Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Files Class Action
Press Release | 2012/01/16 09:40
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP today announced that a class action has been commenced on behalf of an institutional investor in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of purchasers of Netflix, Inc. common stock during the period between December 20, 2010 and October 24, 2011.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Darren Robbins of Robbins Geller at 800-449-4900 or 619-231-1058, or via e-mail at djr@rgrdlaw.com. If you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint as filed or join this class action online at http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/netflix. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

The complaint charges Netflix and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Netflix is a subscription service that streams television shows and movies over the Internet, and in the United States subscribers can have DVDs delivered to their homes.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business practices and its contracts with content providers. As a result of defendants’ false statements, Netflix’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a high of almost $300 per share on July 13, 2011. While Netflix stock was inflated (partially by Netflix buying back its own stock), Company insiders were selling 388,661 shares of their own Netflix stock for proceeds of $90.2 million.

On September 15, 2011, Netflix updated its third quarter 2011 guidance and revealed that it had lost a million subscribers due to its recently announced price increases becoming effective. On this news, Netflix stock fell nearly $40 per share to close at just under $170 per share. On September 19, 2011, the Company announced that, in an effort to offset skyrocketing costs and rapidly defecting customers, the Company would begin charging separately for its two services and had raised prices as much as 60%. Netflix stock dropped to $130 per share on this news. Then, on October 24, 2011, Netflix issued its third quarter 2011 shareholder letter, which reported a net loss of 810,000 U.S. subscribers, translating into a cumulative loss of 5.5 million subscribers. The subsequently filed Form 10-Q revealed that Netflix’s obligations for content over the coming years had skyrocketed to $3.5 billion, with $2.8 billion due within three years. These disclosures caused Netflix stock to collapse from $118.84 per share on October 24, 2011 to $80.86 per share on October 27, 2011, a 32% decline in three days and a 73% decline from the stock’s Class Period high.

According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known by the defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period, were as follows: (a) Netflix had short-term contracts with content providers and defendants were aware that the Company faced the choice of renegotiating the contracts in 2011 at much higher rates or not renewing them at all; (b) content providers were already demanding much higher license fees, which would dramatically alter Netflix’s business; (c) defendants recognized that Netflix’s pricing would have to dramatically increase to maintain profit margins given the streaming content costs they knew the Company would soon be incurring; and (d) Netflix was not on track to achieve the earnings forecasts made by and for the Company for 2011.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of Netflix common stock during the Class Period (the “Class”). The plaintiff is represented by Robbins Geller, which has expertise in prosecuting investor class actions and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud.

Robbins Geller, a 180-lawyer firm with offices in San Diego, San Francisco, New York, Boca Raton, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia and Atlanta, is active in major litigations pending in federal and state courts throughout the United States and has taken a leading role in many important actions on behalf of defrauded investors, consumers, and companies, as well as victims of human rights violations. The Robbins Geller Web site (http://www.rgrdlaw.com) has more information about the firm.


[PREV] [1] ..[44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52].. [1017] [NEXT]



All
Legal News
Law Firm News
Attorney News
Headline Legal News
Lawyer Blog
Legal Business
Court News
Court Watch
Legal Interview
Topics in Legal News
Press Release
Opinions
Legal Marketing
Politics & Legal
Law School News
A Class Action Has Been Filed Ag..
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP..
Indianapolis Business Litigation..
Lower Chinese court rules shops ..
Israel top court takes Palestini..
Eugene Criminal Defense - MJM La..
NY appeals court orders NJ progr..
EU court: Web sites need not che..
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Announces..
Houston Class Actions Law Firm -..
Law Firm Marketing Coach - Why d..
Student bra search case goes to ..
Indianapolis Bankruptcy Law Firm..
The Shuman Law Firm Announces Cl..
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP..
Roseburg Criminal Defense Attorn..
Fugitive sibling to appear in Co..
Experts: Marriage ban's path to ..
Appeals court: Seniors can't rej..


   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
Eugene personal injury lawyer
Eugene DUI, Criminal Defense. Call (541) 338-9111
www.arnoldlawfirm.com
New York Securities Litigation
New York SEC Attorneys
Securities Litigation Lawyer
www.herskovitslaw.com
Indiana business litigation attorney
Price Waicukauski & Riley
Indiana Class Action
www.price-law.com
Oregon Criminal Defense
Eugene Criminal Defense Lawyer
Coit & Associates, P.C.
www.criminaldefenseoregon.com
Oregon Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer Eugene. Family Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
Chicago, IL Business Attorney
Corporate Lawyer
Roth Law Group, LLC.
www.rothlawgroup.com
Pittsburgh DUI Laywer
Pennsylvania DUI Lawyer
DUI. Call (412) 429-4360
www.gbmlawpittsburgh.com
Professional License Defense
OC Criminal Defense
The Khouri Law Firm.
www.khourilaw.com
   Legal Resource Links
  Law firm logo design
  Chicago Litigation Lawyer
  Pharmacist Criminal Defense
  Law Firm Network
  Legal News Journal
  Class Action Litigation News
  Lawyer Blog Post
  Click The Law
  Law Firm Logos
  Attorney Web Design
 
 
Disclaimer: The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Romeo Media as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Blog postings and hosted comments are available for general educational purposes only and should not be used to assess a specific legal situation.

Law Firm SEO | Legal News | Law Firm Websites That Work | Legal Marketing Website

Romeomedia.com has used reasonable efforts in collecting, preparing and providing quality information and material, but does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, adequacy or currency of the information contained on or linked to the web site. Users of information from the web site or links do so at their own risk.

Law Promo specializes in creating a powerful web presence for lawyers and law firms. From lawyer website design to law firm logo design to law firm seo, Law Promo is a turnkey company that takes the hassle out of worrying about your web presence.