The settlement stems from allegations that company representatives suggested the boating manufacturer was financially insulated from post-pandemic market fluctuations. Investors argued that internal business practices instead revealed vulnerability to broader economic pressures affecting consumer purchasing patterns.
According to the complaint, the company was accused of distributing excessive inventory through its dealer network after the pandemic-era recreational boat buying boom slowed. Plaintiffs alleged this strategy created financial strain on distributors and risked pushing at least one major dealer toward insolvency.
Investor filings claimed company management promoted optimistic business outlooks despite deteriorating macroeconomic conditions. The class action further alleged that hundreds of millions of dollars in surplus inventory were pushed into distribution channels in what plaintiffs described as a market-inflation scheme.
The settlement agreement was finalized earlier in February after the court determined that the resolution was fair, reasonable, and adequate for affected shareholders. The plaintiffs’ legal counsel argued that the recovery level was meaningful given the company’s limited cash flexibility and the declining value of directors’ and officers’ liability insurance coverage available to the defendants.
