Class Action Lawsuit Could Spell Big Trouble For Angie's List

A class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana charges key officers of Angie's List of defrauding investors who purchased stock in the company between between February 14, 2013 and October 23, 2013 by issuing  materially false and misleading statements regarding the strength of the company’s business model and its financial performance and future prospects and failed to disclose adverse effects on the company's prospects of becoming profitable. Named in the lawsuit are the company's CEO, William Oesterle, the company's co-founder and Chief Marketing Officer, Angie Hicks Bowman, current and past CFOs Charles Hundt and Robert Millard, and Thapur Manu, the recently-terminated Chief Information Officer.

The serious allegations contained in the lawsuit call into question the legitimacy of the subscription-based reviews of local service providers on the company's website because of its shifting business model, which increasingly relies on revenues it now derives from referral fees to those same service providers. According to the lawsuit, Angie's List this year began relying on offering free membership subscriptions in order to artificially boost the number of subscribers in order to mislead investors. This helped boost the price of the stock significantly during the period in question. Oesterle and the other officers cashed out many shares they owned during this period for a handsome profit. Ooesterle sold 486,400 shares of stock for more than $10.3 million, while the other officers collectively sold about $3 million of their personally-held shares of common stock "to the unsuspecting public at fraud-inflated prices."

At the same time, the company's assertion that "You can't pay to be on Angie's List" appears dubious based on the company's growing reliance on revenues it derives from service providers. The company has increasingly started relying on fees it collects from service providers (more than half of its revenues) in consideration for listing them more prominently on the company's website than service providers which don't pay the additional fees. In some instances, the lawsuit alleges that Angie's List "sometimes charges service providers hundreds of dollars for 'hot leads.'" Those costs are "passed along to . . . subscribers, increasing the prices consumers were paying and decreasing the benefit to them of using the website," the lawsuit alleges.

The entire legitimacy of the company's business model for service providers rated on its website is "called into question" as a result of the company "forcing service providers to pay high fees to be listed as highly rated service providers" the lawsuit contends. If service providers don't ante up and pay the high fees, they won't get customer referrals from the company's website. Even worse, the lawsuit claims that Angie's List  does not vet service providers listed and recommended on its website, "either for qualifications or for safety," which caused many subscribers to question the website's value and made them less willing to pay the subscription fees. The lawsuit claims the company's officers "lacked a reasonable basis" for positive statements they made to investors about the company's business model and its financial prospects.

Angie's List's stock price closed yesterday at $15.03 per share. The company's stock reached a high of $28.32 earlier this year before starting to slide the second half of this year. The stock has traded as low as $11.14 this year. After nearly 20 years in business, the company has yet to turn a profit during a single fiscal year.