) to specify the nationwide “Separating Permits from Business Licenses” reform measures in the medical field, including allowing online application for cord blood bank establishment and practice approval, and shortening the approval time limit. Meanwhile, the 2021 policy provides that the application procedure shall still be implemented in accordance with the Measures for Administration of Blood Stations; that is, the NHC was responsible for the approval of the establishment of cord blood banks and the LHCs were responsible for the practice approval. However, as of the date of this report, the NHC has not issued any notice on whether to accept the cord blood banking license applications nationwide.

​

If new licenses are issued in Beijing, Guangdong, Zhejiang or any region where we operate the licensed cord blood banks, or if the LHCs actually permit or acquiesce the operation of subscription service by other types of institutions, our market position as the sole cord blood banking operator in the relevant region may be undermined. Further, we may be required to record impairment charges in respect of some or all of the carrying values of the rights to operate our cord blood banks in Guangdong and Zhejiang, or our investment in Shandong, if additional licenses are issued in those regions or if the NHC or the relevant LHC takes the position that the provision of fee-based commercial cord blood banking services is not limited to operators of licensed cord blood banks. Any impairment charge that we may be required to record due to changes in regulatory policies could materially and adversely affect our assets and net income.

​

11

Table of Contents

The Biosecurity Law of the People’s Republic of China (the “Biosecurity Law”) was passed by the Standing Committee of the PRC National People’s Congress and took effect on April 15, 2021. The Biosecurity Law empowered the government to strengthen the regulation and supervision over multiple biological factors, including the biosecurity management of human genetic resources (“HGR”) and biological resources. The Biosecurity Law also contains provisions that specifically address the collection (only for certain HGR defined under the Biosecurity Law), preservation, international research or export of HGR shall be subject to the prior approval of the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of China (“MOST”), unless for the purposes of clinical diagnosis and treatment, for collection and supply of blood or for other purposes defined under the Biosecurity Law. Under the Biosecurity Law, any overseas organization, individual or any entity established or actually controlled thereby is not allowed to collect or preserve China’s HGR in China, or provide China’s HGR collected in China to regions outside of China. In the absence of further implementation details, there are significant ambiguities and uncertainties regarding the Biosecurity Law and how it will affect GCBC’s operations. Given that GCBC is a Cayman company and GCBC’s subscription services involve collection and storage of umbilical cord blood stem cells from subscribers and donors in China (which contains HGR), it is possible that the regulatory authorities will take the position that GCBC is in violation of the Biosecurity Law. If this is the case, we may be forced to cease our subscription and matching services; or be forced to modify our operations or apply for additional approvals in order to comply with the Biosecurity Law. As such, our operational, financial condition and share price would be materially and adversely affected.

Our business may be exposed to increasingly stringent anti-monopolistic measures from the PRC government. Under the PRC Antitrust Law, the monopolistic activities are classified into (i) monopoly agreements, including both agreements entered into between business operators and suppliers and agreements between the operators; (ii) abuse of a dominant market position by business operators; and (iii) concentration of business operators that may have the effect of precluding or impeding competition. As of the date of this report, only seven cord blood banking licenses have been granted in China, three of which to the Beijing Cord Blood Bank, the Guangdong Cord Blood Bank and the Zhejiang Cord Blood Bank (all of which are operated by us) and a fourth to Qilu, the sole operator of the Shandong Cord Blood Bank, in which we own a 24.0% equity interest and our controlling shareholder owns a 76.0% equity interest. Therefore, we cannot assure you that we will not be identified as a business operator having a dominant market position. In the event of such circumstances, the antitrust authorities may impose more stringent supervision over our operations in China, in particular as to our ability in changing or modifying any parts of our operations. There is even a risk that subscription prices would become subject to compulsory or directory guidance or other restrictions imposed by PRC government. Further, we plan to expand our business through further strategic acquisitions. If the contemplated business concentration has the effect of precluding or impeding competition, the antitrust authorities may prohibit consummation of the contemplated business concentration or impose conditions that would lessen the impact of the concentration poses on competition, and we may therefore be unable to expand our business through acquisitions. In addition, our subsidiaries in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang adopt similar commercial policies and share lots of material procurement channels in China. In the event that any agreement or a series of agreements entered into by us are identified as monopoly agreements, the profits generated from such agreements could be confiscated and we may be subject to administrative penalties.

​

Under the Measures for the Administration of Blood Stations issued by the MOH, or “the Measures”, which became effective on March 1, 2006 and were amended in 2009, 2016 and 2017, respectively:

12

Table of Contents

Our Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang licenses were either renewed or issued by the relevant provincial-level DOHs, LHFPCs or LHCs after the Measures became effective on March 1, 2006.

The cord blood bank operated by Jiachenhong, our operating subsidiary in Beijing, obtained its first cord blood banking license from the MOH in September 2002. In September 2005, June 2007, March 2010 and April 2013, the MOH/DOH in Beijing renewed the license for the cord blood bank operated by us for an additional three years. In April 2016, the LHFPC in Beijing renewed the license for the cord blood bank operated by us for an additional nine years. The cord blood bank operated by Nuoya, our operating subsidiary in Guangdong, obtained its first cord blood banking license from the DOH in Guangdong in June 2006. In each of May 2009, May 2012, May 2015, May 2018 and April 2021, the DOH/LHFPC/LHC in Guangdong renewed the license for the cord blood bank operated by us for an additional three years. The cord blood bank operated by Lukou, our operating subsidiary in Zhejiang, obtained its first cord blood banking license from the DOH in Zhejiang in September 2010. In each of September 2013, September 2016 and September 2019, the DOH/LHFPC/LHC in Zhejiang renewed the license for the cord blood bank operated by us for an additional three years.

​

All the operators of the licensed cord blood banks in China have been providing fee-based commercial cord blood banking services to fee-paying subscribers in conjunction with cord blood banking services provided to the public with respect to donated cord blood units. We believe that the NHC and the LHCs in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang are aware of fee-based commercial cord blood banking services in these regions, as they inspect cord blood bank facilities from time to time. In addition, our license application materials submitted to the LHFPCs/LHCs in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang contained information about our subscription services to subscribers.

Although the above facts indicate that the NHC and the LHCs have been continuously supervising Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang cord blood banks, which collect cord blood units donated by the public and provide fee-based commercial cord blood banking services, there lacks a clear, consistent and well-developed regulatory framework for the cord blood banking industry in China as well as formal clarifications of policies or positions by the NHC and the LHCs on how they interpret, administer and enforce the regulations in light of the ambiguities under the current regulatory environment. In response to the development of China’s medical reform, the PRC government may further promulgate certain guidance or compulsory regulations or clarify its policies or regulatory positions in other manners, which could undermine cord blood bank operator profitability by restricting or even prohibiting licensed cord blood banks or their operators from conducting fee-based commercial cord blood banking services. The PRC government may guide or force licensed cord blood bank to focus on its business of providing matching services or at least take matching services as its main business by imposing certain restrictive conditions on subscription services. We cannot assure you that the PRC government and the health authorities will continue their current regulatory practice and not prohibit the provision of for-profit subscription services. In the event that the PRC government and the health authorities change their regulatory position and prohibit companies or any other entities in China, including us, from operating for-profit subscription businesses or acting as operators of cord blood banks, we may have to terminate our business or change our business model. Further, if we were required to apply for a special or a separate permit, license or authorization for the provision of such services, we may have to suspend our business to apply for the special or a separate permit, license or authorization. We may be subject to administrative penalties and/or claims for operation without a license. There is no assurance that we will be able to obtain the license. We may be forced to shut down our business if we are unable to obtain the license. Also, there is no assurance that we will be able to apply for and obtain a new approval or license to expand our business.

13

Table of Contents

The NHC or the relevant LHC may take the position that the provision of fee-based commercial cord blood banking services is not limited to operators of licensed cord blood banks. In the event that the NHC or the relevant LHC publicly announces such position, or clarifies such position in an implicit or explicit manner, other companies in healthcare or other related industries may begin to provide such services, in which case we will face direct competition from these companies.

If any of the above circumstances occur, our business and financial condition will be materially and adversely affected. Similarly, if the NHC or the relevant LHC orders the operator of the Shandong Cord Blood Bank to cease fee-based commercial cord blood banking operations, Qilu’s operations will be severely affected, which in turn may materially and adversely affect our investment.

Our business may be materially and adversely affected if we are prohibited from providing collection, testing, storage and matching services in connection with cord blood under the Industrial Catalogue Guiding Foreign Investment, or the “Catalogue” and the Negative List.

Prior to December 1, 2007, foreign investments in China were subject to regulation by the Catalogue promulgated in November 2004 by the National Development and Reform Commission, or the “NDRC”, and the Ministry of Commerce, or the “MOC”. On October 31, 2007, the NDRC and the MOC revised the Catalogue, which became effective on December 1, 2007. The Catalogue was subsequently amended and revised by the NDRC and the MOC in 2011, 2015 and 2017. On June 28, 2018, the NDRC and the MOC promulgated the Special Administrative Measures for Access of Foreign Investment (Negative List) (the “Negative List”) (2018 Edition), which entered into force from July 28, 2018, and superseded the categories of “restricted” and “prohibited” for foreign investment as provided in the Catalogue revised in 2017. On June 30, 2019, the NDRC and the MOC promulgated the Negative List (2019 Edition) and The Catalogue of Industries for Encouraged Foreign Investment (the “Encouraged Catalogue”) (2019 Edition) which became effective on July 30, 2019, and the Negative List (2018 Edition) and the categories of “encouraged” for foreign investment as provided in the Catalogue revised in 2017 were repealed simultaneously. On June 23, 2020, the NDRC and the MOC promulgated the Negative List (2020 Edition) which became effective on July 23, 2020 and the Negative List (2019 Edition) was repealed. On December 27, 2020, the NDRC and the MOC promulgated the Encouraged Catalogue (2020 Edition) which became effective on January 27, 2021 and the Encouraged Catalogue (2019 Edition) was repealed. On December 27, 2021, the NDRC and the MOC promulgated the Negative List (2021 Edition), which became effective on January 1, 2022 and replaced the Negative List (2020 Edition).

On March 15, 2019, the National People’s Congress promulgated The Foreign Investment Law of the PRC (the “FIL”), which became effective on January 1, 2020. According to the FIL, foreign investments are entitled to pre-entry national treatment and subject to negative list administration. Foreign investors (the “Foreign Investors”) must not invest in any forbidden fields stipulated in the Negative List. Under the Catalogue promulgated in 2004, there were no prohibitions against investment by foreign enterprises in the cord blood banking industry in China. Under the Catalogue revised in 2007, 2011, 2015, 2017 and the Negative List (including the 2018 Edition, the 2019 Edition, the 2020 Edition and the 2021 Edition), however, foreign enterprises are prohibited from engaging in stem cell and gene diagnosis and treatment technology development and application. Since the Negative List still does not clearly define the scope of such prohibited business, it is uncertain whether it prohibits diagnosis and treatment technology development and application of stem cells only or it prohibits all stem-cell-related technology development and application. Therefore, it is unclear whether our cord blood banking services will be construed as a prohibited business under the Negative List.

14

Table of Contents

We have consulted with our PRC counsel and found no evidence leading to the conclusion that the subscription services provided by our cord blood banks violate the Catalogue revised in 2007, 2011, 2015 and 2017 and the Negative List (including the 2018 Edition, the 2019 Edition, the 2020 Edition and the 2021 Edition). We have also communicated and consulted with the MOH/NHFPC/NHC and the relevant DOHs/LHFPCs/LHCs regarding the legality of cord blood banking services provided by our cord blood banks subsequent to the effectiveness of the Catalogue revised in 2007, 2011, 2015 and 2017 and the Negative List (including the 2018 Edition, the 2019 Edition, the 2020 Edition and the 2021 Edition). So far, neither the Company nor our cord blood banks have received any negative comment, query, notice of prohibition, notice of termination of the service, administration sanction or penalty due to the cord blood banking service being deemed non-compliant with the relevant PRC laws and regulations or in violation of the terms set forth in the blood station licenses. Moreover, all the annual inspections, payments of the registered capital and change of the legal representative of our PRC subsidiaries, after the Catalogue revised in 2007, 2011, 2015 and 2017 and the Negative List (including the 2018 Edition, the 2019 Edition, the 2020 Edition and the 2021 Edition) became effective, have been officially approved, registered and filed with the authorized Industry and Commerce Administration Bureau. Also, our Beijing Cord Blood Bank, Guangdong Cord Blood Bank and Zhejiang Cord Blood Bank renewed their cord blood banking licenses in April 2016, April 2021 and September 2019, respectively, with the relevant authorities, after the Catalogue revised in 2007, 2011, 2015, 2017 and the Negative List (including the 2018 Edition, the 2019 Edition, the 2020 Edition and the 2021 Edition) were already effective. None of Jiachenhong, the Beijing Cord Blood Bank, Nuoya, the Guangdong Cord Blood Bank, Lukou, or the Zhejiang Cord Blood Bank encountered any major obstacle, hurdle or query during the renewal process of the cord blood banking license or business license.

The Catalogue revised in 2007, 2011, 2015 and 2017 and the Negative List (including the 2018 Edition, the 2019 Edition, the 2020 Edition and the 2021 Edition) have no retroactive force, and foreign enterprises approved to operate in China before their businesses become prohibited under the Catalogue revised in 2007, 2011, 2015 and 2017 and the Negative List (including the 2018 Edition, the 2019 Edition, the 2020 Edition and the 2021 Edition) should be able to continue their businesses in accordance with the approvals they previously obtained. However, there is no assurance that such enterprises will continue to be able to renew their licenses if the government authorities consider that renewal of their licenses would contravene the Negative List. Moreover, we may not be able to obtain necessary approvals for our business expansion or acquisitions under the Negative List from the government authorities. We also may not be able to extend the operating periods of our existing PRC subsidiaries, including Jiachenhong, Nuoya and Lukou. Jiachenhong has an operating period of twenty years and the cord blood banking license is subject to renewal in May 2025. Nuoya has an operating period of thirty years and the cord blood banking license is subject to renewal in May 2024. Lukou has an operating period of twenty years and the cord blood banking license is subject to renewal in September 2022. The contracts between Jiachenhong, Nuoya and Lukou and their respective subscribers are typically for a period of 18 years. Effective from April 1, 2021, we provide further storage service with a contract period for 10 years or 20 years to subscribers who completed the first 18-year contract period. If Jiachenhong, Nuoya and Lukou are unable to extend their respective operating periods, these respective operating periods will not cover the period of the contracts entered into after September 2005, August 2019 and December 2012, respectively, and the relevant entities may have to be transferred to domestic companies or go into liquidation upon the expiration of their respective operating periods. In addition, after the Negative List is issued, we may not be able to obtain approval from the relevant authorities for increasing the registered capital of Jiachenhong, Nuoya and Lukou, subscribing to the increased registered capital of Jiachenhong, Nuoya and Lukou, or making contributions for such capital with foreign currency sourced from overseas. If any of the above factors occurs, we may be required to change our business model or otherwise cease our business operations.

​

​

​

15

Table of Contents

​

If we lose our position as the sole provider of cord blood banking services in our existing markets, our business and prospects may be materially and adversely affected.

​

Our business and financial results may not benefit from, and in certain circumstances may be adversely affected by, the adoption of three-child policy in China.

​

The one-child policy lasted for over 40 years in China, and successfully controlled population growth rates in the past few decades. Effective on January 1, 2016, the amendment of Population and Family Planning Law of PRC relaxed the one-child policy by allowing families to have two children where certain requirements are met. On May 31, 2021, the Chinese government approved the three-child policy which allows each couple in China to have up to three children. With only one child in each family, it was previously difficult to obtain matching stem cells if such child needed a transplant. In families with more than one child, the possibility of acquiring matching stem cells from a sibling is increased, and such families may decide not to subscribe our subscription services. As the number of babies born in China continues to decline, it remains uncertain whether the adoption of the three-child policy will immediately lift the newborn number. Also, if the number of family members increase, the economic resources allocated to each child may fall, and our services may become less appealing to less affluent families. As a result, our subscription services may not benefit from, and our business and financial results may even be adversely affected by, the three-child policy.

​

If all or part of the demand for stem cells is met by matching cord blood units donated by the public to patients in need of transplants, expectant parents may choose not to pay for our subscription services, and our business and financial results may be materially and adversely affected.

​

There is no assurance that demand for our subscription services will remain at current levels for the following reasons:

​

​

​

16

Table of Contents

​

Any decrease in the demand for our subscription services could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

​

We currently operate our business only in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang. As a result of this geographic concentration, a downturn in the local economy or birthrate level of these regions could impair our growth and adversely affect our financial results.

​

Our operations are largely concentrated in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang. Due to the lack of geographical diversity of our operations, we may be unable to mitigate the effects of any adverse trends in economic development, disposable income or birthrate level in these regions. In particular:

​

​

​

​

A major growth strategy of ours is to focus on penetrating our existing markets. Such strategy could be risky, because adverse economic or regulatory developments in one or multiple markets may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We cannot assure you that we can maintain or enhance our success rates in attracting new subscribers in the future.

​

Our investment in Qilu may be materially and adversely affected due to a downturn in the local economy or birthrate level in the Shandong province, which may result in an impairment of our investment.

​

We invested in Qilu, the exclusive cord blood banking operator in the Shandong province, with an equity interest of 24.0%; its remaining 76.0% equity interest is owned by our controlling shareholder. Due to the lack of geographical diversity, Qilu may be unable to mitigate the effects of any adverse trends in local economic development, disposable income or birthrate level. Any slowdown in the Shandong province’s economic development, unfavorable demographic trend, decline in disposable income of expectant parents or adverse change in consumer behavior will adversely affect Qilu’s capability to penetrate its local market. As such, our investment in Qilu may be materially and adversely affected or severely impaired.

​

17

Table of Contents

If we fail to expand through strategic acquisitions of cord blood banks in other regions, we may not be able to expand our scope of operations or increase our revenues.

​

According to the Notice on Extension of Time Limit on Planning and Establishment of the Cord Blood Bank published by the NHFPC in December 2015, the NHFPC extended the planning and establishment timetable for cord blood banking and will not grant any new licenses before 2020 in addition to the seven existing cord blood banking licenses. On November 29, 2019, the NHC announced the New Policy. Under the New Policy, the LHCs are allowed to approve cord blood banking licenses in 18 pilot FTZs in China. The New Policy does not specify the implementation details, such as qualifications for applicants, license approval procedures or licensed region coverage, but it implies that the regulatory bodies could expand the current seven licensed regions for cord blood banking to up to 19 regions, including Beijing. Detailed rules on the implementation of the New Policy are yet to be provided by relevant government agencies. As of September 24, 2020, the FTZs in China had been increased from 18 FTZs to 21 FTZs, with three new FTZs including Beijing, Hunan and Anhui. Thus, the New Policy implies that the regulatory bodies could expand the current seven licensed regions for cord blood banking to up to 21 regions. On December 30, 2020, the NHC announced a Notice Regarding the Matters Related to Issuance of Cord Blood Banking License, which specified that no cord blood banking license applications shall be accepted in 2021.

​

On July 2, 2021, the NHC announced the 2021 Policy to specify the nationwide “Separating Permits from Business Licenses” reform measures in the medical field, including allowing online application for cord blood bank establishment and practice approval, and shortening the approval time limit. Meanwhile, the 2021 policy provides that the application procedure shall still be implemented in accordance with the Measures for Administration of Blood Stations; that is, the NHC was responsible for the approval of the establishment of cord blood banks and the LHCs were responsible for the practice approval. However, as of the date of this report, the NHC has not issued any notice on whether to accept the cord blood banking license applications nationwide. We believe we would have to rely on strategic acquisitions of cord blood banks in other regions to expand our operations. Expansion through strategic acquisitions is subject to a number of risks:

​

​

​

​

​

18

Table of Contents

​

Our future success depends on our ability to increase our target subscription base by expanding our geographical coverage to other regions. If we are unable to grow our operations through strategic acquisitions, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.

​

We may not be able to expand our service portfolio by bringing in additional healthcare and therapeutic related services or, if such expansion plans are implemented, we may not realize the anticipated benefits and they could disrupt our business, decrease our profitability, result in dilution to our stockholders or cause us to incur significant additional debt or expense.

​

As part of our business strategy to expand our service portfolio, we are seeking to acquire additional businesses which would enable us to offer additional healthcare and therapeutic related services to our cord blood banking subscribers that in turn diversify our revenue stream, leverage our corporate infrastructure and commercial expertise. There are limited opportunities available that align with our business strategy and there can be no assurance that we will be able to identify or complete any suitable acquisition in a timely manner, on a cost-effective basis, or at all, or that such transactions will be successfully integrated into our business. For example, we have entered into agreements to acquire an approximately 95% equity interest of Cellenkos and the rights to develop and commercialize all of its existing and future products worldwide except those related to Cellenkos’ existing collaboration with Incyte Corporation (Nasdaq: INCY). However, we cannot assure you that we can complete this transaction or realize any anticipated benefits from this transaction, if completed. See “—Risks to Our Shareholders— Our largest shareholder filed a winding up petition with the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands, which, among other things, seeks to prevent our acquisition of Cellenkos, remove our current Board of Directors and effect related governance changes, a Writ of Summons which, among other things, seeks to unwind the Cellenkos Acquisition, and a claim against GM Stem Cells in the British Virgin Islands which, among other things, seeks a declaration that a share charge over its shares in the Company is invalid” for more information.

