Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC reminds investors that a class action lawsuit has been filed againstApple Inc. and certain of its officers, on behalf of shareholders who purchased or otherwise acquired Apple securities between November 2, 2018 and January 2, 2019, both dates inclusive. Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm’s site: www.bgandg.com/aapl.
This class action seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose adverse information regarding Apple’s business and prospects. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose that: (a) the U.S.-China trade war had negatively impacted demand for iPhones and Apple’s pricing power in greater China; (b) due to Apple discounting the cost of replacement batteries to make up for the Company’s prior conduct of intentionally degrading the performance of the batteries in older iPhones, the rate at which Apple customers were replacing their batteries in older iPhones, rather than purchasing new iPhones, was negatively impacting Apple’s iPhone sales growth; (c) as a result of slowing demand, Apple had slashed production orders from suppliers for the new 2018 iPhone models and cut prices to reduce inventory; and (d) defendants’ decision to withhold unit sales for iPhones and other hardware, which was a metric relevant to investors and their view of the Company’s financial performance, was designed to and would mask declines in unit sales of the Company’s flagship product. As a result of this information being withheld from the market during the Class Period, the price of Apple stock was artificially inflated to more than $209 per share.
Then on January 2, 2019, post-close, Apple disclosed that, for the first time in over 14 years, Apple would miss its prior quarterly revenue forecast amid falling iPhone sales in China, its third largest market after USA and Europe. The Company announced first quarter fiscal 2019 revenues of only $84 billion, below the expected range of $89 billion to $93 billion the Company had announced eight weeks previously on November 1, 2018. The Company also disclosed that in addition to macroeconomics in the Chinese market, the price cuts to battery replacements a year earlier to fix the Company’s prior surreptitious conduct had hurt iPhone sales. This news caused the market price of Apple common stock to decline more than $15 per share, or more than 9%, from a close of $157.92 per share on January 2, 2019 to a close of $142.19 per share on January 3, 2019.
If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint you can visit the firm’s site: www.bgandg.com/aapl or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Investor Relations Analyst, Yael Hurwitz of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 212-697-6484. If you suffered a loss in Apple you have until June 14, 2019 to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn’t require that you serve as a lead plaintiff.
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a corporate litigation boutique. Our primary expertise is the aggressive pursuit of litigation claims on behalf of our clients. In addition to representing institutions and other investor plaintiffs in class action security litigation, the firm’s expertise includes general corporate and commercial litigation, as well as securities arbitration. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
Source: Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC
MacDailyNews Take: Again, both Apple CEO Tim Cook and CFO Luca Maestri could have thought, back in November, that China iPhone sales would continue and they might not have been able to foresee, even though it seems obvious in hindsight, that a late rush of battery replacements would ensue in December just before the low-priced iPhone battery replacement program’s end date, negatively impacting sales of new iPhones.
So, this seems like a tough one for the attorneys to prove.