That is illogical, if it's not managed by government bureocrats then it's not a government enterprise. Yes they get 100% the revenue, and they legally own it but that doesnt make it so.
That is like saying that if I had a corporation and pay 50% taxes on profits, that the government is 50% shareholder.
No, if they have private corporate boards, and CEO and they get their salary and bonuses by managing the enterprise then it's privately managed but government owned. So there is a distincition there.
However there cannot exist a government enterprise like the ones in soviet union, because there a government appointed individual controlled it, mostly very inneficiently and with big corruption. It would go bankrupt soon.
Are you kidding? Whoever owns the controlling stake of an enterprise (sometimes it is even below 50%) appoints its top management, be it state, a private investor or an investment group. There is no such thing as private management unless the management themselves have the controlling stake...
Whether this management is up to the task is another matter