1 amended class action complaint 06/13/2016

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN RE CNOVA N.V. SECURITIES LITIGATION This Document Relates To: All Actions

MASTER FILE 16 CV 444-LTS

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Lead Plaintiffs Michael Schwabe and Jaideep Khanna (collectively, “Plaintiffs”)

make the following allegations, except as to allegations specifically pertaining to Plaintiffs

and Plaintiffs’ counsel, based upon the investigation undertaken by Plaintiffs’ counsel, which

investigation included analysis of publicly available news articles and reports, public filings,

securities analysts’ reports and advisories about Cnova N.V. (“Cnova” or “Company”), press

releases and other public statements issued by the Company, and media reports about the

Company, and believe that substantial additional evidentiary support will exist for the

allegations set forth herein after a reasonable opportunity for discovery.

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is a federal securities class action on behalf all persons other than

Defendants (defined herein) who purchased the ordinary shares of Cnova pursuant and/or

traceable to the Company’s Registration Statement (“Registration Statement”), which

incorporated the Prospectus (“Prospectus”), which was filed pursuant to Rule 424(b)(4) on

November 21, 2014, issued in connection with the Company’s initial public offering on or

about November 19, 2014 (“IPO” or “Offering”) seeking to pursue remedies under the

Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”).

Case 1:16-cv-00444-LTS Document 24 Filed 06/13/16 of 34

2

2. Cnova was formed on May 30, 2014 as a combination of Cdiscount S.A. and

its subsidiaries (“Cdiscount”), which have operations in France, Columbia, Thailand,

Vietnam, Ecuador, Ivory Coast, Belgium and Senegal, and Nova Pontocom Comércio

Eletrônico S.A. and its subsidiaries (“Cnova Brazil”), which operate Extra.com,

Casasbahia.com and Pontofrio.com in Brazil. To effect the combination of Cdiscount and

Cnova Brazil, Cnova implemented reorganization (“Reorganization”) of the eCommerce

businesses of its parent companies (i.e., Cnova and Big C Supercenter, Casino, CBD, Éxito

and Via Varejo). As of the IPO, Cnova generated approximately half of its sales from each

of Cdiscount and Cnova Brazil.

3. On November 20, 2014, Cnova priced its IPO of 26,800,000 shares at $7.00

per share, exclusive of the underwriters’ over-allotment option to purchase 4,020,000

additional shares. Inexplicably, the IPO price reflected a discount of between 44% and 50%

compared to the range of $12.50 to $14.00 that the Company had indicated just two days

earlier on November 18, 2015. The IPO offered approximately 6.1% of Cnova’s equity to the

public.

4. The Registration Statement included consolidated financial statements for the

years ended December 31, 2011, 2012 and 2013, and for the nine months ended

September 30, 2013 and 2014, prepared on a pro forma basis reflecting the effects of the

Reorganization. The Registration Statement likewise included the quarterly financial

information for the quarterly periods ending September 30, 2012 through September 30,

2014.

5. Beginning a little over a year after Cnova’s IPO, the Company issued a series

of disclosures wherein it revealed that the financial information incorporated into the


3

Registration Statement for 2013 and 2014, and all of the financial results Cnova reported

since becoming a public company, require corrective restatements that will cumulatively

reduce its operating EBIT (earnings before interest and taxes) by at least €50.8 million.

(Cnova’s previously reported operating EBIT for full year 2013 and 2014 was €23 million

and €33 million, respectively). Specifically, the Company admitted that it: (i) overstated net

sales and earnings; (ii) improperly valued damaged and returned items and failed to take an

appropriate write-off; (iii) misstated accounts receivable related to the damaged/returned

items; (iv) identified discrepancies related (a) to accounts payable due to suppliers, and (b) to

accounts receivable and products in-transit with delivery companies; (v) improperly

accounted for intangible assets; and (vi) may have improperly deferred operating expenses.

Thus, the Company materially misreported its historical financial reports, which violated the

Company’s own stated accounting policies.

6. Based on these shocking disclosures, it now is evident that Defendants’

Registration Statement was materially false and misleading in violation of the Securities Act.

From the IPO through the commencement of this Action, Cnova shares declined more than

67%, from $7 to $2.28, or $4.62 per share, damaging investors in excess of approximately

$120 million.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

7. The claims asserted herein arise under and pursuant to Sections 11 and 15 of the

Securities Act [15 U.S.C. §§77k, and 77o].

8. This Court has jurisdiction of this action pursuant to Section 22 of the Securities

Act [15 U.S.C. §77v] and 28 U.S.C. §§1331 and 1337.


4

9. Venue is properly laid in this District pursuant to Section 22 of the Securities

Act and 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and (c). The acts and conduct complained of herein occurred in

substantial part in this District.

10. In connection with the acts and conduct alleged in this Complaint,

defendants, directly and indirectly, used the means and instrumentalities of interstate

commerce, including the United States mail, interstate telephonic communications, and the

facilities of the NASDAQ Global Select Market, a national securities exchange.

11. This Action has been brought within three years of the ordinary shares being

bona fide offered to the public and within one year after the discovery of the untrue statement

or the omission, or after such discovery should have been made by the exercise of reasonable

diligence.

PARTIES

Plaintiffs

12. Plaintiff Michael Schwabe purchased ordinary shares of Cnova, as set forth

in the certification previously filed with the Court and incorporated herein by reference,

pursuant and/or traceable to the Registration Statement issued in connection with the

Company’s IPO, and was damaged thereby.

13. Plaintiff Jaideep Khanna purchased ordinary shares of Cnova, as set forth in

the certification previously filed with the Court and incorporated herein by reference,

pursuant and/or traceable to the Registration Statement issued in connection with the

Company’s IPO, and was damaged thereby.


5

Defendant Cnova

14. Defendant Cnova is a public limited liability company organized under the

laws of The Netherlands. Its principal executive offices are at WTC Schiphol Airport,

Tower D, 7th Floor, Schiphol Boulevard 273, 1118 BH Schiphol, The Netherlands. Cnova

ordinary shares traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market at all relevant times hereto.

