According to the Apple lawsuit, throughout the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or 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, one of Apple’s most important growth markets;
(b) 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;
(d) unit sales for iPhone and other hardware was relevant to investors and the Company’s financial performance, and the decision to withhold such unit sales was designed to and would mask declines in unit sales of the Company’s flagship product; and
(e) as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis in fact when issuing the Company’s revenue outlook for the first quarter 2019 and/or making the related statements concerning demand for its products, as Apple’s business metrics and financial prospects were not as strong as defendants had led the market to believe.
If you suffered a loss in Apple you have until June 17, 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.
To receive more information, please fill out the form here.
Source: The Law Offices of Vincent Wong
MacDailyNews Take: Sigh, these things are piling up. Hopefull, in the name of efficiency, they’ll all get roled up into one class action eventuually.
Once 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.