Please complete this form relating to your transactions for Paysafe Limited (NYSE: PSFE) f/k/a Foley Trasimene Acquisition Corp. II (NYSE: BFT) securities between December 7, 2020 and November 10, 2021, inclusive (the “Class Period”).
You may also contact James Maro, Esq. (484) 270-1453; or toll free at (844) 887-9500; or you may submit your information via email at firstname.lastname@example.org; or you may click here to print a PDF of this form.
Paysafe investors may receive additional information about the case by clicking the link "Submit Your Information" above. If you are a member of the class described below, you may no later than February 8, 2022 move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff of the class, if you so choose.
Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of those who purchased or acquired Paysafe Limited (“Paysafe”) (NYSE: PSFE) f/k/a Foley Trasimene Acquisition Corp. II (“FTAC”) (NYSE: BFT) securities between December 7, 2020 and November 10, 2021, inclusive (the “Class Period”).
Paysafe, a Bermudian company with principal executive offices in Hamilton, Bermuda, provides end-to-end payment solutions through three primary business segments: Integrated Processing, Digital Wallet and eCash Solutions.
The Class Period commences on December 7, 2020, when FTAC announced that it had entered into a definitive agreement and plan of merger with Paysafe Group Holdings Limited. In connection with this announcement, the defendants represented that the transaction would position Paysafe for strong, accelerated growth. Thereafter, and throughout the Class Period, the defendants repeatedly assured investors that Paysafe was executing well against its strategy and was positioned for strong growth throughout 2021.
Investors began to learn the truth about Paysafe on August 16, 2021, when Paysafe announced its financial results for the second quarter of 2021 and provided disappointing guidance for the third quarter of 2021. Specifically, the defendants projected third quarter revenue of between $360 million and $375 million—well below analysts’ estimate of $389 million. The defendants attributed this weak guidance to challenges in Paysafe’s Digital Wallet segment, including “some softness in the . . . online gambling space” in European markets.
Nonetheless, Defendants assured investors that the company would rebound in the fourth quarter of 2021, stating that “Q4 is . . . where you start seeing a double-digit growth in Digital Wallet’s revenue,” and reiterating that despite a weak third quarter, the company still expected full-year 2021 revenue of between $1.53 billion and $1.55 billion due to strong fourth quarter expected results.
Following this news, the price of Paysafe common stock declined $1.58 per share, or more than 15%, from a close of $10.20 per share on August 13, 2021, to close at $8.62 per share on August 16, 2021.
Then, on November 11, 2021, Paysafe announced its third quarter 2021 financial results—including below-guidance quarterly revenue of $353.6 million—and lowered its full-year 2021 guidance for revenue and other financial metrics. Specifically, the defendants revealed that, due to “[g]ambling regulations and softness in key European markets and performance challenges impacting the Digital Wallet segment,” as well as “modified scope and timing of new eCommerce customer agreements relative to [Paysafe]’s original expectations for these agreement,” they now expected full-year 2021 revenue of between $1.47 billion and $1.48 billion. Additionally, the defendants provided disappointing guidance for the fourth quarter of 2021, projecting quarterly revenue of between $355 million and $385 million.
Following this news, the price of Paysafe common stock declined $3.03 per share, or more than 41%, from a close of $7.27 per share on November 10, 2021, to close at $4.24 per share on November 11, 2021.
The O’Brien Action alleges that, throughout the Class Period, the defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Paysafe was being negatively impacted by gambling regulations in key European markets; (2) Paysafe was encountering performance challenges in its Digital Wallet segment; (3) new eCommerce customer agreements were being pushed back; and (4) as a result, the defendants’ statements about Paysafe’s business, operations, and prospects lacked a reasonable basis.
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. Filling out the online form above 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.
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: James Maro, Esq. (484) 270-1453; toll-free at (844) 887-9500; or via e-mail at email@example.com. 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.