Individual Defendants

15. Defendant Vitor Faga de Almeida (“Almeida”) was, at all relevant times,

Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”) of Cnova. Almeida signed or authorized the signing of the

Registration Statement.

16. Defendant German Quiroga (“Quiroga”) was, at all relevant times, Co-Chief

Executive Officer and a director of Cnova. Quiroga signed or authorized the signing of the

Registration Statement and was the founder of Nova Pontocom, whose eCommerce business

is the main component of Cnova Brazil, and Pontofrio.com.

17. Defendant Emmanuel Grenier (“Grenier”) was, at all relevant times, Co-

CEO of Cnova. Grenier signed or authorized the signing of the Registration Statement.

18. Defendant Jean-Charles Naouri (“Naouri”) was, at all relevant times, a

director and Chairman of Cnova. Naouri signed or authorized the signing of the

Registration Statement. According to the Registration Statement, prior to completion of the

IPO, Naouri was the beneficial owner of 100% of the Company’s ordinary shares and

100% of the special voting depository receipts for special voting shares, which together

accounted for 100% of the total voting power. Also according to the Registration

Statement, upon completion of the IPO, Naouri would be the beneficial owner of 93.9% of

the Company’s ordinary shares and 100% of the special voting depository receipts for


6

special voting shares, which together would account for 96.9% of the total voting power.

19. Defendant Libano Miranda Barroso (“Barroso”) was, at all relevant times, a

director of Cnova. Barroso signed or authorized the signing of the Registration Statement.

20. Defendant Eleazar de Carvalho Filho (“Filho”) was, at all relevant times, a

director of Cnova. Filho signed or authorized the signing of the Registration Statement.

21. Defendant Didier Leveque (“Leveque”) was, at all relevant times, a director of

Cnova. Leveque signed or authorized the signing of the Registration Statement.

22. Defendant Ronaldo Iabrudi dos Santos Pereira (“Pereira”) was, at all relevant

times, a director of Cnova. Pereira signed or authorized the signing of the Registration

Statement.

23. Defendant Arnaud Strasser (“Strasser”) was, at all relevant times, a director of

Cnova. Strasser signed or authorized the signing of the Registration Statement.

24. Defendant Fernando Tracanella (“Tracanella”) was, at all relevant times, CFO

and Human Resources Director of the Company’s Brazilian operating segment. Tracanella

signed or authorized the signing of the Registration Statement.

25. Defendant Nicolas Woussen (“Woussen”) was, at all relevant times, Deputy

CEO in charge of Finance, Legal and Human Resources of Cdiscount, the Company’s French

operating segment. Woussen signed or authorized the signing of the Registration Statement.

26. Defendant Yves Desjacques (“Desjacques”) was, at all relevant times, a

director of Cnova.

27. Defendant Bernard Oppetit (“Oppetit”) was, at all relevant times, a director of

Cnova.


7

28. Defendants Almeida, Quiroga, Grenier, Naouri, Barroso, Filho, Leveque,

Pereira, Strasser, Tracanella Woussen, Desjacques and Oppetit are collectively referred to as

the “Individual Defendants.”

29. Because of their positions with the Company, the Individual Defendants had

the power and authority to control the contents of Cnova’s filings with the U.S. Securities

and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), press releases, presentations to securities analysts and

investors, and other public statements, including the Registration Statement and Prospectus.

Each Defendant was provided with copies of the Company’s filings and statements alleged

herein to be materially false and misleading, including the Registration Statement and

Prospectus, prior to, or shortly after, their issuance and had the ability and the opportunity to

prevent their issuance or to cause them to be corrected.

Underwriter Defendants

30. Defendant Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC (“Morgan Stanley”) was lead

underwriter of the Company’s IPO. In the IPO, Morgan Stanley agreed to purchase

10,050,000 shares of Cnova, exclusive of its over-allotment option.

31. Defendant J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (“J.P. Morgan”) was an underwriter of

the Company’s IPO. In the IPO, J.P. Morgan agreed to purchase 6,030,000 shares of Cnova,

exclusive of its over-allotment option.

32. Defendant Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated (“Merrill

Lynch”) was an underwriter of the Company’s IPO. In the IPO, Merrill Lynch agreed to

purchase 2,680,000 shares of Cnova, exclusive of its over-allotment option.

33. Defendant Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (“Credit Suisse”) was an

underwriter of the Company’s IPO. In the IPO, Credit Suisse agreed to purchase 2,680,000


8

shares of Cnova, exclusive of its over-allotment option.

34. Defendant Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. (“Deutsche Bank”) was an

underwriter of the Company’s IPO. In the IPO, Deutsche Bank agreed to purchase 2,680,000

shares of Cnova, exclusive of its over-allotment option.

35. Defendant BNP Paribas Securities Corp. (“BNP Paribas”) was an underwriter

of the Company’s IPO. In the IPO, BNP Paribas agreed to purchase 670,000 shares of

Cnova, exclusive of its over-allotment option.

36. Defendant HSBC Securities (USA) Inc. (“HSBC”) was an underwriter of the

Company’s IPO. In the IPO, HSBC agreed to purchase 670,000 shares of Cnova, exclusive

of its over-allotment option.

37. Defendant Natixis Securities Americas LLC (“Natixis”) was an underwriter of

the Company’s IPO. In the IPO, Natixis agreed to purchase 670,000 shares of Cnova,

exclusive of its over-allotment option.

38. Defendant SG Americas Securities, LLC (“SG Americas”) was an underwriter

of the Company’s IPO. In the IPO, SG Americas agreed to purchase 670,000 shares of

Cnova, exclusive of its over-allotment option.

39. Defendants Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan, Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse,

Deutsche Bank, BNP Paribas, HSBC, Natixis and SG Americas are collectively referred to

as the “Underwriter Defendants.”

