Group 1 - The Rosen Law Firm is reminding purchasers of American Depositary Shares (ADSs) of Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC about the lead plaintiff deadline of August 4, 2025, for a class action lawsuit [1] - Investors who purchased Reckitt ADSs may be entitled to compensation through a contingency fee arrangement, meaning no out-of-pocket fees or costs [2] - A class action lawsuit has already been filed, and interested parties can join by contacting the Rosen Law Firm [3][6] Group 2 - The lawsuit alleges that during the class period, Reckitt failed to warn investors that preterm infants were at increased risk of developing necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) from consuming its Enfamil formula, which misled investors about the company's business prospects [5]

Core Viewpoint - Robbins LLP has initiated a class action lawsuit on behalf of investors who acquired Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC American Depository Shares (ADSs) between January 13, 2021, and July 28, 2024, alleging that the company misled investors regarding the safety of its Enfamil baby formula [1][2]. Allegations - The lawsuit claims that Reckitt failed to inform investors and consumers about the increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in preterm infants consuming its cow's milk-based formula, Enfamil, and the potential negative impact on sales and legal exposure [2]. - A jury in Illinois awarded $60 million in a case against Mead Johnson, finding negligence related to the same NEC risk, which led to a significant drop in Reckitt's ADS price [3]. - Following a similar case in Missouri, where Abbott Laboratories was found liable for NEC, Reckitt's ADS price also experienced a notable decline [4]. Next Steps - Shareholders interested in participating in the class action must file a motion for lead plaintiff by August 4, 2025, with the option to remain an absent class member if they choose not to take action [5].

Core Viewpoint - A class action securities lawsuit has been filed against Reckitt Benckiser Group plc, alleging securities fraud that negatively impacted investors between January 13, 2021, and July 28, 2024 [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that Reckitt Benckiser's cow's milk-based formula, Enfamil, posed an increased risk of NEC (necrotizing enterocolitis) in preterm infants, which was not disclosed [2]. - It is alleged that the company made false statements regarding its business operations and sales prospects, which were materially misleading [2]. Group 2: Investor Information - Investors who suffered losses during the specified timeframe have until August 4, 2025, to request appointment as lead plaintiff, although participation in any recovery does not require this [3]. - Class members may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket costs or fees [3]. Group 3: Legal Firm Background - Levi & Korsinsky has a strong track record in securities litigation, having secured hundreds of millions for shareholders over the past 20 years [4]. - The firm has been recognized as one of the top securities litigation firms in the United States for seven consecutive years [4].

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against Reckitt Benckiser Group plc for allegedly making false and misleading statements regarding the safety of its Enfamil formula, particularly concerning the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis in preterm infants [4]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit is based on violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, specifically §§10(b) and 20(a), and Rule 10b-5 [1]. - Investors who purchased Reckitt's securities between January 13, 2021, and July 28, 2024, are encouraged to participate in the class action [2]. - The class has not yet been certified, meaning potential participants are not currently represented by an attorney [3]. Group 2: Allegations Against the Company - The complaint alleges that Reckitt failed to disclose the increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) associated with its Enfamil formula for preterm infants [4]. - The company is accused of misleading investors about its exposure to legal claims related to NEC, resulting in materially false public statements throughout the class period [4]. - As a result of the revelations, investors reportedly suffered damages when the truth about Reckitt's practices became known [4].

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against Reckitt Benckiser Group plc for allegedly misleading investors regarding the risks associated with its cow's milk-based formula, Enfamil, during the Class Period from January 13, 2021, to July 28, 2024 [1][4]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all individuals and entities who purchased Reckitt securities during the specified Class Period [1]. - Investors have until August 4, 2025, to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit [1]. Group 2: Allegations Against Reckitt - The class action alleges that Reckitt made misleading statements and omissions regarding its business, financial condition, and prospects [4]. - Specifically, it is claimed that Reckitt failed to warn investors that preterm infants consuming its Enfamil formula were at an increased risk of developing necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) [4]. - The lawsuit also asserts that Reckitt did not disclose the potential impact on sales of Enfamil and the company's exposure to legal claims [4]. Group 3: Industry Context - Reckitt, a UK-based global consumer goods company, is facing over 500 state and federal products liability lawsuits related to its formula and that of its competitor, Abbott Laboratories [3].

