The Fox Footy host wants to see crowd capacity for Victorian stadiums increased Credit: Fox Footy/On The Couch
The Fox Footy host wants to see crowd capacity for Victorian stadiums increased Credit: Fox Footy/On The Couch
A large segment of a Chinese rocket is expected to make an uncontrolled re-entry into the Earth's atmosphere early Sunday, but Beijing has downplayed fears of damage on the ground and said the risk is very low.
NEW YORK, May 08, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pomerantz LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Vroom, Inc. (“Vroom” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: VRM) and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and docketed under 21-cv-03296, is on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities other than Defendants that purchased or otherwise acquired Vroom securities between June 9, 2020 and March 3, 2021, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). If you are a shareholder who purchased Vroom securities during the Class Period, you have until May 21, 2021 to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class. A copy of the Complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com. To discuss this action, contact Robert S. Willoughby at firstname.lastname@example.org or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll-free, Ext. 7980. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address, telephone number, and the number of shares purchased. [Click here for information about joining the class action] Vroom was founded in 2013 and is based in New York, New York. The Company is an ecommerce platform that buys and sells used vehicles. Through the Company’s online platform, consumers can research and select from thousands of fully reconditioned vehicles. After a vehicle is purchased, the Company provides contact-free delivery to the buyer’s driveway. Vroom became a public company through an initial public offering on June 9, 2020 (the “IPO”). Prior to the IPO, Vroom significantly reduced its inventory to account for an expected drop in demand as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) a lack of inventory had materially constrained Vroom’s ability to increase revenues in the second quarter of 2020 and meet a surge in customer demand for online used vehicles; (ii) Vroom had slashed the average selling price per vehicle by over 15% in response to a sustained and fundamental market shift to lower-priced vehicles, and not simply because of the Company’s temporary inventory reduction activities taken earlier in the year; (iii) Vroom’s lack of adequate sales and support staff had resulted in degraded customer experiences, lost sales opportunities, and a greater than 10% increase in average days to sale for Vroom products; (iv) as a result of all the foregoing, Vroom needed to invest tens of millions of dollars in growing inventory and bolstering its sales and support and logistics networks, materially impairing the Company’s short-term profitability; (v) as a result of all the foregoing, Vroom was generating materially lower profits per vehicle and poised to suffer accelerating losses and increased negative cash flows, despite a robust online used car market; (vi) as a result of all the foregoing, Vroom’s inventory growth had far outpaced the capabilities of its existing sales and support personnel, creating a logistical bottleneck that threatened the Company’s profits, the value of its existing inventory, and its ability to achieve positive cash flows; (vii) as a result of all the foregoing, Vroom was unable to sell a significant portion of existing inventory as a result of inadequate sales personnel and overreliance on third-party sales support; (viii) as a result of all the foregoing, Vroom had been forced to mark down and liquidate existing inventory at fire sale prices; (ix) as a result of all the foregoing, Vroom was on track to miss its already disappointing fourth quarter 2020 profit and earnings guidance and such guidance lacked any reasonable basis in fact; and (x) as a result of all the foregoing, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. On August 12, 2020, Vroom issued a release announcing its financial results for the second quarter of 2020 (the “2Q20 Press Release”). That press release revealed that Vroom had achieved only $253.1 million in revenues for the quarter, a 3% year-over-year decline, largely as a result of a 17% decline in the average vehicle selling price per ecommerce unit. Additionally, the 2Q20 Press Release stated that Vroom only expected to achieve an average total revenue per ecommerce unit of just $23,500 for the third quarter, which represented a 25% year-over-year average product price decline. As a result of this lower average price, Vroom stated it achieved only $314 in average gross profit per ecommerce vehicle, a 75% year-over-year profit decline, and projected average gross profit per unit of only $1,600 to $1,700 for the third quarter of 2020. During the earnings call to discuss these results, Defendants essentially confirmed that the pricing pressures facing the Company were not short term but reflected a fundamental market shift toward lower-priced vehicles. On this news, Vroom’s stock price fell $12.64 per share, or 18.32%, to close at $56.37 per share on August 13, 2020, on usually heavy trading volume of 6.8 million shares traded. Then, on November 11, 2020, Vroom issued a release announcing its third quarter 2020 financial results. That press release stated that Vroom expected to suffer sharply higher losses in the fourth quarter of 2020, with adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (“EBITDA”) losses projected to increase from $36 million in the