"In denying Compass's motion, Judge Vargas appears to say that Compass did not adequately show that the policy has caused it irreparable harm. During the hearing, an expert witness for Compass testified that Zillow's policy harms competition because it suppresses competing platforms, which Compass claims Compass.com is. Other witnesses for Compass testified that Zillow's policy had resulted in a decline in both engagement and users on its platform,"
"However, under questioning by Zillow, Soham Bohnsle, Compass's head of investor relations, confirmed that Compass had no concrete evidence tying the three-phased marketing strategy to changes in revenue and that despite Compass's claims that the policy was causing irreparable harm, no analyst had issued a sell rating on Compass stock. Bohnsle also confirmed that Compass has continued to post annual revenue gains since the policy was announced."
Judge Vargas denied Compass's preliminary injunction, finding Compass did not adequately show irreparable harm from Zillow's policy. An expert for Compass testified the policy harms competition by suppressing competing platforms like Compass.com. Compass witnesses reported declines in engagement and users and said enforcement reduced the percentage of sellers willing to use Compass's three-phased marketing plan, which Compass says harms revenue and performance. Under Zillow questioning, Soham Bohnsle conceded no concrete evidence tied the three-phased strategy to revenue changes and that no analyst had issued a sell rating on Compass stock. Compass has continued to post annual revenue gains since the policy announcement. The ruling concerns only the preliminary injunction and indicates the plaintiff did not meet the burden to show likely success at trial.
Read at www.housingwire.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]