​

Further, the valuation methods that we use for any acquired business require significant judgments and assumptions. There is no guarantee that we can successfully commercialize such additional healthcare services or such additional healthcare services will be well received by our existing and future subscribers. Actual results and performance of the products or businesses that we may acquire, including anticipated synergies, regulatory outcomes, economies of scale and other financial benefits, could differ significantly from our original assumptions. In addition, acquisitions may cause significant changes to our current business and operations, may subject us to more rigid or constraining regulations or government oversight and may have negative tax and accounting consequences. These results could have a negative impact on our financial position or results of operations and result in significant charges in future periods.

​

Even if we do acquire suitable businesses, the management of integration of an acquired business or company may disrupt our ongoing business and require management resources that otherwise would be available for ongoing efforts and development of our existing business. The integration of the operations of such acquired businesses requires significant efforts, including the coordination of information technologies, sales and marketing, operations, finance and business systems and processes. These efforts result in additional expenses and involve significant amounts of management’s time. Further, due to our limited experience in operating non-cord blood banking business, there may be unanticipated or unforeseeable event which can materially and adversely affected our operation and financial condition. If we cannot successfully integrate additional healthcare and therapeutic related services for the benefits of our cord blood banking subscribers, we may experience material negative consequences to our business, financial condition or results of operations.

​

19

Table of Contents

We may incur significant initial investments to apply for cord blood banking licenses in other regions, and if we are unsuccessful, our operating results could be materially and adversely affected.

​

On November 29, 2019, the NHC announced a New Policy. Under the New Policy, the LHCs are allowed to approve cord blood banking licenses in 18 pilot FTZs in China. The New Policy does not specify the implementation details, such as qualifications for applicants, license approval procedures or licensed region coverage, but it implies that the regulatory bodies could expand the current seven licensed regions for cord blood banking to up to 19 regions, including Beijing. Detailed rules on the implementation of the New Policy are yet to be provided by relevant government agencies. As of September 24, 2020, the FTZs in China had been increased from 18 FTZs to 21 FTZs, with three new FTZs including Beijing, Hunan and Anhui. Thus, the New Policy implies that the regulatory bodies could expand the current seven licensed regions for cord blood banking to up to 21 regions. On December 30, 2020, the NHC announced a Notice Regarding the Matters Related to Issuance of Cord Blood Banking License, which specified that no cord blood banking license applications shall be accepted in 2021.

​

On July 2, 2021, the NHC announced the 2021 Policy to specify the nationwide “Separating Permits from Business Licenses” reform measures in the medical field, including allowing online application for cord blood bank establishment and practice approval, and shortening the approval time limit. Meanwhile, the 2021 policy provides that the application procedure shall still be implemented in accordance with the Measures for Administration of Blood Stations; that is, the NHC was responsible for the approval of the establishment of cord blood banks and the LHCs were responsible for the practice approval. However, as of the date of this report, the NHC has not issued any notice on whether to accept the cord blood banking license applications nationwide. If the NHC or the relevant LHCs decide to grant new cord blood banking licenses in the future in other regions, we may attempt to apply for licenses in such regions. Applying for licenses involves a variety of risks:

​

​

​

​

We compete with other market players for substantially the same licenses. Increased competition may result in an increase in the average cost per license. There is no assurance that we will be able to obtain new licenses through the application process. If we are unable to successfully obtain the new licenses to be awarded, we may not be able to maintain our market position within the China cord blood banking industry. Currently, we have neither identified any specific locations nor expressed any written interest in constructing a cord blood bank.

​

20

Table of Contents

We may face unfair competition from competitors with or without licenses in our target markets.

​

Chinese laws and regulations are changed, supplemented and amended from time to time to establish a well-developed legal system, while at the same time, China is in an environment in which market conditions change rapidly. Therefore, certain laws and regulations may fail to be updated in time to adapt to the new business environment, and some of the laws and regulations published only give a regulatory framework or fundamental principles, whose specific operational procedures and clear explanations in relation to certain details (for example, the standard, the scope and the procedures) may be absent. In addition, laws and regulations may not be enforced in a timely manner by administrative or judicial institutions, and provincial-level LHCs may have different positions and therefore adopt different supervision methods as they interpret the laws and regulations in relation to administration of cord blood banks. Although a decision (No. 2004 HuErZhongXingZhong256) made on December 6, 2004 by Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court, which can be accessed on the official website of Shanghai No. 2 Intermediate People’s Court (https://www.shezfy.com/view.html?id=2894) held that operators that conduct cord blood collection and supply activities without licenses will be ordered to shut down by the authorities, we cannot assure you that there will not be competitors without licenses operating in our target markets. These competitors may include medical institutions having a hematology specialty, general blood stations, institutions which preserve biological tissues (i.e. sperm bank), hospitals’ blood clinic divisions, research institutions, and commercial institutions or organizations. Also, there can be no assurance that operators of the licensed cord blood banks in other regions (outside Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang) will not compete with us in our target markets, or otherwise pose competition against us with other unfair methods. If the above circumstances occur, we may be unable to obtain timely and effective protection from the government and may have to deal with unfair competition from such operators, which may result in our loss of opportunities to explore the potential market, or even a decrease or loss of our existing market demand. In any such case, our operations and financial condition would be adversely affected.

​

We may not be able to manage our expected growth and enlarged business.

​

We anticipate that further expansion will be required in order for us to capitalize on the opportunities available in the cord blood banking industry. Our growth strategy may not be successful for the following reasons:

​

​

​

​

We do not know whether our revenues will grow at all or grow rapidly enough to absorb the capital and expenses necessary for its growth. It is difficult to assess the extent of capital and expenses necessary for our growth and their impact on our operating results. Failure to manage our growth and enlarged business effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

21

Table of Contents

Our prospects may be adversely affected if there are no or limited new developments in medical science to overcome some of the current technical and therapeutic limitations on the use of cord blood in medical treatment.

​

Cord blood therapy is yet to be considered as a mainstream therapeutic approach, with the first successful cord blood transplant occurring only in 1988. Cord blood therapy needs to overcome various technical obstacles before it can become an established medical practice. Cord blood therapy currently has the following limitations:

​

​

​

​

Cord blood therapy may never become an established medical practice. If the perceived utility of cord blood therapy declines, our prospects will be materially and adversely affected.

​

The profitability of our business is subject to market acceptance of cord blood banking in China.

​

Growing market acceptance of cord blood banking services is critical to our future success. It is, however, difficult to predict whether we will be successful in generating additional consumer interest and confidence in the value of our services. Cord blood banking is a relatively new precautionary healthcare concept among the Chinese population. To many of our target subscribers, our services are novel and represent a departure from conventional healthcare spending. Cord blood banking may be unattractive to some from a costs-and-benefits perspective. We have made substantial capital investments in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang, and expect to incur substantial capital investments in our potential markets in the future. If we are unable to penetrate our existing and future markets by attracting new subscribers or potential subscribers in the PRC, or our target subscribers do not acknowledge or accept the idea of cord blood banking, our business, financial condition and results of operations will be materially and adversely affected.

​

Our prospects and business may be materially and adversely affected by negative publicity involving cell related therapies.

​

In April 2016, an unsuccessful treatment involving cell therapy generated significant public concerns in China. In 2014, Mr. Zexi Wei, a 21-year-old Chinese college student, was diagnosed with synovial sarcoma, a rare form of cancer that affects tissue around major joints. Mr. Wei died in April 2016 after receiving a certain type of cell-based immunotherapy in a hospital in Beijing that he learned of from a promoted result on a Chinese Internet search engine (the “Wei Zexi incident”). The Wei Zexi incident was widely covered by the media, which was highly critical of the promoted search practices of the Chinese Internet search engine. This incident was investigated by the CAC, which concluded that the Chinese Internet search engine’s pay-for-placement results influenced Mr. Wei’s medical choices, and influenced the fairness and objectivity of search results. As a result, there remains significant public distrust in the PRC regarding the possibility for online promotion of false or misleading medical information, particularly as it relates to innovative cell therapies.

​

22

Table of Contents

We are a cord blood banking operator which provides storage services of hematopoietic stem cells. The clinical application of hematopoietic stem cell therapies has been proven by clinical data and was approved by the NHC many years ago. Accordingly, we have not witnessed any immediate material impact on our business due to the Wei Zexi incident as of the date of this report, nor does management expect it to cause a radical shift in the regulatory landscape in China. Furthermore, we believe that thorough examination of and proper regulation regarding the clinical applications and research of biological cell therapies would benefit the regenerative medicine industry as a whole over the long run.

​

On the other hand, we, as one of the largest private hematopoietic stem cell storage operators, may face challenges when marketing our services to expand our subscriber base if the public loses confidence in cell-based therapies due to certain negative effects from public events similar to the Wei Zexi incident in the future. Negative publicity and related Internet rumors may cast doubt among consumers in the PRC regarding cell-based therapies, which in turn may adversely affect consumer confidence in the cord blood banking industry.

​

Changes in the cord blood banking industry dynamics and technologies could render our services uncompetitive or obsolete, which could cause our revenues to decline.

​

The cord blood banking industry is evolving and may become increasingly competitive. We believe that a variety of cryopreservation technologies are under development by other companies. Our facilities may be rendered obsolete by the technological advances of others. Other cord blood banks may have better technologies than ours for preserving the cord blood units collected upon childbirth which results in higher cell count. To effectively compete in the future, we may need to invest significant financial resources to keep pace with technological advances in the cord blood banking industry. Any significant capital outlay, however, may adversely affect our profitability because we may not be able to pass the costs onto our existing or future subscribers.

​

To remain competitive, we must continue to enhance our infrastructure to keep up with technological developments in the healthcare industry. Untimely response to changing technologies could have a material and adverse impact on our financial and operational performance.

​

Suppliers of equipment and consumables necessary for the examination, processing, collection and preservation of cord blood stem cells may become limited, which could adversely affect our operations.

​

We maintain a reasonable level of equipment and consumables as inventory in our laboratories for the examination, processing, collection and preservation of cord blood stem cells. We also maintain, whenever available, multiple suppliers for our equipment and consumables. However, the number of equipment and consumables suppliers within the cord blood banking industry may become limited, while some of them may decide to exit the industry, leaving us with even more limited suppliers to choose from. Without adequate or sufficient equipment and consumables, we may not be able to handle all potential subscribers and our operations and financial performance will be materially and adversely affected.

​

If we fail to maintain and strengthen our service platform, our new subscriber sign-ups may decline and our growth may be impaired.

​

Sales and marketing activities are conducted by our own direct sales force through a network of collaborating hospitals. As of March 31, 2022, we had collaborative relationships with 434 major hospitals in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang. We conduct a significant portion of our sales and marketing activities through these hospitals and rely on them for cord blood collection. Our ability to maintain and strengthen our relationships with these hospitals is critical to our success and will be affected by the following:

​

​

23

Table of Contents

​

The expansion of our service platform is also likely to require a significant investment of financial resources and management efforts, and the benefits, if any, that we gain from such an expansion may not be sufficient enough to justify our investment. If we fail to do so, our sales could fail to grow or could even decline, and our ability to grow our business could be adversely affected.

​

Our financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected if a significant number of our subscribers terminate their contracts with us prior to the end of a typical contract period.

​

The contracts we entered into with our subscribers are typically for an initial period of 18 years. The contract period may be shorter if the cord blood unit stored with us is needed for transplants by the child or a family member. The contract period may also be shorter if our subscribers terminate their contracts with us prior to the end of the contract period for any reason. No penalties will be imposed for early termination. This effectively results in an annual election by our subscribers to renew their subscription contracts for storage services, which may result in more of our subscribers terminating the contract prior to the end of contract period.

​

In the event of termination by our subscribers prior to the end of contract period, we are unable to continue to collect storage fees on an annual basis. There is no guarantee that all of our subscribers will fulfill their contract obligations by continuing to pay storage fees on an annual basis during the contract period. If we experience early termination by a significant number of our subscribers prior to the end of a typical contract period, we will lose revenues from storage fees payable by these subscribers for the remaining contract period.

​

Effective from April 1, 2021, we provide further storage service with a contact period for 10 or 20 years to subscribers who completed the first 18-year contract period. As more contracts expire over time, if subscribers elect not to purchase further storage service after the expiration of the initial period of 18 years, we will lose storage fees revenues from these subscription service contracts.

​

If the above-mentioned risks occur, our revenues will decrease and our financial condition and results of operations will be materially and adversely affected.

​

We are exposed to the risk of a deterioration or sudden dramatic decline in our reputation among our target subscribers due to failure in the performance of our cord blood banks.

​

Our reputation among clients and the medical community is extremely important to our success. Our future success depends on acknowledging and actively monitoring the concerns of our target subscribers, regulatory agencies, medical practitioners, civil society groups and non-government organizations. Failure to take appropriate consideration of legitimate corporate responsibility issues in our day-to-day operations could have a material adverse impact on our reputation and business prospects. In particular:

​

​

24

Table of Contents

Any problems with our services, if publicized in the media or otherwise, could negatively impact our reputation. Similarly, inappropriate or inadequate communication following a major crisis, such as a major operational incident, cybersecurity breach, breach of law or ethics or leak of market-sensitive confidential information, could quickly and seriously impair our reputation. Depending on the nature of such crisis, effective communication may not mitigate serious damage to our reputation and may render us subject to criminal and civil prosecution or class action suits by shareholders and other interested parties. Any of these risks can have a material adverse impact on our business.

​

We treat cord blood units abandoned by our former subscribers as donated property and release such units to our cord blood inventory available for patients in need of transplants. This practice may subject us to criticism that could damage our reputation.

​

In addition to subscription services, we accept and preserve cord blood units donated by the general public and deliver matched cord blood units for a fee to patients in need of transplants. For subscribers who cease subscription for our services at the end of contract period or who fail to pay subscription fees, we have the right under the subscription contracts to treat the cord blood units stored as donated property and release such units to our cord blood inventory for patients in need of transplants. We require our employees to fully inform all prospective subscribers of this policy, and our subscribers are required to give their consent to this policy when subscribing for our services.

​

During the year ended March 31, 2022, we determined that the recoverability of 4,548 private cord blood banking subscribers was remote, therefore, we terminated their subscription services according to the subscription contracts. Out of these prior private cord blood units, 3,666 prior private cord blood units were being treated as if they were donated units and will be part of our non-current inventories.

​

In the opinion of our PRC counsel, Commerce & Finance Law Offices, consent of this nature is valid and enforceable under PRC law. However, in the event of a dispute relating to the ownership of the cord blood units abandoned by our former subscribers, it is possible that a court may rule in favor of our former subscribers based on considerations of fairness and equity regardless of the fact that we have contractual rights under the subscription contracts to treat cord blood units abandoned by our former subscribers as donated properties and release such units to our cord blood inventory available for patients in need of transplants. If this occurs, we may be forced to return the cord blood units or continue to store the cord blood units for the benefit of subscribers who do not fulfill their payment obligations. If the cord blood units abandoned by our former subscribers are already used by patients in need of transplants and are no longer available to our former subscribers or their family members who are in need of transplants, we may be required to pay them substantial monetary compensation in order to compensate for those damages.

​

Based on information available to us, treating cord blood units abandoned by former subscribers and releasing such units as inventory available to patients in need of transplants is a common practice followed by cord blood banking operators in China. Nonetheless, we cannot assure you that we will not become the subject of negative publicity resulting from this business practice, whether due to failure by our employees to duly notify our subscribers of this contract provision, ethical issues underlying this business practice or other reasons. If this business practice receives negative media attention, our reputation and our ability to attract new subscribers may be materially and adversely affected.

​

Our insurance coverage may not be sufficient to cover the risks related to our business, and our insurance costs may increase significantly.

​

Our cord blood banks and other infrastructure in our facilities are vulnerable to damages or disruption from fire, flood, equipment failure, break-ins, typhoons and similar events. We do not have back-up facilities or a formal disaster recovery plan. Consequently, we could suffer a loss of some or all of the stored cord blood units.

​

25

Table of Contents

Currently, we maintain insurance coverage of RMB50.0 million (US$7.9 million) to cover our liabilities arising from collection, testing and processing of cord blood units and an additional RMB450.2 million (US$71.0 million) in aggregate to cover liabilities arising from storage of donated cord blood units in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang. We also maintain property insurance policies for facilities, machinery and office equipment for our Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang operations to cover damages from accidents. However, we do not maintain any property insurance policies covering losses due to earthquake and other disasters, nor do we maintain business interruption or cyber security related insurance. Under our insurance policies, the insurance company will provide reimbursement if any cord blood unit of a subscriber is destroyed or unfit to use due to our mishandling; provided, however, the payments to which we are entitled in each incident are limited to RMB200,000 (US$31,549) per person and RMB10.0 million (US$1.6 million) in the aggregate.

​

While we believe that we maintain adequate insurance, our business and prospects could nonetheless be adversely affected in the event of problems in our operations, for the following reasons:

​

​

​

​

Further, we cannot assure you that we will be able to continue to maintain insurance with adequate coverage for liability or risks arising from any of our services on acceptable terms. Even if the insurance is adequate, insurance premiums could increase significantly which could result in higher costs to us. Depending on the development of the industry, certain potential liability may be excluded from coverage under the terms of our insurance policy in the future which imposes even higher level of risk and uncertainty going forward.

​

Our business activities are subject to regulations that may impose significant costs and restrictions.

​

As the healthcare industry in China is monitored closely by regulatory authorities, our operations are constrained in many aspects. In particular:

​

26

Table of Contents

​

​

Regulations of cord blood banking services in China are still evolving and there are uncertainties in relation to the application and interpretation of the relevant regulations. We may be required to devote significant time and attention to comply with the applicable requirements, and our compliance costs may increase in future periods.

​

Unauthorized use of our brand name by third parties may adversely affect our business.

​

We consider our brand name critical to our success. Due to the nature of our business, we do not have any patents, administrative protection or trade secrets covering our use of cord blood collection, processing, storage or retrieval technologies. Our continued ability to differentiate ourselves from the other cord blood banking operators and other potential new entrants would depend substantially on our ability to preserve the value of our brand name.

​

We rely on trademark law, company brand name protection policies, and agreements with our employees, subscribers and business partners to protect the value of our brand name. In particular, we have completed the trademark registration process and have been licensed by the Trademark Office of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce of the People’s Republic of China (which has been reorganized as the Trademark Office of National Intellectual Property Administration since March 2018) to use our trademarks, as of the date of issuance of this report, we had 86 registered trademarks. However, there can be no assurance that the measures we take in this regard are adequate to prevent or deter infringement or other misappropriation of our brand name. Among others, we may not be able to detect unauthorized use of our brand name or copycat in a timely manner because our ability to determine whether other parties have infringed our brand name is generally limited to information from publicly available sources.

​

In order to preserve the value of our brand name, we may need to take legal actions against third parties. Nonetheless, because certain aspects such as validity, enforceability and scope of trademark protection in the PRC still remain unclear and the relevant legal framework is still evolving, we may not be successful in litigation. Further, future litigation may also result in substantial costs and diversion of our resources and disrupt our business.

​

Our strategic partnership with Cordlife Singapore may not be successful.

​

Cordlife was a provider of cord blood banking services with operations in Singapore, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines. Before the completion of the restructuring of Cordlife, we paid an aggregate of AUD12.4 million in exchange for a total of 24,366,666 shares in Cordlife. In June 2011, shareholders of Cordlife approved a capital reduction scheme by way of distribution in specie. The scheme involved a spin-off of Cordlife’s more mature cord blood banking businesses in Singapore and Hong Kong. The restructuring and distribution in specie were subsequently completed and effective on June 30, 2011. After the restructuring of Cordlife as of June 30, 2011, we owned a total of 24,366,666 shares in each of LFC and Cordlife Singapore.

​

Before the restructuring, operations of the whole group were conducted under Cordlife. After the restructuring, the developing cord blood banking businesses in Indonesia, India and the Philippines were operated under LFC, which was listed on the Australian Securities Exchange, while the more mature cord blood banking businesses in Singapore and Hong Kong were operated under Cordlife Singapore, which was listed on the Singapore Exchange on March 29, 2012. In June 2013, Cordlife Singapore completed the acquisition of the cord blood and cord tissue banking businesses in Indonesia, India and the Philippines from LFC. After the acquisition, Cordlife Singapore now operates cord blood banking businesses in both mature markets such as Singapore and Hong Kong, and developing markets such as Indonesia, India and the Philippines (as well as brand presence in Bangladesh, Brunei, Macau, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam). Subsequently, Cordlife Singapore acquired Stemlife, a Malaysia-based cord blood banking operator.

27

Table of Contents

In December 2013, LFC acquired an unlisted company which engaged in the provision of funeral and related services, and thereafter, LFC’s principal activities changed to the provision of funeral and related services. In November 2014, we acquired 1,150,000 shares in Cordlife Singapore. In February 2018, we disposed of all of our shares in LFC. As of March 31, 2022, we owned 25,516,666 shares in Cordlife Singapore representing approximately 10.0% equity interest. There are risks associated with Cordlife Singapore’s operations, such as changes in regulations and different consumer appetite toward cord blood banking.

​

In May 2011, we entered into a marketing collaboration agreement with Cordlife HK, a subsidiary of Cordlife Singapore. Under the agreement, we will help to promote and provide referral services to potential clients who have interest in delivering babies in Hong Kong where Cordlife HK operates, in return for a minimal fee. As of the date of this report, no material development in this respect has been recorded.

​

In February 2014, we entered into a strategic alliance agreement with Cordlife Singapore in relation to the provision of human postnatal umbilical cord tissues storage services in the PRC. Pursuant to the agreement, we will obtain a sub-license right for the use of cellular technology from Cordlife Singapore, which was granted by CordLabs Asia Pte. Ltd. to Cordlife Singapore. In return, we pay a licensing fee, but no material amount had been incurred up to March 31, 2022. We cannot assure you the market will accept these new services and accordingly the strategic alliance may not be successful or generate satisfactory returns.

