What would your descendants need to remember about you? Part V

Control without ownership

Author

Ray Doraisamy
January 28, 2026

The single largest investor in mainland China does not actually own most of the companies that make them up. They’re also foreign to China.

How?

We know you can "own" something without controlling it.

You might also control something while owning just a little of it.

In the 1920s, Ekchor Saechia and Sewhui Saechia immigrated to Bangkok to sell seeds and agro-chemicals.

In the 1980s, the family was positioned to act as brokers between Honda, Walmart, Tesco, and mainland China.

Ekchor's son, Dhanin Chearavanont, now heads up the Charoen Pokphand Group.

  • It is the single largest investor in mainland China

  • The largest private company in Thailand

  • The largest private holder of a Thai Royal Warrant (whatever that means)

Ethnic Chinese families employ cross-holdings as well as pyramids to secure control of their business groups. Cross-holdings are popular in Asia, it is said, because they make the locus of control over company groups less transparent. A prominent example is the vast Chareon Pokphand group (CP), based in Thailand, which owns directly 33 percent of CP Feedmill (agribusiness and some real estate, retailing, manufacturing, and telecom), 2 percent of CP Northeastern (agribusiness), and 9 percent of Bangkok Agro-Industrial (agribusiness). But CP Feedmill owns 57 percent of Northeastern. CP Feedmill also owns 60 percent of Bangkok Agro-Industrial, and CP Northeastern owns 3 percent of Bangkok Agro-Industrial. Bangkok Agro-Industrial owns 5 percent of CP Feedmill. CP Feedmill, CP Northeastern, and Bangkok Agro-Industrial are all listed on the Bangkok Stock Exchange.

This happens when companies split controlling shares from cash-flow ownership shares.

Say someone could make ACME Corp double its profits if they bought it. However, ACME doesn't sell even though most owners would benefit- if the minority that controls it doesn't actually reap most of the benefits.

Powers, side deals, choice. These become more important than profit.

The more companies are cross-tied in chains of ownership, the harder it is to tell who actually controls what.

This is useful in places with less rule of law, where control is more important than profit.

One of the regrets American founders seem to have is selling off large parts of their companies.

Lose lots of ownership, and you lose control.

This method, on the other hand, allows controllers to raise money without losing control.

So for your descendants:

How do you control without owning?