VNET Group

Investors that purchased the Company’s securities and have suffered a loss, please fill in transaction information below, or email to info@portnoylaw.com.

Are you a current or former employee of the company?*YesNo

Purchases

+Additional Purchases

Sales

+Additional Sales

If you prefer, you may submit your transaction information or comments/questions in the box below:




There is no cost or obligation associated with submitting your information. If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, please submit your contact information and purchase information to participate in the putative class action.

We also encourage you to contact Lesley F. Portnoy of The Portnoy Law Firm, at 310.692.8883, to discuss your rights free of charge. You can also reach us through the firm’s website at www.portnoylaw.com, or by email at info@portnoylaw.com.

If you choose to take no action, you can remain an absent class member.

Joining the case through the Portnoy Law website enables investors to learn about their legal claims and take an active role in recovering their losses.

The Portnoy Law Firm represents investors around the world and specializes in securities class action lawsuits and shareholder rights litigation.

CONTACT:
Portnoy Law Firm
Lesley F. Portnoy, Esq.,
www.portnoylaw.com
Office: 310.692.8883
1800 Century Park East, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90067
info@portnoylaw.com

The legal action claims that the defendants either misrepresented or failed to disclose that: (1) GenTao, a subsidiary of VNET, was facing financial troubles and was on the verge of breaching the terms of the facility agreement entered into by VNET’s co-founder, Josh Sheng Chen, with Bold Ally; (2) due to these circumstances, there was a significant chance that Bold Ally would seize a considerable share of ownership in VNET from Sheng Chen; (3) in an effort to reinstate Sheng Chen’s voting rights within VNET, the company planned to issue new shares to him, which would dilute the equity of existing investors; (4) therefore, the optimistic representations made by the defendants regarding the company’s operational health, business strategies, and future growth opportunities were substantially misleading and lacked an adequate basis.