Selling buildings for 600 million RMB, offloading subsidiaries at zero price, education companies have started a massive sell-off spree.

Why would an education company transfer its subsidiary at a price of 0 yuan?

In September, Shengtong Co., Ltd. announced that it plans to transfer 74.36% of the equity of its subsidiary Beijing LeyiBo Education Technology Co., Ltd. at 0 yuan. Almost at the same time, Kaiwen Education also announced that it plans to sell three subsidiaries that hold and operate property buildings in Chaoyang District, Beijing, with a listing reserve price of about 614 million yuan.

One company transfers its subsidiary with a consideration of 0 yuan; the other sells property assets with a listing reserve price exceeding 600 million yuan.

This is not an isolated phenomenon. Since 2026, education enterprises including Huamei Holdings, Shiji Mingde, New Higher Education Group, and Xi Jiao International Holdings have successively disclosed equity or asset sale plans. Previously, Only Education has also sold its UK school and idle domestic properties.

From schools, properties to subsidiary equity, a number of education enterprises are readjusting their asset layouts. Assets accumulated through investment and mergers and acquisitions in the past are now being re-evaluated, sold or divested.

From 600 million yuan to 0 yuan, education companies are accelerating the cleanup of old assets

The most intuitive feature of this round of asset sales is the huge difference in prices.

The listing reserve price of Kaiwen Education exceeds 600 million yuan, while the price for Shengtong Co., Ltd. to transfer LeyiBo is 0 yuan. This contrast does not entirely come from the transaction scale, but is more related to the profitability, liability status and subsequent operating responsibilities of the assets themselves.

Let's look at Kaiwen Education first. The three subsidiaries to be sold this time are Kaiwen Hengxin, Kaiwen Renxin and Kaiwen Camp, which mainly hold and operate Buildings 2, 3 and 4 in Courtyard 46, Baoquan 3rd Street, Chaoyang District, Beijing. According to the announcement, affected by factors such as the regional real estate leasing market, the overall occupancy rate of the relevant buildings is relatively low. Kaiwen Education hopes to divest these inefficient non-core assets through public listing to reduce their continuous drag on operating performance.

For an enterprise whose main development direction is education business, holding properties does not necessarily bring stable returns. When the occupancy rate is insufficient, the buildings may continue to occupy capital and management resources instead.

Shengtong Co., Ltd. is facing a different situation. On September 12, the company disclosed that it plans to transfer 74.36% equity of LeyiBo at a price of 0 yuan. According to the announcement, by the end of August 2026, the net assets of LeyiBo were about -2.3052 million yuan, and the net loss in the first eight months of 2026 was about 752,100 yuan.

The assets sold this time are not the more well-known children's robot programming brand "Roborobo" under Shengtong. Roborobo is an important part of Shengtong's education business, while LeyiBo is mainly engaged in science and technology competitions, artificial intelligence camps and other businesses. Although the two have similar names, they are not the same company.

Shengtong chose to withdraw from the business entity LeyiBo. Even if the transfer consideration is 0 yuan, the transaction is still expected to have an impact of about -3.1478 million yuan on the company's net profit in 2026, so it cannot be simply understood as a cost-free asset disposal.

The zero-consideration transfer situation also appears in other education enterprises. In August, education technology company LogisTech disclosed that it plans to transfer 100% equity of Xi'an Beihui Information Technology Co., Ltd. at a price of 0 yuan. By the end of June, the net assets of Xi'an Beihui were about -22.0262 million yuan, the operating revenue in the first half of 2026 was only about 26,900 yuan, and the net loss was about 1.1102 million yuan.

Compared with Shengtong, the assets and liabilities of the subsidiary to be transferred by LogisTech are more prominent. The company clearly stated in the announcement that this transaction is to optimize resource allocation and further concentrate operating resources on core businesses.

Research and study travel education enterprise Shiji Mingde is also carrying out similar adjustments. In June, Shiji Mingde disclosed that it plans to transfer 45% equity of Mingde Huayi at 1 yuan; at the same time, since the original shareholder failed to fulfill the performance commitment agreed earlier, the two parties negotiated that the original shareholder would repurchase the other 15% equity at 7.29 million yuan; in August, it disclosed the equity transfer plans of four subsidiaries in Anhui, Henan, Guizhou and Liaoning.

Among them, the transfer price of 51% equity of Liaoning Shiji Mingde Education is also only 1 yuan. The announcement shows that the business in relevant regions is affected by factors such as the market environment and operation management, and some subsidiaries continue to make losses, even insolvent.