PLAINTIFFS’ CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

40. Plaintiffs bring this action as a class action pursuant to Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3) on behalf of themselves and all persons (“Class”) who

purchased the ordinary shares of Cnova pursuant and/or traceable to the Registration


9

Statement issued in connection with the Company’s IPO during the period between

November 19, 2014 (the date of the IPO) and December 18, 2015 (“Class Period”). Excluded

from the Class are Defendants; the officers and directors of Defendants; members of the

immediate family of any excluded person; the legal representatives, agents, heirs,

successors, or assigns of any excluded person; and any entity in which any excluded person

has a controlling interest or which is related to or affiliated with any excluded person.

41. The members of the Class are so numerous that joinder of all members is

impracticable. Cnova sold 26.8 million shares in the IPO. During the Class Period, Cnova’s

ordinary shares were actively traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market. While the

exact number of Class members is unknown to Plaintiffs at this time and can only be

ascertained through appropriate discovery, Plaintiffs believe there are hundreds, if not

thousands, of members of the proposed Class. Record owners and other members of the

Class may be identified from records maintained by Cnova or its transfer agent or the

underwriters of the IPO and may be notified of the pendency of this action, by mail and

publication, using techniques and forms of notice similar to those customarily used in class

actions arising under the federal securities laws.

42. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of the

members of the Class. Plaintiffs have retained competent counsel experienced in class and

securities litigation to further ensure the Class’s interests are protected and intend to

prosecute this action vigorously.

43. Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of all members of the Class

because Plaintiffs’ and all the Class members’ damages arise from and were caused by the

same violations of the federal securities laws that are complained of herein. Plaintiffs do


10

not have any interest antagonistic to, or in conflict with, the Class.

44. Common questions of law and fact exist as to all members of the Class and

predominate over any questions affecting only individual members of the Class. Among the

questions of law and fact common to the Class are:

(a) Whether the federal securities laws were violated by Defendants’ acts

and omissions as alleged herein;

(b) Whether the Registration Statement that Defendants issued to the

investing public in connection with the IPO misstated and/or omitted material facts about

Cnova and its financial results; and

(c) Whether the members of the Class have sustained damages and, if so,

what is the proper measure of damages.

45. A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient

adjudication of this controversy since joinder of all Class members is impracticable.

Furthermore, as the damages suffered by individual Class members may be relatively small,

the expense and burden of individual litigation make it virtually impossible for Class

members, individually, to seek to redress the wrongs done to them. Plaintiffs know of no

difficulty that will be encountered in the management of this litigation that would preclude

its maintenance as a class action.

THE OFFERING AND DEFENDANTS’ MISSTATEMENTS

46. Cnova describes itself as “one of the largest global eCommerce companies,

with operations in Europe, Latin America, Asia and Africa.” Its most significant product

categories are home appliances, consumer electronics, computers, and home furnishings.

The Company’s brands include Cdiscount, Extra, Casas Bahia, and Ponto Frio. In its


11

primary markets of France and Brazil, Cnova was the largest and second largest eCommerce

company, respectively.

47. According to the Company’s Form 20-F filing for the fiscal year ended

December 31, 2014, Cdiscount accounted for approximately 46.2% of the Company’s total

reported net sales in 2014 and Cnova Brazil accounted for approximately 53.8% of total net

sales that year.

48. On November 18, 2014, Cnova filed Amendment No. 8 to its Form F-1

indicating that it “expect[s] that the initial public offering price will be between $12.50 and

$14.00 per ordinary share.”

49. On November 20, 2014, Cnova priced its IPO at $7.00 per share – 44% to

50% lower than the range of $12.50 to $14.00 that the Company had indicated just two

days earlier. Pursuant to the IPO, the Company offered 26,800,000 ordinary shares,

exclusive of the underwriters’ over-allotment option to purchase 4,020,000 additional shares.

According to the Company, after a partial exercise of the underwriters’ over-allotment

option (for an additional 2,357,327 shares), the Offering raised €117.2 million (or

approximately $146.6 million) for the Company net of underwriter discounts and expenses.

The IPO offered approximately 6.1% of Cnova’s equity to the public.

50. The Registration Statement included consolidated financial statements for

the years ended December 31, 2011, 2012 and 2013, and for the nine months ended

September 30, 2013 and 2014, prepared on a pro forma basis reflecting the effects of the

Reorganization. The Registration Statement likewise included the quarterly financial

information for the quarterly periods ending September 30, 2012 through September 30,

2014. In addition, the Registration Statement represented the respective percentage changes


12

of various financial metrics, including, inter alia, net sales, cost of sales, operating

expenses, net financial expenses and income tax expenses, cash flow and earnings during

the various covered periods.

Cnova Misstated its Net Sales, Cost of Sales and Gross Margin

51. The Registration Statement included, inter alia, the following representations

regarding Cnova’s Net Sales:1

for the year ended December 31, 2013, net sales were €2,898,912,000

for the nine months ended September 30, 2013, net sales were €1,981,232,000

for the nine months ended September 30, 2014, net sales were €2,375,225,000

See, e.g., Prospectus at 56.

52. Defendants also represented that: “Net sales consist primarily of revenue

generated from product sales and related services from our business to consumer direct sales

and our business to business transactions, across our variety of product categories. . . . We

exclude revenue from items that are returned and orders that are cancelled.” Prospectus at

71. [Emphasis added]. However, in direct contravention to Cnova’s own stated policy,

Cnova did not exclude revenue from damaged/returned items in its financial reports. Instead,

in its reported net sales for the year ended December 31, 2013, for the nine months ended

September 30, 2013, and for the ninth months ended September 30, 2014, the Company

improperly included sales of merchandise that was returned for replacement and the

merchandise sent as replacement as two sales, rather than cancelling out the original sales

once the merchandise was returned. This double booking of replacement sales resulted in a

1 Although, based on currently available information, the inaccurately reported financial information related to Cnova’s operations in Brazil, Cnova reported its income statement and balance sheet on a consolidated basis without specifying the specific inputs by country and thus distorted all of the financial information for the entire Company.


13

material overstatement of Net Sales.

53. In addition, as defined in the Prospectus, Cost of Sales “consist of costs

related to [Cnova’s] direct sales business, including purchase price of consumer products

sold to customers from our direct sales . . . and costs for lost, stolen or damaged goods we

receive. Prospectus at 72. [Emphasis added]. However, contrary to that representation, Cnova

did not properly account for its costs related to damages goods in its Costs of Sales.