​

Our investments in equity securities may adversely affect our financial performance.

​

We continuously review and monitor our investments entities such as Cordlife (or LFC and Cordlife Singapore after the restructuring) and other investment.

​

The market value of our investment in Cordlife declined during the nine months ended December 31, 2008. Having considered the significance of the accumulated decline in the fair market value of the ordinary shares of Cordlife, the period of time during which market value of the shares was below cost, and the market condition at that time, the management determined that the impairment loss on the investment up to December 31, 2008 was other-than-temporary. As a result, accumulated impairment loss amounting to RMB37.4 million was recognized in earnings during the year ended March 31, 2009. After taking into account the extent of the decline in the fair value of the ordinary shares of LFC, the length of time during which the market value of the shares was below cost, and the financial condition and near-term prospects of LFC, our management considered that the decline in value on the investment in LFC was other-than-temporary. As a result, impairment loss of RMB8.4 million and RMB2.5 million was recognized in our earnings, which was transferred from other comprehensive income, during the years ended March 31, 2016 and 2017, respectively, and the market value as of December 31, 2016 formed a new cost basis of our investment in LFC. Our investment in LFC was disposed of in February 2018 and the unrealized holding loss was recognized in our earnings, which was transferred from other comprehensive income, during the year ended March 31, 2018.

Upon the adoption of Accounting Standard Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-01 on April 1, 2018, all equity investments to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value was recognized through net income and the cumulative effect was adjusted to our balance sheet as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. As of March 31, 2018, included in accumulated other comprehensive losses were unrealized net holding gains for equity investments in Cordlife Singapore of RMB62.6 million, which amount was then adjusted to retained earnings as of April 1, 2018. Decreases in fair value of equity investments in Cordlife Singapore and other investment of RMB13.2 million and RMB20.4 million (US$3.2 million) for the years ended March 31, 2020 and 2022, respectively, and an increase in fair value of equity investments of RMB25.4 million for the year ended March 31, 2021, were recorded as other expenses and income through net income. As of March 31, 2022, we owned an approximately 10.0% equity interest in Cordlife Singapore. Should the value of our investment experience a significant decline, a decrease in fair value will have to be recognized through net income and this will adversely affect our financial performance.

28

Table of Contents

If demand for our matching services is significantly different from our management’s expectations, the valuation of donated cord blood units could be materially impacted, which could affect our financial performance.

​

A significant portion of our inventories, which consist of cord blood units donated by the public, consists of the handling costs attributable to the testing, processing and preservation of donated cord blood units. The handling costs include direct material costs and direct labor costs incurred in handling of donated cord blood units. Cost of inventories also comprises an allocation of production overheads. Donated cord blood units are valued at the lower of cost or net realizable value using the weighted average cost method. Since we do not expect to recognize revenue from such inventories within 12 months from the balance sheet date, we classify donated cord blood units as non-current assets on our consolidated balance sheets. The carrying value of our donated cord blood units was RMB95.2 million (US$15.0 million) as of March 31, 2022. Our management periodically reviews quantities of donated cord blood stored in our banks to determine if a write-down on inventories is necessary based on estimated demand for our matching services and other industry knowledge. We did not record any write-downs on our inventories for the years ended March 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022. If demand for our matching services is significantly different from our management’s expectations, the valuation of donated cord blood units could be materially impacted.

​

We may have anti-takeover provisions in our organizational documents that discourage a change of control.

​

Certain provisions of our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association may have an anti-takeover effect and may delay, defer or prevent a tender offer or takeover attempt that a shareholder might consider in its best interest, including those attempts that might result in a premium over the market price for the shares held by shareholders.

​

Certain of these provisions include:

​

​

​

​

​

In addition, we entered into service contracts with senior executive officers on June 30, 2009, namely Ms. Ting Zheng, Mr. Albert Chen, Ms. Rui Arashiyama and Ms. Xin Xu. Each contract is automatically renewed every three years until the death or incapacitation of the senior executive officer unless terminated by either party with notice. If a service contract is terminated by the relevant executive within 30 days following a change of control of our company, the executive will be entitled to (i) all the salary and guaranteed bonuses that have actually accrued and are payable to him/her as the case may be; (ii) immediate vesting of all of his/her unvested options; and (iii) a severance payment in the amount of US$5 million. GCBC may terminate a service contract without cause with at least 30 days’ written notice, in which case the executive will be entitled to (i) all the salary and guaranteed bonuses that have actually accrued and are payable to him/her as the case may be; (ii) the immediate vesting of all of his or her unvested options; and (iii) if the termination is made within two years of a change of control of our company, a severance payment in the amount of US$5 million. The aggregate cost of the severance payments that would become payable at the option of the senior executive officers upon a change of control could discourage acquisition bids for GCBC. These anti-takeover provisions could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire GCBC, even if the third party’s offer may be considered beneficial by many shareholders. As a result, shareholders may be limited in their ability to obtain a premium for their shares.

​

29

Table of Contents

As of March 31, 2022, Nanjing Ying Peng, via its wholly-owned subsidiary Blue Ocean Structure Investment Company Ltd (“Blue Ocean”), beneficially owned approximately 65% equity interest of GCBC. GCBC’s Board of Directors is divided into three classes, each of which will generally serve a term of three years with only one class of directors being elected in each year. At each of our annual meetings, as a consequence of GCBC’s “staggered” Board of Directors, only a minority of the Board of Directors will be considered for reelection and Nanjing Ying Peng, because of its ownership position, has considerable influence regarding the outcome.

​

As our success depends on several key management personnel, our business may be adversely affected if we fail to retain them.

​

Our success is highly dependent on the retention of the principal members of our management, scientific and sales personnel. In particular, Ms. Ting Zheng, our chairperson and chief executive officer, and the rest of our senior management team, are critical to our ability to execute our overall business strategy. In addition, several other employees with scientific or other skills are important to the successful development of our business. If any of our key employees joins a competitor or forms a competing company, we may lose some competitive advantages, and our operating results may be adversely affected. As qualified personnel are difficult to attract and retain, we have entered into service contracts with key senior executive officers. Each contract will be automatically renewed every three years until the death or incapacitation of the senior executive officer unless terminated by either party with notice. Although these contracts contain non-competition clauses, the restrictions imposed by the clauses may not be adequate to prohibit these key management personnel from competing against us after their departure.

​

If the PCAOB is unable to inspect our auditors as required under the HFCA Act, the SEC will prohibit the trading of our ordinary shares. A trading prohibition for our ordinary shares, or the threat of a trading prohibition, may materially and adversely affect the value of your investment. Additionally, the inability of the PCAOB to conduct inspections of our auditors deprives our investors of the benefits of such inspections.

​

The HFCA Act was enacted into law on December 18, 2020. Under the HFCA Act, if the SEC determines that we have filed audit reports issued by a registered public accounting firm that has not been subject to inspection by the PCAOB for three consecutive years (beginning with those we filed with this annual report on Form 20-F), the SEC will prohibit our securities, including our ordinary shares, from being traded on a U.S. national securities exchange, including the NYSE, or in the over-the-counter trading market in the U.S. The process for implementing trading prohibitions pursuant to the HFCA Acts will be based on a list of registered public accounting firms that the PCAOB has been unable to inspect and investigate completely as a result of a position taken by a non-U.S. government, or the Relevant Jurisdiction. The first such list was included in a release by the PCAOB on December 16, 2021, or the PCAOB December 2021 Release, and our auditor was included in that list. The SEC will review annual reports filed with it in 2022 to determine if the auditor used for such reports was so identified by the PCAOB, and such issuers will be designated as “Commission Identified Issuers” on a list to be published by the SEC. If an issuer is a Commission Identified Issuer for three consecutive years (which will be determined after the third such annual report), the SEC will issue an order that will implement the trading prohibitions described above.

​

Unless we are able to retain a PCAOB-registered auditor subject to PCAOB inspection and investigation, we would expect that a trading prohibition for our ordinary shares could be issued shortly after the filing of our annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2024, which would be due on July 31, 2024. Given that all PCAOB-registered firms in China were included in the list in the PCAOB December 2021 Release, our ability to retain an auditor subject to PCAOB inspection and investigation will depend on the relevant U.S. and PRC regulators reaching an agreement to permit these inspections and investigations. The PCAOB entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on Enforcement Cooperation with the CSRC and the PRC Ministry of Finance, which established a cooperative framework between the parties for the production and exchange of audit documents relevant to investigations undertaken by the PCAOB in the PRC or by the CSRC or the PRC Ministry of Finance in the United States. The PCAOB continues to be in discussions with the CSRC and the PRC Ministry of Finance to permit joint inspections of the PCAOB-registered audit firms that audit Chinese companies trading on U.S. exchanges. However, in the PCAOB December 2021 Release, the PCAOB identified problems in implementing these agreements and a lack of cooperation. Accordingly, we can offer no assurance that we will be able to retain an auditor that would allow us to avoid a trading prohibition for our securities under the HFCA Act.

​

30

Table of Contents

In June 2021, the United States Senate passed a bill that would amend the HFCA Act to accelerate the imposition of trading prohibitions once an issuer is identified from three years to two years, and a companion bill was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on December 14, 2021. If this bill amending the HFCA Act is approved by both houses of Congress and signed by the U.S. President, our securities could be subject to a trading prohibition following our filing of our annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2023, which will be due on July 31, 2023.

​

If our ordinary shares are subject to a trading prohibition under the HFCA Act, the price of our ordinary shares may be adversely affected, and the threat of such a trading prohibition would also adversely affect their price. If we are unable to be listed on another securities exchange that provides sufficient liquidity, such a trading prohibition may substantially impair your ability to sell or purchase our ordinary shares when you wish to do so. Furthermore, if we are able to maintain a listing of our ordinary shares on a non-U.S. exchange, investors owning our ordinary shares may have to take additional steps to engage in transactions on that exchange, including establishing non-U.S. brokerage accounts.

​

The HFCA Act also imposes additional certification and disclosure requirements for Commission Identified Issuers, and these requirements will apply beginning with annual reports on Form 20-F to be filed in 2023 for Commission Identified Issuers named in the prior year. Because our auditor was included in the list in the PCAOB December 2021 Release, we expect to have to comply with these disclosure requirements in our annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2023 to be filed in 2023. The additional requirements include a certification that the issuer is not owned or controlled by a governmental entity in the Relevant Jurisdiction, and the additional requirements for annual reports include disclosure that the issuer’s financials were audited by a firm not subject to PCAOB inspection, disclosure on governmental entities in the Relevant Jurisdiction’s ownership in and controlling financial interest in the issuer, the names of Chinese Communist Party, or CCP, members on the board of the issuer or its operating entities, and whether the issuer’s articles include a charter of the CCP, including the text of such charter.

​

In addition to the issues under the HFCA discussed above, the PCAOB’s inability to conduct inspections in China and Hong Kong prevents it from fully evaluating the audits and quality control procedures of our independent registered public accounting firm. As a result, we and investors in our ordinary shares are deprived of the benefits of such PCAOB inspections. The inability of the PCAOB to conduct inspections of auditors in China makes it more difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of our independent registered public accounting firm’s audit procedures or quality control procedures as compared to auditors outside of China that are subject to the PCAOB inspections, which could cause investors and potential investors in our stock to lose confidence in our audit procedures and reported financial information and the quality of our financial statements.

​

Proceedings instituted by the SEC against certain PRC-based accounting firms, including our independent registered public accounting firm, could result in financial statements being determined to not be in compliance with the requirements of the Exchange Act.

​

In December 2012, the SEC brought administrative proceedings against five accounting firms in China, including our independent registered public accounting firm, alleging that they had refused to produce audit work papers and other documents related to certain other China-based companies under investigation by the SEC. On January 22, 2014, an initial administrative law decision was issued, censuring these accounting firms and suspending four of these firms from practicing before the SEC for a period of six months. The decision is neither final nor legally effective unless and until reviewed and approved by the SEC.

​

In February 2014, the initial decision was appealed. While under appeal and in February 2015, four of these PRC-based accounting firms (the “Chinese member firms of “Big Four” accounting firms”) reached a settlement with the SEC. As part of the settlement, each of the Chinese member firms of “Big Four” accounting firms agreed to settlement terms that include a censure; undertakings to make a payment to the SEC; procedures and undertakings as to future requests for documents by the SEC; and possible additional proceedings and remedies should those undertakings not be adhered to.

​

If the SEC restarts the administrative proceedings, depending upon the final outcome, listed companies in the United States with major PRC operations may find it difficult or impossible to retain auditors in respect of their operations in the PRC, which could result in financial statements not in compliance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, including possible delisting. Moreover, any negative news about the proceedings against these audit firms may cause investor uncertainty regarding China-based, United States-listed companies and the market price of our ordinary shares may be adversely affected.

​

31

Table of Contents

If our independent registered public accounting firm was denied, even temporarily, the ability to practice before the SEC and we were unable to timely find another registered public accounting firm to audit and issue an opinion on our financial statements, our financial statements could be determined not to be in compliance with the requirements of the Exchange Act. Such a determination could ultimately lead to the delisting of our ordinary shares from the NYSE or deregistration from the SEC, or both, which would substantially reduce or effectively terminate the trading of our ordinary shares in the United States.

​

If we grant additional RSUs in the future, our net income could be adversely affected.

​

In February 2011, at our annual general meeting, our shareholders approved an Incentive Plan which has a mandate limit of granting rights to receive ordinary shares not exceeding 10.0% of our issued and outstanding share capital, to directors, officers, employees and/or consultants of GCBC and our subsidiaries. Certain administrative provisions of the Incentive Plan were subsequently amended by our Board of Directors in August 2014. The Incentive Plan is intended to enable the Company to attract, motivate, reward and retain the services of executives, directors and key employees. The Incentive Plan provides for the granting of RSUs, which may vest upon satisfaction of certain conditions set by the Compensation Committee of the Company. A total of 7,300,000 RSUs were issued to certain executives, directors and key employees under the Incentive Plan for the year ended March 31, 2015. During the year ended March 31, 2018, an aggregate of 7,300,000 RSUs were fully vested, and a reversal of RMB1.5 million was recorded in sales and marketing expenses which was resulted from a write back of previously recognized share-based compensation expense due to the forfeiture of RSUs on the resignation of one of the grantees. Share-based compensation expenses of RMB84.3 million were recognized for the year ended March 31, 2018. We did not issue any RSUs subsequently and had no RSUs outstanding as of March 31, 2022. If we grant additional RSUs in the future, we could incur significant compensation charges and our net income could be adversely affected.

​

We are subject to cybersecurity risks and other cyber incidents, including the misappropriation of our information and other breaches of information security, which could adversely affect our business and disrupt our operations.

​

In the normal course of conducting our business, we collect and store sensitive data on our systems, including personal information of subscribers and employees, and proprietary business information of vendors and business partners. Despite the security measures we have in place and any additional measures we may implement in the future to safeguard our systems and to mitigate potential security risks, our facilities and systems, and those of our third-party service providers, could be vulnerable to cybersecurity breaches, such as unauthorized access, accidents, employee errors or malfeasance, computer viruses, hackings or other disruptions. Such breaches could compromise the security of our data and information technology infrastructure, thereby exposing our relevant data and information to unauthorized third parties. Techniques used to obtain unauthorized access to information systems, or to sabotage those systems, change frequently and generally are not recognized until launched against a target. We may be required to expend significant capital and other resources to remedy, protect against or alleviate these and related problems, and we may not be able to remedy these problems in a timely manner, or at all. Any disruption of its systems or security breach or event resulting in the misappropriation, loss or other unauthorized disclosure of confidential information, whether by the Company directly or by its third-party service providers, could damage our reputation, result in the incurrence of costs, expose us to the risks of litigation and liability, result in regulatory penalties under laws that protect privacy of personal information, disrupt our business or otherwise affect its results of operations.

​

32

Table of Contents

Risks Relating to Operations in China

​

Changes in political, economic and legal developments in China may adversely affect our business.

​

As we derive substantially all of our revenues in China and substantially all of our assets and operations are in China, our continued growth would depend heavily on China’s general economic conditions. We, however, cannot assure you that the Chinese economy will continue to grow, or that such growth will be steady or in geographic regions or economic sectors to our benefit. The global recovery from the lows of 2008 and 2009 was uneven, including the escalation of the European sovereign debt crisis since 2011, the impact of COVID-19, the impact of the recent Russia-Ukraine crisis and the related sanctions and other conflicts between Russia and Western countries, and the slowdown of the Chinese economy in the recent years. It is unclear whether the Chinese economy will continue slowing down. There is also considerable uncertainty over the long-term effects of the expansionary monetary and fiscal policies that have been adopted by the central banks and financial authorities of some of the world’s leading economies, including China’s. Inflation has accelerated in many economies, in particular the United States, and policy actions to address inflation may slow or reverse economic growth or have other negative effects on economic conditions. A downturn in China’s economic growth or a decline in economic condition may have material adverse effects on our results of operations.

​

Further, we will continue to be affected by the political, social and legal developments of China. Since the late 1970s, the PRC government has introduced a series of economic and political reforms, including measures designed to effectuate the country’s transitioning from a planned economy to a more market-oriented economy. During such economic and political reforms, a comprehensive system of laws was promulgated, including many new laws and regulations seeking to provide general guidance on economic and business practices in China and to regulate foreign investment.

​

In the past forty years, the growth of the Chinese economy has been uneven across different geographic regions and different economic sectors. In order to stabilize national economic growth, the PRC government adopted a series of macroeconomic policies. These policies include measures that restricted excessive growth and investment in specific sectors of the economy. We cannot predict the future direction of economic reforms or the effects that any such measures may have on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

​

Changes in U.S. and China relations and related regulations may adversely impact our business, our operating results, our ability to raise capital and the market price of our ordinary shares.

​

Political tensions between the U.S. and China have escalated. The U.S. government has taken a range of actions relating to U.S-China relations, including imposing several rounds of tariffs affecting certain products manufactured in China, imposing sanctions, export controls and investment restrictions against Chinese companies, imposing sanctions on certain officials of the PRC and Hong Kong governments, enacting legislation such as the HFCA Act, and implementing enhanced reviews of companies with significant China-based operations. Partially in response to these actions, the PRC government has also taken a number of steps affecting U.S.-China relations, including the issuance of the Unreliable Entity List in 2019 and the enactment of the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law in 2021. Economic conditions in China are sensitive to global economic conditions. Rising political tensions between China and the U.S. could reduce levels of trade, investment, technological exchanges and other economic activities between the two major economies, which would have a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets. The measures taken by the U.S. and Chinese governments may also restrict our ability to do business with entities both within and outside of China and may cause investors to lose confidence in Chinese companies and counterparties, including us. In addition, new legislation, executive orders, tariffs, laws or regulations may be adopted that negatively affect companies with significant connections to the U.S. or to China, our industry or on us. Any unfavorable government policies on cross-border relations or international trade, including increased scrutiny on companies with significant China-based operations may affect the competitive position of our products, the hiring of research and development personnel, our ability to raise capital, and the market price of our ordinary shares.

​

33

Table of Contents

The SEC has issued statements focused on companies with significant China-based operations, such as us. For example, on July 30, 2021, SEC Chairman Gary Gensler, issued a Statement on Investor Protection Related to Recent Developments in China, in which he reported that he has directed the SEC staff to engage in targeted additional reviews of filings for companies with significant China-based operations. Consistent with that directive, on December 20, 2021, the SEC posted an illustrative letter containing sample comments to companies with the majority of their operations in the PRC or Hong Kong. The statement and sample comment letter also addressed risks inherent in companies with a variable interest entity, or a VIE, structure, which are used by some companies in China that operate in sectors that are subject to foreign ownership limitations. We do not have a VIE structure and are not in an industry that is subject to foreign ownership limitations. Further, we believe that we have full and complete disclosures relating to our operations in China, including applicable risks. However, our periodic reports and other filings with the SEC may be subject to enhanced review by the SEC, and this additional scrutiny could affect our ability to effectively raise capital in the U.S.

​

In response to the SEC’s July 30 statement, the CSRC announced on August 1, 2021, that the CSRC will continue to collaborate “closely with different stakeholders including investors, companies, and relevant authorities to further promote transparency and certainty of policies and implementing measures.” There is no assurance that the tension between the two nations will ease soon.

​

If any new legislation, executive orders, tariffs, laws and/or regulations are implemented, if existing trade agreements are renegotiated or if the U.S. or Chinese governments take retaliatory actions due to the U.S.-China tension, such changes could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, our ability to raise capital and the market price of our ordinary shares.

​

Our revenues are denominated in Renminbi, which is not freely convertible for capital account transactions.

​

We are exposed to the risks associated with foreign exchange controls and restrictions in China, as our revenues are primarily denominated in Renminbi, which is currently not freely exchangeable. The PRC government imposes control over the convertibility between Renminbi and foreign currencies. Under the PRC foreign exchange regulations, payments for “current account” transactions, including remittance of foreign currencies for payment of dividends, profit distributions, interest and operation-related expenditures, may be made without prior approval but are subject to procedural requirements. Strict foreign exchange control continues to apply to “capital account” transactions, such as direct foreign investment and foreign currency loans. These capital account transactions must be approved by or registered with the PRC State Administration of Foreign Exchange, or “SAFE” or its authorized local branches. We cannot assure you that we are able to meet all of our foreign currency obligations to remit profits out of China or to fund operations in China.

