Bragar Eagel & Squire PC warns those kinds of investors. | Tech Rasta

NEW YORK, Oct. 21, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC, a nationally recognized shareholder rights law firm. Reminds investors that it has begun group operations on behalf of shareholders of NIO, Inc. (NYSE: NIO) ), Dingdong (Cayman) Ltd. (NYSE: DDL), Stitch Fix, Inc. (NASDAQ: SFIX). and Coupang, Inc. (NYSE: CPNG) shareholders have until the deadlines below to file a motion with the court to act as lead plaintiff. More information about each case can be found at the links provided.


Study period: 20 August 2020 – 11 July 2022

Plaintiff’s deadline: October 24, 2022.

On June 28, 2022, Grizzly Research published a report alleging that NIO inflated net income of approximately 95% through sales to the related company Wuhan Weineng Battery Asset Co. (“Weineng”). together

Based on the news, the company’s American Depositary Shares (“ADS” or “shares”) fell $0.59, or 2.5 percent, to close at $22.36 per share on June 28, 2022 on unusually high trading volumes.

Then, on 11 July 2022, NIO announced that it had formed a special committee to oversee an investigation into the allegations in Grizzly’s research report.

Based on the news, its shares fell $2.03, or 8.9 percent, to close at $20.57 per share on July 11, 2022 on unusually high trading volumes.

Complaints filed in this class action claim that over the course of the class Defendants have made materially false and/or misleading statements. and fails to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations and opportunities. especially Defendants did not disclose to investors: (1) NIO pulled revenue forward by selling batteries to related parties who own batteries and (2) managed user subscriptions through related parties. NIO also recognizes huge depreciation savings; (3) the cause has exaggerated the company’s net income and loss, and (4) as a result. Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations and prospects were significantly misleading and/or lacking a reasonable basis.

For more information about NIO class implementation, go to:

Dingdong (Cayman) Ltd. (NYSE: DDL)

Study period : According to June 29, 2021, IPO

Plaintiff’s deadline: October 24, 2022.

Dingdong is committed to being the leader and fastest growing on-demand e-commerce company in China. Dingdong conducts an IPO in New York and advertises a company listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the ticker “DDL.”

In June 2021, as part of Dingdong’s IPO, the defendants issued approximately 4.07 million advertisements to the public invested for $23.50 in total ADS, according to the listing statement.

According to the listing statement, Dingdong’s mission is to “make fresh groceries into household water.” “Serving users and homeowners directly… fresh Produce, averages, seafood and other daily necessities through convenient channels and excellent The shopping experience is supported by an Extensively operated manually Vanguard replenishment table [emphasis added]” During the crisis, Dingdong differentiates itself from its competitors by claiming that it “provides… most of its products come directly from upstream sources such as farms and cooperatives.”Implement strict quality control throughout [its] the entire supply chain to ensure product quality to [its] user” and relying on “front-line replenishment tables and strong digital fulfillment capabilities… [to] Send…orders within 30 minutes. [emphasis added]”

However, the said registration statement is unknown to prospective investors. Dingdong has distorted Dingdong’s commitment to ensuring the safety and quality of food sold to the market. In fact, Dingdong defames food safety responsibilities, such as selling dead fish to customers while marketing it as “containing fish”. Life and recycled vegetables that have passed the date of sale. In other words, Dingdong is no better at providing or guaranteeing access to “fresh” groceries than supermarkets. traditional chinese bazaar or traditional ecommerce platforms claiming to be replaced over and over again. Doing so exposes Dingdong to an increased risk of regulatory and/or government scrutiny and enforcement. which when all revealed tend to By ignoring these facts, ADS buyers are unable to adequately assess the value of the shares offered in connection with the IPO. and hence purchased ADS without material and damaging information.

according to complaint The Company’s public statements throughout the IPO are materially false and misleading. When the market learned the truth about Dingdong, investors were devastated.

For more information about Dingdong class implementation, go to:

Stitch Fix, Inc. (NASDAQ: SFIX)

Study period: 8 December 2020 – 8 March 2022

Plaintiff’s deadline: October 25, 2022.

