WILMINGTON, Del., Jan. 23, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.:
- Do you, or did you, own shares of ChannelAdvisor Corporation (NYSE: ECOM)?
- Did you purchase your shares between November 6, 2014 and January 12, 2015, inclusive?
- Did you lose money in your investment in ChannelAdvisor Corporation?
- Do you want to discuss your rights?
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., including former Special Assistant United States Attorney, Timothy J. MacFall, announces that a complaint has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased the common stock of ChannelAdvisor Corporation ("ChannelAdvisor" or the "Company") (NYSE: ECOM) between November 6, 2014 and January 12, 2015, inclusive (the "Class Period"), alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of its officers (the "Complaint").
If you purchased shares of ChannelAdvisor during the Class Period, or purchased shares prior to the Class Period and still hold ChannelAdvisor, and wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Peter Allocco of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 2 Righter Parkway, Suite 120, Wilmington, DE 19803 at (888) 969-4242; by e-mail to [email protected]; or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/channeladvisor-corporation-ecom.
ChannelAdvisor is a leading provider of software-as-a-service ("SaaS") solutions that enable its retailer and manufacturer customers to integrate, manage and optimize their merchandise sales across hundreds of online channels. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements, and omitted materially adverse facts, about the Company's business, operations and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the defendants concealed from the investing public that: (1) ChannelAdvisors' shift in customer base away from smaller clients to larger clients posed a risk to the Company's financial performance as it impacts the revenue generated from its variable subscriptions; and (2) larger clients were given a discount in the percentage of gross merchandise value ("GMV") that goes to ChannelAdvisor for variable subscription, which results in lower revenue for the Company. As a result of defendants' alleged false and misleading statements, the Company's stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period.
According to the Complaint, on January 12, 2015, the Company issued a press release which lowered its revenue guidance for the fourth quarter of 2014. The Company's Chief Executive Officer, Scot Wingo, commented: "We saw an unusual shift of gross merchandise volume (GMV) to larger customers this holiday season at the expense of smaller customers. . . . Because larger customers enjoy volume discounts in the form of lower take rates, this shift translated to lower variable subscription revenue, even though overall GMV increased 31% year over year for the fourth quarter. This resulted in fixed subscription revenue for the fourth quarter growing approximately 27% while variable subscription revenue decreased approximately 5% compared to a year ago."
On this news, shares in ChannelAdvisor plummeted over 53%, closing at $9.83 per share on January 13, 2015, on extraordinarily high trading volume.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than March 24, 2015. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member's claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Any member of the proposed 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.
While Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. did not file the Complaint in this matter, the firm, with offices in Wilmington, Delaware and Garden City, New York, regularly litigates securities class, derivative and direct actions, shareholder rights litigation and corporate governance litigation, including claims for breach of fiduciary duty and proxy violations in the Delaware Court of Chancery and in state and federal courts throughout the United States.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
SOURCE Rigrodsky & Long, P.A.