​

34

Table of Contents

On August 29, 2008, SAFE promulgated the Circular on the Relevant Operating Issues concerning the Improvement of the Administration of Payment and Settlement of Foreign Currency Capital of Foreign-invested Enterprises, or “Circular 142”. On March 30, 2015, SAFE issued the Circular of the State Administration of Foreign Exchange Concerning Reform of the Administrative Approaches to Settlement of Foreign Exchange Capital of Foreign-invested Enterprises, or “Circular 19”, which became effective on June 1, 2015 and replaced the Circular 142, to regulate the conversion by foreign invested enterprises, or FIEs, of foreign currency into Renminbi by restricting how the converted Renminbi may be used. On June 9, 2016, SAFE issued the Notice of the State Administration of Foreign Exchange on Reforming and Standardizing the Administrative Provisions on Capital Account Foreign Exchange Settlement, or “Circular 16”, which became effective on the date of promulgation and prevails in the event of any discrepancy between Circular 19 and Circular 16. Circular 19 and Circular 16 require that Renminbi converted from the foreign exchange earnings under capital account which the voluntary settlement has been applied by relevant policies (including the foreign currency-dominated capital of an FIE, foreign debts, and funds repatriated from overseas listing) shall be managed under the accounts for foreign exchange settlement and pending payment. The expenditure scope of such account includes: expenditure within the business scope, payment of funds for domestic equity investment and Renminbi deposits and so forth. An FIE shall truthfully use its capital by itself within the business scope and shall not, directly or indirectly, use its capital or Renminbi converted from the foreign exchange earnings under capital account for (i) expenditure beyond its business scope or expenditure prohibited by laws or regulations, (ii) investing in securities or financial schemes other than bank guaranteed products unless otherwise provided by relevant laws and regulations, (iii) disbursing loans to unrelated parties unless explicitly permitted under its business scope, and (iv) the construction or purchase of real estate that is not for self-use (except for the real estate enterprises). Where an FIE, other than a foreign-invested investment company, foreign-invested venture capital enterprise or foreign-invested equity investment enterprise, makes domestic equity investment by transferring its capital in the original currency, it shall obey the current provisions on domestic re-investment. Where such an FIE makes domestic equity investment by its Renminbi conversion, the invested enterprise shall first go through domestic re-investment registration and open a corresponding account for foreign exchange settlement and pending payment, and the FIE shall thereafter transfer the conversion to the aforesaid account according to the actual amount of investment.

​

On October 23, 2019, SAFE released the Circular on Further Promoting Cross-border Trade and Investment Facilitation, or “Circular 28”, according to which non-investment foreign-invested enterprises are permitted to make domestic equity investments with their capital funds provided that such investments do not violate the Negative List. On April 10, 2020, SAFE promulgated the Circular on Optimizing Administration of Foreign Exchange to Support the Development of Foreign-related Business, or “Circular 8”, eligible enterprises are allowed to make domestic payments by using their capital funds, foreign loans and the income under capital accounts of overseas listing, without providing the evidentiary materials concerning authenticity of each expenditure, provided that their capital use shall be authentic and in line with provisions, and conform to the prevailing administrative regulations on the use of income under capital accounts. On December 31, 2020, the People’s Bank of China, the NDRC, the MOC, the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council, the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission, and the SAFE jointly promulgated the Circular on Further Optimizing the Cross-border Renminbi Policy to Support the Stabilization of Foreign Trade and Foreign Investment, or “Circular 330”,which became effective on February 4, 2021, and further lifts the restriction on the use of RMB income from capital accounts. RMB income from capital accounts of domestic institutions (including foreign direct investment capital, cross-border financing and repatriation of funds raised from overseas listings) shall be operated within the business scope approved by relevant state departments and shall be in line with specified circumstances: (i) shall not be directly or indirectly used for the payment beyond the business scope of the enterprises or the payment prohibited by national laws and regulations; (ii) shall not be used for granting loans to non-connected enterprises unless otherwise expressly permitted by its business scope; and (iii) shall not be used for the construction or purchase of real estate that is not for self-use (except for the real estate enterprises). Considering that Circular 28, Circular 8 and Circular 330 are often principle-oriented and subject to the detailed interpretations by the enforcement bodies to further apply and enforce such laws and regulations in practice, it is unclear how they will be implemented, and there exist high uncertainties with respect to its interpretation and implementation by government authorities and banks.

​

In the future, we may grow our business in part by acquiring additional cord blood banks in China. Any non-compliance with the relevant foreign exchange requirements may delay or inhibit our ability to complete such transactions, which could affect our ability to expand business.

​

35

Table of Contents

Fluctuation in the value of the Renminbi against the U.S. dollar may have a material adverse effect on investments in our ordinary shares.

​

Any significant revaluation of the Renminbi may have a material adverse effect on the U.S. dollar equivalent amount of our revenues and financial condition as well as on the value of, and any dividends payable on, our ordinary shares in foreign currency terms. For instance, a decrease in the value of Renminbi against the U.S. dollar could reduce the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts of our revenue and profit, the value of your investment in our ordinary shares and the dividends we may pay in the future, if any, all of which may have a material adverse effect on the prices of our ordinary shares. Any further appreciation of the Renminbi against the U.S. dollar may result in significant exchange losses as we convert U.S. dollars into Renminbi. As of March 31, 2022, we had cash denominated in U.S. dollars of US$0.1 million.

​

Prior to 1994, Renminbi experienced a significant net devaluation against most major currencies, and there was significant volatility in the exchange rate during certain periods. Upon the execution of the unitary managed floating rate system in 1994, the Renminbi was devalued by 50% against the U.S. dollar. Since 1994, the Renminbi to U.S. dollar exchange rate has largely stabilized. On July 21, 2005, the People’s Bank of China announced that the exchange rate of U.S. dollar to Renminbi would be adjusted from US$1 to RMB8.27 to US$1 to RMB8.11, and it ceased to peg the Renminbi to the U.S. dollar. Instead, the Renminbi would be pegged to a basket of currencies, whose components would be adjusted based on changes in market supply and demand under a set of systematic principles. On September 23, 2005, the PRC government widened the daily trading band for Renminbi against non-U.S. dollar currencies from 1.5% to 3.0% to improve the flexibility of the new foreign exchange system. On June 19, 2010, the People’s Bank of China released a statement indicating that they would “proceed further with reform of RMB exchange rate regime and increase the RMB exchange rate flexibility”. On March 17, 2014, the floating band of Renminbi against U.S. dollar was increased from 1% to 2%. Effective from October 1, 2016, RMB has been included in the International Monetary Fund’s basket of special drawing rights. There remains significant international pressure on the PRC government to further liberalize its currency policy, which could result in a further and more significant appreciation or depreciation in the value of the Renminbi against the U.S. dollar or other currencies. The Renminbi may be revalued further against the U.S. dollar or other currencies, or may be permitted to enter into a full or limited free float, which may result in an appreciation or depreciation in the value of the Renminbi against the U.S. dollar or other currencies. Any significant changes regarding the PRC government foreign exchange policy or major revaluation of Renminbi against U.S. dollar or other major currencies may materially and adversely affect our financial condition and our ordinary share price.

​

China’s legal system is different from those in some other countries.

​

It is especially difficult for us to accurately predict the potential impact to us of new legal requirements in China because China is a civil law jurisdiction. Under the civil law system, prior court decisions may be cited but do not have binding precedential effect. Although progress has been made in the promulgation of laws and regulations dealing with economic matters, such as corporate organization and governance, foreign investment, commerce, taxation and trade, China’s legal system remains less developed than the legal systems in many other developed countries. Furthermore, because many laws, regulations and legal requirements have been recently adopted, their interpretation and enforcement by the courts and administrative agencies may involve uncertainties. Sometimes, different government departments may have different interpretations. Licenses and permits issued or granted by one government authority may be revoked by a higher government authority at a later time. The PRC legal system is based in part on government policies and internal rules (some of which may not be published on a timely manner or at all) that may have a retroactive effect. We may not be aware of our violation of these policies and rules until the time after the violation. Rules and regulations in China can change quickly with little advance notice. Changes in China’s legal and regulatory framework, the promulgation of new laws and possible conflicts between national and provincial regulations may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Recently, Chinese regulators have announced regulatory actions aimed at providing the Chinese government with greater oversight over certain sectors of China’s economy, including the for-profit education sector and technology platforms that have a quantitatively significant number of users located in China. Although the cord blood banking related businesses do not appear to be the focus of these regulatory actions, we cannot guarantee that the Chinese government will not in the future take regulatory actions that materially adversely affect the business environment and financial markets in China as they relate to us, our ability to operate our business, our liquidity and our access to capital. In addition, any litigation in China may result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and management attention.

​

36

Table of Contents

Recent regulatory developments in China may subject us to additional regulatory review and disclosure requirements, expose us to government interference, or otherwise restrict or completely hinder our ability to offer securities and raise capital outside China, which could adversely affect our business operations and cause the value of our securities to significantly decline or become worthless.

​

As substantially all of our business is conducted in China, we are exposed to legal and other risks associated with our operations in China. The PRC government has significant authority to exert influence on the ability of a company with operations in China, including us, to conduct its business, and may exert substantial intervention and influence over the manner of our operations. Any actions by the PRC government to exert more oversight and control over offerings that are conducted overseas or foreign investment in companies having operations in China, including us, could significantly limit or completely hinder our ability to offer or continue to offer securities to investors, and cause the value of our securities to significantly decline or become worthless. Recently, the PRC government initiated a series of regulatory actions and statements to regulate business operations in China with little advance notice, including cracking down on illegal activities in the securities market, enhancing supervision over China-based companies listed overseas, adopting new measures to extend the scope of cybersecurity reviews and new laws and regulations related to data security, and expanding the efforts in anti-monopoly enforcement. While we do not believe that these regulatory changes would have any material impact on us, we cannot guarantee that the authorities will agree with us or will not promulgate new regulations that restrict our business operations or access to capital.

​

On July 6, 2021, the General Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the General Office of the State Council jointly issued the Opinions on Severe and Lawful Crackdown on Illegal Securities Activities. These opinions emphasized the need to strengthen the administration over illegal securities activities and the supervision on overseas listings by China-based companies. These opinions proposed to take effective measures, such as promoting the construction of relevant regulatory systems, to deal with the risks and incidents facing China-based overseas-listed companies and the demand for cybersecurity and data privacy protection. These opinions and any related implementation rules to be enacted may subject us to additional compliance requirement in the future. As these opinions were recently issued, official guidance and interpretation of the opinions remain unclear at this time. Therefore, we cannot assure you that we will remain fully compliant with all new regulatory requirements of these opinions or any future implementation rules on a timely basis, or at all.

​

With the trend of strengthening anti-monopoly supervision around the world, the PRC government has issued a series of anti-monopoly laws and regulations in 2021, paying more attention to corporate compliance. On February 7, 2021, the Anti-monopoly Commission of the State Council of the PRC promulgated the Guidelines for Anti-monopoly in the field of Platform Economy. On November 15, 2021, the State Administration for Market Regulation of the PRC promulgated the Guidelines for the Overseas Anti-monopoly Compliance of Enterprises. We believe that these regulations have little impact on us, but we cannot guarantee that regulators will agree with us or that these regulations will not affect our business operations in the future.

​

37

Table of Contents

On December 28, 2021, 13 government departments including the CAC jointly issued the Measures for Cybersecurity Review (2021 version), which became effective on February 15, 2022 and superseded the Measures for Cybersecurity Review promulgated on April 13, 2020. The Measures for Cybersecurity Review (2021 version) provides that, a cybersecurity review is required, when national security has been or may be affected and where critical information infrastructure operators purchase network products or services and network platform operators process data. When a platform operator in possession of personal information of over one million users applies for listing abroad, it must apply for cybersecurity review. On July 30, 2021, the State Council promulgated the CII Regulation, which became effective on September 1, 2021. Pursuant to the CII Regulation, “critical information infrastructures” refers to important network facilities and information systems of key industries such as public communications and information services, energy, transportation, irrigation, finance, public services, e-government and science, technology and industry for national defense, as well as other important network facilities and information systems that may seriously endanger national security, national economy and citizens’ livelihood and public interests if they are damaged or suffer from malfunctions, or if any leakage of data in relation to them occurs. The CII Regulation also provides that competent authorities shall promulgate detailed rules in designating critical information infrastructure, identify critical information infrastructure in the relevant industries, and notify operators of such critical information infrastructure in a timely manner. As of the date of this report, the responsible authorities have not promulgated any implementation provisions or identification rules, and cord blood banking services have not been included in the relevant scope of “critical information infrastructure.” In addition, as of the date of this report, we have not been notified by any authorities of being classified as a critical information infrastructure operator, involved in any cybersecurity review or received any investigation, inquiry, notice, warning or sanctions made by the CAC on such basis. As advised by our PRC counsel, Commerce & Finance Law Offices, we should not be identified as a “critical information infrastructure operator” or a “network platform operator” as mentioned above.

​

However, Measures for Cybersecurity Review (2021 version) were recently adopted, and there remain uncertainties as to their implementation and interpretation and how they will affect us. If applicable laws, regulations, or interpretations change and it is determined in the future that the Measures for Cybersecurity Review (2021 version) become applicable to us, we may be subject to review when conducting data processing activities, and may face challenges in addressing its requirements and make necessary changes to our internal policies and practices. We may incur substantial costs in complying with the Measures for Cybersecurity Review (2021 version), which could result in material adverse changes in our business operations and financial position. If we are not able to fully comply with the Measures for Cybersecurity Review (2021 version), our ability to offer or continue to offer securities to investors may be significantly limited or completely hindered, and our securities may significantly decline in value or become worthless.

​

On November 14, 2021, the CAC released the Regulation on Network Data Security Management (draft for public comments) and accepted public comments until December 13, 2021. The draft Regulations on Network Data Security Management provides that data processors refer to individuals or organizations that autonomously determine the purpose and the manner of processing data. If a data processor that processes personal data of more than one million users intends to list overseas, it shall apply for a cybersecurity review. In addition, data processors that process important data or are listed overseas shall carry out an annual data security assessment on their own or by engaging a data security services institution, and the data security assessment report for the prior year shall be submitted to the local cyberspace affairs administration department before January 31 of each year. Since the Draft Regulation on Network Data Security Management (draft for public comments) is in the process of being formulated, it remains unclear on its final form, promulgation schedule, implementation and interpretation by the relevant PRC governmental authorities.

​

38

Table of Contents

On September 1, 2021, the PRC Data Security Law became effective, which imposes data security and privacy obligations on entities and individuals conducting data-related activities, and introduces a data classification and hierarchical protection system. In addition, the Standing Committee of the PRC National People’s Congress promulgated the PIPL on August 20, 2021, which took effect on November 1, 2021. The PIPL further emphasizes processors’ obligations and responsibilities for personal information protection and sets out the basic rules for processing personal information and the rules for cross-border transfer of personal information. On July 7, 2022, the CAC promulgated the Assessment Measures which will be effective on September 1, 2022. According to the Assessment measures, a data processor shall declare security assessment for its outbound data transfer to the CAC through the local cyberspace administration at the provincial level under any of the following circumstances: (a) where a data processor provides critical data abroad; (b) where a critical information infrastructure operator or a data processor processing the personal information of more than one million individuals provides personal information abroad; (c) where a data processor has provided personal information of 100,000 individuals or sensitive personal information of 10,000 individuals in total abroad since January 1 of the previous year; and (d) other circumstances prescribed by the CAC for which declaration for security assessment for outbound data transfers is required. We have the opportunity to contact, obtain or be exposed to personal information of our subscribers and their close relatives. We may be required to declare security assessment once we fall under any of the aforementioned circumstances and our business operations may be restricted according to the regulations abovementioned.

​

Since these legislative and regulatory actions are new, it is highly uncertain as to how soon legislative or administrative regulation making bodies will respond and how existing or new laws or regulations or detailed implementation and interpretations will be modified or promulgated. Moreover, PRC laws and their interpretations and enforcement will continue to develop and change, and the PRC government may adopt other rules and restrictions in the future, which may subject us to additional regulatory review and disclosure obligations.

​

Future equity offerings by us may be subject to approval of the CSRC and other regulatory authorities in China, which could impose uncertainty on our capital raising activities.

​

On December 24, 2021, the CSRC released the Draft Overseas Listing Regulations which had a comment period that expired on January 23, 2022, and if enacted, may subject us to additional compliance requirements in the future. Thus, it is still uncertain as to how the PRC governmental authorities will regulate overseas listings in general and whether we will be required to obtain any specific regulatory approvals. Furthermore, if the CSRC or other regulatory agencies later promulgate new rules or explanations requiring that we obtain their approvals for offering our securities to our investors, we may be unable to obtain such approvals, which could significantly limit or completely hinder our ability to offer or continue to offer securities to our investors. Furthermore, the PRC government authorities may strengthen oversight and control over offerings that are conducted overseas and/or foreign investment in China-based issuers like us. Such actions taken by the PRC government authorities may intervene or influence our operations at any time, which are beyond our control. Therefore, any such action may adversely affect our operations and significantly impair our ability to raise funds and reduce the value of our securities.

​

39

Table of Contents

On April 2, 2022, the CSRC promulgated Provisions on Strengthening the Confidentiality and Archives Administration of Overseas Securities Issuance and Listing by Domestic Enterprises (Draft for Comments), according to which, a domestic company that plans to, either directly or through its overseas listed entity, publicly disclose or provide to relevant entities or individuals including securities companies, securities service providers, and overseas regulators, documents and materials that contain state secrets or government work secrets, shall first obtain approval from competent authorities according to law, and file with the secrecy administrative department at the same level. A domestic company that plans to, either directly or through its overseas listed entity, publicly disclose or provide to relevant entities or individuals including securities companies, securities service providers, and overseas regulators, other documents and materials that, if divulged, will jeopardize national security or public interest, shall strictly fulfil relevant procedures stipulated by applicable national regulations. Archives, including working papers, that have been produced in mainland China by securities companies and securities service providers for overseas securities offering and listing by domestic companies shall be retained in mainland China, and, without prior approval by competent authorities, must not be brought, mailed or otherwise transferred to outside mainland China, or transmitted to any institutions or individuals outside mainland China through any methods including via the use of information technologies. Overseas securities regulators and competent overseas authorities may request to investigate, including to collect evidence for investigation purpose, or inspect a domestic company that has been listed or offered securities in an overseas market or securities companies and securities service providers that undertake securities business for such domestic companies. Such inspection, investigation and evidence collection shall be conducted under a cross-border regulatory cooperation mechanism, and the CSRC and competent authorities of the Chinese government will provide necessary assistance pursuant to bilateral and multilateral cooperation mechanisms. Before cooperating with the investigation and inspection by, or providing documents and materials to overseas securities regulators or other competent overseas authorities, such domestic companies, securities companies and securities service providers shall report to the CSRC or other competent authorities. As of the date of this document, this draft has not been formally adopted and the final version and effective date of such measures are subject to change with substantial uncertainty.

​

Our shareholders may experience difficulties in effecting service of legal process, enforcing foreign judgments or bringing actions in China against us or our management based on foreign laws.

​

We are an exempted company incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands, while we conduct substantially all of our operations in China, and substantially all of our assets are located in China. In addition, most of our senior executive officers reside within China for a time and most of our senior executive officers are PRC nationals. As a result, it may be difficult for our shareholders to effect service of process upon us or those persons inside China. In addition, China does not have treaties providing for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments of courts with the Cayman Islands and many other countries and regions. Therefore, recognition and enforcement in China of judgments of a court in any of these non-PRC jurisdictions in relation to any matter not subject to a binding arbitration provision may be difficult or impossible.

​

It may be difficult for overseas regulators to conduct investigation or collect evidence within China.

​

Shareholder claims or regulatory investigation that are common in the United States generally are difficult to pursue as a matter of law or practicality in China. For example, in China, there are significant legal and other obstacles to providing information needed for regulatory investigations or litigations initiated outside China. Although the authorities in China may establish a regulatory cooperation mechanism with the securities regulatory authorities of another country or region to implement cross-border supervision and administration, such cooperation with the securities regulatory authorities in the Unities States may not be efficient in the absence of mutual and practical cooperation mechanism. Furthermore, according to Article 177 of the PRC Securities Law, which became effective in March 2020, no overseas securities regulator is allowed to directly conduct investigation or evidence collection activities within the PRC territory. While detailed interpretation of or implementation rules under Article 177 have yet to be promulgated, the inability for an overseas securities regulator to directly conduct investigation or evidence collection activities within China may further increase the difficulties you face in protecting your interests. See also “—Risks to Our Shareholders—Your ability to bring an action against us or against our directors and executive officers, or to enforce a judgment against us or them, will be limited” for risks associated with investing in us as a Cayman Islands company.

​

40

Table of Contents

PRC regulations relating to the establishment of offshore companies by PRC residents may subject our PRC resident shareholders to personal liability and limit our ability to inject capital into the PRC subsidiaries, limiting our subsidiaries’ ability to distribute profits to us or otherwise adversely affect us.

​

SAFE issued the Notice on Issues Relating to the Administration of Foreign Exchange in Fund-raising and Reverse Investment Activities of Domestic Residents Conducted via Offshore Special Purpose Companies, or “Notice 75”, on October 21, 2005, which became effective as of November 1, 2005 and the operating procedures in May 2007.

