Connect with us

Technology

Youxin Technology Ltd Reports Financial Results for Fiscal Year 2024

Published

on

GUANGZHOU, China, Jan. 30, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — Youxin Technology Ltd (Nasdaq: YAAS) (the “Company” or “Youxin Technology”), a software as a service (“SaaS”) and platform as a service (“PaaS”) provider committed to helping retail enterprises digitally transform their businesses, today announced its financial results for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2024.

Mr. Shaozhang Lin, Chief Executive Officer of Youxin Technology Ltd, commented, “The past year underscores our diligent strategic adjustments and significant efforts to enhance operational efficiency amid macroeconomic headwinds and challenges in China. We successfully improved our gross margins by 5% to 66% overall in fiscal year 2024 from 61% in fiscal year 2023, despite a decline in revenue due to our strategic shift from developing the customized CRM systems toward developing and marketing our third-generation PaaS platform. As PaaS products generally feature more functionalities in contrast to the more hands-on personnel efforts required for customized CRM development services, we managed to reduce operating expenses and increase efficiency. This improvement reflects better cost control, reduced focus on less profitable service lines, and a pivot toward an upgraded portfolio of solutions. Overall, we reduced our net loss by 45.3%, from $2.34 million in fiscal year 2023 to $1.28 million in fiscal year 2024, while maintaining adequate cash reserves to support product development and strategic execution. We remain optimistic about the growth potential and profitability outlook of our third-generation PaaS platform, which is poised for significant enhancements through AI integration in 2025.”

Mr. Lin continued, “Looking ahead, we are confident that our strategic shift, supported by substantial investment, positions us for a turnaround and long-term growth. Our prudent planning, disciplined management, and strict cost controls will further enhance our operational efficiency and financial stability, ultimately delivering long-term value for the Company and our shareholders.”

Fiscal Year 2024 Financial Overview

Revenue was $521,241 in fiscal year 2024, compared to $895,978 in fiscal year 2023.Gross profit was $341,593 in fiscal year 2024, compared to $543,302 in fiscal year 2023.Gross margin was 66% in fiscal year 2024, an increase from 61% in fiscal year 2023.Net loss was $1.3 million in fiscal year 2024, compared to $2.3 million in fiscal year 2023.

Fiscal Year 2024 Financial Results

Revenues

Total revenues were $521,241 in fiscal year 2024, or a decrease of 42% from $895,978 in fiscal year 2023. The decrease was mainly because the Company gradually reduced operating the customized CRM system development services.

For the years ended September 30,

2024

2023

($)

Revenue

Cost of
Revenue

Gross
Margin

Revenue

Cost of
Revenue

Gross
Margin

Professional
services

275,314

158,880

42

%

548,822

318,439

42

%

Payment channel
services

206,526

–

100

%

291,643

–

100

%

Others

39,401

20,768

47

%

55,513

34,237

38

%

Total

521,241

179,648

66

%

895,978

352,676

61

%

 

Revenue from professional services was $275,314 in fiscal year 2024, or a decrease of 50% from $548,822 in fiscal year 2023.

The Company did not generate revenue from customized CRM system development services in fiscal year 2024. Revenue from customized CRM system development services was $134,768 in fiscal year 2023. The decrease was mainly due to the Company gradually reducing operating Customized CRM system development service.Revenue from the additional function development services was $42,758 in fiscal year 2024, or a decrease of 73% from $155,904 in fiscal year 2023. The decrease was mainly due to the less new needs of the function development from the existing clients for fiscal year 2024.Revenue from subscription services was $232,556 in fiscal year 2024, or a decrease of 10% from $258,150 in fiscal year 2023. The decrease was mainly due to the decreasing customized CRM system development services from 2023, which led to the Company to provide less subscription service in the following periods.

Cost of Revenues

Cost of revenues was $179,648 in fiscal year 2024, a decrease of 49% from $352,676 in fiscal year 2023.

Gross Profit

Gross profit was $341,593 in fiscal year 2024, compared to $543,302 in fiscal year 2023.

Gross margin was 66% in fiscal year 2024, an increase from 61% in fiscal year 2023. 

Operating Expenses

Operating expenses were $1.7 million in fiscal year 2024, compared to $3.0 million in fiscal year 2023.

Selling expenses were $94,481 in fiscal year 2024, a decrease of 58% from $225,926 in fiscal year 2023. The decrease was mainly due to the decrease in headcount and salaries and welfare. The decrease of salaries and welfare by 59% was primarily due to a decrease in headcount and pay cuts for fiscal year 2024, compared to fiscal year 2023.General and administrative expenses were $496,006 in fiscal year 2024, a decrease of 16% from $589,372 in fiscal year 2023. The decrease was primarily due to a decrease in salaries and welfare of 46% compared to fiscal year 2023 as decrease in headcount and pay cuts.Research and development expenses were $1.1 million in fiscal year 2024, a decrease of 47% from $2.2 million in fiscal year 2023. The decrease was primarily attributed to the decrease in labor related costs including salary and welfare by 47% for fiscal year 2024 compared to fiscal year 2023. Payment made to Cloud Service and other related research and development costs decreased by 43% for fiscal year 2024, which was in line with the operating of business of reducing of CRM development services.

