InsWeb Corp. (INSW, Financial) filed Annual Report for the period ended 2011-12-31.
Insweb Corp. has a market cap of $51.2 million; its shares were traded at around $7.99 with a P/E ratio of 29.6 and P/S ratio of 1.2.
Read the The complete Report
Insweb Corp. has a market cap of $51.2 million; its shares were traded at around $7.99 with a P/E ratio of 29.6 and P/S ratio of 1.2.
Highlight of Business Operations:
On October 12, 2007, Vanessa Simmonds, a purported stockholder of IPC, filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, against IPC and two investment banking firms that served as underwriters for the initial public offering of our common stock in July 1999. The complaint alleges that: (i) the defendants, other underwriters of the offering, and unspecified officers, directors and principal stockholders of IPC constituted a “group” that owned in excess of 10% of IPC s outstanding common stock between July 23, 1999 and July 20, 2000; (ii) the defendants were therefore subject to the “short swing” prohibitions of Section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (iii) the defendants engaged in purchases and sales, or sales and purchases, of IPC s common stock within periods of less than six months in violation of the provisions of Section 16(b). The complaint seeks disgorgement of all profits allegedly received by the defendants, with interest and attorneys fees, for transactions in violation of Section 16(b). IPC, as the statutory beneficiary of any potential Section 16(b) recovery, is named as a nominal defendant in the complaint. A number of similar lawsuits against underwriters of other public offerings have recently been filed by the same plaintiff and law firm. On February 11, 2008, the court approved a stipulated order that IPC need not answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. On February 28, 2008, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint, and IPC was again excused from filing an answer. On March 12, 2009 the court issued an order dismissing the lawsuit with prejudice, but plaintiffs appealed this order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. On December 2, 2010, the Ninth Circuit determined that the plaintiff s demand letters sent to 30 defendant issuers were inadequate and affirmed the district court's dismissal of plaintiff's claim as to those defendants. The Ninth Court remanded another 24 cases, including IPC s case, with instructions that the District Court permit the underwriters and issuers to file motions challenging the adequacy of the demand letters in those cases. The Ninth Circuit made clear to the District Court that the Ninth Circuit expects the District Court to dismiss claims as to issuers, such as IPC, that received demand letters similar to the letters that were found to be inadequate. But the Ninth Circuit also reversed the District Court's decision that the statute of limitations had run on claims of certain issuers, including IPC, which may leave open the possibility that plaintiff could send new demand letters. The underwriters and plaintiff are seeking review by the United States Supreme Court. If the lawsuit is reinstated on appeal, IPC intends to defend the lawsuit vigorously. The litigation and settlement process is inherently uncertain and management cannot predict the outcome, though, if unfavorable, it could have a material adverse effect on IPC s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.Read the The complete Report