​

In July 2014, SAFE issued the Circular on Issues Relating to the Administration of Foreign Exchange in Overseas Investment and Financing and Reverse Investment Activities of Domestic Residents Conducted via Special Purpose Companies, or “Circular 37”, which superseded Notice 75. According to Circular 37, PRC residents (including PRC institutions and individuals) shall, among other things, (i) register with the local SAFE branch regarding offshore enterprises they, for purpose of financing or/and investment, directly established or indirectly control using assets and interests in onshore enterprises or offshore assets or interests they legally possess (“Special Purpose Vehicle”); (ii) amend registration regarding changes in the Special Purpose Vehicle, including the basic information of the Special Purpose Vehicle, and material changes such as the increase or decrease of capital contributed by PRC individuals, equity transfer or exchange, merger or division; (iii) amend registration or deregister where, as a result of equity transfer, bankruptcy, dissolution, liquidation, expiration of business term, change of personal identity and etc., PRC individuals no longer possess rights and interests in the Special Purpose Vehicles, or where filings are no longer required.

​

On February 13, 2015, SAFE released the Notice on Further Simplifying and Improving Policies for the Foreign Exchange Administration of Direct Investment (the “Circular 13”), which became effective on June 1, 2015. According to Circular 13, local banks shall examine and handle foreign exchange registration for overseas direct investment, including the initial foreign exchange registration and amendment registration under Circular 37.

​

Under Circular 37, failure to comply with the registration requirements will result in administrative penalties under Administrative Regulations on the Foreign Exchange of PRC. To the extent possible, we urge our PRC shareholders to make necessary registrations as required under Circular 37, however, it is unclear how it will be interpreted and implemented by the local branches of SAFE. Therefore, we cannot assure you that all relevant shareholders have made or will make and obtain all registrations required. In addition, under Circular 37, registrations are prerequisites for conducting subsequent businesses. Therefore, the inflow and outflow of funds and the settlement of foreign exchange will be limited should any PRC shareholder fail to make such registration.

​

To date, we have not received any communications from, or had contact with, the PRC government with respect to SAFE Rules. Neither do we have information regarding whether our shareholders who may be subject to SAFE Rules have made necessary applications, filings and amendments as required under SAFE Rules. However, to the extent possible, we urge our shareholders and beneficial owners who may be subject to SAFE Rules to make the necessary applications, filings and amendments as required under SAFE Rules. However, we cannot provide any assurance that all of our shareholders and beneficial owners who may be PRC residents will comply with our request to make or obtain any applicable registrations or comply with other requirements required by SAFE Rules. The failure or inability of our PRC resident shareholders or beneficial owners to make any required registrations or comply with other requirements may subject such shareholders or beneficial owners to fines and legal sanctions and may also limit our ability to contribute additional capital into or provide loans, including cash of GCBC, to our PRC subsidiaries, limit the ability of our PRC subsidiaries to pay dividends or otherwise distribute profits to us, or otherwise adversely affect us.

​

41

Table of Contents

In January 2007, SAFE promulgated the Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Measures for the Administration of Individual Foreign Exchange, and the Operating Rules on the Foreign Exchange Administration of the Evolvement of Domestic Individuals in the Employee Stock Ownership Plans and Share Option Schemes of Overseas Listed Companies, or “Circular 78”. Circular 78 has then been superseded by the Circular of the State Administration of Foreign Exchange on Issues concerning the Administration of Foreign Exchange Used for Domestic Individuals’ Participation in Equity Incentive Plans of Overseas Listed Companies, or “Circular 7”, which became effective from February 15, 2012. Under Circular 7, domestic individuals who participate in equity incentive plans of an overseas listed company shall, through the domestic company to which the said company is affiliated, collectively entrust a domestic agency to handle regarding issues and entrust an overseas institution to process the exercise of options, purchase and sale of corresponding stocks or equity, and transfer of proceeds. The domestic agency shall go through the foreign exchange registration procedures with the local office of the SAFE at the place where it is located for all individuals participating in the equity incentive plans and shall submit certain forms to the local office of the SAFE periodically to report and declare such plans. Moreover, any substantial or material change and termination or expiration of the equity incentive plans shall be reported to the local office of the SAFE by the domestic agency within time limitation. In respect of all the proceeds obtained by such employees from the overseas listed company through the equity incentive plans, the domestic agency may convert such proceeds into RMB for all the individuals with the bank and then transfer the proceeds obtained from such conversion to the respective domestic RMB accounts of the domestic individuals.

​

To implement the Incentive Plan, GCBC established The Magnum Opus International Trust (the “Trust”); and according to the Incentive Plan, the trustee, Magnum Trustee, subscribed a total of 7,080,000 shares for facilitating the grant and vesting of incentive RSUs and hold such shares for the benefit of such executives, directors and key employees as a class. During the year ended March 31, 2018, all the 7,080,000 RSUs granted and deposited in the Trust were fully vested. The form and structure of the Incentive Plan is not the same with the equity incentive plans under Circular 7, therefore we did not go through the procedures required by Circular 7. However, we cannot assure you that the arrangement of the Incentive Plan will not be identified by relevant authorities as an equity incentive plan under Circular 7, and thus that the procedures required by Circular 7 are applicable. Under such circumstance, we will incur costs to fulfill the procedural requirements, and may also be subject to regulatory measures and administrative sanctions, including, but not limited to fines, imposed by SAFE and its local branches.

​

The discontinuation of any preferential tax treatment currently available to us and the increase in the enterprise income tax in the PRC could in each case result in a decrease in our profits and materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

​

On March 16, 2007, the National People’s Congress approved and promulgated a new tax law, the PRC Enterprise Income Tax Law, or “EIT Law”, which took effect on January 1, 2008 and subsequently revised on February 24, 2017 and December 29, 2018, respectively. Under the EIT Law, foreign-invested enterprises and domestic companies are subject to a uniform tax rate of 25%. While the EIT Law equalizes the tax rates for foreign-invested enterprises and domestic companies, preferential tax treatment would continue to be given to companies in certain encouraged sectors and to those classified as a high and new technology enterprise (“HNTE”) enjoying special support from the government. As to the HNTE, the applicable tax rate is 15%.

​

On January 29, 2016, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the MOF and the SAT jointly promulgated the Administrative Measures for Determination of High-tech Enterprises, or the “Measures for Determination”, and the annex thereto (i.e. the High and New Technology Fields under the Key Support from the State) which replaced the previous “Measures for Determination” and its annex promulgated on April 14, 2008. Under the Measures for Determination, the “high-tech enterprises” as mentioned in such Measures refer to the resident enterprises in sectors as listed in the High and New Technology Fields under the Key Support from the State, which have been registered within China (excluding Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan regions), have incessantly devoted to the research and development as well as transformation of technological achievements, have formed their own independent core intellectual property rights and are carrying out business activities on such basis.

​

42

Table of Contents

Jiachenhong’s high and new technology enterprise (“HNTE”) certificate was originally dated October 25, 2017 and was approved by the relevant PRC tax authority in February 2018. Such status was valid retroactively as of January 1, 2017 and expired on December 31, 2019. As a result, Jiachenhong was subject to a reduced tax rate of 15% during such period. Jiachenhong’s HNTE certificate was renewed on December 2, 2020 with a validity period of three years. Thus Jiachenghong’s HNTE status is valid retroactively as of January 1, 2020 and will expire on December 31, 2022, and Jiachenhong is subject to a reduced tax rate of 15% during such period. Nuoya’s HNTE certificate was originally dated December 2, 2019 and was approved by the relevant PRC tax authority in February 2020. Such status was valid retroactively as of January 1, 2019 and expired on December 31, 2021. As a result, Nuoya was subject to a reduced tax rate of 15% during such period. Nuoya is in the process of reapplication for its HNTE certificate which, upon approval, will entitle it to the preferential income tax rate of 15% from January 1, 2022 to December 31, 2024. Lukou’s HNTE certificate was originally dated November 30, 2018 with a validity of 3 years. Such status is valid retroactively as of January 1, 2018 and expired on December 31, 2020. As a result, Lukou was subject to a reduced tax rate of 15% during such period. Lukou’s HNTE certificate was renewed on December 16, 2021 with a validity period of three years. Thus Lukou’s HNTE status is valid retroactively as of January 1, 2021 and will expire on December 31, 2023, and Lukou is subject to a reduced tax rate of 15% during such period. We cannot assure you that Jiachenhong, Nuoya and Lukou will each be redetermined as an HNTE and thus continue to enjoy preferential tax treatment upon expiration. Furthermore, because the PRC government may adjust from time to time the encouraged sectors and the specific conditions for determination of high-tech enterprises in response to the development of economies and technologies, we cannot assure you that Jiachenhong, Nuoya and Lukou will have their business operations continuously conform to the applicable conditions for determination of high-tech enterprises published by the government at any time. Once the business we operate is considered by authorities to have substantive differences from the conditions for high-tech enterprise published by the government at that time, our HNTE certificates may be revoked, and our position as HNTEs enjoying certain tax preferential treatment may be lost. Any further legislative changes to the tax regime could further increase the enterprise income tax rate applicable to, or provide for other adverse tax treatments for, our principal subsidiaries in the PRC, the result of which would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

​

Under the PRC EIT Law, we and/or our non-PRC subsidiaries may be classified as a “resident enterprise” of the PRC. Such classification could result in PRC tax consequences to us, our non-PRC resident enterprise investors and/or our non-PRC subsidiaries.

​

Under the EIT Law, enterprises are classified as resident enterprises and non-resident enterprises. An enterprise established outside of the PRC with “de facto management bodies” within the PRC is considered a “resident enterprise”, meaning that it can be treated in a manner similar to a PRC enterprise for enterprise income tax purposes. The implementing rules of the EIT Law define “de facto management bodies” as the managing bodies that in practice exercise “substantial and overall management and control over the production and operations, personnel, accounting, and properties” of the enterprise; however, it remains unclear whether the PRC tax authorities would deem our managing body or the managing body of any of our non-PRC subsidiaries as being located within the PRC. Due to the lack of applicable legal precedents, the PRC tax authorities determine the PRC tax resident treatment of a non-PRC company on a case-by-case basis.

​

If the PRC tax authorities determine that we are, or any of our non-PRC subsidiaries is, a “resident enterprise” for PRC enterprise income tax purposes, a number of PRC tax consequences could follow. First, we and/or such subsidiary may be subject to the enterprise income tax at a rate of 25% on our and/or such subsidiary’s worldwide taxable income, as well as PRC enterprise income tax reporting obligations. Second, under the EIT Law and its implementing rules, dividends paid between “qualified resident enterprises” are exempt from enterprise income tax. As a result, if we and each of our non-PRC subsidiaries are treated as “qualified resident enterprises”, all dividends from our PRC subsidiaries to us (through our non-PRC subsidiaries) should be exempt from PRC tax.

​

If we or any of our non-PRC subsidiaries is determined to be a PRC “non-resident enterprise” and receives dividends from a subsidiary that is determined to be a PRC “resident enterprise” (assuming such dividends were considered sourced within the PRC), such dividends may be subject to a 10% PRC withholding tax. Any such tax on dividends could materially reduce the amount of dividends, if any, we could pay to our investors.

​

43

Table of Contents

If we are determined to be a “resident enterprise” under the EIT Law, this could result in a situation in which a 10% PRC tax is imposed on dividends we pay to our enterprise (but not individual) investors that are not tax residents of the PRC (“non-resident investors”) and gains derived by them from transferring our ordinary shares, if such income is considered PRC-sourced income by the relevant PRC tax authorities. In such event, we may be required to withhold a 10% PRC tax on any dividends paid to our non-resident investors. Our non-resident investors also may be responsible for paying PRC tax at a rate of 10% on any gain realized from the sale or transfer of our ordinary shares in certain circumstances. We would not, however, have an obligation to withhold PRC tax with respect to such gain under the PRC tax laws.

​

Moreover, on February 3, 2015, the SAT issued the Announcement on Several Issues Concerning the Enterprise Income Tax on Indirect Transfers of Properties by Non-Resident Enterprises (“Circular 7”, which is partly abrogated in 2017). Pursuant to Circular 7, in the event that non-residential enterprises indirectly transfer PRC taxable properties (“PRC Taxable Properties”) without reasonable commercial purposes in order to evade PRC enterprise income tax, such indirect transfer will be deemed as a direct transfer of PRC Taxable Properties and, therefore, will be subject to PRC enterprise income tax. Circular 7 provides clearer criteria on how to assess reasonable commercial purposes and allows for safe harbor scenarios applicable to internal group restructurings. In addition, Circular 7 does not apply to situations where (1) the non-resident enterprise transferor obtains income from purchase and sale of equity interests of the same publicly-listed overseas enterprise in a public securities market; or (2) under the circumstance that the non-resident enterprise directly holds and transfers the PRC Taxable Property, income obtained from such transfer could be exempted from enterprise income tax in China in accordance with the applicable provisions of the applicable tax treaty or tax arrangement. Under Circular 7 and subject to the above exceptions, an indirect transfer of PRC Taxable Properties shall be directly deemed as having no reasonable commercial purposes if the following circumstances are satisfied: (i) more than 75% of the value of overseas enterprises’ shares directly or indirectly comes from PRC Taxable Properties; (ii) at any time within one year before the indirect transfer of PRC Taxable Properties, more than 90% the total amount of overseas enterprises’ assets (excluding cash) are directly or indirectly constituted by their investment within the PRC, or within one year before the indirect transfer of PRC Taxable Properties, more than 90% of the overseas enterprises’ income directly or indirectly derive from the PRC; (iii) the overseas enterprises and their controlling enterprises, which directly or indirectly hold PRC Taxable Properties, cannot justify the economic substance of the corporate structure; and (iv) overseas tax payment regarding indirect transfer of PRC Taxable Properties is lower than PRC tax payment regarding direct transfer of PRC Taxable Properties. Circular 7 also brings uncertainties to the offshore transferor and transferee of the indirect transfer of PRC Taxable Properties as they have to make self-assessment on whether the transaction should be subject to PRC tax and to file or withhold the PRC tax accordingly. On October 17, 2017, the SAT issued the Announcement of the State Administration of Taxation on Issues Concerning the Withholding of Non-resident Enterprise Income Tax at Source, or the “Circular 37”, which came into effect on December 1, 2017. Circular 37 further clarifies the practice and procedure of the withholding of non-resident enterprise income tax. Pursuant to Circular 7 and Circular 37, both the transferor and the transferee may be subject to penalties under PRC tax laws if the transferee fails to withhold the taxes and the transferor fails to file the taxes.

​

As a result, where non-resident investors are involved in our private equity financing or share transfer of our company between two or more offshore parties, if such transactions are determined by the tax authorities as lack of reasonable commercial purpose, we and our non-resident investors may become at risk of being taxed under SAT Circular 7 and Circular 37, and may be required to expend valuable resources to comply with SAT Circular 7 and Circular 37 or to establish that we/our non-resident investors should not be taxed under SAT Circular 7 and Circular 37, which may have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

​

If any PRC tax applies to a non-resident investor, the non-resident investor may be entitled to a reduced rate of PRC tax under an applicable income tax treaty and/or a deduction for such PRC tax against such investor’s domestic taxable income or a foreign tax credit in respect of such PRC tax against such investor’s domestic income tax liability (subject to applicable conditions and limitations). Investors should consult their own tax advisors regarding the applicability of any such taxes, the effects of any applicable income tax treaties, and any available deductions or foreign tax credits.

​

44

Table of Contents

Changes in PRC laws and regulations on labor and employee benefits may adversely affect our business and results of operations.

​

As we conduct a significant portion of our business through our subsidiaries in China, we are subject to PRC laws and regulations on labor and employee benefits. In recent years, the PRC government has implemented policies to strengthen the protection of employees and obligate employers to provide more benefits to their employees. In addition, an employment contract law came into effect in China on January 1, 2008. The PRC Employment Contract Law and related legislations require more benefits to be provided to employees, such as an increase in pay or compensation for termination of employment contracts. As a result, we expect to incur higher labor costs, which would have an adverse impact on our business and results of operations.

​

Our management capability is confronted with challenges due to requirements by PRC government in relation to protection of personal information.

​

In February 2009, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress promulgated the Criminal Law Amendment (VII) (“Amendment (VII)”), which, among other things, provides that any government, financial institutions, telecommunications organizations, or transportation, education, health care institutions or similar institutions or their employees who illegally sell or provide personal information which is obtained in the process of performing their duties would constitute a crime. The aforementioned clause was replaced by relevant clause in Criminal Law Amendment (IX) (“Amendment (IX)”) promulgated by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress on August 29, 2015. According to Amendment (IX), selling or providing, in violation of relevant provisions of the State law, citizens’ personal information would constitute a crime. Amendment (IX) came into effect on November 1, 2015.

​

The National People’s Congress promulgated the Civil Code on May 28, 2020 which became effective from January 1, 2021. The Civil Code stipulated the scope of privacy and personal information. According to the Civil Code, an information processor shall not divulge or falsify the personal information collected and stored by it. Without the consent of the natural person, it shall not provide the personal information to others, except the information that has been processed and cannot identify a specific person and cannot be restored. The information processor shall take technical measures and other necessary measures to ensure the security of the collected and stored personal information and prevent the divulgement, falsification and loss of information. Where personal information is or may be divulged, falsified or lost, it shall take immediate remedial measures, and inform the natural person concerned and report the same to the relevant department as required.

​

The PIPL, which was promulgated on August 20, 2021 by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress and became effective on November 1, 2021, provided a comprehensive personal information protection system, under which in the case of any personal information processing, individual prior consent must be obtained except in certain circumstances stipulated in it to the contrary. Further, any data processing activities in relation to sensitive personal information including biometrics, religious beliefs, specific identities, medical health, financial accounts, whereabouts, personal information of teenagers under 14 years old and other personal information that once leaked or illegally used might easily lead to the infringement of personal dignity or harm of personal and property safety, are allowed only if such activities are purpose-specified, highly necessary and strictly protected. In addition, cross-border personal information transmission is restricted unless certain requirements in the PIPL have been satisfied, including security review organized by the national cyberspace department and other conditions specified by the laws, regulations and the national cyberspace department.

​

45

Table of Contents

In the ordinary operations of our company, we have the opportunity to contact, obtain or be exposed to personal information of our subscribers and their close relatives. If we, our business partners or some of our employees are found to violate the Civil Code or the PIPL by divulging or falsifying our subscribers’ personal information or failing to protect our subscribers’ personal information, or violate the criminal law by illegally providing or selling our subscribers’ private information, we will be confronted with lawsuit and our reputation will be ruined. Therefore, we may have to devote more resources and management efforts to reinforce our internal control system to ensure the security of our subscribers’ personal information and prevent the divulgement, falsification, loss and illegal disclosure of our subscribers’ personal information. In spite of this, our subscribers’ information may also be unexpectedly disclosed, and in some cases, we may, based on due reasons and through lawful channels, provide our subscribers’ information to a third person. There is no assurance whether such person would not violate the Civil Code or the PIPL or Amendment (IX), and use the information it receives from us in the agreed manners. The law does not provide clearly whether we will be prosecuted or will be required to bear other legal responsibilities in the event the person who receives personal information from us abuses such information. There is a possibility that we will be claimed by our subscribers for our failure in protecting their private information and such claim may be supported by the court. We may also be subject to investigation from criminal judiciary or even criminal penalties. Our corporate image may, as a result, also be materially and adversely affected in such circumstances, which in turn may affect our ability to recruit new customers and our financial performance.

​

Risks to Our Shareholders

​

Our largest shareholder filed a winding up petition with the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands, which, among other things, seeks to prevent our acquisition of Cellenkos, remove our current Board of Directors and effect related governance changes, a Writ of Summons which, among other things, seeks to unwind the Cellenkos Acquisition, and a claim against GM Stem Cells in the British Virgin Islands (the “BVI Claim”) which, among other things, seeks a declaration that a share charge over its shares in the Company is invalid.

​

On May 6, 2022, the Company received a winding up petition (the “Petition”) filed by Blue Ocean in the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands (the “Cayman Court”). Among other things, the Petition seeks orders that: (i) the Company refrain from proceeding with a proposed transaction by which the Company would acquire Cellenkos, as described in a Form 6-K filed by the Company on April 29, 2022 (the “Cellenkos Acquisition”); (ii) the Company amend and restate its Memorandum and Articles of Association; and (iii) the Company convene an extraordinary general meeting to propose the removal of its current Board of Directors and the appointment of alternative directors proposed by Blue Ocean. In the alternative, the Petition seeks an order for, among other things, the winding up of the Company. On May 16, 2022, a litigation steering committee (the “Litigation Steering Committee”), consisting of Ms. Ting Zheng (Ms. Ting Zheng is the chairman of the Litigation Steering Committee), Mr. Albert Chen, Mr. Mark Chen, Dr. Ken Lu, Ms. Jennifer Wang, Mr. Jack Chow and Mr. Jacky Cheng, was formed to oppose the Petition and to bring such other actions to satisfactorily resolve the matter.

​

The Cayman Court made various orders in relation to various interlocutory applications filed in the Petition. Among other things:

​

On May 12, 2022, upon Blue Ocean’s application, the Cayman Court issued an ex parte order preventing the completion of the Cellenkos Acquisition (the “12 May Injunction”).

​

On June 15, 2022, upon the Company’s application, the Cayman Court ordered, among other things, that, until further order of the Court, any resolution or resolutions (the “Resolutions”) that might be passed or purported to be passed at any extraordinary general meeting of the Company to be held or purporting to be held on June 16, 2022 (“the Purported EGM”) or other meeting held or purporting to be held pursuant to a Notice of Extraordinary General Meeting dated June 3, 2022 (on June 16, 2022 or any other date) shall not take effect and shall not be implemented, and Blue Ocean must not rely or purport to rely upon any such Resolutions and/or seek to convene or convene any extraordinary general meeting of the Company or other meeting (the “EGM Injunction”).