Other Income, Net

Total net other income was $113,367 in fiscal year 2024, compared to $81,360 in fiscal year 2023.

Net Loss

Net loss was $1.3 million in fiscal year 2024, compared to a net loss of $2.3 million in fiscal year 2023.

Basic and Diluted Loss per Share

Basic and diluted loss per share was $0.04 in fiscal year 2024, compared to $0.09 in fiscal year 2023.

Financial Condition

As of September 30, 2024, the Company had cash of $18,372, compared to $399,050 as of September 30, 2023.

Net cash used in operating activities was $728,066 in fiscal year 2024, compared to $2,310,183 in fiscal year 2023.

Net cash provided by investing activities was $360 in fiscal year 2024, compared to $815 in fiscal year 2023.

Net cash provided by financing activities was $431,390 in fiscal year 2024, compared to $484,878 in fiscal year 2023.

Recent Development

The Company’s Class A ordinary shares began trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market on December 20, 2024 under the ticker symbol “YAAS.” On December 23, 2024, the Company completed its initial public offering (the “Offering”) of 2,300,000 Class A ordinary shares at a public offering price of US$4.50 per Class A ordinary share. The Company received aggregate gross proceeds of US$10.35 million from the Offering, before deducting underwriting discounts and other related expenses payable by the Company.

About Youxin Technology Ltd

Youxin Technology Ltd is a SaaS and PaaS provider committed to helping retail enterprises digitally transform their businesses using its cloud-based SaaS product and PaaS platform to develop, use and control business applications without the need to purchase complex IT infrastructure. Youxin Technology provides a customized, comprehensive, fast-deployment omnichannel digital solutions that unify all aspects of commerce with store innovations, distributed inventory management, cross-channel data integration, and a rich set of ecommerce capabilities that encompass mobile applications, social media, and web-based applications. The Company’s products allow mid-tier brand retailers to use offline direct distribution to connect the management team, distributors, salespersons, stores, and end customers across systems, apps, and devices. This provides retailers with a comprehensive suite of tools to instantly address issues using real-time sales data. For more information, please visit the Company’s website: https://ir.youxin.cloud.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

The foregoing material may contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, each as amended. Forward-looking statements include all statements that do not relate solely to historical or current facts, including without limitation the Company’s statements regarding the Company’s product development and business prospects, and can be identified by the use of words such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “project,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “believe,” “potential,” “should,” “continue” or the negative versions of those words or other comparable words. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future actions or performance. These forward-looking statements are based on information currently available to the Company and its current plans or expectations and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could significantly affect current plans. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or the underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may differ significantly from those anticipated, believed, estimated, expected, intended, or planned. Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, the Company cannot guarantee future results, performance, or achievements. Except as required by applicable law, including the security laws of the United States, the Company does not intend to update any of the forward-looking statements to conform these statements to actual results. 

For investor and media inquiries, please contact:

Youxin Technology Ltd.
Investor Relations Department
Email: ir@youxin.cloud

Ascent Investor Relations LLC
Tina Xiao
Phone: +1-646-932-7242
Email: investors@ascent-ir.com

 

 

YOUXIN TECHNOLOGY LTD

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2024 AND 2023

(Expressed in U.S. dollars, except for the number of shares)

September
30, 2024

September
30, 2023

ASSETS

CURRENT ASSETS

Cash

$

18,372

$

399,050

Restricted cash

24,649

–

Accounts receivable, net

176,607

233,481

Prepaid expenses and other current assets

122,676

140,696

Total current assets

342,304

773,227

NON-CURRENT ASSETS

Property and equipment, net

3,948

11,696

Deferred offering costs

478,108

117,215

Operating lease right-of-use assets

123,170

85,662

Other non-current assets

10,608

27,558

Total non-current assets

615,834

242,131

TOTAL ASSETS

$

958,138

$

1,015,358

LIABILITIES

CURRENT LIABILITIES

Short-term bank loan

$

323,472

$

311,129

Accounts payable

31,350

52,448

Contract liabilities

215,768

166,628

Amount due to related parties

1,067,119

274,836

Operating lease liabilities – current

42,277

85,082

Payroll payable

1,869,436

1,465,220

Accrued expenses and other current liabilities

40,299

21,192

Total current liabilities

3,589,721

2,376,535

Operating lease liabilities – non-current

82,674

363

Total non-current liabilities

82,674

363

TOTAL LIABILITIES

$

3,672,395

$

2,376,898

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

–

–

SHAREHOLDERS’ DEFICIT

Class A ordinary shares, ($0.0001 par value, 400,000,000 shares
authorized, 22,304,693 shares issued and outstanding as of September
30, 2024 and 2023, respectively)

2,230

2,230

Class B ordinary shares, ($0.0001 par value, 100,000,000 shares
authorized, 8,945,307 shares issued and outstanding as of September 30,
2024 and 2023, respectively)