Moreover, Cnova’s records included discrepancies related to accounts payable due to

suppliers and also related to accounts receivable/products in-transit with delivery companies.

The Registration Statement thus materially misstated Cnova’s Cost of Sales.

54. Cnova represented that it calculated its “Gross Margin” as “net sales minus

cost of sales.” See, e.g., Prospectus at 57-58. Thus, the Registration Statement also

materially misstated Cnova’s Gross Margin as follows:

for the year ended December 31, 2013, €426,768,000

for the nine months ended September 30, 2013, €285,886,000


Id. The Company similarly materially misstated its Gross Margin for each of the financial

quarters within 2013 and the first three quarters of 2014 contained in the Registration

Statement. Likewise, the Company materially misstated its “Gross Margin post-marketing

expenses” for each of the relevant periods contained in the Registration Statement.

55. According to the Company, see Prospectus at 58, gross margin was included

in the Registration Statement as a supplemental disclosure “because it is a performance

measure used by [Cnova’s] management and board of directors to determine the commercial

performance of our business. In addition, we provide gross margin post-marketing expenses


14

because it indicates that our growth in sales has been achieved with only limited marketing

expenses.” Thus, these misstatements were admittedly material.

56. As set forth in detail below, on January 12, 2016, the Company publicly

announced that it failed to properly account for certain product returns and thereby overstated

its Net Sales. The Company subsequently admitted that the requisite accounting adjustments

to Net Sales, and the related approximately €50 million reduction in operating EBIT, needed

to be partially apportioned to the Company’s 2013 and 2014 financial statements, which were

included in the Registration Statement. The Company further admitted that its records also

included incorrect entries concerning accounts payable.

Cnova Misstated its Income Statement

57. The Registration Statement represented Cnova’s Income Statement, and,

critically, its earnings for its year ended December 31, 2013, and for the nine months ended

September 30, 2013 and 2014 as follows:

Year Ended December 31,Nine Months Ended

September 30, 2013 2013 2014

(€

thousands) (€

thousands) (€ thousands) Consolidated Income Statement: Net Sales 2,898,912 1,981,232 2,375,225 Cost of sales (2,472,144) (1,695,346 ) (2,058,079)Operating expenses:

Fulfillment (202,840) (140,429 ) 167,795 Marketing (79,136) (58,820 ) (48,959)Technology and content (76,733) (54,696 ) (60,615)General and administrative (44,554) (34,657 ) (38,784)

Operating profit before restructuring, initial public offering expenses, litigation, gain/(loss) from disposal of non-current assets and impairment of assets 23,505 (2,717 ) 993 Restructuring (2,790) (78 ) (9,359)Litigation (3,145) (1,837 ) (410)Initial Public Offering expenses — — (5,097)Gain/(loss) from disposal of non-current assets 835 860 13 Impairment of assets (1,139) — —

Operating profit (loss) 17,266 (3,772 ) (13,860)


15

Financial income 5,297 3,532 4,369 Financial expense (60,946) (42,188 ) (53,901)

Profit (loss) before tax (38,382) (42,428 ) (63,392)Income tax gain (expense) 15,732 6,380 10,518 Share of profits of associates (356) (356 ) (2,339)

Net profit (loss) (23,006) (36,404 ) (55,213)Attributable to the owners (22,490) (35,772 ) (53,685)Attributable to non-controlling interests (516) (632 ) (1,528)

Earnings (loss) per share (in € and $, respectively) (0.05) (0.09 ) (0.13)Diluted earnings per share in € and $, respectively (0.05) (0.09 ) (0.13)

Prospectus at 56.

58. Additionally, as set forth in detail below, on April 26, 2016, Cnova admitted

that its financials statements for 2013 and 2014 underestimated freight costs and products in

transit, and contained other accounting inaccuracies related to intangible assets and possible

improperly deferred operating expenses. Cnova further admitted that certain intangible assets

had been improperly accounted for and that it also was looking into whether some

operational costs were improperly deferred.

59. As a result of the foregoing, the Registration Statement materially misstated

Cnova’s quarterly income for each of the quarters in the relevant period. See Prospectus at

83. Moreover, in addition to misstating the actual inputs to the income statement, the

Registration Statement falsely stated that the income statement was prepared “on a basis

consistent with [its] audited annual consolidated financial statements” and included “all

normal recurring adjustments necessary for a fair statement of the financial information

contained in those statements.” Id.

Cnova Misstated its Balance Sheet

60. The Registration Statement also included Cnova’s balance sheet as of

September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, as follows:


16

As of December 31,As of September 30, 2013 2014 (€ thousands) (€ thousands) Consolidated Balance Sheet: Cash and cash equivalents 263,550 46,777Trade receivables, net 110,380 155,291Inventories, net 366,974 353,270Total assets 1,691,379 1,437,835Trade payables 905,417 771,484Financial debt (current and non-current portion) 163,318 107,934Total equity 473,161 465,494

Prospectus at 56.

61. However, Cnova improperly valued damaged and returned items, failed to

take appropriate write-offs, misstated its accounts receivable, and improperly accounted for

intangible assets. Discrepancies were also identified in Cnova’s accounts payable and

products in-transit. Accordingly, the Registration Statement misstated Cnova’s Trade

Receivables, Inventories, Total Assets, Trade Payables and Total Equity.

62. Further, because of the foregoing, and Cnova’s failure to properly account for

certain returns, the Registration Statement falsely stated how Cnova calculated the net

realizable value of its inventories by representing that the reported figures are “based on

currently available information[] about the likely method of disposition, such as . . . returns

to product vendors.” Prospectus at F-16, F-97.

Cnova Misstated its Gross Merchandise Volume

63. The Registration Statement also materially misstated Cnova’s gross

merchandise volume (“GMV”) for each of the relevant periods as follows:

for the year ended December 31, 2013, €3,563,600



See, e.g., Prospectus at 57.