​

Following a hearing of various interlocutory applications on July 13 and 14, 2022, the Cayman Court subsequently issued a judgment (the “Judgment”). Among other things:

​

46

Table of Contents

(iii)the Cayman Court ordered that the EGM Injunction continue until further Order;

The Company cautions its shareholders and others that the Judgment, despite having been delivered, will not legally take effect until the various consequential matters, including applications for leave to appeal and/or a stay of execution pending appeal, are heard and the final Order of Court is perfected/ sealed. The Judgment provides that the final Order of Court “should, if necessary, take effect from the date it is perfected so as to preserve any appeal rights which might otherwise be affected”.

​

As of the date of this report, a date for any further hearing(s) has not been fixed and the final Order of Court has not been perfected. This means, among other things, that both the 12 May Injunction and the EGM Injunction still apply. There is also a possibility that the Judgment could still be revised until the final Order of Court is sealed.

​

Separately, on June 8, 2022, Blue Ocean issued a Writ of Summons (the “Writ”) in the Cayman Court against the Company, our current directors, and other parties in relation to the Cellenkos Acquisition. Among other things, Blue Ocean seeks: (i) a declaration that the Cellenkos Acquisition is void; (ii) equitable compensation against various defendants; (iii) rectification of the Company’s register of members; and (iv) declarations that certain defendants hold shares/ funds received as trustee of the Company on constructive trust.

​

Therefore, the Cellenkos Acquisition remains the subject of legal proceedings against, among others, the Company and the current Board of Directors. The ultimate resolution of these proceedings may have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Failure to settle these proceedings or other unfavorable outcomes in these proceedings – including but not limited to the winding up of the Company, the appointment of joint official liquidators, or the appointment of joint provisional liquidators - could result in significant damages, additional penalties or other remedies imposed against the Company, our current or former directors or officers.

​

Litigation of this kind could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources. It could also result in our reputation being harmed and our stock price could decline as a result of allegations made in the course of the proceedings, regardless of the truthfulness of the allegations.

​

On May 20, 2022, Blue Ocean and Blue Ocean Creation Investment Hong Kong Limited filed the BVI Claim against GM Stem Cells in the High Court of Justice of the Virgin Islands (the “BVI Court”). Among other things, the BVI Claim concerns a “purported share charge allegedly executed by Blue Ocean in favour of GM Stem Cells over the shares in the Company” and seeks a declaration that “the purported Charge dated March 30, 2018 between Blue Ocean and GM Stem Cells in respect of the shares in the Company is invalid and of no legal effect”. The outcome of the BVI Claim may result in a change of control of the Company.

​

The market price for our ordinary shares may be volatile.

​

The market price for our ordinary shares is likely to be highly volatile and subject to wide fluctuations in response to factors including the following:

​

​

47

Table of Contents

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

In addition, the securities market has from time to time experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that are not related to the operating performance of particular companies. These market fluctuations may also have a material adverse effect on the market price of our ordinary shares.

​

48

Table of Contents

Cayman Islands law may be less protective of shareholder rights than the laws of the U.S. or other jurisdictions.

​

We are registered by way of continuation under the laws of the Cayman Islands. Our corporate affairs are governed by our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association, the Companies Act, Cap 22 (Law 3 of 1961, as consolidated and revised) of the Cayman Islands (the “Companies Act”) and the common law of the Cayman Islands. The rights of shareholders to take action against our directors and us, the rights of minority shareholders to institute actions, and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors to us are to a large extent governed by the common law of the Cayman Islands. The common law of the Cayman Islands is derived in part from comparatively limited judicial precedent in the Cayman Islands as well as from English common law, the latter of which has persuasive, but not binding, authority on a court in the Cayman Islands. Any shareholder of a company may petition the court which may make a winding up order if the court is of the opinion that it is just and equitable that the company should be wound up or, as an alternative to a winding up order, (a) an order regulating the conduct of the company’s affairs in the future, (b) an order requiring the company to refrain from doing or continuing an act complained of by the shareholder petitioner or to do an act which the shareholder petitioner has complained it has omitted to do, (c) an order authorizing civil proceedings to be brought in the name and on behalf of the company by the shareholder petitioner on such terms as the court may direct, or (d) an order providing for the purchase of the shares of any shareholders of the company by other shareholders or by the company itself and, in the case of a purchase by the company itself, a reduction of the company’s capital accordingly. The rights of our shareholders and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors under Cayman Islands law are not as clearly established as they would be under statutes or judicial precedent in some jurisdictions in the United States. In particular, the Cayman Islands has a less developed body of securities laws than the United States.

​

As a result of all of the above, our shareholders may have more difficulty in protecting their interests in the face of actions taken by management, our directors or principal shareholders than they would as a shareholder of a U.S. company.

​

Your ability to bring an action against us or against our directors and executive officers, or to enforce a judgment against us or them, will be limited.

​

We are not incorporated in the United States. We conduct our business outside the United States, and substantially all of our assets are located outside the United States. Most of our directors and executive officers are non-U.S. citizens/residents, and substantially all of the assets of those persons are located, outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for you to bring an action against us or against these individuals in the United States in the event that you believe that your rights have been infringed under U.S. securities laws or otherwise. Even if you are successful in bringing an action of this kind, the laws of the Cayman Islands or the PRC may render you unable to enforce a judgment against our assets or the assets of our directors and executive officers. In addition, there is uncertainty as to whether the courts of the Cayman Islands or the PRC would (i) recognize or enforce judgments of U.S. courts against us or our directors or officers predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the United States or any state in the United States; or (ii) entertain original actions brought in the Cayman Islands or the PRC against us or our directors or officers predicated upon the securities laws of the United States or any state in the United States.

​

We are a foreign private issuer within the meaning of the rules under the Exchange Act, and as such we are exempt from certain provisions applicable to United States domestic public companies.

​

Because we are a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act, we are exempt from certain provisions of the securities rules and regulations in the United States that are applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, including:

​

​

​

​

​

49

Table of Contents

We are required to file an annual report on Form 20-F within four months of the end of each fiscal year. In addition, we intend to publish our results on a quarterly basis through press releases, distributed pursuant to the rules and regulations of the New York Stock Exchange. Press releases relating to financial results and material events will also be furnished to the SEC on Form 6-K. However, the information we are required to file with or furnish to the SEC will be less extensive and less timely than that required to be filed with the SEC by U.S. domestic issuers. As a result, you may not be afforded the same protections or information that would be made available to you were you investing in a U.S. domestic issuer.

​

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may be unable to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud, and investor confidence and the market price of our ordinary shares may be adversely affected.

​

Our reporting obligations as a public company place a significant strain on our management, operational and financial resources and systems. We must maintain financial and disclosure control procedures and corporate governance practices that enable us to comply, on a standalone basis, with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and related SEC rules. Failure to maintain the necessary controls and procedures would make it difficult to comply with SEC rules and regulations with respect to internal control and financial reporting. We intend to continue to take further actions to continue to improve our internal controls. If we are unable to implement solutions to any weaknesses in our existing internal controls and procedures, or if we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls in the future, we may be unable to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud and investor confidence and the market price of our ordinary shares may be adversely impacted.

​

We have previously instituted changes to our internal controls and management systems to satisfy the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. We engaged external Sarbanes-Oxley consultants to advise us on Sarbanes-Oxley compliance issues and may do so again in the future. Section 404 requires us to perform an evaluation of our internal controls over financial reporting and file annual management assessments of their effectiveness with the SEC. The management assessment to be filed is required to include a certification of our internal controls by our chief executive officer and chief financial officer. In addition to satisfying requirements of Section 404, we may also make improvements to our management information system to computerize certain manual controls, establish a comprehensive procedures manual for U.S. GAAP financial reporting, strengthen our anti-corruption policy and increase the headcount in the accounting and internal audit functions with professional qualifications and experience in accounting and financial reporting under U.S. GAAP.

​

Our auditors are required to attest to our evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting. Unless we maintain the adequacy of these controls as such standards are modified or amended from time to time, we may not be able to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. As a result, our auditors may be unable to attest to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting. This could subject us to regulatory scrutiny and result in a loss of public confidence in our management, which could, among other things, adversely affect the price of our ordinary shares and our ability to raise additional capital.

​

We may not be able to pay any dividends on our ordinary shares.

​

Under Cayman Islands law, we may only pay dividends out of our profits or our share premium account subject to our ability to service our debts as they become due in the ordinary course of business. Our ability to pay dividends will therefore depend on our ability to generate sufficient profits. We cannot give any assurance that we will declare dividends of any amounts, at any rate or at all in the future. Although our Board of Directors declared a dividend with respect to the fiscal year ended March 31, 2018, future dividends, if any, will be at the discretion of our Board of Directors, subject to obtaining all relevant approvals, and will depend upon our results of operations, our cash flows, our financial condition, the payment of cash dividends from our subsidiaries to us, our capital needs, expansion and acquisition opportunities available, regulatory environment, future prospects and other factors that our directors may deem appropriate. You should refer to “Item 4. Information on the Company—B. Business Overview—Regulation—Dividend Distributions” in this report for additional information regarding our current dividend policy for additional legal restrictions on the ability of our PRC subsidiaries to pay dividends to us.

​

In addition, due to the failure of the Measures for Administration of Blood Stations to define or interpret the terms “non-profit”, “for-profit” or “for the purpose of making a profit” as they relate to our business, we cannot assure you that the PRC government authorities will not request our subsidiaries to use their after-tax profits for their own development and restrict our subsidiaries’ ability to distribute their after-tax profits to us as dividends.

​

50

Table of Contents

We incurred additional costs as a result of being a public company in the United States, which affected our profits.

​

We are subject to the reporting obligations of the SEC, which many consider to be more stringent, rigorous and expensive than operating a privately held company. In particular:

​

​

​

​

If we fail to attract and retain independent directors, we may be subject to SEC enforcement proceedings and delisting by the exchange on which we are listed at the time. The costs incurred to comply with various listing requirements, including but not limited to, U.S. corporate governance compliance related expenses, internal control expense, and directors’ and officers’ insurance related expenses may continue to increase in the future, and, in turn, will increase our operating expenses and reduce our profit.

​

The sale or availability for sale of substantial amounts of our ordinary shares could adversely affect their market price.

​

Sales of substantial amounts of our ordinary shares (or derivative instruments convertible into our ordinary shares) in the public market, or the perception that these sales could occur, could adversely affect the market price of our ordinary shares and could materially impair our future ability to raise capital through offerings of our ordinary shares.

​

Volatility in the price of our ordinary shares may result in shareholder litigation that could in turn result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

​

The financial markets in the United States and other countries have experienced significant price and volume fluctuations, and market prices of healthcare companies have been and continue to be extremely volatile. Volatility in the price of our ordinary shares may be caused by factors outside our control and may be unrelated or disproportionate to our results of operations. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a public company’s securities, shareholders have frequently instituted securities class action litigation against that company. Litigation of this kind could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

​

If we become directly subject to the scrutiny involving U.S.-listed Chinese companies, we may have to expend significant resources to investigate and/or defend the matter, which could harm our business operations, stock price and reputation.

​

U.S. public companies that have substantially all of their operations in China have been the subject of intense scrutiny by investors, financial commentators and regulatory agencies. Much of the scrutiny has centered around financial and accounting irregularities and mistakes, a lack of effective internal controls over financial reporting and, in many cases, allegations of fraud. As a result of the scrutiny, the publicly traded stock of many U.S.-listed China-based companies that have been the subject of such scrutiny has sharply decreased in value. Many of these companies are now subject to shareholder lawsuits and/or SEC enforcement actions that are conducting internal and/or external investigations into the allegations. If we become the subject of any such scrutiny, whether any allegations are true or not, we may have to expend significant resources to investigate such allegations and/or defend our company. Such investigations or allegations will be costly and time-consuming and distract our management from our business plan and could result in our reputation being harmed and our stock price could decline as a result of such allegations, regardless of the truthfulness of the allegations.

51

Table of Contents

As a result of the Proposed Transaction or the Redomestication and the Share Exchange, we could be treated as a U.S. corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes or subject to adverse U.S. federal income tax rules.

​

Under current U.S. federal income tax law, a corporation organized under the laws of the Cayman Islands is generally not treated as a U.S. corporation and, therefore, is treated as a non-U.S. corporation. Section 7874 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) and the Treasury regulations promulgated thereunder, however, contain rules that may cause a non-U.S. corporation that acquires the stock of a U.S. corporation to be treated as a U.S. corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes under certain circumstances. If, as a result of the Proposed Transaction or the Redomestication and the Share Exchange (as defined below under “Item 4. Information on the Company—A. History and Development of the Company”), we are treated as a U.S. corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, among other consequences, we would generally be subject to U.S. federal income tax on our worldwide income, and our dividends would be treated as dividends from a U.S. corporation and subject to U.S. withholding taxes on payments to non-U.S. Holders (“U.S. Holder” defined below in “Item 10. Additional Information—E. Taxation—United States Federal Income Taxation”). Even if we are not treated as a U.S. corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we and our shareholders may become subject to other adverse tax consequences pursuant to the “60% Inversion Rules” (as described under “Item 10. Additional Information—E. Taxation—United States Federal Income Taxation—Tax Residence of GCBC after the Proposed Transaction and the Redomestication and the Share Exchange”).

​

We do not believe that we are treated as a U.S. corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes or subject to the 60% Inversion Rules, and we intend to take this position on our tax returns. We have not sought and will not seek any rulings from the IRS as to such tax treatment. There can be no assurance that a tax advisor, the IRS, or a court will agree with the position that we are not treated as a U.S. corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes or subject to the 60% Inversion Rules. We are not representing to you that we will not be treated as a U.S. corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes or subject to the 60% Inversion Rules. The rules for determining whether a non-U.S. corporation is treated as a U.S. corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes or subject to the 60% Inversion Rules are complex, unclear, and the subject of ongoing regulatory change. Our intended position is not free from doubt. For more information about the application of Section 7874 of the Code to us, see “Item 10. Additional Information—E. Taxation—United States Federal Income Taxation— Tax Residence of GCBC after the Proposed Transaction and the Redomestication and the Share Exchange.”

​

There is a significant risk that we may be classified as a PFIC, which could result in adverse consequences to investors.

​

In general, we will be classified as a PFIC in a particular taxable year if either (i) 75 percent or more of our gross income for the taxable year is passive income or (ii) the average percentage of the value of our assets that produce or are held for the production of passive income is at least 50 percent. For this purpose, passive income generally includes dividends, interest, gains from certain commodities transactions, rents, royalties and the excess of gains over losses from the disposition of assets that produce passive income. Goodwill is treated as an active asset under the PFIC rules to the extent attributable to activities that produce active income. Cash generally is a passive asset for these purposes.

​

Based on the composition of our income and assets and the trading price of our shares, we believe there is a significant risk that we were a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes for our 2022 fiscal year. Additionally, there is a significant risk that we will be a PFIC in our 2023 fiscal year and in the reasonably foreseeable future. The determination of whether we are a PFIC must be made annually based on the facts and circumstances at that time, some of which may be beyond our control, such as the trading price of our shares and the valuation of our assets, including goodwill and other intangible assets, at the time. If it is determined we are a PFIC for any of our taxable year (or portion thereof) that is included in the holding period of a U.S. Holder (as defined in the section of this report captioned “Item 10. Additional Information—E. Taxation—United States Federal Income Taxation”) of our ordinary shares, the U.S. Holder may be subject to increased U.S. federal income tax liability upon a sale or other disposition of our ordinary shares or the receipt of certain excess distributions from us and may be subject to additional reporting requirements.

​

U.S. Holders of our ordinary shares are urged to consult their own tax advisors regarding the possible application of the PFIC rules. See the discussion in the section entitled “Item 10. Additional Information—E. Taxation—United States Federal Income Taxation—Passive Foreign Investment Company Status.”

​

52

Table of Contents

ITEM 4.INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY

​

​

We are a Cayman Islands company registered by way of continuation in the Cayman Islands on June 30, 2009. Our corporate affairs are governed by our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association, the Companies Act (Revised) of the Cayman Islands and the common law of the Cayman Islands.

​

GCBC, formerly known as CCBC, was formed through a business combination (the “Business Combination”), which involved the merger of Pantheon China Acquisition Corp. (“Pantheon”) with and into Pantheon Arizona Corp. (“Pantheon Arizona”), then a wholly owned subsidiary of Pantheon was formed for the purpose of effecting a merger, with Pantheon Arizona surviving the merger (the “Merger”) and the conversion and continuation of Pantheon Arizona’s corporate existence from Arizona to the Cayman Islands (the “Redomestication”). Immediately following the Redomestication, the participating shareholders of approximately 93.94% of the issued and outstanding shares of CCBS completed a share exchange with Pantheon Arizona, and Pantheon Arizona changed its name to CCBC, resulting in CCBS becoming a subsidiary of CCBC and the participating shareholders becoming holders of CCBC’s ordinary shares (the “Share Exchange”). Subsequent to the Share Exchange, CCBC entered into agreements to exchange 3,506,136 newly issued CCBC shares for the remaining 6.06% of the issued and outstanding shares of CCBS on terms substantially similar to those of the Business Combination, resulting in CCBS becoming our wholly owned subsidiary. In connection with the Business Combination, we agreed to issue up to 9,000,000 ordinary share purchase warrants to our management pursuant to a warrant incentive scheme, subject to us achieving certain performance thresholds. Notwithstanding achievement of these thresholds, no warrants were ever issued, and on July 14, 2010 the scheme was cancelled.

​

CCBS was incorporated on January 17, 2008 under the Companies Act to become the direct holding company of CSC Holdings. At the time of the Business Combination, CCBS had two operating subsidiaries in China: an indirect 100.0% equity interest in Jiachenhong and an indirect 90.0% equity interest in Nuoya. Moreover, CCBS held an indirect 18.9% equity interest (i.e. 17,525,000 shares) in Cordlife.

​

Immediately following the Business Combination and the share exchange with CCBS’s remaining shareholders, Golden Meditech owned 46.3% of CCBC’s issued shares through its wholly-owned subsidiary, GM Stem Cells. The participating shareholders of CCBS (excluding Golden Meditech) owned 45.8% of CCBC’s issued shares, the public shareholders owned approximately 0.2% of CCBC’s issued shares, the management team of Pantheon prior to the Business Combination owned 2.0% of CCBC’s issued shares and the CCBC management team owned 5.7% of CCBC’s issued shares.

​

The Business Combination was accounted for in accordance with U.S. GAAP as a capital transaction in substance. Pantheon was treated as the “acquired” company for financial reporting purposes. This determination was primarily based on CCBS comprising the ongoing operations of the combined entity, the senior management of CCBS continued as the senior management of the combined company and CCBS shareholders retaining the majority of voting interests in the combined company. For accounting purposes, the Business Combination was treated as the equivalent of CCBS issuing stock and warrants for the net assets of Pantheon, accompanied by a recapitalization. Operations of the combined entity prior to the Business Combination are those of CCBS. The remaining 6.06% issued and outstanding shares of CCBS not exchanged in the Business Combination were recorded as redeemable non-controlling interest. Upon completion of the share exchange with the remaining 6.06% CCBS shares in August 2009, the carrying amount of such non-controlling interest was adjusted to reflect the change in CCBC’s ownership interest in CCBS. The difference between the fair value of the CCBC shares issued and the amount by which the non-controlling interest is adjusted, together with the transaction costs incurred, was recognized in equity attributable to CCBC.

​

The cord blood bank in Beijing operated by Jiachenhong received its cord blood banking license in September 2002. In September 2003, GM Stem Cells, a wholly owned subsidiary of Golden Meditech acquired a 51.0% equity interest in Jiachenhong. The remaining 49.0% equity interest in Jiachenhong was held by other founding members through a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. CSC Holdings was formed in January 2005 to become the holding company of Jiachenhong. Under a corporate restructuring in March 2005, CSC Holdings issued ordinary shares to GM Stem Cells and other founding members in exchange for all of their equity interests in Jiachenhong. CSC Holdings subsequently completed two private placements and four share transfers, as a result of which GM Stem Cells’ equity interest in CSC Holdings was reduced to 50.2%. Immediately after the Business Combination described above, GM Stem Cells owned 46.3% equity interest in CCBC.

​

53

Table of Contents

The cord blood bank in Guangdong operated by Nuoya received its cord blood banking license in June 2006. In May 2007, CSC South, our subsidiary, completed the acquisition of Nuoya. At that time, CSC South, being 90% owned by us, was the sole shareholder of Nuoya.

​

On November 19, 2009, CCBC was listed on the NYSE with a ticker symbol “CO”. On November 24, 2009, CCBC completed a public offering of 3,305,786 ordinary shares at a public offering price of US$6.05 per share. An over-allotment issuance of 495,867 ordinary shares was completed in January 2010. Total gross proceeds raised (including the over-allotment issuance) amounted to US$23 million. The proceeds were used for the expansion into new geographical markets, including applications for new licenses and acquisitions and investments, and for the construction and upgrading of facilities in existing geographical markets.

​

In May 2010, we invested in a 19.9% equity interest in Qilu, the exclusive cord blood banking operator in Shandong province. The cord blood bank in Shandong operated by Qilu received its permission to commence operation from Shandong DOH in May 2009.