895

895

Share subscription receivables

(3,125)

(3,125)

Additional paid-in capital

12,154,929

12,154,929

Accumulated deficit

(15,419,765)

(14,139,104)

Accumulated other comprehensive income

550,579

622,635

Total shareholders’ deficit

(2,714,257)

(1,361,540)

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ DEFICIT

$

958,138

$

1,015,358

 

 

YOUXIN TECHNOLOGY LTD

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE LOSS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2024, 2023 AND 2022

(Expressed in U.S. dollars, except for the number of shares)

2024

2023

2022

Years Ended September 30,

2024

2023

2022

REVENUES

$

521,241

$

895,978

$

1,277,066

COST OF REVENUES

(179,648)

(352,676)

(581,339)

GROSS PROFIT

341,593

543,302

695,727

OPERATING EXPENSES

Selling expenses

(94,481)

(225,926)

(934,744)

General and administrative expenses

(496,006)

(589,372)

(1,276,127)

Research and development expenses

(1,139,922)

(2,152,602)

(5,257,256)

Total operating expenses

(1,730,409)

(2,967,900)

(7,468,127)

NET LOSS FROM OPERATIONS

(1,388,816)

(2,424,598)

(6,772,400)

OTHER INCOME, NET

Other income

134,802

99,053

349,797

Other expense

(21,435)

(17,693)

(34,280)

Total other income, net

113,367

81,360

315,517

NET LOSS BEFORE TAXES

(1,275,449)

(2,343,238)

(6,456,883)

Income tax expense

(5,212)

–

–

NET LOSS

(1,280,661)

(2,343,238)

(6,456,883)

Accretion to redeemable preferred equity

–

(326,837)

(605,659)

Net loss attributable to ordinary shareholders

(1,280,661)

(2,670,075)

(7,062,542)

NET LOSS

(1,280,661)

(2,343,238)

(6,456,883)

Other comprehensive loss

Foreign currency translation (loss) income

(72,056)

(212,292)

895,745

TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE LOSS

$

(1,352,717)

$

(2,555,530)

$

(5,561,138)

Basic and diluted loss per share

$

(0.04)

$

(0.09)

$

(0.27)

*Weighted average number of ordinary shares
outstanding – basic and diluted

31,335,616

28,204,585

25,931,452

* Giving retroactive effect to the issuance of shares effected on April 21, 2023.

 

 

YOUXIN TECHNOLOGY LTD

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2024, 2023 AND 2022

(Expressed in U.S. dollars, except for the number of shares)

2024

2023

2022

Years Ended September 30

2024

2023

2022

Cash flows from operating activities

Net loss

$

(1,280,661)

$

(2,343,238)

$

(6,456,883)

Adjustments to reconcile net loss to cash used in
operating activities:

Loss (gain) on disposal of property and equipment

572

(357)

–

Amortization of right-of-use assets

101,888

204,715

481,504

Depreciation

6,816

12,293

14,717

Credit loss provision

4,664

–

–

Loss from termination of right-of-use assets

183

369

–

Changes in assets and liabilities

Accounts receivable

52,210

94,595

(16,181)

Prepaid expenses and other current assets

18,020

69,605

(87,583)

Deferred contract costs

–

30,192

(7,184)

Other non-current assets

16,950

28,368

24,131

Accounts payable

(21,098)

(14,007)

27,495

Operating lease liabilities

(100,073)

(207,881)

(507,521)

Payroll Payable

404,216

102,096

1,040,790

Accrued expenses and other current liabilities

19,107

(18,026)

(4,532)

Contract liabilities

49,140

(268,907)

217,491

Net cash used in operating activities

(728,066)

(2,310,183)

(5,273,756)

Cash flows from investing activities

Purchase of property and equipment

–

–

(1,618)

Proceeds from dispose of property and equipment

360

815

–

Repayment from a related party

–

–

768,380

Net cash provided by investing activities

360

815

766,762

Cash flows from financing activities

Loan from related parties

792,283

284,292

–

Proceeds from short-term bank loan

–

321,834

–

Payment of deferred offering cost

(360,893)

(121,248)

–

Net cash provided by financing activities

431,390

484,878

–

Effect of exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents
and restricted cash

(59,713)

5,194

(312,986)

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents and
restricted cash

(356,029)

(1,819,296)

(4,819,980)

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year

399,050

2,218,346

7,038,326

Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash at end
of year

$

43,021

$

399,050

$

2,218,346

Cash and cash equivalents

18,372

399,050

1,802,236

Restricted cash

24,649

–

416,110

Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash at end
of year

43,021

399,050

$

2,218,346

Cash paid for interest expenses

$

10,237

$

257

$

–

Cash paid for income tax

$

–

$

–

$

–

Supplemental disclosure of non-cash financing
activities:

Accretion to redeemable preferred equity

$

–

$

326,837

$

605,659

Exchange redeemable preferred equity with Class A
ordinary shares

$

–

$

12,154,929

$

–

Operating lease right-of-use assets obtained in exchange
for operating lease liabilities

$

140,844

$

–

$

–

 

 

View original content:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/youxin-technology-ltd-reports-financial-results-for-fiscal-year-2024-302364912.html

SOURCE Youxin Technology Ltd

Continue Reading

Technology

Truth-seeking: the Turning Point in Zunyi

Published

on

By

BEIJING, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — An interview from China.org.cn with Wang Xiaohui and David Ferguson on the Long March:

 

Wang Xiaohui:

When you march toward your ideals but encounter repeated setbacks and failures, do you have the courage to pause, reflect on the path taken, and chart a new way forward?

