Since the Vanke incident, why did the developer not dare to connect directly with the owner?

Vanke Real Estate has always been at the forefront of China's real estate sector, but it has been in a lot of trouble lately.

On July 14, several owners of Vanke Sky City broke into the underground parking garage of the community, why, I asked to know that some owners found that the underground parking garage had flowing water, and there were cracks in the load-bearing wall, but today there are maintenance personnel to carry out construction and not let the owners enter, and the developer has not carried out direct docking work with the owners so far. <>

I think that the developer did not carry out direct docking work with the owner, a big reason is to avoid contradictions, to avoid unnecessary contradictions and quarrels between the developer and the owner as soon as they meet, so at night Vanke's maintenance personnel secretly went in to repair, this is only from the developer's point of view, if the developer stands on the owner's side to consider the problem, such a situation will not happen, after such a problem occurs, it is necessary to communicate with the owner as soon as possible, explain the reasons for the wall fracture and garage soaking, It not only reflects the responsibility of the developer, but also gives the owner an explanation. <>

And after the incident, the owner came to a collective check-out, because the load-bearing wall is to ensure the safety of the entire building, once broken, the consequences are unimaginable, while the enterprise is bigger, do not forget the word integrity, because once there is an accident, it is the lives of many people to accompany the funeral, so the best solution is that the developer thoroughly inspects the building, explains the reason to the owner, if it is really the reason for the load-bearing wall, it is necessary to move the owners of the entire building out.

The main reason for Vanke's failure to directly connect with the owner after the accident is incorrect, and the main reason is to evade responsibility, believing that by secretly repairing the damaged part in the middle of the night, it can avoid the owner's accountability and social accountability. Part of the reason is that Vanke is its own boss and does not need to come forward to explain, Vanke headquarters will do everything well, but it turns out that this is not right.

Why talk to the owner?

Because when Vanke held a general meeting of owners, the owners' rights protection was successful. Vanke, on the other hand, is afraid of compromise. But Vanke is not afraid of him, but just goes down the ** behind his back.

Because Vanke was afraid that the owners would directly trouble them, they did not dare to connect with them directly.

Because the owner will be very angry when such a thing happens, so the resentment against the developer is very great.

Because if the developer is directly connected with the owner, then it will definitely be opposed by the owner and want to move out.

As of the publication of this article, more than 140,000 "owners" have signed it, becoming a unique scene in the "Battle of Wanbao".

The "Statement of Joint Support for Vanke by Vanke Owners across the Country" mentions that as Vanke owners, we should not have the right to intervene in the tearing up between Vanke's shareholders and management, but we hope that our houses and communities can continue to enjoy Vanke's refined services and careful care for the owners. If Vanke is no longer the Vanke that was market-oriented before, it is no longer Vanke in the bureaucratic system; is no longer the Vanke that advocates corporate citizenship and is transparent and transparent; It is no longer the customer-oriented, reverent of the land and respectful of history; It is no longer Vanke, where the owner is supreme and pursues customer satisfaction; It is no longer Vanke that adheres to humanistic care and conforms to goodness; It is no longer a Vanke ...... that adheres to green ecology and social responsibilityThen they want to teach Vanke.

Who threw out this "statement of joint support for Vanke by Vanke owners across the country", and it is not clear whether it was concocted by a certain or certain owners, or by the management of Vanke themselves? I can't draw conclusions at this time. One thing is certain, so many people support it, whether it is the real owner or not, at least it shows that these people are worried about the impact of Wang Shi's expulsion and the possible reorganization of Vanke's management, and at the same time reflect the complex interests of the "Wanbao dispute".

The owner has no right to intervene in the dispute over Vanke's equity or the struggle between the controller and the management, but from the owner's point of view, such concerns are not unreasonable, and the appeal for their own interests is understandable. Because Vanke's power change will affect their vital interests, they do not completely put themselves out of the matter, which is a normal right demand, and this kind of demand may affect the "Wanbao dispute", which cannot but attract the attention of both sides of the competition and plan their own strategies.

Tencent Maker Space unites forces from all walks of life, integrates Tencent's internal resources, and relies on entrepreneurship boosters such as the Double Hundred Plan, the Maker Competition, the Evergreen Teng Entrepreneurship Camp, and the Entrepreneurship Base to create a new platform for all-factor incubation and acceleration of mass innovation and help entrepreneurs realize their entrepreneurial dreams.