NEW YORK, Oct. 19, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder rights law firm, reminds investors that class actions have been commenced on behalf of stockholders of Longeveron Inc. (NASDAQ: LGVN), The Boston Beer Company, Inc. (NYSE: SAM), Waterdrop Inc. (NYSE: WDH), and AppHarvest, Inc. (NASDAQ: APPH). Stockholders have until the deadlines below to petition the court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information about each case can be found at the link provided.
Longeveron Inc. (NASDAQ: LGVN)
Class Period: February 12, 2021 IPO; February 12, 2021 to August 12, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 12, 2021
On January 19, 2021, Longeveron filed a registration statement on Form S-1 with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) in connection with the IPO, which, after several amendments, was declared effective by the SEC on February 11, 2021 (the “Registration Statement”).
On or about February 12, 2021, pursuant to the Registration Statement, Longeveron’s Class A common stock began trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market (“NASDAQ”) under the ticker symbol “LGVN.”
Also on February 12, 2021, Longeveron filed a prospectus on Form 424B4 with the SEC in connection with the IPO, which incorporated and formed part of the Registration Statement (the “Prospectus” and, together with the Registration Statement, the “Offering Documents”).
Pursuant to the Offering Documents, Longeveron conducted the IPO, issuing 2.66 million shares of its Class A common stock to the public at the Offering price of $10.00 per share, for approximate proceeds of $24.7 million to the Company after applicable underwriting discounts and commissions, and before expenses.
On August 13, 2021, Longeveron issued two press releases—one announcing topline results of the Phase 2b Aging Frailty Trial, and a second providing a corporate update and reporting the Company’s financial results for the second quarter of 2021. Both press releases disclosed, among other results, that Lomecel-B had “not achiev[ed] . . . statistical significance for the pairwise comparison to placebo” with respect to the primary efficacy endpoint.
On this news, Longeveron’s stock price fell $1.51 per share, or 27.91%, to close at $3.90 per share on August 13, 2021, representing a total decline of 61% from the Offering price.
The complaint alleges that the Offering Documents were negligently prepared and, as a result, contained untrue statements of material fact or omitted to state other facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading and were not prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations governing their preparation. Additionally, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations, and compliance policies. Specifically, the Offering Documents and Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Lomecel-B was not as effective in treating aging frailty as Defendants had led investors to believe; (ii) accordingly, Lomecel-B’s clinical and commercial prospects with respect to aging frailty were overstated; and (iii) as a result, the Offering Documents and Defendants' public statements throughout the Class Period were materially false and/or misleading and failed to state information required to be stated therein.
For more information on the Longeveron class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/LGVN
The Boston Beer Company, Inc. (NYSE: SAM)
Class Period: April 22, 2021 to September 8, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 15, 2021
On July 22, 2021, after the market closed, Boston Beer reduced its full year 2021 guidance, expecting earnings per share between $18 and $22, down from a prior range of $22 and $26. The Company cited softer-than-expected sales in the hard seltzer category and overall beer industry and also stated that it had “overestimated the growth of the hard seltzer category in the second quarter.”
On this news, the Company’s share price fell $246.54, or 26%, to close at $701.00 per share on July 23, 2021, on unusually heavy trading volume.
On September 8, 2021, after the market closed, Boston Beer withdrew its 2021 financial guidance, citing decelerating sales of hard seltzer products. The Company also stated that it "expects to incur hard seltzer-related inventory write-offs, shortfall fees payable to 3rd party brewers, and other costs" for the remainder of fiscal 2021.
On this news, the Company’s share price fell $21.09, or 3.7%, to close at $538.31 per share on September 9, 2021, on unusually heavy trading volume.
Throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that Boston Beer’s hard seltzer sales were decelerating; (2) that, as a result, Boston Beer was reasonably likely to incur inventory write-offs; (3) that the Company was reasonably likely to incur shortfall fees payable to third party brewers; (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, Boston Beer’s financial results would be adversely impacted; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
For more information on the Boston Beer class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/SAM
Waterdrop Inc. (NYSE: WDH)
Class Period: May 2021 IPO
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 15, 2021
On June 17, 2021, Waterdrop issued a press release announcing Waterdrop’s financial results for the quarter conducted before the IPO. In doing so, Waterdrop reported that its operating costs and expenses had ballooned over 75%, or RMB579.1 million, to RMB1,343.9 million (US$205.1 million). As a result, Waterdrop suffered an operating loss for the quarter of RMB460.6 million (US$70.3 million), compared with operating loss of RMB111.1 million for the same period of 2020 – a more than four-fold increase. This rapid increase in operating expenses was due largely to the cessation of Waterdrop’s mutual aid business and growing customer acquisition costs.
Then, on August 11, 2021, multiple news sources reported that China’s banking and insurance watchdog, the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission, had issued an order directing insurance companies to cease improper marketing and pricing practices rampant in the industry and enhance their user privacy protections. Failure to comply would reportedly result in the offenders being “severely punished” by Chinese authorities. As Bloomberg reported, “[r]egulators have since moved to shutter some operations including mutual aid healthcare platforms operated by Waterdrop.” The article continued: “he latest move will stymie growth in an industry that had been expected to grow to 2.5 trillion yuan ($385 billion) in a decade.”
Finally, on September 8, 2021, Waterdrop revealed that its operating losses for the quarter ended June 30, 2021 had continued to accelerate, totaling RMB815.4 million (US$126.3 million), compared with an operating profit of RMB7.2 million for the same period of 2020. This was once again due to a sharp increase in Waterdrop’s operating costs and expenses, as Waterdrop’s operating costs and expenses during the quarter increased by RMB1,081.1 million, or 160.5% year over year, to RMB1,754.7 million (US$271.8 million) from RMB673.6 million for the same period of 2020.
On September 13, 2021, Waterdrop ADSs dropped to a low of just $3 per ADS –75% below the price at which Waterdrop ADSs were sold to the investing public just four months previously.
The Complaint alleges that the IPO’s Registration Statement failed to disclose that Waterdrop was the subject of an intense regulatory investigation and pending crackdown by Chinese authorities because of a variety of market abuses perpetrated by Waterdrop used to artificially inflate Waterdrop’s short-term financial results in the lead up to the IPO, including, among other things: (i) operating insurance platforms without proper governmental authorizations; (ii) mispricing risks for consumers; and (iii) illicitly using client information. The Waterdrop class action lawsuit further alleges that, unbeknownst to investors, the reason that Waterdrop had discontinued its mutual aid segment was because it had been ordered to do so by Chinese regulators. Furthermore, Waterdrop had suffered rapidly accelerating operating losses in the first quarter of 2021 which was completed weeks before the IPO.
For more information on the Waterdrop class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/WDH
AppHarvest, Inc. (NASDAQ: APPH)
Class Period: May 17, 2021 to August 10, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 23, 2021
On August 11, 2021, before the market opened, AppHarvest announced its second quarter financial results, reporting a $32.0 million net loss. The Company also lowered its full year sales guidance to a range of $7 million to $9 million, from a prior range of $20 million to $25 million. AppHarvest attributed the lower than expected results to “operational headwinds with the full ramp up to full production at the company’s first CEA facility, including labor and productivity challenges related to the training and development of the new workforce and historically low market prices for tomatoes.”
On this news, the Company’s share price fell $3.46, or approximately 29%, to close at $8.51 per share on August 11, 2021, on unusually heavy trading volume.
Throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that AppHarvest lacked sufficient training for its recently expanded labor force; (2) that, as a result, the Company could not produce Grade No. 1 tomatoes consistently; (3) that, as a result, the Company’s financial results would be adversely impacted; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
For more information on the AppHarvest class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/APPH
About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York, California, and South Carolina. The firm represents individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities, derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal courts across the country. For more information about the firm, please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.