third quarter of 2020 to $48 million at the midpoint, a 33% sequential increase. During the accompanying earnings call, Defendants revealed that Vroom was suffering from a “bottleneck” in its sales support and needed to invest heavily in building out the Company’s sales support and logistics networks to avoid constrained growth, despite the favorable market environment. On this news, Vroom’s stock price fell $5.31 per share, or 13.01%, to close at $35.49 per share on November 12, 2020, on unusually heavy trading volume of 9.2 million shares traded. Finally, on March 3, 2021, Vroom issued a release announcing its fourth quarter and full year financial results (the “4Q/FY20 Press Release”). That press release was the third consecutive adverse report by the Company since going public and revealed operational issues and financial results far worse than previously disclosed to investors. For the quarter, the 4Q/FY20 Press Release stated that Vroom suffered a net loss of $60.7 million, a 42% year-over-year increase. This represented a $0.46 loss per share, which was outside the range provided by Defendants and 20% worse than the midpoint. The 4Q/FY20 Press Release also stated that Vroom suffered a $55.9 million adjusted EBITDA loss during the quarter, which was also outside the range provided by Defendants and $8 million worse than the midpoint. The 4Q/FY20 Press Release further stated that Vroom had achieved only $1,821 total gross profit per unit, which was outside the range provided by Defendants and 13% below the midpoint, and generated only $878 gross profit per vehicle, which represented a 13% decline year-over-year. During the earnings call to discuss the results held that same day, Defendant Paul J. Hennessy (“Hennessy”), the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, revealed that Vroom was suffering from severe sales backlogs because of inadequate sales and support staff, which had materially impaired the Company’s ability to sell existing inventory. These backlogs, in addition to degrading the customer experience, had led to substantially lower gross profits per unit and caused the average days to sale per vehicle to increase 13% year-over-year to seventy-seven days. Defendants acknowledged that Vroom was operationally constrained and unable to keep up with demand because of these sales constraints, which had forced the Company to liquidate aging inventory at fire sale prices for a significantly reduced profit or even at a loss, despite a historically favorable online used car market. Defendants further revealed that Vroom’s sales deficiencies were so severe that the deficiencies would continue to constrain the Company’s profits well into the first quarter of 2021, even though Vroom had purportedly tripled its sales support staff. As Defendant Hennessy admitted, “we bought more inventory than we could actually process and that excess inventory needed to be moved in Q4 and will continue to be moved in Q1.” Following these disclosures, Vroom’s stock price fell $12.29 per share, or 28%, to close at $31.61 per share on March 4, 2021, on unusually heavy trading volume of 19.6 million shares traded. The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Paris is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 80 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com CONTACT:Robert S. WilloughbyPomerantz LLPrswilloughby@pomlaw.com888-476-6529 ext. 7980
The Michael Jordan jersey is from the 1982-83 season at North Carolina.
All the important info around the highly-anticipated bout
NEW YORK, May 08, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pomerantz LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Root Inc. (“Root” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: ROOT) and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, and docketed under 21-cv-01197, is on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities other than Defendants that purchased or otherwise acquired: (a) Root securities between October 28, 2020 and March 8, 2021, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”); and/or (b) Root Class A common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the Offering Documents (defined below) issued in connection with the Company’s initial public offering conducted on or about October 28, 2020 (the “IPO” or “Offering”). Plaintiff pursues claims against the Defendants under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). If you are a shareholder who purchased Root securities during the Class Period and/or pursuant and/or traceable to the IPO, you have until May 18, 2021 to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class. A copy of the Complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com. To discuss this action, contact Robert S. Willoughby at email@example.com or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll-free, Ext. 7980. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address, telephone number, and the number of shares purchased. [Click here for information about joining the class action] Root provides insurance products and services in the U.S. The Company has historically focused on auto insurance and operates a direct-to-consumer model that serves customers primarily through mobile applications, as well as through the Company’s website. Leading up to and following the IPO, Root described itself as an innovator in the personal insurance space with a new data- and technology-driven business model that was ready to disrupt traditional insurance markets and capture disproportionate market share, in part because of the Company’s telematics-driven approach to insurance—i.e., the collection and transmission of vehicle-use data through devices. On October 5, 2020, Root filed a registration statement on Form S-1 with the SEC in connection with the IPO, which, after several amendments, was declared effective on October 27, 2020 (the “Registration Statement”). On October 28, 2020, Root conducted the IPO, selling 26.8 million shares of the Company’s Class A common stock to the public at $27.00 per share for total approximate proceeds of $724.43 million. On October 29, 2020, Root 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”). 