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC on behalf of purchasers of American Depositary Shares (ADSs) during the period from January 13, 2021, to July 28, 2024, due to alleged misleading statements regarding the safety of its cow's milk-based formula, Enfamil, for preterm infants [1][5]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that Reckitt failed to inform investors that preterm infants consuming Enfamil were at an increased risk of developing necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) [5]. - It is alleged that Reckitt's positive statements about its business and operations were materially false and misleading, lacking a reasonable basis during the class period [5]. - Investors reportedly suffered damages when the true details about the risks associated with Enfamil became public [5]. Group 2: Legal Representation - The Rosen Law Firm is representing the investors and encourages potential class members to select qualified counsel with a successful track record in securities class actions [4]. - Investors who purchased Reckitt ADSs may be entitled to compensation without any out-of-pocket fees through a contingency fee arrangement [2]. - A lead plaintiff must move the court by August 4, 2025, to represent other class members in the litigation [1][3].

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against Reckitt Benckiser Group Plc, alleging securities fraud and unlawful business practices [2][4]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit involves allegations against Reckitt and certain officers and directors for engaging in securities fraud or other unlawful business practices [2]. - Investors have until August 4, 2025, to request to be appointed as Lead Plaintiff if they purchased Reckitt securities during the Class Period [2]. Group 2: Financial Impact - On March 15, 2024, Reckitt's American Depositary Share (ADS) price fell by $1.87, nearly 14%, closing at $11.44 following a $60 million verdict against its Mead Johnson subsidiary for negligence related to infant formula [3][4]. - On July 29, 2024, after a similar lawsuit against Abbott Laboratories, Reckitt's ADS price dropped by $1.02, nearly 9%, closing at $10.64 [4]. Group 3: Company Background - Pomerantz LLP, the firm handling the lawsuit, is recognized for its expertise in corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation, having a history of recovering multimillion-dollar damages for victims of securities fraud [5].

Core Viewpoint - Robbins LLP has initiated a class action lawsuit on behalf of investors who acquired Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC American Depository Shares (ADSs) between January 13, 2021, and July 28, 2024, alleging that the company misled investors regarding the safety of its Enfamil baby formula [1][2]. Allegations - The lawsuit claims that Reckitt failed to inform investors and consumers about the increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in preterm infants consuming its cow's milk-based formula, Enfamil, and the potential negative impact on sales and legal exposure [2]. - A jury in Illinois awarded $60 million in a case against Mead Johnson, finding negligence in failing to warn about the risks associated with cow's milk-based formula, which led to a significant drop in Reckitt's ADS price [3]. - Following a similar case in Missouri, where Abbott Laboratories was found liable for NEC-related damages, Reckitt's ADS price also experienced a notable decline [4]. Class Action Participation - Shareholders interested in serving as lead plaintiffs in the class action must file a motion by August 4, 2025, but participation is not required to be eligible for recovery [5].

Group 1 - Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC (RBGLY) is currently outperforming its peers in the Consumer Staples sector, with a year-to-date gain of approximately 10.8% compared to the sector average of 5.4% [4] - The Zacks Rank for Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC is 1 (Strong Buy), indicating a strong potential for outperformance based on earnings estimate revisions and improving earnings outlooks [3] - The Zacks Consensus Estimate for RBGLY's full-year earnings has increased by 7.5% over the past quarter, reflecting stronger analyst sentiment and an improving earnings outlook [4] Group 2 - Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC belongs to the Soap and Cleaning Materials industry, which is currently ranked 1 in the Zacks Industry Rank [5] - The Consumer Staples group, which includes Reckitt Benckiser, is ranked 11 within the Zacks Sector Rank, which evaluates 16 different sector groups [2] - Another notable stock in the Consumer Staples sector is Reeds (REED), which has seen a significant year-to-date increase of 175.1% and has a Zacks Rank of 2 (Buy) [5][6]