17

64. As defined in the Prospectus, GMV is “derived from our product sales,

marketplaces business volumes and other revenues, after returns, including taxes.”

[Emphasis added].

65. Thus, by virtue of the Company overstating its sales and failing to properly

account for retuned merchandise, the Registration Statement also misstated Cnova’s GMV.

66. According to the Company, “[a] key component of our business model is

increasing GMV transacted on our marketplaces, which we believe to be an important driver

of future profitable growth.” Prospectus at 66. Thus, these misstatements are admittedly

material. [Emphasis added].

Other Misstatements

67. As a result of, inter alia, misstating Net Sales, GMV and EBIT, the

Company’s representations concerning the growth of those metrics over the relevant periods

were also false and misleading. See, e.g., Prospectus at 65, 76.

68. Similarly, as a result of the misstated Net Sales, the Company also misstated

its fulfillment, marketing, technology and content, general and administrative, and financing

expenses, i.e., its operating expenses as a percentage of Net Sales, and also misstated the

percentage changes of each of those metrics over the relevant periods. See, e.g., Prospectus at

74-77.

69. In addition, because of the foregoing, the Registration Statement misstated

Cnova’s interim condensed consolidated statement of cash flows for the nine months ended

September 30, 2013 and 2014. See Prospectus at F-69.

70. As a result of the numerous material misstatements in the Registration

Statement, members of the Class suffered damages in excess of approximately $120 million


18

as Cnova shares declined from $7 to $2.28, or $4.62 per share during the Class Period.

Cnova’s Performance During the Class Period

71. On January 28, 2015, Cnova issued a press release entitled, “Cnova’s Q4 and

FY 2014 Earnings,” which announced its first financial results as a public company,

including the following highlights:

GMV for 4Q14 increased by 28.6% to € 1,472 million compared to € 1,144 million in 4Q13. GMV for the full year 2014 increased by 26.6% to € 4,516 million, compared to € 3,567 million in the full year 2013.

Placed Orders for 4Q14 increased by 38.0% to 10.8 million, compared to 7.9 million in 4Q13. Placed Orders for the full year 2014 increased by 34.3% to 31.7 million, compared to 23.6 million in 2013.

Net sales for 4Q14 increased by 19.7% to € 1,099 million compared to € 918 million in 4Q13. Net sales for the full year 2014 increased by 19.8% to € 3,474 million, compared to € 2,899 million in the full year 2013.

Operating Profit Before Other Expenses Excluding Expansion to New Countries, or Adjusted Operating Profit, increased by 34.5% to € 35.3 million for 4Q14 and by 58.1% to € 37.2 million for the full year 2014.

As of December 31, 2014, the Net Cash position was € 534 million, compared to € 164 million at the end of 2013, representing a cash amount of € 1.21 per share.

Moreover, Cnova advised that for 1Q15 net sales were expected to grow 17%, within a plus

or minus 200bps deviation, compared with 1Q14.

72. On April 29, 2015, Cnova announced its financial results for the first quarter

ended March 31, 2015. Highlights included:

Strong commercial dynamics: Net Sales growth of +17.8% and GMV growth of +28.2%

Improvement in Gross Margin excluding Expansion to New

Countries by +18 bps as a percentage of net sales


19

Improvement in Net Financial Expense

Good Free Cash Flow generation of +27.6 M€ on a last twelve

months basis vs -47.1 M€ at end of 1Q14, leading to a positive Net Cash position of +71 M€ at end 1Q15.

On a constant exchange rate basis, over the last twelve months, Free Cash Flow generation improved by 92 M€ (+25.4 M€ in 2015 vs -66.8 M€ in 2014)

73. On July 22, 2015, Cnova announced its financial results for the second quarter

ended June 30, 2015. Highlights included:

Strong growth of GMV and net sales:

GMV +25.8% (€1,154 million)

Net sales +17.5% (€837 million)

Significant sequential improvement in France & Brazil in 2nd quarter 2015 in view of important investments in 1Q15 to fuel future growth:

Gross margin +56 basis points

EBITDA margin +93 basis points

EBIT margin +78 basis points

74. On October 9, 2015, Cnova announced GMV, net sales and other activity data

for the quarter ended September 30, 2015. Highlights included:

GMV: €1,121 million (+17.6% constant currency)

Marketplace share: 22.7% (+1,032 bps)

Sales: € 781 million (+9.1% constant currency)

75. On October 28, 2015, Cnova announced its financial results for the third

quarter ended September 30, 2015. Highlights included:


20

Gross merchandise volume (GMV): €1,121 million (+17.6% constant currency)

Net sales: €781 million (+9.1% constant currency)

Gross profit: €97 million (Gross margin: 12.5%)

Resilient gross margin in a tough macro environment

Operating EBIT

Cnova Brazil declines; action plan at Cnova Brazil to adapt to market conditions

Free cash flow (LTM): €23 million

Operating working capital management helps compensate for net loss and increased capital expenditure

Cnova’s Financial Statements Require Restatement and Were Materially Inaccurate

76. A little over a year after Cnova’s IPO, the Company disclosed that all of the

financial reports Cnova issued since becoming a public company, as well as much of the

financial information incorporated into the Registration Statement, could not be relied upon

and require corrective negative restatements.

77. First, on December 18, 2015, after the market closed, Cnova issued a press

release entitled “Cnova N.V. Initiates a Review of Inventory in Brazil.” Therein, in relevant

part, the Company disclosed that its Board of Directors engaged legal advisors and external

forensic accountants to perform a review of issues related to inventory management.

According to the Company, the issues involved “the handling of product returns and

damaged product inventory at distribution centers of Cnova’s Brazilian subsidiary, Cnova

Comércio Eletrônico S.A. (Cnova Brazil). The investigation will also assess any accounting

and financial statement impact of the conduct under review.”

78. Shares of Cnova subsequently declined $0.53, or nearly 18%, to close at $2.42

on December 21, 2015, on unusually heavy volume. The shares continued to decline in value


21

the following day, dropping another $0.14 per share, or nearly 6%, to close at $2.28 per

share.