From Kaiwen Education listing and selling properties, to Shengtong, LogisTech and Shiji Mingde transferring subsidiaries at low prices, education enterprises are dealing with a batch of stock assets that are difficult to continue to create ideal returns. These assets may have carried plans for regional expansion, business extension or diversified development in the past, but when the actual operating performance cannot support continuous investment, retaining assets is no longer the only choice.

Not just selling buildings, even the schools themselves are starting to be sold

If selling idle properties and withdrawing from loss-making subsidiaries is still a common asset optimization, the actions of some other education groups further touch the school operating assets themselves.

On May 29, 2026, New Higher Education Group announced that it would sell 100% equity of Songming Xinju Enterprise Management Co., Ltd. for 359.5 million yuan.

The education assets involved in the transaction include Guangxi Yinghua International Vocational College and its affiliated secondary school. According to the announcement, the transaction has been completed on the day of signing, and the financial performance of the two schools will no longer be included in the consolidated statements of New Higher Education Group thereafter.

Different from idle land, this is a set of college and university assets that actually carry out teaching activities. Data shows that the relevant target group recorded a revenue of about 163 million yuan for the year ended August 31, 2025, and a post-tax loss of about 2.19 million yuan. New Higher Education Group stated that the net proceeds from the sale will be used for the group's working capital, and continue to concentrate resources on developing existing colleges and universities. This means that even if schools have been built and started enrollment and teaching, they will not necessarily be held by education groups for a long time.

Another private higher education group, Xi Jiao International Holdings, is also accelerating the adjustment of its assets. On July 31, Xi Jiao International Holdings disclosed that its subsidiary plans to sell 100% equity of Sichuan Yonghe Education Investment Co., Ltd. and its affiliated entities for a total consideration of about 396 million yuan. A week later, on August 7, the company disclosed another transaction: it plans to sell a plot of land and related properties in Gaoxian County, Yibin, Sichuan for about 248 million yuan.

The latter can better reflect the risks faced by private higher education in the past expansion process. According to the announcement, this plot of land covers an area of about 165 mu, with teaching and supporting buildings on the ground, with a total construction area of more than 80,000 square meters. Xi Jiao International Holdings purchased the land as early as 2020, originally planning to invest in and build a new private higher education project.

However, since the project was not included in the 14th Five-Year Plan for the establishment of colleges and universities in Sichuan Province, the relevant school-running qualifications were not successfully obtained, and the project has been in an idle state ever since. A school that has not yet been officially operated has already invested in land, buildings and construction funds. As the school-running plan cannot be implemented, the previous investment has been transformed into stock assets that require continuous management and maintenance. Xi Jiao International Holdings chose to sell it to recover part of the investment and avoid continued related expenditures.

The trade-off of education groups on school assets did not start in 2026. In September 2025, Only Education announced that it plans to sell 100% equity of Kensington Park School Limited in the UK for 80,000 pounds. This school located in London, UK offers courses such as GCSE and A-Level.

Only Education disclosed in its 2025 annual report that affected by operating pressure and rising operating costs, the school has accumulated large losses. Although the transaction price is only about 760,000 yuan converted into RMB, due to the book situation of the relevant assets, the transaction finally brought Only Education a gain of about 22.1385 million yuan and increased the net assets by about 29.3757 million yuan.

In the same year, Only Education also sold a real estate in Minhang District, Shanghai for 65.6 million yuan. The two asset disposals together generated a total gain of about 70.1886 million yuan. From idle domestic properties to overseas schools, from higher education projects that have not yet been put into use to vocational colleges in actual operation, the scope of assets sold by education enterprises is expanding.

From these transactions, education groups are paying more attention to the operating efficiency of school-running assets. After New Higher Education Group sold some schools, it concentrated resources on existing colleges and universities; Only Education withdrew from loss-making overseas schools while continuing to develop businesses related to vocational education, basic education and international education.

Compared with the past when growth was driven by adding new schools and expanding the scale of enrolled students, nowadays, the profitability, capital investment and business synergy benefits of schools are becoming an important basis for education groups to adjust their asset layout.

From competing for scale to competing for efficiency, the operating logic of education companies has changed

In addition to directly selling assets, some education enterprises also adjust the control right and operating structure of their education businesses through equity transfer, introducing external investors and other methods.