David Ferguson:

If I continually encountered setbacks on the road to my ideals, I would stop and reflect seriously on whether my methods need adjusted or my direction needs corrected. This is a matter of being honest with oneself and honest about one’s shortcomings. Granted, this requires as much courage as setting out in the first place — because what you have to confront is not only the judgment of others, but your own ingrained reluctance to accept that you might have got it wrong.

Wang Xiaohui:

The waters of the Xiangjiang River ran crimson in the winter of 1934.

To cover the Red Army’s main force as they crossed the river, Chen Shuxiang, then Commander of the 34th Division of the Fifth Army Corps, led his troops to fight against vastly superior enemy forces until they ran out of ammunition and supplies. Severely wounded, Chen was captured alive. On the way to the enemy camp to be paraded for merit, Chen seized a moment of the enemy’s unawareness, tore his own intestines through his abdominal wound, and died a heroic death. He was only 29 years old.

The Battle of Xiangjiang River was the deadliest campaign for the Red Army since the start of the Long March. In less than two months, their troop strength plummeted from over 86,000 to just over 30,000.

At that critical moment, doubts and discontent among officers and soldiers with the military leadership peaked.

During the fights against the previous four Kuomintang (KMT) “encirclement” campaigns, the Red Army adopted Mao Zedong’s strategy of “luring the enemy in deep.” With flexible tactics in mobile warfare, the Red Army worked miracles of defeating superior enemies time and again. Yet, the tide turned completely during the KMT’s fifth “encirclement.”

At that time, the CPC was a branch of the Communist International (Comintern). After 1927, the Comintern instructed the CPC to adopt an urban-centered path in its revolution, for it was how Russia’s October Revolution had achieved victory. Affected by this directive, during the Fifth Counter-Campaign against “Encirclement and Suppression”, Bo Gu and Otto Braun, who held actual command of the Red Army, insisted on launching offensive operations to seize major cities.

Otto Braun also mechanically applied European conventional warfare tactics, forcing the Red Army into rigid positional and fortress battles. In the Battle of Guangchang, the poorly equipped Red Army fought head-on against enemy tanks and artillery on open terrain, resulting in more than 5,000 casualties, about one-fourth of all participating troops.

Successive military defeats forced the Red Army to launch a strategic shift. However, Bo Gu and Otto Braun insisted that everything be evacuated, including heavy equipment: printing presses, currency-making machines, and arms-manufacturing facilities… When crossing the Xiangjiang River, troops were slowed down by these cumbersome supplies, and numerous soldiers even laid down their lives for protecting these assets. Chen Shuxiang and his 34th Division wrote the gravest footnote to this bloody sacrifice.

By the banks of the Xiangjiang River, the spark of hope in the eyes of the Red Army soldiers was nearly quenched by the cold water. Could the rigid foreign doctrines truly guide the Red Army and China’s revolution? What path lay ahead?

History often unfolds in paradoxes: when all hope seems lost, a historical turning point is quietly emerging.

After the Battle of Xiangjiang River, Mao firmly opposed the original plan drafted by Bo Gu and Otto Braun to march towards Hunan. Instead, he proposed to advance to Guizhou where enemy defenses were weak. There, the Red Army broke through the natural barrier of the Wujiang River, and captured Zunyi. On Jan. 15, 1935, the CPC Central Committee convened an enlarged Political Bureau meeting in an old mansion, later known to the world as the Zunyi Conference.

Inside the modest living room on the second floor, a charcoal brazier expelled the winter chill. The CPC leadership sat around a long table to review why the Red Army had fallen into passive positions since 1933. Bo Gu attributed the defeats solely to the enemy’s overwhelming strength, while other leading officials like Zhou Enlai and Zhang Wentian pinpointed flawed military command as the fundamental cause.

Mao Zedong also made a pivotal speech.

As a revolutionary forged in rural base-area practice, Mao always sought truth from real combat experience. Citing victories from the previous four counter-“encirclement” campaigns, he rebutted Bo Gu’s opinions and criticized the flawed strategies of passive defense and abandoning mobile warfare tactics. In plain, incisive language, he pointed out that “the soldiers also needed to march, eat and sleep,” and that Braun’s rigid commands were completely divorced from the realities of China’s revolutionary warfare. 

Throughout the whole meeting, Bo Gu remained dejected; Braun sat near the door and lit one cigarette after another. Never had these “true Bolsheviks” faced such rigorous criticism before.