​

In June 2010, we entered into an agreement to underwrite the Cordlife’s rights issue which amounted to AUD11.6 million. On July 4, 2010, we terminated the underwriting agreement and were released from such obligation but continued to participate in the rights issue and took up our share entitlements on a pro-rata basis. The rights issue was completed on July 26, 2010 and we subscribed for 6,841,666 shares of Cordlife at a total cost of approximately AUD2.0 million. Prior to the restructuring of Cordlife, Cordlife was a provider of cord blood banking services with operations in Singapore, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia and the Philippines. After the restructuring, developing cord blood banking businesses in Indonesia, India and the Philippines were operated under LFC, which was listed on the Australian Securities Exchange, while the more mature cord blood banking businesses in Singapore and Hong Kong were operated under Cordlife Singapore, which was listed on the Singapore Exchange on March 29, 2012. After the restructuring of Cordlife, we held 24,366,666 shares in LFC; Cordlife Singapore was listed on the Singapore Exchange subsequently on March 29, 2012, and we held 24,366,666 shares in Cordlife Singapore. In June 2013, Cordlife Singapore completed the acquisition of the cord blood and cord tissue banking businesses in Indonesia, India and the Philippines from LFC. After the acquisition, Cordlife Singapore operated cord blood banking businesses in both mature markets such as Singapore and Hong Kong, and developing markets such as Indonesia, India and the Philippines. Cordlife Singapore later on acquired Stemlife, a Malaysia-based cord blood banking operator. In December 2013, LFC acquired an unlisted company which engaged in the provision of funeral and related services, and thereafter, LFC’s principal activities changed to the provision of funeral and related services. LFC’s issued share capital was consolidated on the basis that each parcel of three shares held by a shareholder was consolidated into one new share. After the share consolidation, we owned a total of 8,122,222 shares in LFC. In November 2014, we acquired 1,150,000 shares in Cordlife Singapore. In February 2018, we disposed of all of our shares in LFC. As of March 31, 2022, we owned 25,516,666 shares, or approximately 10.0% equity interest, in Cordlife Singapore and our total investment cost in relation to Cordlife, Cordlife Singapore and LFC combined up to the date of this report amounted to RMB63.5 million (converted into RMB using the currency exchange rate as of March 31, 2022).

​

In September 2010, we announced the execution of a framework agreement to form a non-wholly owned subsidiary, Lukou, with the Zhejiang Provincial Blood Center. The new entity which completed business registration and regulatory approval procedures in February 2011, is 90% owned and controlled by us.

​

In November 2010, we completed a follow-on public offering of 7,000,000 shares at US$4.50 per share. Total gross proceeds of US$31.5 million raised were used in building out our Zhejiang operation and for general working capital purposes.

​

In December 2010, we completed a warrant exchange offer to simplify our capital structure, which allowed warrant holders to receive one ordinary share for every eight warrants outstanding. We issued an aggregate of 1,627,518 ordinary shares upon closing of the warrant exchange offer, equal to approximately 2.2% of shares outstanding as of December 10, 2010, in exchange for 13,020,236 warrants. Any remaining warrants outstanding that were not exercised expired on December 13, 2010.

​

54

Table of Contents

On April 27, 2012, we completed the sale of US$65 million in aggregate principal amount of 7% senior unsecured convertible notes, which notes were convertible into ordinary shares at a conversion price of US$2.838 per share to BCHIL. On August 26, 2015, BCHIL transferred the convertible notes to Excellent China Healthcare Investment Limited (“ECHIL”). On the same day, Magnum Opus 2 International Holdings Limited (“Magnum 2”) acquired from BCHIL the convertible notes through acquisition of all the issued and outstanding shares of ECHIL. On January 4, 2016, Golden Meditech acquired from ECHIL the convertible notes and subsequently transferred the convertible notes to GM Stem Cells. In April 2017, GM Stem Cells converted such convertible notes and we issued 22,903,454 ordinary shares in exchange for the cancellation of the convertible notes.

​

In August 2012, we entered into a share purchase agreement with Cordlife Singapore in which we agreed to sell to Cordlife Singapore, and Cordlife Singapore agreed to purchase, 7,314,015 of our ordinary shares for a total purchase price of approximately US$20.8 million. Contemporaneously, CSC South entered into a shares repurchase agreement with Cordlife HK to repurchase the 10% of its shares held by Cordlife HK for approximately US$16.8 million. Upon completion of the transactions on November 12, 2012, Nuoya became our indirect wholly owned subsidiary and Cordlife Singapore acquired 7,314,015 of our ordinary shares, representing approximately 10% of our issued ordinary shares as of the closing date. Such 7,314,015 ordinary shares were subsequently acquired by Golden Meditech in November 2015.

​

On October 3, 2012, we completed the sale of US$50 million in aggregate principal amount of 7% senior unsecured convertible notes, which notes are convertible into ordinary shares at a conversion price of US$2.838 per share to Golden Meditech. In November 2014, Golden Meditech completed the sale of such convertible note to Cordlife Singapore and Magnum Opus International Holdings Limited (“Magnum Opus”) on a several and not joint basis, each 50% of the convertible notes. In May 2015, Golden Meditech entered into agreements with Cordlife Singapore and Magnum Opus to purchase the convertible notes. The acquisitions of convertible notes from Cordlife Singapore and Magnum Opus were completed in November and December 2015, respectively, and the convertible notes were subsequently transferred to GM Stem Cells. In April 2017, GM Stem Cells converted such convertible notes and we issued 17,618,040 ordinary shares in exchange for the cancellation of the convertible notes.

In December 2012, Favorable Fort, which indirectly owned a 24% equity interest in Qilu, entered into a shares purchase agreement with Cordlife Services, which owned a 17% equity interest in Favorable Fort, pursuant to which Favorable Fort agreed to repurchase 17% of its outstanding ordinary shares not already indirectly owned by CCBC from Cordlife Services for a total purchase price of approximately US$8.7 million. Upon completion of the transaction on February 7, 2013, Favorable Fort became an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of CCBC and CCBC’s effective equity interest in Qilu increased from 19.9% to 24.0%.

​

Our annual general meeting in February 2011 resolved to adopt an Incentive Plan which has a mandate limit of granting rights to receive ordinary shares not exceeding 10% of our issued and outstanding share capital to directors, officers, employees and/or consultants of CCBC and our subsidiaries. Certain administrative provisions of the Incentive Plan were subsequently amended by our Board of Directors in August 2014. A total of 7,300,000 RSUs were granted in December 2014. During the year ended March 31, 2018, all 7,300,000 RSUs granted were fully vested and subsequently, no RSUs were issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2022.

​

On April 27, 2015, our Board of Directors received a non-binding proposal letter from Golden Meditech, pursuant to which Golden Meditech proposed to acquire all of the outstanding ordinary shares of the Company not already directly or indirectly owned by Golden Meditech for US$6.40 per ordinary share in cash in a “going private” transaction (the “GM Proposal”). On the same day, the Board of Directors formed a special committee of independent directors, consisting of Mr. Mark Chen, Ms. Jennifer Weng and Dr. Ken Lu, who were not affiliated with Golden Meditech, to evaluate the GM Proposal and certain other potential transactions involving the Company. The special committee subsequently appointed Houlihan Lokey (China) Limited as its independent financial advisor, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP as its United States legal counsel and Maples & Calder as its Cayman Islands legal counsel to assist in evaluating GM Proposal and the Company’s other alternatives. On April 13, 2017, the Board of Directors of the Company adopted the recommendation of the special committee to terminate any further evaluation and negotiation regarding the GM Proposal. In making its recommendation, the special committee took into account various factors including but not limited to the pending transaction between GM Stem Cells and Nanjing Ying Peng in relation to GM Stem Cells’s equity interest in the Company, Nanjing Ying Peng’s future plans regarding the Company after the acquisition is completed and the overall viability of the proposal. The special committee’s recommendation was unanimous and the adoption of its recommendation by the full Board of Directors of the Company was unanimous, with the then Chairman Mr. Yuen Kam (our former chairman and director before January 31, 2018) abstaining.

​

55

Table of Contents

On December 30, 2016, GM Stem Cells and Nanjing Ying Peng entered into a conditional sale and purchase agreement (the “GM Sale Agreement”), pursuant to which GM Stem Cells agreed to sell to Nanjing Ying Peng approximately 65% equity interest of the Company on a fully diluted basis (the “GM Sale Shares”) for RMB5.764 billion in cash. GM Stem Cells and Nanjing Ying Peng also entered into a profit compensation agreement, pursuant to which GM Stem Cells agreed to provide certain undertakings to Nanjing Ying Peng with respect to the financial performance of the Company for each of the calendar years ended December 31, 2016, 2017 and 2018. The transaction as contemplated under the GM Sale Agreement was consummated on January 31, 2018 and GM Stem Cells ceased to own any shares of the Company. Nanjing Ying Peng, via its subsidiary, became a major shareholder of the Company. Following the entry of Nanjing Ying Peng, its authorized representative of the executive partner, Mr. Ping Xu, was appointed as a director of the Board of Directors of the Company. Simultaneously, Mr. Yuen Kam resigned from his positions as chairman and director of the Board of Directors and as chairman and member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Company, effective as of January 31, 2018. Following Mr. Kam’s resignation, Ms. Ting Zheng, chief executive officer of the Company, was appointed as the chairperson of the Board of Directors and the chairperson of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Mr. Mark D. Chen, one of the Company’s existing independent non-executive directors, also joined as a new member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.

​

On March 16, 2018, the shareholders approved the change of the Company name from “China Cord Blood Corporation” to “Global Cord Blood Corporation” through an extraordinary general meeting to better reflect the future development direction and business strategy of the Company. The Company’s ordinary shares commenced trading under the new name on the NYSE with effect from March 22, 2018.

On June 4, 2019, our Board of Directors received a non-binding proposal letter from Cordlife Singapore, pursuant to which Cordlife Singapore proposed to combine the businesses of Cordlife Singapore and the Company, by way of a statutory merger. Cordlife Singapore would issue approximately 2.5 billion ordinary shares at an issue price of SGD0.5 per ordinary share in exchange for all of the outstanding ordinary shares of the Company at US$7.5 per ordinary share (the “CGL Proposal”). On June 5, 2019, a special committee of independent directors, consisting of Mr. Mark Chen, Ms. Jennifer Weng and Dr. Ken Lu, who were not affiliated with Cordlife Singapore, was formed to evaluate the CGL Proposal. In November 2019, Mr. Jack Chow replaced Ms. Weng as a member of the special committee. In February 2020, Mr. Jacky Cheng joined the special committee as a member. In February 2021, our Board of Directors and the Board of Cordlife Singapore mutually agreed to discontinue any further discussions regarding the CGL Proposal.

On or about June 26, 2019, an originating summons was filed in the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands, Financial Services Division naming the Company and certain directors thereof as defendants in connection with the CGL Proposal. The proceedings, captioned Jayhawk Capital Management, L.L.C., JHMS Fund, LLC and Kent C. McCarthy v. Global Cord Blood Corporation, Mark D. Chen, Jennifer Weng and Ken Lu, FSD Cause No. 122 of 2019 (RMJ), challenged the CGL Proposal and alleged, among other things, that the consideration to be paid in such proposal was inadequate, as was the process by which the proposal was being evaluated due to the alleged lack of independence of certain members of the special committee to evaluate the CGL Proposal. The proceedings sought, among other relief, to enjoin the defendants from consummating the CGL Proposal and to direct the defendants to revoke the appointment of such members of the special committee. The Company reviewed the allegations contained in the summons and believed they were without merit. The Company defended the litigation vigorously and filed an application to strike out the proceedings on January 20, 2021. In May 2021, the proceedings were dismissed by the Cayman Islands Grand Court with costs ordered in favor of the Company and the other defendant directors.

As of March 31, 2022, CCBS held an indirect 100.0% interest in each of Jiachenhong and Nuoya, and an indirect 90.0% interest in Lukou. In addition, CCBS held an indirect 10.0% (approximately) equity interest in Cordlife Singapore, a provider of cord blood banking services with operations in Singapore, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines (as well as brand presence in Bangladesh, Brunei, Macau, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam).

Our principal executive offices are located at 48^th Floor, Bank of China Tower, 1 Garden Road, Central, Hong Kong S.A.R., and our telephone number at that location is +852 3605 8180. Our registered office in the Cayman Islands is located at the offices of Conyers Trust Company (Cayman) Limited, Cricket Square, Hutchins Drive, P.O. Box 2681, Grand Cayman KY1-1111, Cayman Islands. Our main website is http://www.globalcordbloodcorporation.com. The SEC maintains an Internet site (http://www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding us that file electronically with the SEC.

​

56

Table of Contents

See “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—B. Liquidity and Capital Resources” for a discussion of our capital expenditures.

​

Recent Developments

​

On March 2, 2021, our Board of Directors received an unsolicited non-binding proposal letter from Alternate Ocean (the “Alternate Ocean Proposal”). Pursuant to the Alternate Ocean Proposal, acting on behalf of certain funds and/or entities that Alternate Ocean manages and/or advises, Alternate Ocean proposed to acquire all of the outstanding ordinary shares of the Company for US$5.00 per ordinary share in cash, subject to certain conditions. Our Board of Directors has formed a special committee of independent directors who are not affiliated with Alternate Ocean to evaluate such proposal. The special committee consists of Mr. Mark D. Chen, Dr. Ken Lu, Mr. Jack Chow and Mr. Jacky Cheng, each of whom currently serves as an independent director on the Board, with Mr. Mark D. Chen serving as the chair of the special committee. In December 2021, our Board of Directors decided to reject the Alternate Ocean Proposal as the special committee and our Board of Directors believed such proposal in its original form fails to properly reflect the value of the Company and maximize shareholder value.

​

On April 29, 2022, GCBC entered into a series of stock purchase agreements, dated April 29, 2022 (collectively the “SPAs”) with the holders of approximately 95% of the outstanding shares of common stock of Cellenkos. The SPAs provide for the acquisition by the Company, directly and indirectly, of the equity securities of Cellenkos held by such holders, subject to the satisfaction or waiver of customary closing conditions set forth in the SPAs (including that neither Dr. Simrit Parmar nor Jackie Leong would have repudiated his or her employment agreement with the Company and/or Cellenkos), in exchange for an aggregate of approximately 65.7 million ordinary shares of the Company, and certain units of Cellenkos Holdings L.P. which may be redeemed upon the unit holders’ request with aggregate consideration of 36,112,267 ordinary shares of the Company on a fully diluted basis. On June 27, 2022, GCBC and the counterparties to each of the SPAs entered into an amendment thereto providing that the date by which the Cellenkos Acquisition shall have been consummated in order to avoid the terminability thereof by either of the parties shall be extended from June 28, 2022 to July 28, 2022.

​

Moreover, GCBC entered into a framework agreement dated April 29, 2022 (the “Framework Agreement”) with GM Precision Medicine (BVI) Limited (“GMPM BVI Company”). The consideration for the Equity Transfer and Assignment as defined in the Framework Agreement consists of approximately 12.4 million ordinary shares of the Company (the “Stage 1 Share Issue”) and US$664 million cash consideration (the “Stage 1 Payment”), each to be issued/paid to GMPM BVI Company and/or its designated person(s) in accordance with the Framework Agreement, with the purpose to provide the Company with the intellectual property (“Cellenkos Asia Rights”) and certain PRC laboratory assets that will be necessary to develop Cellenkos’ product candidates in the field of umbilical cord blood treatment for acute and chronic autoimmune diseases and inflammatory disorders in Asia.

​

The Stage 1 Payment and the Stage 1 Share Issue were completed on April 29, 2022 and May 4, 2022, respectively. As of the date of this report, GCBC acquired the Cellenkos Asia Rights and held an indirect 100% interest in Shanghai GM Life Bank Co., Ltd. and Shanghai GM Diagnosis Co., Ltd.

​

On May 6, 2022, the Company received the Petition filed by Blue Ocean in the Cayman Court. Among other things, the Petition seeks orders that: (i) the Company refrain from proceeding with the Cellenkos Acquisition; (ii) the Company amend and restate its Memorandum and Articles of Association; and (iii) the Company convene an extraordinary general meeting to propose the removal of its current Board of Directors and the appointment of alternative directors proposed by Blue Ocean. In the alternative, the Petition seeks an order for, among other things, the winding up of the Company. On May 16, 2022, the Litigation Steering Committee was formed to oppose the Petition and to bring such other actions to satisfactorily resolve the matter.

​

As of the date of this report, both the 12 May Injunction and the EGM Injunction still apply.

​

On June 8, 2022, Blue Ocean issued the Writ in the Cayman Court against the Company, our current directors, and other parties in relation to the Cellenkos Acquisition. Among other things, Blue Ocean seeks: (i) a declaration that the Cellenkos Acquisition is void; (ii) equitable compensation against various defendants; (iii) rectification of the Company’s register of members; and (iv) declarations that certain defendants hold shares/ funds received as trustee of the Company on constructive trust.

​

On May 20, 2022, Blue Ocean and Blue Ocean Creation Investment Hong Kong Limited filed the BVI Claim against GM Stem Cells in the BVI Court.

57

Table of Contents

For further details, see “Item 3. Key Information—D. Risk Factors—Risks to Our Shareholders— Our largest shareholder filed a winding up petition with the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands, which, among other things, seeks to prevent our acquisition of Cellenkos, remove our current Board of Directors and effect related governance changes, a Writ of Summons which, among other things, seeks to unwind the Cellenkos Acquisition, and a claim against GM Stem Cells in the British Virgin Islands which, among other things, seeks a declaration that a share charge over its shares in the Company is invalid.”

​

​

Overview

​

We are the leading provider of cord blood banking services in China. We provide cord blood processing and storage services for expectant parents interested in capturing the opportunities made available by evolving medical treatments and technologies such as cord blood transplants. We also preserve cord blood units donated by the public, provide matching services on such donated units and deliver matching units to patients in need of transplants. Our Beijing-based subsidiary, Jiachenhong, was the operator of the first licensed cord blood bank in China. Currently, the PRC government only grants one cord blood banking license per province or municipality. According to the Notice on Extension of Time Limit on Planning and Establishment of the Cord Blood Bank published by the NHFPC in December 2015, the NHFPC extended the planning and establishment timetable for cord blood banking and would not grant any new licenses before 2020 in addition to the seven existing cord blood banking licenses. On November 29, 2019, the NHC announced the New Policy. Under the New Policy, the LHCs are allowed to approve cord blood banking licenses in 18 pilot FTZs in China. The New Policy does not specify the implementation details, such as qualifications for applicants, license approval procedures or licensed region coverage, but it implies that the regulatory bodies could expand the current seven licensed regions for cord blood banking to up to 19 regions, including Beijing. Detailed rules on the implementation of the New Policy are yet to be provided by relevant government agencies. As of September 24, 2020, the FTZs in China had been increased from 18 FTZs to 21 FTZs, with three new FTZs including Beijing, Hunan and Anhui. Thus, the New Policy implies that the regulatory bodies could expand the current seven licensed regions for cord blood banking to up to 21 regions. On December 30, 2020, the NHC announced a Notice Regarding the Matters Related to Issuance of Cord Blood Banking License, which specified that no cord blood banking license applications shall be accepted in 2021.

​

On July 2, 2021, the NHC announced the 2021 Policy to specify the nationwide “Separating Permits from Business Licenses” reform measures in the medical field, including allowing online application for cord blood bank establishment and practice approval, and shortening the approval time limit. Meanwhile, the 2021 policy provides that the application procedure shall still be implemented in accordance with the Measures for Administration of Blood Stations; that is, the NHC was responsible for the approval of the establishment of cord blood banks and the LHCs were responsible for the practice approval. However, as of the date of this report, the NHC has not issued any notice on whether to accept the cord blood banking license applications nationwide.

​

Our operations currently benefit from multiple exclusive cord blood banking licenses issued in China, including our licenses for Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang. We also have a 24.0% equity interest in Qilu (our controlling shareholder owns the remaining 76.0% equity interest), the operator of the exclusive licensed cord blood bank in Shandong province.

​

Our cord blood banking network is the largest in China. The aggregate number of births in our operating regions, namely Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang, was estimated to be over 1.8 million in 2020, accounting for approximately 49% of the total newborn population in the seven provinces and municipalities that have been authorized or issued cord blood banking licenses to date, according to the China Statistical Yearbook 2021. We believe our leading market position and track record of growing our subscriber base positions us well to continue to expand our presence in China. According to the China Statistical Yearbook 2021, the nation had a newborn population of over 12.0 million in 2020; and according to the CIA World Factbook, China is estimated to have the second largest newborn population in the world in 2022. Cord blood banking as a precautionary healthcare measure is still a relatively new concept in China, with penetration rates that we estimate to be approximately 1.2% of China’s overall newborn population in 2020. The estimated penetration rate in our operating regions was approximately 4%, 4% and 4% for the fiscal years ended March 31, 2019, 2020 and 2021 (based on the number of new subscriber sign-ups for the fiscal years ended March 31, 2019, 2020 and 2021 divided by the number of newborns of calendar years ended December 31, 2018, 2019 and 2020 according to the China Statistical Yearbook). We expect that the demand for cord blood banking services will continue to grow due to factors such as rising disposable income in the PRC and increasing public awareness of the benefits of cord blood and hematopoietic stem cell related therapies.

​

58

Table of Contents

Furthermore, we are also a significant shareholder with a 10.0% (approximately) equity interest (as of March 31, 2022) in Cordlife Singapore, which is listed on the Singapore Exchange and operates cord blood banking businesses in Singapore, Hong Kong, Indonesia, India, Malaysia and the Philippines (as well as brand presence in Bangladesh, Brunei, Macau, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam). Such strategic positioning provides us with the exposure and insight into attractive developing markets such as India, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines, and strategic presence in relatively mature markets such as Singapore and Hong Kong respectively.

​

We have developed a highly effective sales and marketing platform that has enabled us to consistently grow our cord blood subscriber base in the markets we serve. Our 766-person sales team has direct access to expectant parents through collaboration with 434 hospitals in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang. We also cooperate with some local government family planning agencies and medical institutions and utilize a variety of marketing programs, including media advertising, seminars and pre-natal classes, to further educate expectant parents on the benefits of cord blood banking. Our accumulated subscriber base has grown from 23,322 in March 2007 to 970,375 in March 2022.