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) Root would foreseeably fail to generate positive cash flow for at least several years following the IPO; (ii) accordingly, the Company would foreseeably require significant cash infusions to meet its cash flow needs; (iii) notwithstanding the Defendants’ touting of Root’s purportedly unique, data-driven advantages, several of the Company’s established industry peers in fact possessed significant competitive advantages over Root with respect to, inter alia, telematics data and data engagement; and (iv) 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. On March 9, 2021, Bank of America (“BofA”) Securities analyst Joshua Shanker (“Shanker”) initiated coverage of Root with an “Underperform” rating on the premise that the Company is unlikely to be cash flow positive until 2027, finding that Root “will require not insignificant cash infusions from the capital markets to bridge its cash flow needs.” Shanker also noted that insurers Progressive, Allstate, and Berkshire Hathaway’s Geico would continue to impede the Company’s profitability, with Progressive and Allstate having a “sizable advantage over Root in terms of amount of [telematics] data as well as engagement with the data” used to price their auto insurance. On this news, Root’s stock price fell $0.18 per share, or 1.46%, to close at $12.17 per share on March 9, 2021, representing a total decline of 54.93% from the Offering price. The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Paris is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 80 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com CONTACT:Robert S. WilloughbyPomerantz LLPrswilloughby@pomlaw.com888-476-6529 ext. 7980
Interview: Youngest player to ever step out for the Hammers has moved on but still dreams of international duty with England
Pep Guardiola refused to blame Sergio Aguero for Manchester City's defeat to Chelsea despite the striker apologising for a penalty miss during the 2-1 defeat. A win at the Etihad on Saturday would have seen Man City crowned Premier League champions, and Aguero had a golden chance to put Guardiola's side on the road to that result. With City leading 1-0 just before half-time thanks to a Raheem Sterling goal, Aguero stepped up to take a penalty which Gabriel Jesus had won - but the Argentine forward made a mess of the opportunity.
Barack Obama’s beloved dog Bo has died from cancer. Mr Obama promised his daughters Malia and Sasha they could get a puppy on the night he was elected as president. Bo spent much of his life at the White House as “first dog” and was almost 13 when he died.
The SNP has won an emphatic victory in the Holyrood elections, but did not gain an overall majority. Nicola Sturgeon’s party took 64 seats in Thursday’s vote – 62 in constituencies and one on the Highlands and Islands and another in the South Scotland regional list – one shy of a majority but well ahead of the Tories on 31 seats. With the failure to return 65 MSPs, the case for another independence referendum is weakened, but the Scottish Greens provide an overall pro-independence majority of 72 seats.
Boris Johnson offers olive branch with appeal for ‘Team UK’ to work together
With thousands of fans celebrating outside the San Siro stadium and a guard of honour onto the pitch, Inter Milan celebrated their first Serie A title in over a decade with a 5-1 victory over Sampdoria giving Antonio Conte's side a record 14th successive home win.
Zoom has unique access to your iPad's camera that you won't find in other third-party apps.
The Aussie's astonishing run on clay has ended after a diabolical first set in the Madrid Open final. Read on to find out what happened.
Victor Osimhen's latest impressive display has resulted in two goals and an assist in Napoli's 4-1 dismantling of relegation-threatened Spezia 4-1 in Serie A to boost their Champions League hopes.Both of Osimhen's goals came in the first half after Piotr Zielinski's 15th-minute opener on Saturday.
Each year on December 7, Gay Weir would lovingly make and decorate four birthday cakes without fail.With three of her precious quadruplets now no longer so close to home, her baking skills are a little less in demand.
Liverpool 2-0 Southampton: Sadio Mane and Thiago Alcantara give the Reds a much-needed win at home
Ultra-wealthy CEO is known for trolling people on Twitter, but folks aren’t exactly thrilled to see his comedic stylings on “Saturday Night Live”
Follow all the latest developments
Liverpool boosted their hopes of Champions League qualification with a 2-0 victory over Southampton at Anfield on Saturday night. Sadio Mane opened the scoring on Merseyside with a close-range header 31 minutes into the contest, and Liverpool had Alisson Becker to thank for keeping the Saints at bay before Thiago Alcantara’s classy finish in the 90th minute settled the contest. The result may only push Liverpool up from seventh to sixth position in the table for now, but the champions are now just five points off fourth-placed Leicester City with a game in hand.
Alexander Zverev produced an impressive display to beat Dominic Thiem in straight sets on Saturday and book his spot in the Madrid Open final, where he will face Matteo Berrettini.