The intensive confrontation lasted three days. In the end, Mao Zedong was elected to the leadership of the Red Army and the CPC Central Committee, putting an end to the wrong guidance. This marked a life-and-death turning point in the history of the Communist Party of China.

The Zunyi Conference freed the CPC from the Comintern’s intervention, enabling the Party to independently master the destiny of China’s revolution. From then on, the Red Army turned peril into safety, and China’s revolution emerged from despair toward new life.

David Ferguson:

When faced with major setbacks, the Communist Party of China was not crushed; instead, it demonstrated the courage to confront and correct its own mistakes, thereby turning adversity into opportunity. For any ruling party, this kind of courage is exceptionally rare.

Throughout history, guided by the principle of seeking truth from facts, the Party has always corrected errors, updated systems and adjusted course. By doing so, it has guaranteed social progress. This is precisely the secret to success that has made the Party resilient and invincible.

Wang Xiaohui:

No grand undertaking advances without setbacks. Faced with obstacles and defeats, the CPC demonstrated extraordinary courage and wisdom. They sought truth from facts, corrected wrong courses, and led the revolution towards triumph.

The Zunyi Conference Spirit, embodied in firm conviction, adherence to truth, independence and self-reliance, solidarity and unity, was forged amid blood and fire. It has shaped the unique spiritual character of the CPC. In the years that followed, these timeless values continued to evolve and sustain the Party in the face of trials and challenges, endowing it with enduring vitality.

China Mosaic 
http://www.china.org.cn/video/node_7230027.htm

Faith: The Spark Born by the Yudu Riverside
http://www.china.org.cn/2026-10/17/content_118737624.shtml

 

 

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/truth-seeking-the-turning-point-in-zunyi-302912139.html

SOURCE China.org.cn

Continue Reading

Technology

Truth-seeking: the Turning Point in Zunyi

Published

on

By

BEIJING, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — An interview from China.org.cn with Wang Xiaohui and David Ferguson on the Long March:

 

Wang Xiaohui:

When you march toward your ideals but encounter repeated setbacks and failures, do you have the courage to pause, reflect on the path taken, and chart a new way forward?

David Ferguson:

If I continually encountered setbacks on the road to my ideals, I would stop and reflect seriously on whether my methods need adjusted or my direction needs corrected. This is a matter of being honest with oneself and honest about one’s shortcomings. Granted, this requires as much courage as setting out in the first place — because what you have to confront is not only the judgment of others, but your own ingrained reluctance to accept that you might have got it wrong.

Wang Xiaohui:

The waters of the Xiangjiang River ran crimson in the winter of 1934.

To cover the Red Army’s main force as they crossed the river, Chen Shuxiang, then Commander of the 34th Division of the Fifth Army Corps, led his troops to fight against vastly superior enemy forces until they ran out of ammunition and supplies. Severely wounded, Chen was captured alive. On the way to the enemy camp to be paraded for merit, Chen seized a moment of the enemy’s unawareness, tore his own intestines through his abdominal wound, and died a heroic death. He was only 29 years old.

The Battle of Xiangjiang River was the deadliest campaign for the Red Army since the start of the Long March. In less than two months, their troop strength plummeted from over 86,000 to just over 30,000.

At that critical moment, doubts and discontent among officers and soldiers with the military leadership peaked.

During the fights against the previous four Kuomintang (KMT) “encirclement” campaigns, the Red Army adopted Mao Zedong’s strategy of “luring the enemy in deep.” With flexible tactics in mobile warfare, the Red Army worked miracles of defeating superior enemies time and again. Yet, the tide turned completely during the KMT’s fifth “encirclement.”

At that time, the CPC was a branch of the Communist International (Comintern). After 1927, the Comintern instructed the CPC to adopt an urban-centered path in its revolution, for it was how Russia’s October Revolution had achieved victory. Affected by this directive, during the Fifth Counter-Campaign against “Encirclement and Suppression”, Bo Gu and Otto Braun, who held actual command of the Red Army, insisted on launching offensive operations to seize major cities.

Otto Braun also mechanically applied European conventional warfare tactics, forcing the Red Army into rigid positional and fortress battles. In the Battle of Guangchang, the poorly equipped Red Army fought head-on against enemy tanks and artillery on open terrain, resulting in more than 5,000 casualties, about one-fourth of all participating troops.

Successive military defeats forced the Red Army to launch a strategic shift. However, Bo Gu and Otto Braun insisted that everything be evacuated, including heavy equipment: printing presses, currency-making machines, and arms-manufacturing facilities… When crossing the Xiangjiang River, troops were slowed down by these cumbersome supplies, and numerous soldiers even laid down their lives for protecting these assets. Chen Shuxiang and his 34th Division wrote the gravest footnote to this bloody sacrifice.

By the banks of the Xiangjiang River, the spark of hope in the eyes of the Red Army soldiers was nearly quenched by the cold water. Could the rigid foreign doctrines truly guide the Red Army and China’s revolution? What path lay ahead?

