Everbridge, Inc. Class Action Lawsuit - EVBG
- Company Name
- Everbridge, Inc.
- Stock Symbol
- Class Period
- November 4, 2019 to February 24, 2022
- Motion Deadline
- June 3, 2022
- Central District of California
The Everbridge class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers of Everbridge, Inc. (NASDAQ: EVBG) common stock between November 4, 2019 and February 24, 2022, inclusive (the “Class Period”) and charges Everbridge as well as certain of its top executives with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Everbridge class action lawsuit was commenced on April 4, 2022 in the Central District of California and is captioned Sylebra Capital Partners Master Fund Ltd v. Everbridge, Inc., No. 22-cv-02249.
If you suffered significant losses and wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the Everbridge class action lawsuit, please provide your information by clicking here. You can also contact attorney J.C. Sanchez of Robbins Geller by calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org. Lead plaintiff motions for the Everbridge class action lawsuit must be filed with the court no later than June 3, 2022.
CASE ALLEGATIONS: Everbridge is a global software company that provides enterprise software applications to automate and accelerate organizations’ operational response to “critical events” in order to keep people safe and organizations running.
The Everbridge class action lawsuit alleges that before and throughout the Class Period, Everbridge engaged in an unusual buying spree, purchasing nine separate companies. But as the Everbridge class action lawsuit further alleges, during that same time, defendants misled investors regarding both the significant problems Everbridge was encountering by its multiple acquisitions and the extent to which the revenues it obtained from those acquired companies were being used to mask increasingly stagnant organic growth. The Everbridge class action lawsuit also alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants led investors to expect every quarter and fiscal year that it would achieve revenue growth over and above 30%, with acquisitions making up only about 5% of that aggregate figure, and in each such reporting period they boasted that the Everbridge had exceeded its own guidance. However, Everbridge’s publicly available financial statements did not break out aggregate revenue amounts by business segment. The result was a lack of transparency as to the extent to which organic growth was lagging and Everbridge was only able to continue with this pattern by acquiring other companies and using their legacy revenues to fill in the gaps.
On December 9, 2021, Everbridge disclosed that defendant David Meredith had unexpectedly resigned as Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), without providing a reason for his decision. Everbridge also provided 2022 revenue growth guidance of between 20%-23%, well below the expected baseline of 30%. On this news, Everbridge’s common stock price fell by more than 45%.
Then, on February 24, 2022, Everbridge announced its financial results for the fourth quarter and full year 2021, as well as its guidance for the first quarter and full year 2022. As to revenue, Everbridge guided only 20% growth in the first quarter of 2022 and a scant 15%-17% growth for the full year, even lower than the disappointing guidance previously issued in December 2021. Further, in an earnings call with analysts that same day, the new interim co-CEO, Vernon Irvin, disclosed for the first time, despite prior representations to the contrary, that “these products and businesses” obtained from Everbridge’s buying binge “have created incremental product line complexity that produce integration challenges and have complicated our go-to-market efforts.” Irvin also stated that Everbridge will pause engaging in any new M&A activity to focus on product integration, as well as significantly “simplify” and reduce its product offerings. Further, Irvin disclosed that in its international public warning business, Everbridge was “seeing meaningful contraction in the size of countrywide deals as compared to the wins that we are seeing over the past couple of years.” Defendant Patrick Brickley, the other interim co-CEO, stated that the focus on product integration and simplification would alone result in an approximate $17 million of revenue loss. Brickley also disclosed that the decline in deal sizes “has been exacerbated by lingering effects of COVID,” and that it would result in another $15 million reduction in revenues. On all this news, Everbridge’s common stock price fell by an additional 33.9%, further damaging investors.
THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased Everbridge common stock during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Everbridge class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the class action lawsuit. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery of the class action lawsuit is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.
ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP: Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world’s leading complex class action firms representing plaintiffs in securities fraud cases. The Firm is ranked #1 on the 2021 ISS Securities Class Action Services Top 50 Report for recovering nearly $2 billion for investors last year alone – more than triple the amount recovered by any other plaintiffs’ firm. With 200 lawyers in 9 offices, Robbins Geller’s attorneys have obtained many of the largest securities class action recoveries in history, including the largest securities class action recovery ever – $7.2 billion – in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig.