Core Viewpoint - Rosen Law Firm is reminding investors who purchased DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. common stock during the specified Class Period of the upcoming lead plaintiff deadline for a class action lawsuit [1]. Group 1: Class Action Details - Investors who bought DoubleVerify common stock between November 10, 2023, and February 27, 2025, may be eligible for compensation without any out-of-pocket fees through a contingency fee arrangement [2]. - A class action lawsuit has already been filed, and interested parties must move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff by July 21, 2025 [3]. - The Rosen Law Firm emphasizes the importance of selecting qualified legal counsel with a successful track record in securities class actions [4]. Group 2: Case Allegations - The lawsuit alleges that DoubleVerify made false and misleading statements regarding its business operations, including the shift of customers' ad spending to closed platforms where DoubleVerify's capabilities were limited [5]. - It is claimed that DoubleVerify's high-margin advertising optimization services faced significant challenges in monetization due to the high costs and time required for technology development on closed platforms [5]. - The lawsuit also states that DoubleVerify systematically overbilled customers for ad impressions served to declared bots, and that its risk disclosures were materially misleading [5].

Core Viewpoint - The Gross Law Firm has issued a notice to shareholders of DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. regarding a class action lawsuit due to alleged misleading statements and failure to disclose critical information during the class period from November 10, 2023, to February 27, 2025 [1][3]. Allegations - The complaint alleges that DoubleVerify's customers shifted ad spending from open exchanges to closed platforms, where the company's technological capabilities were limited, impacting its competitive position against platforms like Meta and Amazon [3]. - It is claimed that the monetization of DoubleVerify's Activation Services was hindered by the high costs and time required to develop technology for closed platforms, which were not adequately disclosed to investors [3]. - The lawsuit states that it would take several years for DoubleVerify's Activation Services related to certain closed platforms to become profitable [3]. - Competitors were reportedly better positioned to integrate AI into their offerings on closed platforms, negatively affecting DoubleVerify's competitiveness and profitability [3]. - The company allegedly overbilled customers for ad impressions served to bots operating from known data centers [3]. - The risk disclosures provided by DoubleVerify were said to be materially false and misleading, as they downplayed already materialized adverse facts [3]. - As a result of these issues, the positive statements made by the defendants regarding the company's business and prospects were claimed to be materially false or misleading [3]. Next Steps for Shareholders - Shareholders who purchased shares of DoubleVerify during the specified class period are encouraged to register for the class action by July 21, 2025, to potentially become lead plaintiffs [4]. - Once registered, shareholders will receive updates through a portfolio monitoring software regarding the status of the case [4].

Core Viewpoint - Kuehn Law, PLLC is investigating potential breaches of fiduciary duties by officers and directors of DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. related to misrepresentation and failure to disclose critical information affecting shareholders [1]. Group 1: Allegations of Misrepresentation - Insiders at DoubleVerify allegedly caused the company to misrepresent customer behavior, specifically that customers were shifting ad spending from open exchanges to closed platforms, where DoubleVerify's technological capabilities were limited [2]. - The company’s ability to monetize its Activation Services was reportedly constrained due to the high costs and time required for technology development for closed platforms, which were not adequately disclosed to investors [2]. - It is claimed that monetization of Activation Services in connection with certain closed platforms would take several years, contrary to what was communicated to shareholders [2]. Group 2: Competitive Position and Billing Issues - DoubleVerify's competitors are said to be better positioned to integrate AI into their offerings on closed platforms, raising concerns about the company's competitive edge [2]. - The company allegedly overbilled customers for ad impressions served to declared bots operating from known data center server farms, which raises ethical and operational concerns [2]. Group 3: Misleading Risk Disclosures - The risk disclosures provided by DoubleVerify were characterized as materially false and misleading, as they downplayed adverse facts that had already materialized [2]. - Positive statements regarding the company's business, operations, and prospects were claimed to be materially false or misleading, lacking a reasonable basis [2].

Core Viewpoint - The Gross Law Firm has issued a notice to shareholders of DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. regarding a class action lawsuit alleging that the company made materially false and misleading statements during the class period from November 10, 2023, to February 27, 2025 [1] Allegations - Allegations include that DoubleVerify's customers shifted ad spending from open exchanges to closed platforms, limiting the company's technological capabilities [1] - The complaint states that the monetization of DoubleVerify's Activation Services was hindered due to the high costs and time required for technology development for closed platforms [1] - It is claimed that monetization of these services would take several years, impacting the company's profitability [1] - Competitors were reportedly better positioned to integrate AI into their offerings on closed platforms, further impairing DoubleVerify's competitive edge [1] - The company allegedly overbilled customers for ad impressions served to bots operating from known data centers [1] - Risk disclosures from DoubleVerify were characterized as materially false and misleading, presenting adverse facts as mere possibilities [1] - As a result of these issues, positive statements made by the defendants regarding the company's business and prospects were deemed materially false or misleading [1] Next Steps for Shareholders - Shareholders are encouraged to register for the class action by July 21, 2025, to participate in the case without any cost or obligation [2] - Registered shareholders will receive updates through a portfolio monitoring software throughout the lifecycle of the case [2]

Core Viewpoint - Thumzup Media Corporation is expanding its digital asset strategy to include a broader range of cryptocurrencies beyond Bitcoin, aiming to enhance financial flexibility and support the growth of its AdTech platform [1][2][3] Company Strategy - The Board of Directors has authorized management to accumulate additional cryptocurrencies, specifically Dogecoin (DOGE), Litecoin (LITE), Solana (SOL), Ripple (XRP), Ether (ETH), and USD Coin (USDC) [1][2] - This initiative builds on the existing strategy that allows the company to hold up to 90% of its liquid assets in Bitcoin, with current holdings of 19.106 BTC valued at approximately $2.1 million as of July 8, 2025 [2] Management Perspective - The CEO of Thumzup stated that diversifying into other leading cryptocurrencies aligns with the company's commitment to innovation and prudent treasury management, which could enhance financial flexibility as the company scales its operations [3] Product Offering - Thumzup Media Corporation is focused on democratizing the social media branding and marketing industry through its flagship product, the Thumzup platform, which allows users to earn cash for posting about participating advertisers [3]

Core Viewpoint - A class action lawsuit has been filed against DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. for allegedly misleading investors regarding the company's performance and competitive position during the class period from November 10, 2023, to February 27, 2025 [1][3]. Group 1: Allegations Against DoubleVerify - The lawsuit claims that DoubleVerify misrepresented the shift of its customers' ad spending from open exchanges to closed platforms, where the company's capabilities were limited and faced competition from platforms like Meta and Amazon [3]. - It is alleged that developing technology for closed platforms was more costly and time-consuming than communicated to investors [3]. - The monetization of Activation Services on closed platforms was expected to take several years, contrary to the company's claims [3]. - Competitors were reportedly better positioned to implement AI solutions on closed platforms, affecting DoubleVerify's competitiveness and profitability [3]. - The company allegedly overbilled customers for ad impressions served to known bots, impacting its financial integrity [3]. - Risk disclosures from DoubleVerify were claimed to be misleading, presenting ongoing issues as hypothetical risks [3]. Group 2: Impact on Stock Price - On February 28, 2024, DoubleVerify issued lower-than-expected Q1 2024 revenue growth guidance, leading to a stock drop of over 21% [4]. - On May 7, 2024, the company cut its full-year 2024 revenue outlook due to reduced ad spending, resulting in a nearly 39% decline in stock price [5]. - On February 27, 2025, disappointing Q4 2024 earnings were reported, revealing the negative impact of the shift to closed platforms, causing shares to fall more than 36% [5].

Core Viewpoint - The Gross Law Firm has issued a notice to shareholders of DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. regarding a class action lawsuit due to alleged misleading statements and failure to disclose critical information during the class period from November 10, 2023, to February 27, 2025 [1][3]. Allegations - The complaint alleges that DoubleVerify's customers shifted ad spending from open exchanges to closed platforms, where the company's technological capabilities were limited, impacting its competitive position against platforms like Meta and Amazon [3]. - It is claimed that DoubleVerify's ability to monetize its Activation Services was constrained due to the high costs and time required for technology development for closed platforms, which were not adequately disclosed to investors [3]. - The lawsuit states that monetization of DoubleVerify's Activation Services on certain closed platforms would take several years, contrary to what was communicated to shareholders [3]. - Competitors of DoubleVerify were reportedly better positioned to integrate AI into their offerings on closed platforms, negatively affecting DoubleVerify's competitiveness and profitability [3]. - The company allegedly overbilled customers for ad impressions served to bots operating from known data center server farms, raising concerns about its billing practices [3]. - The risk disclosures provided by DoubleVerify were claimed to be materially false and misleading, as they downplayed already materialized adverse facts [3]. - As a result of these issues, the positive statements made by the defendants regarding the company's business and prospects were deemed materially false or misleading [3]. Next Steps for Shareholders - Shareholders who purchased shares of DoubleVerify during the specified class period are encouraged to register for the class action by July 21, 2025, to participate in potential recovery efforts [4]. - Once registered, shareholders will receive updates through a portfolio monitoring software regarding the status of the case [4].

Core Viewpoint - The Gross Law Firm has issued a notice to shareholders of DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. regarding a class action lawsuit alleging that the company made materially false and misleading statements during the class period from November 10, 2023, to February 27, 2025 [1]. Allegations - Allegations include that DoubleVerify's customers shifted ad spending to closed platforms, limiting the company's technological capabilities and competition with platforms like Meta and Amazon [1]. - The complaint states that the monetization of DoubleVerify's Activation Services was hindered due to the high costs and time required for technology development for closed platforms [1]. - It is claimed that monetization of these services would take several years, impacting the company's profitability [1]. - Competitors were reportedly better positioned to integrate AI into their offerings, further impairing DoubleVerify's competitive edge [1]. - The company allegedly overbilled customers for ad impressions served to bots, raising concerns about its billing practices [1]. - Risk disclosures from DoubleVerify were characterized as misleading, presenting adverse facts as mere possibilities [1]. - As a result of these issues, the positive statements made by the defendants regarding the company's business and prospects were deemed materially false or misleading [1]. Next Steps for Shareholders - Shareholders are encouraged to register for the class action by July 21, 2025, to participate in the case without any cost or obligation [2]. - Registered shareholders will receive updates through a portfolio monitoring software throughout the lifecycle of the case [2]. About the Law Firm - The Gross Law Firm is a nationally recognized class action law firm focused on protecting investors' rights against deceit and fraud [3]. - The firm aims to ensure companies adhere to responsible business practices and seeks recovery for investors who suffered losses due to misleading statements [3].

Group 1: Streaming Industry Trends - Streaming viewership surpassed the combined total of broadcast and cable viewership for the first time in May 2025, with streaming viewership increasing by 71% over the past four years, while broadcast and cable viewership dropped by 21% and 39%, respectively [1] - The programmatic ad market is massive, with estimates indicating that 91% of digital advertising and at least 56% of total global advertising is programmatic, and global advertising spending is expected to reach $1 trillion this year [6] Group 2: The Trade Desk Overview - The Trade Desk operates as a Demand Side Platform (DSP), executing programmatic advertising purchases on behalf of its clients [3] - The Trade Desk adds value by providing clients with a wealth of useful data during the ad bidding process [4] Group 3: Financial Performance and Valuation - The Trade Desk's stock experienced a decline after missing earnings estimates for the first time in eight years in Q4 2024, leading to valuation metrics dropping significantly below historical averages, with the price-to-sales ratio being 82% off its five-year average [9][11] - Despite the earnings miss, The Trade Desk reported a 22% year-over-year sales growth to $741 million in Q4 2024 and a full-year sales growth of 26%, surpassing $2.4 billion [12] - The company reported encouraging Q1 2025 results with a 25% growth in sales reaching $616 million year-over-year, and operating income nearly doubled from $28.7 million to $54.5 million [12] - The Trade Desk is in a strong financial position with $1.7 billion in cash and investments, current assets of $4.9 billion, and $386 million in common stock repurchased during the quarter [13] Group 4: Investment Potential - The Trade Desk is considered to be growing rapidly, in great financial shape, and significantly undervalued, making it an attractive buy for investors at this time [14]

Core Viewpoint - Rosen Law Firm is reminding investors who purchased DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. common stock during the specified Class Period of the upcoming lead plaintiff deadline for a class action lawsuit [1][3]. Group 1: Class Action Details - Investors who bought DoubleVerify common stock between November 10, 2023, and February 27, 2025, may be eligible for compensation without any out-of-pocket fees through a contingency fee arrangement [2]. - A class action lawsuit has already been filed, and interested parties must move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff by July 21, 2025 [3]. Group 2: Case Allegations - The lawsuit alleges that DoubleVerify made false and misleading statements regarding its business operations, including the shift of customers' ad spending to closed platforms where DoubleVerify's capabilities were limited [5]. - It is claimed that the company overbilled customers for ad impressions served to declared bots and that its risk disclosures were materially false and misleading [5]. - The lawsuit asserts that the defendants' positive statements about DoubleVerify's business lacked a reasonable basis, leading to investor damages when the true details became public [5]. Group 3: Rosen Law Firm's Credentials - Rosen Law Firm has a strong track record in securities class actions, having achieved the largest securities class action settlement against a Chinese company at the time and being ranked No. 1 for the number of settlements in 2017 [4]. - The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors, securing over $438 million in 2019 alone [4].