History often unfolds in paradoxes: when all hope seems lost, a historical turning point is quietly emerging.

After the Battle of Xiangjiang River, Mao firmly opposed the original plan drafted by Bo Gu and Otto Braun to march towards Hunan. Instead, he proposed to advance to Guizhou where enemy defenses were weak. There, the Red Army broke through the natural barrier of the Wujiang River, and captured Zunyi. On Jan. 15, 1935, the CPC Central Committee convened an enlarged Political Bureau meeting in an old mansion, later known to the world as the Zunyi Conference.

Inside the modest living room on the second floor, a charcoal brazier expelled the winter chill. The CPC leadership sat around a long table to review why the Red Army had fallen into passive positions since 1933. Bo Gu attributed the defeats solely to the enemy’s overwhelming strength, while other leading officials like Zhou Enlai and Zhang Wentian pinpointed flawed military command as the fundamental cause.

Mao Zedong also made a pivotal speech.

As a revolutionary forged in rural base-area practice, Mao always sought truth from real combat experience. Citing victories from the previous four counter-“encirclement” campaigns, he rebutted Bo Gu’s opinions and criticized the flawed strategies of passive defense and abandoning mobile warfare tactics. In plain, incisive language, he pointed out that “the soldiers also needed to march, eat and sleep,” and that Braun’s rigid commands were completely divorced from the realities of China’s revolutionary warfare. 

Throughout the whole meeting, Bo Gu remained dejected; Braun sat near the door and lit one cigarette after another. Never had these “true Bolsheviks” faced such rigorous criticism before.

The intensive confrontation lasted three days. In the end, Mao Zedong was elected to the leadership of the Red Army and the CPC Central Committee, putting an end to the wrong guidance. This marked a life-and-death turning point in the history of the Communist Party of China.

The Zunyi Conference freed the CPC from the Comintern’s intervention, enabling the Party to independently master the destiny of China’s revolution. From then on, the Red Army turned peril into safety, and China’s revolution emerged from despair toward new life.

David Ferguson:

When faced with major setbacks, the Communist Party of China was not crushed; instead, it demonstrated the courage to confront and correct its own mistakes, thereby turning adversity into opportunity. For any ruling party, this kind of courage is exceptionally rare.

Throughout history, guided by the principle of seeking truth from facts, the Party has always corrected errors, updated systems and adjusted course. By doing so, it has guaranteed social progress. This is precisely the secret to success that has made the Party resilient and invincible.

Wang Xiaohui:

No grand undertaking advances without setbacks. Faced with obstacles and defeats, the CPC demonstrated extraordinary courage and wisdom. They sought truth from facts, corrected wrong courses, and led the revolution towards triumph.

The Zunyi Conference Spirit, embodied in firm conviction, adherence to truth, independence and self-reliance, solidarity and unity, was forged amid blood and fire. It has shaped the unique spiritual character of the CPC. In the years that followed, these timeless values continued to evolve and sustain the Party in the face of trials and challenges, endowing it with enduring vitality.

China Mosaic 
http://www.china.org.cn/video/node_7230027.htm

Faith: The Spark Born by the Yudu Riverside
http://www.china.org.cn/2026-10/17/content_118737624.shtml

 

 

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/truth-seeking-the-turning-point-in-zunyi-302912139.html

SOURCE China.org.cn

Continue Reading

Technology

GMIF2026: AI Inference Powers the “Token Factory” and Drives System-Level Rethinking of Memory & Storage

Published

on

By

SHENZHEN, China, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — The 5th GMIF Innovation Summit (Global Memory Innovation Forum 2026, GMIF2026) recently concluded at the Renaissance Shenzhen Bay Hotel. Co-hosted by the Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA) and the School of Integrated Circuits at Peking University, the summit was themed “The Future Built on AI Memory and Storage.” Now in its fifth edition, GMIF has grown from a regional industry gathering into a benchmark for the global semiconductor memory ecosystem, with diversified programs including keynote sessions, an investment forum, product exhibitions, a global livestream, and a golf friendship match, all centered on the value of memory and storage in the token economy and the AI inference era.

In the opening remarks by Rixin Sun, President of Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA), GMIF’s growth over five consecutive editions was traced from its early days to today. As a platform for global exchange, GMIF is built around the memory value chain, linking wafer IDMs and players in controllers, modules, packaging and testing, equipment and materials, and end applications to promote technical exchange, supply-demand matching, and ecosystem cooperation.

President Sun noted that as AI evolves from generative to agentic, inference efficiency, data scheduling, and system coordination have become shared priorities. Collaboration across the value chain is no longer a traditional supply-demand relationship, but a deeper partnership built around workload requirements, joint product definition, and scenario validation. Looking ahead, GMIF will pursue a more specialized and differentiated format, connecting memory companies with AI compute and end-application players worldwide.

Capital Meets Technology: Memory & Storage Moves to the Center of AI Infrastructure

As AI shifts from model training to large-scale commercial inference, the token is becoming a new unit of value. Inference demands low latency, high concurrency, and sustained throughput, which places memory and storage bandwidth, capacity, and energy efficiency among the variables that shape overall system efficiency and cost.

