 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
Boston Communications Group, Inc. Conclusion: According to a press release dated June 9, 2004, the amended consolidated complaint in the securities class action lawsuits filed against the Company and two of its senior executives in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts has been voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs without prejudice to the plaintiffs' ability to re-file a complaint. The Company and its insurers made no payment in connection with the dismissal of these lawsuits and have no obligation to make payments in the future.
The original complaint alleges that Defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, and rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing false and misleading statements concerning the Company's business. The action charges that defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the market throughout the Class Period which statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's securities.
Specifically, the complaint alleges that the Defendants issued false and misleading statements and had a duty to correct such statements concerning Boston Communications' relationship with Verizon Wireless. In particular, analysts had raised concerns regarding the company's ability to maintain relationships with its primary customers, which accounted for the majority of the Company's revenue. Moreover, such concerns included the propensity for its customers to take services outsourced to Boston Communications, in-house. To allay investor fears concerning Boston Communications's customer concentration, the Company attempted to reassure investors that contract negotiations with Verizon Wireless, and other customers, were continuing as planned, despite a company policy not to do so.
The complaint further alleges that on July 16, 2003, after the market had closed, Boston Communications announced the truth about its contract negotiations with Verizon. The Company stated that its contract with Verizon is scheduled, according to its terms, to be renegotiated in 2003. The Company is currently in contract discussions with Verizon. The terms and conditions, including the length of the contract and pricing have not yet been determined. Verizon has also requested that Boston Communications provide support services to assist Verizon in testing its own internal prepaid platform in 2004 which could potentially displace prepay services currently being provided by Boston Communications. None of the Company's contracts are exclusive and its carrier customers have and continue to use and/or test competing products in certain markets. The market reacted swiftly to this news, with the Company's stock falling 39%, or $8.46 from a closing price of $21.16 on July 16, 2003 to close at $12.70 on July 17, 2003.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 4812
Sector: Services
Industry: Communications Services
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | Boston Communications Group, Inc. |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | BCGI |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.bcgi.net |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| Den, et al. v. Boston Communications Group, Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Class Action Complaint | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 11/10/2003 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| Den, et al. v. Walker, et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 03/22/2004 | ||
| Stipulation Of Dismissal Without Prejudice Pursuant To Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(ii) | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 06/08/2004 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 06/09/2004 | ||
| OTHER DOCUMENTS | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: | |||
| Type: | Date on the document: | ||
WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
The information included on this Web site, whether provided by personnel employed by Stanford Law School or by third parties, is provided for research and teaching purposes only. Neither Stanford University, Stanford Law School, nor any of their employees, agents, contractors, or affiliates warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information or analyses displayed herein, and we caution all readers that inclusion of any information on this site does not constitute an endorsement of the truthfulness or accuracy of that information. In particular, this Web site contains complaints and other documents filed in federal and state courts, which make allegations that may or may not be accurate. No reader should, on the basis of information contained in or referenced by this Web site, assume that any of these allegations are truthful.
Go to Search page | Go to Case Index page | Back to Top