| Company: | Vimpel-Communications |
| Ticker Symbol: | NYSE: VIP |
| Class Period: | March 25, 2004 to December 8, 2004 |
| Date Filed: | Dec-10-04 |
| Lead Plaintiff Deadline: | Feb-08-05 |
| Court: | Southern District, NY |
| Allegations: |
A class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all securities purchasers of Open Joint Stock Company "Vimpel-Communications" (a/k/a Vympel Communicatii) (NYSE: VIP - News; RTS: VIMP) ("VimpelCom" or the "Company") from March 25, 2004 through December 8, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period").
VimpelCom is a leading provider of telecommunications services in Russia and Kazakhstan. The Company operates under the 'Bee Line GSM' brand in Russia and 'K-mobile' and 'EXCESS' brands in Kazakhstan. VimpelCom is recognized for introducing two digital cellular communications standards in Russia. It built the first dual-band GSM-900/1800 cellular network in Russia and leads the development and emergence of the mass consumer market for wireless telecommunications in Russia with prepaid products.
The complaint charges VimpelCom, Alexander V. Izosimov and Elena A. Shmatova with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that VimpelCom was passing fifty percent (50%) of its revenues from its Moscow operations to its wholly owned subsidiary KB Impuls, thereby improperly deducting fifty percent (50%) of Moscow revenues as expenses to VimpelCom; (2) as such, VimpelCom was only paying taxes on fifty percent (50%) of the Moscow revenues rather than on all revenues from its Moscow operations, including revenues passed onto KB Impuls; (3) that this improper deduction caused VimpelCom to artificially inflate its financial results by at least US$534 million for fiscal years 2001-2003; (4) that as a result of this, the Company's financial results were in violation of generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"); (5) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls; and (6) that as a result of the above, the Company's financial results were materially inflated at all relevant times.
On December 8, 2004, VimpelCom announced that it had received an act with preliminary conclusions of the review of VimpelCom's 2001 tax filing by its tax inspectorate, stating that the Company owed an additional 2.5 billion rubles which is approximately US$90 million in tax (plus 1.9 billion rubles or approximately US$67 million in fines and penalties). A large portion of this amount related to the deductibility of expenses incurred by VimpelCom in connection with the agency relationship between VimpelCom and its wholly owned subsidiary, KB Impuls, which held the GSM license for the city of Moscow and the Moscow region. News of this shocked the market. Shares of VimpelCom fell $8.38 per share, or 21.78 percent, to close at $30.10 per share on unusually high trading volume.
If you acquired the securities of the defendants during the Class Period you may, no later than the Lead Plaintiff Deadline shown above, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff through counsel of your choice. You may also choose to remain an absent class member. A lead plaintiff must meet certain requirements.
VimpelCom is a leading provider of telecommunications services in Russia and Kazakhstan. The Company operates under the 'Bee Line GSM' brand in Russia and 'K-mobile' and 'EXCESS' brands in Kazakhstan. VimpelCom is recognized for introducing two digital cellular communications standards in Russia. It built the first dual-band GSM-900/1800 cellular network in Russia and leads the development and emergence of the mass consumer market for wireless telecommunications in Russia with prepaid products.
The complaint charges VimpelCom, Alexander V. Izosimov and Elena A. Shmatova with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that VimpelCom was passing fifty percent (50%) of its revenues from its Moscow operations to its wholly owned subsidiary KB Impuls, thereby improperly deducting fifty percent (50%) of Moscow revenues as expenses to VimpelCom; (2) as such, VimpelCom was only paying taxes on fifty percent (50%) of the Moscow revenues rather than on all revenues from its Moscow operations, including revenues passed onto KB Impuls; (3) that this improper deduction caused VimpelCom to artificially inflate its financial results by at least US$534 million for fiscal years 2001-2003; (4) that as a result of this, the Company's financial results were in violation of generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"); (5) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls; and (6) that as a result of the above, the Company's financial results were materially inflated at all relevant times.
On December 8, 2004, VimpelCom announced that it had received an act with preliminary conclusions of the review of VimpelCom's 2001 tax filing by its tax inspectorate, stating that the Company owed an additional 2.5 billion rubles which is approximately US$90 million in tax (plus 1.9 billion rubles or approximately US$67 million in fines and penalties). A large portion of this amount related to the deductibility of expenses incurred by VimpelCom in connection with the agency relationship between VimpelCom and its wholly owned subsidiary, KB Impuls, which held the GSM license for the city of Moscow and the Moscow region. News of this shocked the market. Shares of VimpelCom fell $8.38 per share, or 21.78 percent, to close at $30.10 per share on unusually high trading volume.
If you acquired the securities of the defendants during the Class Period you may, no later than the Lead Plaintiff Deadline shown above, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff through counsel of your choice. You may also choose to remain an absent class member. A lead plaintiff must meet certain requirements.
Register your Case
If you feel you qualify for damages or remedies that might be awarded in this class action please fill in our form on the right to submit your complaint.