Daniel Yen of Morgan Stanley projected that global data center capital expenditure will stay strong in the coming years, with more than half of cloud data center capex expected to go to memory & storage (excluding HBM) by 2027. Yen identified six innovation paths to overcome the “memory wall” challenge: process migration, design changes, advanced packaging, memory peripherals, PIM/CIM, and new materials.

Prof. Yimao Cai, Dean of the School of Integrated Circuits at Peking University, pointed out that HBM remains central to high-end AI compute, but yield, cost, and thermal constraints limit broader adoption. NAND-based high-bandwidth technologies such as HBF have become a major research focus because of their cost advantage, and hybrid multi-media architectures could balance performance, capacity, and cost for deploying models with hundreds of billions of parameters.

Kevin Yoon, CVP & CTO of Samsung Memory China at Samsung Electronics, described how agents are generating massive KV cache demand and driving rapid iteration of tiered storage, citing Samsung’s work on Z-NAND, PCIe Gen6 SSDs, and ultra-high-capacity data center SSDs. Maya Zhang, Senior Director of Product Marketing from Sandisk, called this the first year of the “inference boom.” As inference reaches commercial scale, AI data centers are shifting from cost centers to value and capacity centers, and the evaluation framework is moving from TCO to TVO. NAND is becoming a strategic core component of AI, and the SSD is becoming a “token battery” that greatly improves the economics of the industry through token reuse.

Solidigm and Arm focused on the evolution of system-level design. Benny Ni, GAR Sales VP at Solidigm, noted high-capacity QLC SSDs are being adopted faster, and that memory offloading has moved from an alternative to a core design paradigm for data centers, while liquid cooling has become a prerequisite for unlocking high-end storage performance. John Xavier Lionel, Head of Global Storage Business at Arm, shared competition in the AI era is shifting from simply chasing higher TOPS to building a more efficient system balance among compute, memory, storage, and data movement. Arm’s cloud-edge-device continuum framework balances power, capacity, bandwidth, latency, security, and cost constraints at each tier, so that “the right AI workload runs in the right place.”

Moving from the cloud to the edge, Stanley Huang, AVP of Silicon Motion, stressed that devices are the ultimate carrier of AI experiences and that intelligent storage directly determines real-world device performance. Its PerformaShape technology allocates resources flexibly across different agents and greatly improves read/write consistency.

Sam Sun, Chairman of BIWIN, explained that large-scale AI inference is extending memory demand from data centers to the edge and endpoints, where differing needs in capacity, performance, power, size, and reliability are pushing storage from general-purpose specifications toward deep matching with specific scenarios and platforms. Drawing on full-stack capabilities from media selection and controller and firmware development to advanced packaging, testing, and volume delivery, BIWIN works closely with customers, platforms, and chip makers to tailor products to each use case, shortening development and validation cycles and improving system space, energy efficiency, and performance.

Token Factories Move Enterprise AI from Pilot to Production

As the token becomes the core unit of value, producing tokens efficiently and at low cost has become a shared challenge for enterprise AI adoption worldwide, and the “token factory” is emerging as a new industry paradigm. Tao Zhou, General Manager of the Server Division of Lenovo ISG China, said 80% of enterprises have deployed at least one type of agent, yet fewer than 40% of projects can scale and deliver positive ROI. Lenovo has built a full-stack “token factory” paradigm spanning data governance, compute optimization, and security management to address this.

A solid token factory depends on underlying storage media and architecture. Numbers Law’s PMD (Parallel Magnetic Drive) technology and NEXWISE‘s “KuberCloud” token factory solution contributed to full-stack capability from hardware to compute scheduling and model operations. Infplane, Maxio, and Genstoraige lowered the deployment threshold for large on-device models through AI SSD tiered offloading and memory expansion.

Real-world applications are also deepening. SYNCORE has achieved vehicle-cloud embodied intelligence across the whole vehicle. Dify, with its private agent architecture, and Paratera, with its MaaS compute service platform, are moving AI from basic compute supply toward deeper industry intelligence services, accelerating the industrialization of AI.

40 Companies Showcase the Core of the AI Memory & Storage Chain

The concurrent exhibition brought together 40 companies across the full value chain, from memory chips and controllers to compute servers, AIDC services, packaging and testing equipment, and system applications, presenting the latest advances in AI memory and storage from around the world.

Memory IDMs and controller makers led with new products. SanDisk featured its iNAND AT EU752 automotive UFS 4.1, SN861 enterprise NVMe SSD, and BiCS8 QLC NAND. Silicon Motion introduced the SM8466 PCIe Gen6 16-channel controller and the SM2524XT controller for edge SSDs. Maxio, YEESTOR, and other Chinese controller makers showed flagship PCIe Gen4/Gen5 and UFS controllers with enhanced LDPC, a sign that China’s controller portfolio is taking shape and benchmarking itself against leading international standards.

