Slack investors may receive additional information about the case by clicking the link "Submit Your Information" above.
According to the complaint, Slack offers a business technology platform that allows users to share and aggregate information from other software, take action on notifications, and advance workflows in a multitude of third-party applications.
On June 20, 2019, Slack filed its prospectus on a Form 424B4 with the SEC, which forms part of the Registration Statement. Slack registered for the resale of up to 118,429,640 shares of Class A common stock by registered shareholders at a reference price of $26.00. According to the Registration Statement, the resale of Slack’s stock was not underwritten by any investment bank and the registered stockholders would purportedly elect whether or not to sell their shares.
According to the complaint, on September 4, 2019, Slack reported its second-quarter fiscal 2019 results and issued guidance for the third quarter, expecting a wider loss than analysts predicted. In a press release, Slack stated, in part, “Revenue was negatively impacted by $8.2 million of credits related to service level disruption in the quarter.” On a conference call to discuss the results, Stewart Butterfield, Slack’s Chief Executive Officer, stated that the disruptions were attributable, at least distantly, to issues with scaling Slack’s services to encompass a greater user-load.
Following this news, Slack’s share price fell $3.69 per share, nearly 12%, over two consecutive trading sessions to close at $27.38 per share on September 6, 2019.
The complaint alleges that the Registration Statement was false and misleading and omitted to state material adverse facts. Specifically, the defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) Slack’s platform was susceptible to recurring service-level disruptions; (2) such disruptions were increasingly likely to occur as Slack scaled its services to a larger user base; (3) Slack provides credits even if a customer was not specifically affected by service-level disruptions; (4) as a result, any service-level disruptions would have a material adverse impact on Slack’s financial results; and (5) as a result of the foregoing, the defendants’ positive statements about Slack’s business, operations, and prospects, were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
If you are a member of the class described above, you may no later than November 18, 2019 move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff of the class, if you so choose.
A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts 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. Returning the attached form or communicating with any counsel is not necessary to participate or share in any recovery achieved in this case. Any member of the purported class may move the court to serve as a lead plaintiff through counsel of his/her choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an inactive class member.
Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP has not filed a complaint in this matter. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP toll free at 1-844-887-9500 or 1-610-667-7706, or via e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org. If you would like additional information about the suit, please click on the link "Submit Your Information" above and fill out the form as promptly as possible.
Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP
James Maro, Esq. or Adrienne Bell, Esq.
280 King of Prussia Road
Radnor, PA 19087
1-844-887-9500 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706
Or by e-mail at email@example.com