79. On January 12, 2016, the Company issued a press release entitled “Cnova —

Full Year 2015 Activity” announcing its gross merchandise value (GMV), net sales and other

operating activity data for the quarter and full year ended December 31, 2015. The Company

noted that “[f]or Cnova Brazil, GMV and GMV marketplace share as well as net sales for the

quarter and full year ended December 31, 2014 and 2015, presented here are subject to

revision following completion of the legal and forensic accounting review” and “[a]s the

investigation is ongoing, as of the date of this press release, Cnova has not yet determined

whether it may be required to adjust its previously issued financial statements for any prior

period(s) for any portion of this sales adjustment, or for any other items.” [Emphasis

added].

80. Also on January 12, 2016, the Company issued a press release entitled “Cnova

— Update on Investigation into Brazil Inventory Management and Other Topics”. The

Company disclosed that, although the investigation was ongoing:

[a]s of the date of the press release:

Investigations performed so far in connection with inventory management have uncovered a potential overstatement of Cnova net sales by approximately R$110 million (approximately €30 million) on a cumulative basis as of December 31, 2015 (adjusted in 4Q15 numbers on a preliminary basis).

A comprehensive physical count as of December 31, 2015, of all seven of its distribution centers in Brazil has been completed with the support of external consultants. The results currently indicate that no significant adjustment is necessary based on the inventory count. They indicate, however, that a write-off linked to the valuation of damaged/returned items, which represents approximately 10% of total inventory, will be necessary. In addition, a material discrepancy in


22

accounts receivable related to the damaged/returned items was also identified. The combined impact, based on preliminary estimates, would result in non-cash provisions of between R$110 — 130 million (approximately €30 — 35 million) that would reduce Cnova’s EBIT.

* * *

Accounts Payable at Cnova Brazil The company has identified additional supplier or vendor accounts payable balances in the amount of approximately R$70 million (approximately €20 million). A related provision is also planned to be booked that will reduce Cnova’s EBIT.

* * *

Benchmark on Inventory Valuation As a result of benchmarking of inventory valuation of e-commerce companies, warehouse reception and storage costs will no longer be incorporated into a retail-sector inventory valuation but directly expensed through income as is widely practiced in the e-commerce sector. The cumulative impact is a negative one-off of €10 million.

* * *

The company stresses that the assessment of the impact of the above on 2015 and potentially prior periods (annual consolidated financial statements and quarterly financial communication) is currently underway.

* * *

Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2015 Financial Results Release Date Subject to progress of the ongoing inventory management investigation in Brazil, Cnova currently plans to release Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2015 Financial Results on February 24, 2016, at 07:45 CET.

81. In the midst of these revelations, on January 21, 2016, defendant Quiroga,

formerly co-CEO of the Company and CEO of Cnova Brazil, abruptly resigned. The


23

following day, January 22, 2016, the Company issued a press release announcing the

designation of Emmanuel Grenier, previously one of the two co-CEOs of the Company, as

Chief Executive Officer and replacement of defendant Quiroga as executive director of the

Company. The Company also announced that Flavio Dias would become CEO of Cnova

Brazil. Tellingly, the Company offered no explanation for defendant Quiroga’s sudden

resignation and made no attempt to disclaim its connection with Cnova Brazil’s false

financial information incorporated into the Company’s financial statements and reports,

including the Registration Statement and Prospectus.

82. On February 24, 2016, the Company issued a press release entitled “Cnova

N.V. — 4th Quarter and Full Year 2015 Financial Results” wherein it announced its

unaudited financial results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2015.

Therein, Cnova disclosed, inter alia, that:

As of the date of this press release, Cnova has determined that some of the fraud-related accounting adjustments recorded in the 4th quarter of 2015 (-€48 million impact on operating EBIT) will need to be apportioned to 2013 and 2014, but has not yet determined the specific amounts attributable to these prior periods. Accordingly, the financial statements included in our previously filed 2014 annual report on Form 20-F should not be relied upon. Restated financial statements and the related auditor’s report will be issued in due course as the internal review progresses.

[Emphasis added]. The Company further noted that:

During the review, the Company also identified discrepancies related to accounts payable due to suppliers and accounts receivable/products in-transit with delivery companies. 83. Also on February 24, 2016, the Company issued a press release entitled

“Cnova N.V. — Update on Brazil Internal Review,” which reiterated that Cnova had


24

determined that the accounting adjustments will need to be apportioned to 2013 and 2014,

but it had not yet determined the specific amounts attributable to these prior periods.

Accordingly, the Company stated that its previously issued financial statements for those

periods [i.e., the 2013 and 2014 financial statements incorporated into the Company’s

Registration Statement] should not be relied upon. The Company further provided the

following update on its investigation:

Net Sales & Accounts Receivable: Management have identified an overstatement of Cnova net sales and accounts receivable. Under the Cnova Brazil’s customer service practice in Brazil, a customer is sent a replacement order when a report is lodged that ordered merchandise is either not received or is received in damaged/unsuitable condition. In many cases, the replacement shipment is sent before the missing or damaged/unsuitable merchandise is returned to Cnova Brazil, and a second sale is recorded in the company’s books. That second sale is cancelled when Cnova Brazil receives the return of the originally shipped merchandise. Management have determined that a significant portion of second sales were not reversed even though the originally ordered merchandise never showed as having arrived back at Cnova Brazil. While there was a procedure in place to periodically evaluate aged outstanding returns to estimate provisions, this failed to reverse second sales from revenue. Consequently, management decided to:

Revise and enhance the tracking of replacement orders and the associated second sales in Brazil - these are now supervised by a specialized team;

Reduce 4th quarter 2015 net sales by R$ 110.0 million (€ 29.7 million). This has resulted in a decrease of accounts receivable at December 31, 2015, and 4th quarter 2015 operating profit/(loss) from ordinary activities (operating EBIT) both in the amount of R$ 74.9 million (€ 20.2 million).