​

We generate substantially all of our revenues from subscription fees. The standard payment arrangement for our services consists of processing fees payable at the time of subscription and storage fees payable by our subscribers on an annual basis for as long as the contracts remain effective, which typically have an initial contract period of 18 years. Effective from April 1, 2021, we provide further storage service with a contact period for 10 or 20 years to subscribers who completed the first 18-year contract period. The contracts can be terminated early by the parents at each anniversary of the contract. This payment structure provides us with a steady stream of recurring revenue and cash flow. For the year ended March 31, 2022, storage fee revenues represented 43.3% of our total revenues.

​

We recorded revenues and net income of RMB1,243.3 million (US$196.1 million) and RMB509.5 million (US$80.4 million), respectively, during our fiscal year ended March 31, 2022.

​

Our Strengths

​

We are the leading provider of cord blood banking services in China. We believe the following strengths differentiate us from our competitors and enable us to maintain our leadership position:

​

Leading Market Presence. We are the first and largest cord blood banking operator in China with an exclusive presence in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang, and an investment in Shandong. As of the date of this report, only seven licenses have been authorized in China, and we are the only operator with multiple licensed cord blood banks in China. Amongst cord blood banking operators in China, we have the longest history of delivering cord blood banking services and have established strong brand recognition in delivering quality cord blood banking services, which has allowed us to grow our subscriber base from 23,322 in March 2007 to 970,375 in March 2022. According to the Notice on Extension of Time Limit on Planning and Establishment of the Cord Blood Bank published by the NHFPC in December 2015, the NHFPC extended the planning and establishment timetable for cord blood banking and would not grant any new licenses before 2020 in addition to the seven existing cord blood banking licenses. On November 29, 2019, the NHC announced the New Policy. Under the New Policy, the LHCs are allowed to approve cord blood banking licenses in 18 pilot FTZs in China. The New Policy does not specify the implementation details, such as qualifications for applicants, license approval procedures or licensed region coverage, but it implies that the regulatory bodies could expand the current seven licensed regions for cord blood banking to up to 19 regions, including Beijing. Detailed rules on the implementation of the New Policy are yet to be provided by relevant government agencies. As of September 24, 2020, the FTZs in China had been increased from 18 FTZs to 21 FTZs, with three new FTZs including Beijing, Hunan and Anhui. Thus, the New Policy implies that the regulatory bodies could expand the current seven licensed regions for cord blood banking to up to 21 regions. On December 30, 2020, the NHC announced a Notice Regarding the Matters Related to Issuance of Cord Blood Banking License, which specified that no cord blood banking license applications shall be accepted in 2021.

​

On July 2, 2021, the NHC announced the 2021 Policy to specify the nationwide “Separating Permits from Business Licenses” reform measures in the medical field, including allowing online application for cord blood bank establishment and practice approval, and shortening the approval time limit. Meanwhile, the 2021 policy provides that the application procedure shall still be implemented in accordance with the Measures for Administration of Blood Stations; that is, the NHC was responsible for the approval of the establishment of cord blood banks and the LHCs were responsible for the practice approval. However, as of the date of this report, the NHC has not issued any notice on whether to accept the cord blood banking license applications nationwide.

59

Table of Contents

As the licensing process requires applicants to demonstrate their ability to preserve cord blood for use in stem cell transplants, we believe our familiarity with the regulatory framework, combined with our established track record and reputable brand, gives us a competitive advantage comparing to other PRC operators. Our leadership and track record also make us an attractive strategic partner for license holders and applicants and position us well to continue to grow our leading position.

​

Extensive Hospital Network. We provide our services through collaboration with 434 hospitals in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang. Our extensive hospital network provides us with a platform for performing cord blood collection services and allows our 766-person sales force to have direct access to expectant parents. Our focus on building an extensive hospital network by collaborating with hospitals has also contributed to our successful growth. We expect the number of our collaborating hospitals to increase over time, which will help us further penetrate the markets we currently serve.

​

Well-Developed and Effective Marketing Program. Cord blood banking as a precautionary healthcare measure is a relatively new concept in China. To increase penetration in our existing markets, we have developed a comprehensive marketing program that aims to increase cord blood banking penetration in the markets we operate by educating expectant parents on the benefits of cord blood, including the following:

​

​

​

​

Advanced Infrastructure in Place to Meet Market Demand. We maintain an advanced infrastructure for the transportation, testing, processing and storage of cord blood and have devoted considerable management and financial resources in upgrading and improving our facilities and supporting infrastructure. Our facilities in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang are equipped with state-of-the-art laboratories, storage cylinders, automated monitoring systems and advanced equipment to handle the testing, processing and storage of cord blood. In addition, the cord blood banks operated by our Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang subsidiaries have been granted the AABB Accreditation with regard to cord blood processing and storage services. With our existing infrastructure in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang, we believe we have the ability to meet increasing market demand.

​

Capable and Experienced Management Team. Our core management team consists of experienced managers and preeminent medical experts, all of whom have in-depth knowledge and significant experience in one or more emerging healthcare sectors in China. Ms. Ting Zheng, our chairperson and chief executive officer, has over fifteen years of experience in the field of corporate strategy in China’s healthcare industry. Mr. Albert Chen, our chief financial officer, is a CFA charterholder and has over fifteen years of experience in the pharmaceutical and healthcare industries. Ms. Rui Arashiyama, our chief executive officer in the Guangdong and Zhejiang divisions, has over fifteen years of sales and marketing experiences in China and in-depth knowledge about China’s consumer market and regulatory environment. Ms. Xin Xu, our chief technology officer, has over twenty-five years of experience in cryobiology research and lectured cryobiology at Beijing Medical University. We believe our management’s complementary backgrounds, extensive experience and in-depth knowledge of China’s healthcare sector provide a strong foundation for our future growth.

​

Our Strategies

​

The cord blood banking industry in China is a relatively young industry with attractive opportunities due to China’s large population and continuous economic growth. Our goal is to grow our business and build a reputable, committed, caring and socially responsible healthcare company through the following strategies:

​

60

Table of Contents

Further Penetrate Existing Markets. We plan to further increase cord blood banking penetration in our existing markets by broadening our hospital network, expanding our sales and marketing team, and further promoting public understanding of the benefits of cord blood. Over the years, we have successfully expanded our network of collaboration with hospitals and aggregate subscriber base to 434 hospitals and 970,375 subscribers as of March 31, 2022. Our operational track record and in depth understanding of our markets allows us to further increase penetration and grow our existing markets.

​

Acquire the Right to Operate Additional Cord Blood Banks and Invest in Other Cord Blood Banks in China. We intend to acquire the right to operate additional cord blood banks and invest in other cord blood banks in China through investments or acquisitions of existing operators of licensed cord blood banks and potential license applicants. We successfully completed the acquisition of a 90% ownership stake in Nuoya, which operates the Guangdong Cord Blood Bank, in May 2007. We further increased our equity interest in Nuoya and it became our wholly owned subsidiary in November 2012. In May 2010, we acquired 19.9% equity interest in Qilu, which operates the Shandong Cord Blood Bank. We further increased our equity interest in Qilu to 24.0% in February 2013. During the year ended March 31, 2011, we established a 90% owned subsidiary, Lukou, which exclusively operates the licensed cord blood bank in Zhejiang province. We believe that our experience in license acquisition and our track record of growing our subscriber base and hospital network positions us to be the preferred strategic partner for license holders and potential applicants.

​

Expand Overseas Presence. We believe there are significant opportunities to expand our cord blood banking services into other attractive markets. We own approximately 10.0% equity interest in Cordlife Singapore (as of March 31, 2022) which is listed on the Singapore Exchange. Cordlife Singapore is the leading cord blood banking operators in Asia, with operations in Singapore, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines (as well as brand presence in Bangladesh, Brunei, Macau, Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam), countries or regions with approximately 54,000, 59,000, 23.4 million, 4.2 million, 0.5 million and 2.6 million estimated annual births in 2022, respectively, according to the CIA World Factbook. We plan to leverage and further enhance our collaboration with Cordlife Singapore, as Cordlife Singapore gives us the exposure and knowledge about the Southeast Asia market. Additionally, we will continue to identify overseas opportunities and gradually expand our presence internationally. We believe our extensive expertise and track record will allow us to successfully become a multi regions operator.

​

Expand Service Portfolio. Over the years, we had provided cord blood banking services to numerous parents in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang. As of March 31, 2022, our accumulated subscriber base has reached 970,375 subscribers. Our subscriber base together with our extensive hospital network positioned us well and gave us a competitive advantage to commercialize other healthcare services in our respective markets. We intend to seek expansion and diversification opportunities by bringing in additional healthcare and therapeutic related services in order to better serve our existing and future subscribers’ medical needs. We intend to diversify our revenue stream by providing additional healthcare and therapeutic related services, which will potentially improve our revenue per subscriber.

​

Our Revenue Model

​

The payment for our services consists of processing fees payable at the time of subscription or in certain circumstances by installments, depending on the payment option elected by subscribers, and storage fees payable by our subscribers by a lump sum payment at the time of subscription or on an annual basis for as long as the contracts remain effective. For further information of our various payment options, please refer to “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—A. Operating Results—Factors Affecting Our Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Payment Methods for Subscribers.” Our payment structure enables us to enjoy a steady stream of long-term cash inflow. We expect such long-term cash inflow to continue to increase as our subscriber base continues to grow. In addition, we generate a small portion of revenue from the fees we charge in providing matching units we collect from public donors to the hospitals for patients who are in need of transplants.

​

Our cost of revenues consists of fixed costs and variable costs. Fixed costs primarily relate to depreciation of our storage facilities, technical consulting fee for advisory services in relation to our operations and amortization of our operating rights in Guangdong and Zhejiang provinces. Variable costs primarily relate to labor and raw materials consumption. For the years ended March 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022, depreciation expenses, our most significant fixed cost, accounted for 15.3%, 16.0% and 15.6%, respectively, of our cost of revenues. For the years ended March 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022, technical consulting fee accounted for 3.2%, 3.5% and 3.6%, respectively, of our cost of revenues, and amortization expenses accounted for 2.4%, 2.6% and 2.5%, respectively, of our cost of revenues.

​

61

Table of Contents

Our Cord Blood Banking Services

​

Our cord blood banking operations primarily consist of our subscription services, which involve the preservation of cord blood for the new born as a precautionary healthcare measure for the benefit of the children and other family members. Our subscription services accounted for 99.2%, 98.9% and 99.0% of our revenues for the years ended March 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022, respectively.

​

We have developed hospital networks by entering into collaborative agreements with hospitals located in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang, where we operate licensed cord blood banks. Our collaborating hospitals collect the cord blood of the newborns of our subscribers and we reimburse them handling fees for the collection services performed.

​

Our subscribers are required to enter into a subscription contract with us prior to the birth of their children. The contract provides for the collection of cord blood from their newborns at one of our collaborating hospitals and preservation of the cord blood for an initial storage period of up to 18 years.

​

Prior to January 1, 2008, we offered our subscribers three payment options: (1) payment of a one-time processing fee of RMB5,000 and a storage fee of approximately RMB500 payable each year for a period up to 18 years; (2) payment of a one-time processing fee of RMB5,000 and an annual storage fee of approximately RMB400 in one lump sum; and (3) payment of a processing fee at an installment of RMB1,100 at the time of subscription and an annual installment of RMB300 payable each year at each anniversary of the subscription, in which case our subscribers pay an additional amount of RMB1,200 compared to payment options one and two, as well as payment of the storage fee of approximately RMB500 payable each year for a period up to 18 years. Between January 1, 2008 and January 31, 2009, we suspended payment option two to our subscribers while we continued to offer payment options one and three to our subscribers. Starting from February 1, 2009, subscribers can choose to make an upfront payment for 18 years of storage fees at an annual storage fee of approximately RMB500, together with the one-time processing fee of RMB5,000. On April 1, 2011, we increased such processing fee to RMB5,800.

​

Effective from April 1, 2011, subscribers in Beijing who choose payment option two will pay a one-time processing fee of RMB5,800 and an upfront payment for 18 years of storage fees (approximately RMB500 x 18). Effective from April 1, 2011, subscribers in Guangdong who choose payment option two will pay an upfront payment for 18 years of storage fees (approximately RMB500 x 18) and a one-time processing fee of RMB4,640.

​

Also, effective from April 1, 2011, subscribers in Beijing who choose payment option three will pay an initial payment of RMB1,250 at the signing of the contract and an annual payment of RMB350 each year starting from the second year until the end of the eighteenth year. Subscribers in Guangdong who choose payment option three between April 1, 2011 and June 30, 2011, will pay the processing fee by four annual installments. The first, second, third and fourth installment payments are RMB1,800, RMB1,700, RMB1,600 and RMB1,200 respectively. From July 1, 2011 onward, subscribers in Guangdong who choose to pay processing fee by installments (payment option three) will make an initial payment of RMB1,460, followed by four annual payments of RMB1,210 each. Subscribers in Beijing and Guangdong choosing this option will also need to pay the storage fee which is approximately RMB500 per annum for a period of 18 years.

​

Effective from April 1, 2013 in Guangdong and Zhejiang, and from May 1, 2013 in Beijing, the one-time processing fee and annual storage fee are increased to RMB6,800 and approximately RMB860, respectively. Subscribers who choose payment option two will pay a one-time processing fee of RMB6,800 and an upfront payment for 18 years of storage fees (approximately RMB602 x 18).

​

Effective from May 1, 2013, subscribers in Beijing who choose payment option three will pay a one-time processing fee of RMB6,800 in two equal installments, with one payment at the time of subscription and the other at the second year of the subscription. The storage fee will be paid commencing on the third year of subscription in subsequent four yearly installments of RMB3,380 each year.

​

Payment option three was not offered to subscribers in Guangdong from April 1, 2013 to June 30, 2013. Effective from July 1, 2013, subscribers in Guangdong who choose payment option three will pay an initial payment of RMB1,820 at the signing of the contract and an annual payment of RMB1,420 each year starting from the second year until the end of the fifth year. An annual storage fee of approximately RMB860 is payable for a period up to 18 years.

​

62

Table of Contents

Starting from January 1, 2014, the annual storage fee payable by subscribers in Beijing who elected payment option one or three prior to May 1, 2013 increased by RMB35 or to approximately RMB535.

​

Payment option three was not offered to subscribers in Zhejiang before August 1, 2018. Effective from August 1, 2018, subscribers in Zhejiang who choose payment option three will pay an initial payment of RMB1,900 at the signing of the contract and annual payment of RMB850 each year starting from second year until the end of the eighth year. An annual storage fee of approximately RMB860 is payable for a period up to 18 years.

​

Effective from April 1, 2019, the one-time processing fee is increased to RMB9,800 from RMB6,800 (in order to absorb rising costs associated with the Company’s technology and service advancements and to properly position the Company’s services among its peers in China) with annual storage fee remains approximately RMB860 payable each year for a period up to 18 years. Subscribers in Beijing who choose payment option two will pay a one-time processing fee of RMB9,800 and an upfront payment for 18 years of storage fees (approximately RMB602 x 18). Subscribers in Guangdong and Zhejiang who choose payment option two will pay a one-time processing fee of RMB9,800 and an upfront payment for 18 years of storage fees (approximately RMB436 x 18). Subscribers in Beijing who choose payment option three will pay a one-time processing fee of RMB9,800 in two equal installments, with one payment at the time of subscription and the other at the second year of the subscription. The storage fee will be paid commencing on the third year of subscription in subsequent four yearly installments of RMB3,440 each year. Subscribers in Guangdong and Zhejiang who choose payment option three will pay a processing fee of RMB9,800 in ten equal installments (annual payment of RMB980 from the first year to the tenth year), and an annual storage fee of approximately RMB860 for a period of up to 18 years. Starting from July 1, 2019, subscribers in Guangdong and Zhejiang who choose payment option three may also pay an initial payment of RMB5,800 at the signing of the contract, RMB3,000 in the second year and RMB1,000 at the third year, and an annual storage fee of approximately RMB860 for a period of up to 18 years.

​

Effective from April 1, 2021, we provide further storage service with a contract period for 10 or 20 years to subscribers who completed the first 18-year contract period. Subscribers in Beijing can choose to pay an upfront payment for 10-year storages fees (RMB860 x 10) or an upfront payment for 20-year storage fees (RMB860 x 20).

​

In response to changing market dynamics, we do offer some special promotion or discount to subscribers from time to time.

​

In addition, we offer recurring subscribers, medical practitioners, including doctors, nurses or other medical professionals, our services at a discount from time to time. See “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—A. Operating Results—Factors Affecting Our Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Average Revenue per Subscriber.” We offer one-stop-shop services for our subscribers. Following the signing of the subscription contract, we notify the collaborating hospital chosen by our subscriber so that the hospital can arrange for one of its certified medical practitioners to collect the cord blood of the newborns of our subscribers. The cord blood collected is then transported to our facilities for testing, processing and storage. We act as the custodian of the cord blood stored at our facilities during the term of the subscription contract.

​

Our remaining revenues are derived from matching services we provide and the matching cord blood unit we deliver to the hospitals for patients who are in need of transplants. These services accounted for 0.8%, 1.1% and 1.0% of our revenues for the years ended March 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022, respectively.

​

We accept and preserve cord blood units donated by the general public and have created a database containing information of the human leukocyte antigen profiles and characteristics of the donors on an anonymous basis. We require our donors to deliver their newborns at one of our collaborating hospitals. Another source of donations in the future may be the cord blood of the newborns of our former subscribers who cease subscription for our services at the end of the contract period and the cord blood units stored by our subscribers who fail to pay. We require our employees to fully inform all prospective subscribers of our policy of releasing cord blood units to our cord blood inventory in such circumstances, and our subscribers are required to give their consent to this policy when subscribing for our storage services. In the opinion of our PRC counsel, Commerce & Finance Law Offices, a consent of this nature is valid and enforceable under PRC law. Based on information available to us, treating cord blood units abandoned by former subscribers and releasing such units to cord blood bank inventory available to patients in need of transplants is a common practice followed by cord blood banking operators in China.

​

63

Table of Contents

We search, upon request, for possible matches among the donated cord blood units stored in our cord blood banks and provide one or more matching units to the hospitals for patients who are in need of transplant. We also entered into a memorandum of understanding regarding the collaboration with Cordlife Singapore in which Cordlife Singapore, on behalf of its patients who are in need of cord blood stem cell therapy, can facilitate the process by providing relevant information to us, and we will perform searches for possible matching units among our donated cord blood samples in the PRC. For patients who reside in the PRC, we may seek Cordlife Singapore’s assistance or contacts to source possible cord blood unit matches in the relevant public cord blood registries in the regions such as Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia, India, Indonesia and the Philippines. Further, Jiachenhong is affiliated with AsiaCORD, an international organization for cord blood banking operators in Asia and also works with other cord blood banks to promote the usage of donated cord blood units. Up to the date of this report, there has been no shipment of cord blood units derived from this collaboration.

​

We charge a fee that reflects the costs of our matching services provided and the matching units delivered, as well as for the units used in supplementary therapies. We generally charge a fee of RMB15,000 for providing one matching unit in a cord blood transplant or providing one cord blood unit for supplementary therapies. For the years ended March 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022, the number of successful matches found for cord blood transplants among the cord blood units donated by the public and stored at our facilities were 461, 584 and 563, respectively. In addition, during the years ended March 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022, there were 217, 235 and 173 donated units, respectively, used in supplementary therapies and/or supply to research institutions.

​

The following tables set forth, for the dates and periods indicated, certain information relating to our cord blood banking services in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang:

​

​

​

​

64

Table of Contents

​

​

The tables below indicate the number of donated units matched during each of the last three fiscal years and the accumulated number of matches using donated units as of the end of each such fiscal year:

​

​

​

Preservation of Cord Blood

​

Preservation of cord blood consists of the following major steps:

​

​

​

​

​

65

Table of Contents

​

Sales and Marketing

​

As of March 31, 2022, our total sales force (including after sales support) consists of 766 employees. Their compensation consists of base salary and performance-based bonus assessed on a monthly and quarterly basis. Newly hired sales staffs are required to successfully complete an intensive orientation training lasting for more than two months before approaching target subscribers. They are required to attend continuous on-the-job training and pass periodic performance evaluation.

​

Our hospital networks offer us the platforms where a significant portion of our sales and marketing activities are undertaken. We have established collaborative relationships with 434 hospitals in Beijing, Guangdong and Zhejiang as of March 31, 2022.

​

A significant portion of our sales and marketing initiatives are targeted at educating expectant parents on the benefits of cord blood banking services. Our sales and marketing force gives thought to the input and comments they receive from prospective subscribers in promoting our services. Our sales and marketing activities consist primarily of the following:

​

​

​

​

Raw Material Supplies

​

We require collection kits, liquid nitrogen and test reagents for our operations. Materials and supplies used in our cord blood banking business are mainly from the United States and China. We periodically evaluate our terms with our existing raw material suppliers to determine whether we should seek potential suppliers with more favorable commercial terms. However, certain materials or supplies may only be sourced from a few suppliers in the United States and China. To date, we have not encountered any material shortage that has a material adverse effect on our business.

​

66

Table of Contents

To the extent possible, it is our policy to maintain more than one vendor for major raw materials and consumables supplies in order to diversify our supply source. A significant portion of our raw materials and consumables, however, have been sourced from a few major suppliers. The following are purchases from suppliers that individually contributed 10% or more of our gross purchases for the periods indicated:

​