Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Reminds Investors That Class Action Lawsuits Have Been Filed Against Yatsen, Barclays, Warner Bros., and Olo and Encourages Investors to Contact the Firm


NEW YORK, Oct. 16, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder rights law firm, reminds investors that class actions have been commenced on behalf of stockholders of Yatsen Holding Ltd. (NYSE: YSG), Barclays PLC (NYSE: BCS), Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc. (NASDAQ: WBD), and Olo, Inc. (NYSE: OLO). Stockholders have until the deadlines below to petition the court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information about each case can be found at the link provided.

Yatsen Holding Ltd. (NYSE: YSG)

Class Period: November 19, 2020 – March 10, 2022 or pursuant to the Company’s November 19, 2020 IPO

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 22, 2022

Yatsen operates in the Chinese cosmetics market, generating substantially all of its net revenue from the sale of beauty products under the Perfect Diary and Little Ondine brands.

According to the complaint filed in the Southern District of New York, during the Class Period, including in the registration statement and prospectus used to effectuate the Company’s IPO, Yatsen and the other named defendants misled investors into believing that Perfect Diary and Little Ondine were thriving, thereby driving Yatsen’s “healthy” top-line growth at the time of its IPO and quarter after quarter thereafter. In truth, however, cosmetic and skincare sales of Perfect Diary and Little Ondine products were declining in the period leading up to (and including at the time of) the IPO and throughout 2021. Moreover, as the truth about Yatsen’s business reached the market, the value of the Company’s shares declined dramatically, causing Yatsen investors to suffer significant damages.

By the commencement of the action, Yatsen’s shares traded as low as $0.39 per ADS, representing a decline of over 96% from the $10.50 IPO offering price.

For more information on the Yatsen class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/YSG

Barclays PLC (NYSE: BCS)

Class Period: February 18, 2021 – March 25, 2022

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 22, 2022

Barclays is a British universal bank. Its businesses include consumer banking and payments operations around the world, as well as global corporate and investment banking.

Barclays has disclosed that starting on February 18, 2021, Barclays Bank PLC ("BBPLC"), a wholly owned subsidiary of Barclays, issued and sold approximately $17.64 billion in unregistered securities over and above the maximum amount of securities registered in two BBPLC shelf registration statements. Barclays has also admitted that "by virtue of the fact that the over-issuance occurred and was not immediately identified, both [Barclays] and BBPLC had a material weakness in relation to certain aspects of their internal control environment and, as a consequence, their internal control over financial reporting for the year ended 31 December 2021 was not effective." As a result of the over-issuance, Barclays has restated its financial statements included on its Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2021. BBPLC has also commenced a rescission offer for the unregistered securities.

The truth began to emerge on Monday March 28, 2022, when, before the trading market for Barclays ADRs opened for the day, Barclays disclosed the over-issuance for the first time, and informed investors that BBPLC had issued approximately $15.2 billion in unregistered securities in excess of the maximum amount of securities registered in an August 2019 shelf registration statement, that BBPLC would commence a rescission offer for those unregistered securities, and that Barclays expected the rescission losses to be c.£450m (approximately $589.5 million). In response to this news, the price of Barclays ADRs declined 10.61%, or $0.96 per ADR, from a closing price on Friday March 25, 2022 of $9.05 per ADR to a closing price of $8.09 per ADR on Monday March 28, 2022, the next trading day.

On July 28, 2022, before the trading market for Barclays ADRs opened for the day, Barclays announced that BBPLC had also over-issued unregistered securities in excess of the maximum amount of securities registered in a second BBPLC shelf registration statement, and that Barclays had provisioned "£1,592m [approximately $1.940 billion] (December 2021: £220m) related to the overissuance of structured notes and £165m [approximately $201 million] (December 2021: nil) related to liabilities that could be incurred arising out of ongoing discussions in respect of a potential SEC resolution." In response to this news, the price of Barclays ADRs declined $0.41 per ADR, or 5.2%, from a closing price of $7.89 per ADR on July 27, 2022 to a closing price of $7.48 per ADR on July 28, 2022.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements or omitted material information (a) in Barclays reported financial statements (which have been restated), (b) by stating that Barclays internal controls over financial reporting were effective (which Barclays has admitted were not effective and had a material weakness), and (c) by failing to disclose the over-issuance, and that BBPLC was violating U.S. securities laws and/or SEC regulations, subjecting Barclays to legal liability.