Inventory: Management requested forensic accounting consultants, in conjunction with Cnova Brazil personnel and under the observation of Cnova’s external auditors, to conduct a comprehensive physical inventory count as of December 31, 2015, of all seven of Cnova Brazil’s DCs. The results of that count indicated no significant discrepancy in the expected


25

number of new inventory items. Inconsistencies were found, however, linked to the amount and valuation of damaged/returned items, which represent less than 10% of total inventory at the end of 2015. Consequently, management have:

Increased the year-end write-off of total inventory to R$ 46.8 million (€ 12.7 million). This has resulted in a decrease of 4th quarter 2015 operating EBIT in the same amount.

Accounts Payable and Other Accounts: Management has uncovered that incorrect entries concerning primarily accounts payable and written reports were intentionally prepared by Cnova Brazil accounting staff at the direction of former Cnova Brazil employees. Consequently, management:

Decided to expand the scope of the external legal and forensic review to include this matter;

Increased year-end accounts payable by R$ 55.3 million (€ 14.9 million). This has resulted in a decrease of 4th quarter 2015 operating EBIT in the same amount.

Estimated Impact of Financial Adjustments The combined estimated impact of the above management actions on 4th quarter 2015 operating EBIT is a reduction of R$ 177.0 million (€ 47.8 million). This compares to the R$ 180 – 200 million (€ 50 – 55 million) preliminary range provided on January 12, 2016. 84. During Cnova’s February 24, 2016 earnings conference call with investors,

Ms. Brunel provided the following explanation and update on the review:

[L]ast year our CFO at Cnova Brazil, who joined the Company in April 2015, had some suspicions regarding accounting entry requests coming from a DC. He started an internal inquiry and came to the conclusion that there could be problems with inventory management at the DCs and that misconduct might be involved. As a result, Cnova’s Board decided to hire external consultants to look into this matter, and as of today, this is where we stand. First, due to Cnova Brazil’s customer service policy, replacement deliveries were often counted as temporary second sales that were to be backed out once the product from the original delivery was returned. According to the


26

internal review, many of these second sales were never reversed. This resulted in an overstatement of net sales. Second, there was a complete inventory count at the end of 2015 and the first week of 2016. The results of that showed two things. First, there was no material anomaly with respect to more than 90% of total inventory. For the remainder, however, there were differences in the returned goods inventory between the actual value and what was listed in the Company’s books. Third, during the review, it appears that former Cnova Brazil employees intentionally made incorrect bookkeeping entries that led to inaccurate accounting reports. This had two consequences; first, certain accounts in the books, mostly related to accounts payable, were understated. Second, incorrect accounting reports were used to prepare prior period related financial statements, and even though the amount of these misstatements may not seem very significant, the fact that they were done on purpose will require financial restatement.

[Emphasis added].

85. On April 12, 2016, the Company issued a press release, which announced its

gross merchandise value (GMV), net sales and other operating activity data for the quarter

ended March 31, 2016. Therein, Cnova disclosed that:

Due to the Company’s ongoing internal review of Cnova Brazil, Cnova will not be able to file its Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, or its 2015 Dutch Annual Report within the prescribed time period for each filing. Cnova intends to file its 2015 Form 20-F and its 2015 Dutch Annual Report as soon as reasonably practicable upon completion of: (i) the internal review; (ii) the restatement of its previously issued financial statements; and (iii) the audit of its 2015 financial statements by the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, Ernst & Young Audit.

86. On April 26, 2016, Cnova issued a press release, which announced its

unaudited financial results for the first quarter 2016 and disclosed that the review of Cnova

Brazil had identified additional accounting issues. Cnova cautioned investors that the “1st

quarter 2015 figures presented herein are preliminary estimates, prepared solely by

management and these figures are presented for comparison purposes only, and are subject to


27

change depending on the developments of the ongoing review.” The press release further

stated that:

The ongoing review in Cnova Brazil has recently identified other issues (related to intangible assets and possible improperly deferred operating expenses) that are currently the subject of further review. It is not possible at this time to: i) evaluate the impact that these issues may have on 2015 and prior periods, ii) determine how such an impact would be apportioned to the various quarters of those accounting periods, and iii) know whether those apportionments could ultimately also impact the first quarter 2016 financial results.

[Emphasis added].

87. Also on April 26, 2016, the Company issued a press release entitled “Cnova

N.V. — Update on Internal Review at Cnova Brazil,” wherein it increased its estimate of the

impact of the accounting adjustments and provided the following updates on its investigation

into the financial improprieties:

The combined impact on operating EBIT of the above listed adjustments has been revised up to R$ 219 million2 primarily due to unintentional reporting errors related to returned items in-transit as well as their shipping costs.

The ongoing review in Cnova Brazil has recently identified other

issues (related to intangible assets and possible improperly deferred operating expenses) that are currently the subject of further review. It is not possible at this time to: i) evaluate the impact that these issues may have on 2015 and prior periods, ii) determine how such an impact would be apportioned to the various quarters of those accounting periods, and iii) know whether those apportionments could ultimately also impact the first quarter 2016 financial results.

2 In its press release of February 24, 2016, the Company converted the R$ 177 million into euros using an average R$/€ exchange rate of 3.70044. Using the more relevant 2015 year-end R$/€ exchange rate of 4.3117, the R$ 177 million is equivalent to approximately € 41.1 million and the updated amount of R$ 219 million is equivalent to approximately € 50.8 million.


28

In view of the above, the Company now expects to file its 2015 annual report on Form 20-F, including restated financial statements, by no sooner than June 2016.3 As such, the Company will file a Form 12b-25 with the US Securities and Exchange Commission before April 30, 2016.

[Emphasis added].

88. During Cnova’s April 26, 2016 earnings conference call with investors, Ms.

Brunel provided the following summary and update on the review:

First, we revised upwards the estimated adjustments that we booked in the fourth quarter of last year. You may remember that we had provisioned 177 million Reals. We have now increased that to 219 million due to two accounting errors related to under-estimated freight costs and products in transit. This will be apportioned to 2015 and prior years. We have made an estimate of what the impact could be in the first quarter of 2015 and that’s reflected in the numbers we are reporting today. I would remind you that this is a preliminary estimate and could change as the internal review in Brazil progresses. Second, the review team has come across evidence that suggests that intangible assets have been improperly accounted for. They are also looking into whether some operational cost was deferred when they should not have been. At this stage, it is too early to know if these will lead to further provisions and if so what the estimated range of those could be. We will update the market when we have more information. Finally, given that the review is lasting longer than expected, we currently do not anticipate being able to provide restated 2015 financial statements and the 20-F sooner than June of 2016.