Financial Data and Key Metrics Changes - Core Reckitt achieved 3.1% like-for-like net revenue growth and 0.3% volume growth, with a closer estimate of 1% when excluding the SAP pull-forward impact from the previous year [3][9] - Group like-for-like net revenue growth was reported at 1.1%, driven by the strong performance of Core Reckitt [9] - Emerging Markets saw a significant growth of 10.7%, with volume growth of 6.8% and a price/mix impact of 3.9% [10][21] Business Line Data and Key Metrics Changes - Intimate Wellness and Germ Protection categories experienced double-digit growth, particularly in China and India [10][15] - Seasonal OTC brands in Self Care declined mid-single digits due to higher retailer inventory levels at the start of the period, while VMS portfolio saw strong double-digit growth [15][19] - Essential Home reported a decline of 7% in like-for-like net revenue, attributed to a tough comparative period and SAP implementation impacts [18][21] Market Data and Key Metrics Changes - North America experienced a volume decline of 1.8% and a like-for-like net sales decline of 0.9%, with a positive price/mix of 0.9% [13] - Europe saw a 1.7% like-for-like net revenue decline, with volume down 4.7% and a price/mix increase of 3% [12] - Emerging Markets continued to show strong performance, with expectations of mid- to high-single-digit growth in Q2 and the second half of the year [22] Company Strategy and Development Direction - The company is focused on transforming Reckitt into a more efficient, world-class consumer health and hygiene company, with a sharpened focus on Powerbrands [3][24] - The Fuel for Growth program is expected to drive adjusted operating profit ahead of net revenue growth, with a target of 3% to 4% revenue growth for Core Reckitt for the year [21][23] - The planned exit from Essential Home is progressing, with the management team focused on improving performance and completing the separation process [6][7] Management's Comments on Operating Environment and Future Outlook - Management remains confident in the ability to mitigate tariff impacts through strong gross margins and diversified supply chains [5] - Despite macroeconomic uncertainties, the company maintains its fiscal '25 guidance, expecting group like-for-like net revenue growth of 2% to 4% [21][22] - The management team is optimistic about the performance of Intimate Wellness and Germ Protection, expecting sustained strong volume growth [44][61] Other Important Information - The company has initiated a GBP 1 billion share buyback program, with GBP 815 million already repurchased [20] - The new organizational structure is functioning effectively, with a focus on operational excellence and growth [8] Q&A Session Summary Question: What drove the delta versus expectations in Europe and North America? - Management noted a steeper drop-off in seasonal demand and significant retailer destocking impacting North America, while Europe faced macro volatility affecting consumer behavior [29][30][32] Question: What gives confidence in offsetting Essential Home's negative performance in Q2? - Management highlighted the stability of the Essential Home business and expected sequential improvement in Q2, supported by promotional activities and calendar launches [34][35][61] Question: Are there any one-offs in the strong volume performance of Intimate Wellness and Germ Protection? - Management confirmed that the strong performance was due to genuine underlying demand and market share gains, with no significant one-offs [43][44] Question: What are the sell-out trends in North America and Europe? - Sell-out trends in Europe are mid-single-digit growth, while North America has seen a slowdown to low single digits, primarily due to destocking and seasonal resets [51][52][53] Question: How will the Essential Home sale impact cash returns and buyback plans? - Management clarified that there is no announced delay in the Essential Home sale process, but acknowledged that market conditions could affect the timeline [91] Question: Is destocking becoming apparent outside of OTC and VMS? - Management indicated that the most pronounced impact has been in OTC and VMS, with different retailers making varied decisions based on their market performance [95][96]