Stitch Fix sells clothes, shoes and accessories. Through its website and mobile app, Stitch Fix traditionally sells items on a “Fix” format, where customers receive a monthly list box at their personal stylist’s choice. The customer will not know for sure which item they received. But there is an option to return unwanted items. Customer pays a $20 “Formatting Fee” per edit and that fee will be applied to any item. that customers choose to buy

Ahead of the class in 2019, Stitch Fix announced a new direct-to-buy retail component. It was eventually called “Freestyle.” The Freestyle program allows customers to shop at the site. This gives customers more control over the items they receive. The Freestyle program was initially released to a subset of existing Stitch Fix customers in 2020, and was gradually rolled out to customers with All live in early 2021. In September 2021, the Freestyle program is officially launched for new customers.

On December 7, 2021, Stitch Fix announced its first-quarter 2022 loss, cut its full-year revenue forecast and acknowledged for the first time as a result of its “expansion to Freestyle.” Short of cannibalism.” Based on these disclosures, Stitch Fix’s share price is down $5.97 per share, or 24%, from its close of $24.97 per share on Dec. 7, 2021, to a close of $19.00 per share on December 7, 2021. On December 8, 2021, however, Stitch Fix continues to reassure investors that this is a short-term issue.

Then, on March 8, 2022, when Stitch Fix reported earnings for the second quarter of 2022, the company offered a weak outlook for the third quarter of 2022 and downgraded. The guidance for the year Stitch Fix states that the clipped instructions are “Friction” Between Freestyle and Fix Businesses

As of this disclosure, Stitch Fix’s share price fell $0.67 per share, or 6%, from $11.11 to $10.34 per share.

The complaint alleges that over the course of the class, Stitch Fix made numerous false and misleading statements to investors about the collaboration between Fix and the company’s Freestyle programs, and repeatedly denied that Freestyle could destroy business. Fix the company’s original In particular, Stitch Fix has repeatedly assured investors that the company’s Freestyle business is a “Additional experience” and “Free” for Fix businesses “The combination of the two will allow us to deal with more types of customers” and “We see solid growth in both sides of the business. Indeed, over the course of the course, Stitch Fix concealed the fact that these programs did not supplement or supplement Stitch Fix. Knowing that Freestyle would be preferred over the company’s original Fix format, and that Freestyle would destroy the original Fix business. of the company inevitably As a result of these misrepresentations and omissions, Stitch Fix’s Class A common stock is traded at inflated prices for the duration of the class.

For more information about the Stitch Fix class, go to:

Coupang, Inc. (NYSE: CPNG)

Duration of study : According to March 11, 2021 IPO

Plaintiff’s deadline: October 25, 2022.

On or around March 11, 2021, Coupang conducted an initial public offering (“IPO”) and the company sold 130 million shares for $35.00.

Coupang reported that its annual total revenue rose from $11.96 billion in 2020 to $18.4 billion in 2021, and its net loss increased from $474.89 million in 2020 to $1.54 billion in 2021.

Since its IPO, Coupang shares have fallen to $10.51 per share on June 13, 2022.

The lawsuit highlights how the company and its executives violated federal securities laws by making false and/or misleading statements. and/or fails to disclose that: (1) Coupang engages in anti-competitive practices that are improper with its suppliers and other third parties. Violations of applicable regulations include (a) forcing suppliers to raise prices for products on competing e-commerce platforms to ensure that Coupang’s prices are more competitive; It will benefit Coupang financially; (c) force the supplier to bear all promotional costs; and (d) unconditionally request a wholesale refund from the supplier. related to the discount program All of this was in place to fake Coupang’s lower prices and to inflate Coupang’s historical revenue and market share (2). Review products on the Marketplace platform to prioritize private-branded products over other sellers and merchants. To cause harm to consumers, merchants and suppliers (3) without their knowledge, Rocket WOW Coupang members sell products to non-members at lower prices than those currently offered to Rocket WOW (4) Coupang members. Under severe, unsafe and unhealthy working conditions (5) All of the above illegal actions put Coupang at increased risk. but not disclosed Reputational and regulatory audit risks that could jeopardize Coupang’s critical relationships with consumers, merchants, suppliers and employees, and (6) Coupang’s lower prices, historical income, competitive advantage. and increasing market share as a result of systematic, inappropriate, unethical and/or illegal practices. So it’s not sustainable.

For more information about the Coupang class implementation, go to:

About Bragar Eagle & Squire, PC:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, PC is a nationally recognized law firm. with offices in New York, California and South Carolina. The Company represents retail and institutional investors in commercial, securities, derivatives. and other complex litigation in state and federal courts across the country. For more information about the company please visit Advocate Ads. Previous results do not guarantee similar results.

Contact information:

Bragar Eagle & Squire, PC
Brandon Walker SQ
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
(212) 355-4648

Source link