89. On April 28, 2016, Cnova issued a press release, which confirmed that it was

reviewing the possibility of a transaction to divest itself of Cnova Brazil.

3 It should be noted that Cnova announced that it would not file a reliable annual report for 2015, which would necessarily disclose the scope and amount of the reported accounting inaccuracies, before June 2016, and now, before the deadline for filing this Amended Complaint. This announcement, which also identified other potential accounting issues, was made after the Court issued the pertinent scheduling order and with Defendants’ knowledge that such critical information would now be made unavailable to Plaintiffs in advance of this filing.


29

90. Thereafter, on May 12, 2016, Cnova issued a press release, which confirmed

that it had entered into a memorandum of understanding with Via Varejo S.A. to facilitate the

contemplated divestiture. As a result thereof, Cnova would sell off its troubled Brazil

operations and focus entirely on Cdiscount and Cnova’s core, French market. In the same

press release, Cnova also announced that, separately, but contingent on the divestiture

transaction, its parent company, Casino, would make an offer to purchase the outstanding

ordinary shares of Cnova from its public shareholders at a price of $5.50 per share.

COUNT ONE

Violation of Section 11 of the Securities Act (Against All Defendants)

91. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every allegation contained above as if

fully set forth herein.

92. This Count is brought pursuant to Section 11 of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C.

§77k, on behalf of the Class, against all Defendants.

93. The Registration Statement for the IPO was materially false and misleading,

contained untrue statements of material facts, omitted to state other facts necessary to make

the statements made not misleading, and omitted to state material facts required to be stated

therein.

94. Cnova is the registrant for the IPO. The Defendants named herein were

responsible for the contents and dissemination of the Registration Statement.

95. As issuer of the shares, Cnova is strictly liable to Plaintiffs and the Class for

the misstatements and omissions in the Registration Statement.


30

96. Each of the Individual Defendants signed the Registration Statement. In

addition, defendants Quiroga, Naouri, Barroso, Filho, Leveque, Pereira, Strasser,

Desjacques and Oppetit were directors of Cnova, the issuer, at the time of the filing of the

Registration Statement.

97. Each of the Underwriter Defendants was an underwriter with respect to the

ordinary shares of Cnova that were offered and sold pursuant to the Registration Statement.

98. None of the Defendants named herein made a reasonable investigation or

had reasonable grounds to believe, at the time the Registration Statement became effective,

that the statements contained in the Registration Statement were true and that there was no

omission to state a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary to make the

statements therein not misleading.

99. By reason of the foregoing, each Defendant violated Section 11 of the

Securities Act.

100. Plaintiffs and members of the Class acquired ordinary shares of Cnova

pursuant and/or traceable to the Registration Statement.

101. Plaintiffs and members of the Class have sustained damages. The value of

Cnova ordinary shares has declined substantially subsequent to and due to Defendants’

violations.

102. This action was brought within one year after Plaintiffs discovered the untrue

statements and omissions alleged herein or after such discovery should have been made by

the exercise of reasonable diligence. Less than three years elapsed between the time that the

securities upon which this Count is brought were bona fide offered to the public and the time

this action was commenced.


31

COUNT TWO

Violation of Section 15 of the Securities Act (Against the Individual Defendants)

103. Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every allegation contained above as if

fully set forth herein.

104. This Count is brought pursuant to Section 15 of the Securities Act, 15

U.S.C. §77o, on behalf of the Class, against the Individual Defendants.

105. The Individual Defendants, by virtue of their offices, directorship, and

specific acts, were, at the time of the wrongs alleged herein, controlling persons of Cnova

within the meaning of Section 15 of the Securities Act. The Individual Defendants had the

power and influence and exercised the same to cause Cnova to engage in the acts described

herein.

106. Each of the Individual Defendants was a culpable participant in the violation

of Section 11 of the Securities Act alleged in Count I above, based on their having signed

the Registration Statement and having otherwise participated in the process which allowed

the IPO to be successfully completed. The Individual Defendants’ positions made them

privy to and provided them with actual knowledge of the material facts concealed from

Plaintiffs and the Class.

107. By reason of the foregoing, the Individual Defendants are liable jointly and

severally with and to the same extent as Cnova for its violations of Section 11 of the

Securities Act, as alleged herein.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the Class, pray for judgment


32

as follows:

A. Certifying this action as a plaintiff class action properly maintained pursuant

to Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

B. Awarding damages in favor of Plaintiffs and other members of the Class

against all Defendants, jointly and severally, in an amount to be determined at trial,

together with interest thereon;

C. Awarding Plaintiffs and other members of the Class their costs and expenses

of this litigation, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, experts’ fees, and other costs and

disbursements; and

D. Awarding Plaintiffs and other members of the Class such other and further

relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Plaintiffs hereby demand a trial by jury.

Dated: June 13, 2016 Respectfully submitted,

BROWER PIVEN A Professional Corporation /s/ David A.P. Brower David A.P. Brower Daniel Kuznicki 475 Park Avenue South, 33rd Floor New York, New York 10016 Telephone: (212) 501-9000 Facsimile: (212) 501-0300 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]


33

BROWER PIVEN A Professional Corporation Charles J. Piven 1925 Old Valley Road Stevenson, MD 21153 Telephone: (410) 332-0030 Facsimile: (410) 685-1300 Email: [email protected] Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs and the Class


34

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that the foregoing was filed through the ECF system and will be sent

electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing

(NEF), and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as nonregistered participants on June

13, 2016.

/s/ David A.P. Brower David A.P. Brower


1 amended class action complaint 06/13/2016

Documents