Compute and token factory solutions were another highlight. Lenovo exhibited its WenTian series of AI training-and-inference integrated servers. NEXWISE presented its full-stack token factory hardware and software, with heterogeneous compute management and token-based billing. Paratera showed its intelligent compute cloud and supercomputing cloud services, and Numbers Law demonstrated its PMD (Parallel Magnetic Drive) technology, aimed at sharply raising HDD IOPS and throughput. Infplane, Genstoraige, and Quanxing introduced KV cache offload and memory-fusion AI SSD solutions that use storage to share the compute load and significantly cut deployment costs.

Module makers and full-scenario solution providers brought a wide range of products. BIWIN exhibited enterprise SSDs, CXL products, wide-temperature industrial storage, and embedded products spanning AI cloud, edge, and device. KingSpec, POWEV, Topdisk, Barycn, Jielong Storage, HIKSEMI, and others presented industrial-grade, automotive-grade, server, and embedded product families, demonstrating strong volume production and reliable delivery.

Equipment, testing, and materials suppliers rounded out the floor. Attach Point, MICROVIEW, and Maxwell Technologies showed die attach and bonding equipment for 2.5D/3D advanced packaging. OKN Technology, Acroview Technology, Hongjingwei, and Tytantest introduced test and burn-in systems covering SSD, DRAM, and NAND that can accurately reproduce high-load AI I/O scenarios. Hemei Jingyi and Silergy brought storage IC package substrates and dedicated power management ICs. From advanced packaging equipment to test validation to core components, this supporting ecosystem lays the manufacturing foundation for volume production of AI memory and storage and for Chinese suppliers expanding overseas.

GMIF2026 Annual Awards Unveiled: Global Memory & Storage Leaders Build an Open, Collaborative Ecosystem

To recognize companies that have made outstanding contributions to the memory and storage value chain, the summit established the GMIF2026 Annual Awards, which cover memory, compute, packaging and testing equipment, test systems, and end applications across AI infrastructure, and were judged on technological innovation, industry contribution, market service, and real-world results.

Honorees, including Samsung Semiconductor, SanDisk, Solidigm, CXMT, Arm, Lenovo, Dify, Silicon Motion, Infplane, Genstoraige, Numbers Law, Paratera, SYNCORE, NEXWISE, Maxio Technology, BIWIN, Topdisk, KingSpec, POWEV, Quanxing Technology, OKN Technology, Attach Point, COMIX, Barycn, LKAUTO, Maxwell Technologies, Hemei Jingyi, Silergy, Heyan Technology, ExTripod Electronics, UNIMOS, GBAT, and Tytantest, were recognized for standout achievements in technology breakthroughs, product deployment, ecosystem building, and the industry chain.

Global Livestream and Golf Friendship Match Extend the Boundaries of Industry Cooperation

To join the global ecosystem and expand international cooperation, the summit featured a special Global Livestream by Memory Brands on LinkedIn, Facebook, and YouTube. Eight brands presented online: BIWIN, Silicon Motion, Quanxing Technology, OKN Technology, KingSpec, Maxwell Technologies, ExTripod Electronics, and Silergy. They gave overseas audiences a direct look at China’s latest advances in memory chips, advanced packaging, test systems, and other core AI infrastructure components, connecting technology standards, supply chain resources, and market demand across regions.

The momentum carried into the next day. The GMIF2026 “BIWIN Cup” golf friendship match, exclusively sponsored by BIWIN, brought senior executives from across the global memory value chain to the course. After a day of intensive discussion at the main forum, the setting was more relaxed, but the conversations among technology, capital, and markets carried on, helping speed practical cooperation across borders and sectors.

Conclusion

Across the GMIF program, one message stood out: global AI competition is moving beyond the “single-point era” of peak GPU performance into a “system-level era” that integrates storage, compute, networking, and software. In the token economy, memory and storage is shedding its auxiliary role and becoming the strategic foundation of AI inference.

This edition of GMIF brought together capital outlook, frontier technology, product innovation, real-world practice, and ecosystem collaboration, and, with the awards, livestream, and networking events, carried the conversation from ideas to product showcases, overseas exposure, and business deals. Going forward, GMIF will stay focused on the industry’s frontier issues and connect key players across the global memory value chain, promoting joint standards, technology development, and market expansion to open a new chapter for the AI memory and storage industry.

About GMIF

Global Memory Innovation Forum (GMIF) is a premier annual gathering that connects the global memory and storage community. Featuring diverse activities including keynote speeches, roundtable dialogues, supply-demand match-making, product showcases, industry rankings, awards programs, and global livestreaming, GMIF brings together key enterprises across the memory and storage chain, technical experts, terminal companies and investment institutions to exchange insights, build partnerships, and create business opportunities. Learn more about GMIF, please visit https://www.gmif.com.cn/. Follow us on LinkedIn, YouTube and Facebook.

Media Contact:
Carina Gu, wenjing.gu@gmif.com.cn

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/gmif2026-ai-inference-powers-the-token-factory-and-drives-system-level-rethinking-of-memory–storage-302912123.html

SOURCE Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA)

Continue Reading

Trending