In September, Huamei Holdings announced that it plans to publicly list and transfer 8.62% equity of Zhongjiao Weilai with a listing reserve price of 30 million yuan; at the same time, it plans to introduce external investors to increase capital to Zhongjiao Weilai by no less than 240 million yuan. Huamei Holdings currently holds 60% equity of Zhongjiao Weilai

According to the plan proposed in the announcement, if the two transactions are successfully completed, its shareholding ratio will drop to 29.92%, and Zhongjiao Weilai will no longer be included in the consolidated statements. Founded in 2006, this education enterprise covers vocational education, international education, IT education, online education and quality training and other fields.

Zhongjiao Weilai recorded a loss of about 53.83 million yuan in 2025, but achieved a net profit of about 8.51 million yuan in the first half of 2026. Huamei Holdings still chose to propose a plan to introduce external capital and adjust the holding relationship. For Huamei Holdings, asset adjustment is not just about selling loss-making businesses, but also involves the group's resource allocation and re-arrangement of future main businesses.

Kede Education has taken another path. In January 2026, the company's former actual controller Wu Xianliang signed a share transfer agreement with Huaxin Weilai and Oriental International Asset Management, planning to transfer 23.57% of the shares of the listed company for a total price of about 1.335 billion yuan. The transfer of relevant shares was completed in March, and Kede Education thus welcomed a new controlling shareholder and actual controller.

Different from the aforementioned companies that directly sell education assets, Kede Education has long had two business segments: education and ink. According to the agreement of this control right transfer, the former actual controller promises to complete the divestiture of the ink business during the transition period from 2025 to 2027, and undertake the relevant assets, claims, debts and resources through cash acquisition. As of September 2026, the relevant divestiture is still a pending arrangement as agreed in the agreement.

On the one hand, Huamei Holdings plans to change from holding to participating, on the other hand, Kede Education changes control and plans to withdraw from non-education businesses. Although the transaction methods are different, both companies are redefining their own business boundaries.

Looking back at the development of the education industry in the past ten years, asset expansion was once an important path for many enterprises to achieve scale growth. By acquiring schools, adding campuses, investing in new projects, and entering new education market segments, education groups can rapidly expand their revenue scale, business territory and asset volume.

However, the larger the scale does not mean the higher the operating efficiency. Schools require continuous investment, properties need maintenance, regional subsidiaries need management, and cross-business segments may also generate synergy costs. If some assets cannot generate expected returns, the pressure brought by scale expansion will eventually be reflected in cash flow, profits and the balance sheet.

These differences are also reflected in the purpose of asset disposal of various enterprises. Kaiwen Education hopes to recover funds by selling properties; Shengtong and LogisTech choose to withdraw from loss-making subsidiaries; Xi Jiao International Holdings recovers part of the investment by selling projects; New Higher Education Group plans to use the proceeds from the sale for existing business operations. But these transactions cannot all be attributed to the same operating dilemma. Some stem from idle projects, some from operating losses, and some from the active choice of enterprises for future development directions.

Moreover, asset sale itself is not equal to operating improvement. Low-price transfer may cause current losses, the income generated by large-scale property sales may be a one-time item, and selling schools may also reduce future operating revenue. Only by combining the subsequent cash flow, sustained profitability and the development of core business can we judge whether a corporate restructuring has truly improved the operating quality.

Different from some light asset industries that can be replicated quickly, school operation often requires a long cycle. Teaching sites, teaching staff, curriculum systems, enrollment channels and brand reputation all require continuous investment and accumulation.

The scale of assets can be rapidly expanded through mergers and acquisitions, but sustained school-running quality and operating efficiency can hardly be directly obtained through capital transactions.

From this perspective, the asset disposal of many education enterprises since 2025 reflects not only the adjustments on the financial statements, but also the changes in the business focus of enterprises.

In the past, the market paid attention to how many schools an education company acquired, how many cities it entered, and how many businesses it added. Now, an equally important question is emerging: how much continuous return can those assets that have been purchased actually create?

Some sell properties, some withdraw from regional businesses, some sell schools, and some restructure their business structure through changes in control. The final results of these enterprises remain to be seen, but one change is already very clear: education enterprises no longer expand their scale only by "what to buy", but also start to redefine themselves by "what to sell".

For the education industry that has experienced multiple rounds of expansion, mergers and acquisitions and business transformation, the real test may no longer be how many assets are owned, but whether the remaining assets can support the long-term operation of the enterprise.

This article is from the WeChat official account "Duojing" (ID: DJEDUINNO), author: Harvie, published with authorization from 36Kr.