For more information on the Barclays class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/BCS

Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc. (NASDAQ: WBD)

Class Period: May 17, 2021 – April 8, 2022

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 22, 2022

The complaint alleges the Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and omitted material facts in the Registration Statement and Prospectus for Warner Bros. common stock. The complaint's allegations related to the merger between Discovery and the WarnerMedia business of AT&T (the "Merger"). The Merger was announced on May 17, 2021 and closed on April 8, 2022. Pursuant to the Merger, Discovery combined its business with WarnerMedia to form Warner Bros.

At the time of filing the Registration Statement and Prospectus, Defendants either knew or had access to adverse information concerning operations of the WarnerMedia business. Among other things, as subsequently disclosed by Defendants after the Merger, (i) WarnerMedia's HBO Max streaming business had a high churn rate that made the business not "viable" unless the churn rate was reversed, (ii) AT&T was overinvesting in WarnerMedia entertainment content for streaming, without sufficient concern for return on investments, (iii) WarnerMedia had a business model to grow the number of subscribers to its streaming service without regard to cost or profitability, (iv) WarnerMedia was improvidently concentrating its investments in streaming and ignoring its other business lines, and (v) WarnerMedia had overstated the number of subscribers to HBO Max by as many as 10 million subscribers, by including as subscribers AT&T customers who had received bundled access to HBO Max, but had not signed onto the service. That adverse information was not disclosed to Discovery shareholders in the Registration Statement or Prospectus or otherwise prior to the effective date of the Merger.

As a result, the Registration Statement and Prospectus and certain of the Defendants' other public statements, contained untrue statements of material fact or omitted to state material facts required to be stated therein or necessary to make the statements therein not misleading, in violation of Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act.

From April 11, 2022, the first trading day after completion of the Merger, to the date prior to filing of this complaint (September 23, 2022), Warner Bros. market price fell by 52.4%, from $24.78 to $11.79 per share, as the market became aware of the foregoing misrepresented and omitted facts.

For more information on the Warner Bros. class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/WBD

Olo, Inc. (NYSE: OLO)

Class Period: August 11, 2021 – August 11, 2022

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 28, 2022

Olo provides software to restaurants to assist with online ordering and food-delivery coordination. During the Class Period, the Company’s key business metric demonstrating its growth was its “active locations,” with each active location representing a unique restaurant location using an Olo product.

In February 2020, the Company announced a partnership with Subway® restaurants (“Subway”) to enable Subway’s more than 20,000 U.S.-based restaurants to handle digital orders from third-party “marketplaces” such as Uber Eats or DoorDash. Throughout the Class Period, Olo touted the growth of its active locations, with Subway accounting for approximately 20% of those locations. By the first quarter of 2022, the Company’s active locations had grown to approximately 82,000 – a 19% increase over the prior year.

The truth emerged on August 11, 2022, when the Company announced disappointing results for the second quarter of 2022, lowering revenue guidance and reporting that its active location count remained flat at 82,000. The Company explained that it was impacted by the loss of 2,500 Subway locations, due to Subway choosing to implement direct integration with marketplaces, and that the Company expected the remaining Subway locations would also end their contracts with Olo by the fourth quarter of 2022 or first quarter of 2023 – facts Defendants claimed to have incorporated into Olo’s guidance months earlier without informing the market. In response to this news, the price of Olo common stock declined approximately 36%, from a closing price of $12.99 per share on August 11, 2022, to a closing price of $8.26 per share on August 12, 2022.

The Class Action alleges that, during the Class Period, Defendants misled investors and/or failed to disclose that (1) Subway was ending its contract with Olo; (2) Olo’s key business metric – active locations – could not continue to grow as Defendants touted due to the loss of Subway’s business; and (3) that, as a result of the above, Defendants’ statements about Olo’s business, operations, and prospects were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

For more information on the Olo class action go to: https://bespc.com/cases/OLO

About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York, California, and South Carolina. The firm represents individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities, derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal courts across the country. For more information about the firm, please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Contact Information:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com