Item 1A. Risk Factors.
An investment in shares of our common stock is highly speculative and involves a high degree of risk. We face a variety of risks that may affect our operations and financial results and many of those risks are driven by factors that we cannot control or predict. Before investing in our common stock you should carefully consider the following risks, together with the financial and other information contained in this report. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. In that case, the trading price of our common stock would likely decline and you may lose all or a part of your investment. Only those investors who can bear the risk of loss of their entire investment should invest in our common stock.
Risk Factor Summary
We are providing the following summary of the risk factors contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to enhance the readability and accessibility of our risk factor disclosures. We encourage you to carefully review the full risk factors contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K in their entirety for additional information regarding the material.
Risks Related to Our Digital Asset Strategy and Holdings
Our adoption of a digital asset treasury strategy centered on TAO and participation in the Bittensor network may not be successfully implemented and exposes us to significant operational, market, cybersecurity, and regulatory risks.
In June 2025, we adopted a differentiated digital asset treasury strategy that concentrates our excess liquidity in TAO, the native token of the Bittensor network, and contemplates staking and other on‑chain activities designed to earn yield and potentially increase our TAO exposure over time. This strategic shift departs from traditional cash management and requires new and evolving operational, technical, accounting, compliance, and risk‑management capabilities. There is no assurance that we will be able to execute, scale, or profitably maintain this strategy as currently contemplated, within the anticipated timeframes, or at all. Any shortfall or delay in building and maintaining the necessary infrastructure, internal controls, vendor oversight, and personnel expertise could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.
Table of Contents
Our TAO‑focused activities depend on the design, security, and performance of the Bittensor network, a decentralized AI blockchain with a novel incentive and consensus design often described as Proof of Intelligence, implemented across a Subtensor base chain and AI subnets. The Bittensor protocol, its software clients, validator and miner incentive mechanisms including Yuma consensus and subnet‑level scoring, and its governance model continue to evolve and may contain defects, vulnerabilities, or design tradeoffs that create operational disruptions, unexpected economic outcomes, or security incidents. We do not control or have any ability to meaningfully influence the development, governance, or security of the Bittensor network. Changes to protocol rules, software releases, forks, governance processes, or emergency measures, whether to address bugs, exploits, or performance, can occur on short notice, may be contentious, and could impair staking operations, reduce rewards, or adversely affect the TAO market. Past network security events and rapid protocol changes illustrate these risks and the potential for , of confidence, or impacts on TAO’s value.
To participate in staking and similar on‑chain activities, we rely on specialized infrastructure and third‑party service providers, including custodians and validators, for critical functions such as key management, staking delegation, software upgrades, and node uptime. Errors, malfunctions, outages, performance degradation, or cybersecurity incidents at any of these providers, or within our own systems, could result in the permanent loss, slashing, or inaccessibility of staked or unstaked TAO, missed rewards, or the inability to transact or rebalance our treasury in a timely manner. Because Bittensor’s AI workloads and validations depend in part on off‑chain infrastructure, failures or manipulation in those off‑chain processes can also negatively affect on‑chain incentives and our staking outcomes. We may be required to incur costs to adapt to protocol updates, add redundancy, or transition providers, which may not be .
The regulatory environment applicable to public companies pursuing cryptocurrency treasury strategies, and to crypto asset markets, staking, and decentralized AI networks in particular, remains uncertain and continues to evolve. We are subject to ongoing scrutiny by regulators and listing authorities, and future interpretations or rulemakings by the SEC, Nasdaq, or other domestic or foreign regulators could impose registration, disclosure, custody, broker‑dealer, exchange, investment company, commodity, sanctions, AML and KYC, tax, or other requirements that are costly to implement, restrict our activities, or require changes to our strategy. Future classification of TAO or staking rewards as securities, commodities, or other regulated instruments could impose significant compliance obligations, increase costs, or limit our ability to continue our current activities. Any adverse regulatory developments, examination findings, enforcement actions, accounting guidance, or changes in tax treatment applicable to TAO, staking rewards, or our treasury practices could materially adversely affect our operations, financial condition, and the market for our securities.
We may seek to raise additional capital in the future to support our digital asset treasury strategy, including the acquisition of TAO, and we cannot predict the timing of any such financing.
We may pursue additional financing to support our digital asset treasury strategy, which may involve acquiring, holding, or managing TAO, as part of our corporate treasury operations. These financing activities could include the issuance of equity or equity-linked securities in public offerings, as well as issuing equity or equity-linked securities in exchange for TAO, which may result in substantial dilution to existing stockholders. The timing, amount, and terms of any such financing will depend on market conditions and our strategic objectives, and we cannot predict when or if such financing will occur. Any such financing may not be available on favorable terms, or at all.
In addition, the value and volatility of digital assets like TAO may require us to maintain higher levels of liquidity or collateral, potentially increasing our need for capital. If we issue additional shares or securities convertible into or exercisable for shares of our common stock, our existing stockholders may experience dilution of their ownership interests, and the market price of our common stock may decline. There can be no assurance that any future financing will be available on acceptable terms, or at all, and any inability to raise capital when needed could adversely affect our financial condition and strategic initiatives.
Our financial results are heavily dependent on TAO, significantly increasing our exposure to crypto asset market volatility, valuation uncertainty, and concentrated credit risks.
Our holdings in crypto assets are focused on TAO, which subjects us to heightened risks related to asset concentration and market volatility. A substantial decline in demand for TAO, if not offset by interest in other assets, would materially and adversely impact our revenues and overall financial performance. This concentration also amplifies our vulnerability to downturns in the broader crypto market, exposing us to outsized losses, asset write-downs, liquidity constraints, and difficulties in meeting collateral obligations.
Table of Contents
Moreover, a significant percentage of the TAO tokens in circulation is concentrated among a relatively small number of holders, including network validators, early participants, and large-scale staking entities. This concentration increases the risk that a small number of parties could exert outsized influence over governance decisions, validator selection, network upgrades, and the market for TAO. If large holders were to coordinate, they could act in ways that disadvantage us or smaller participants, including by influencing the direction of protocol development, restricting access to certain subnets, or taking positions that destabilize the market price of TAO. Concentrated ownership also heightens the risk of large, sudden dispositions of TAO, which could adversely affect liquidity and price stability. Any of these developments could impair our ability to rely on the Bittensor network, reduce the value of its holdings, or otherwise adversely affect its business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Additionally, accurately valuing crypto assets, including TAO, can be challenging, especially during periods of market stress. Crypto assets trade globally across numerous exchanges, many of which are lightly regulated, causing significant price volatility and disparities across trading venues. The absence of a centralized market or definitive closing price means valuations can be unreliable or temporarily distorted due to liquidity shortages, market disruptions, or manipulation. Such valuation uncertainties complicate the accurate determination of our financial position and make it difficult for auditors to verify our asset values.
Moreover, new accounting standards requiring adjustments to how we mark crypto assets to market values could introduce substantial fluctuations in our reported earnings. These valuation changes might also trigger unintended tax liabilities, resulting in increased tax expenses or additional compliance burdens.
Our concentrated crypto asset holdings further expose us to credit risks. For instance, maintaining large asset balances with a single custodian or significant lending exposure to a single counterparty within the crypto industry could substantially increase the severity of an adverse event, as the failure or insolvency of such entities would directly jeopardize a major portion of our assets.
If we fail to successfully implement our crypto asset-related business strategy, or if our strategy proves ineffective, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.
Our future performance depends significantly on the successful execution of our business strategy, which is focused, in part, on acquiring, holding and staking TAO and participating in the TAO ecosystem. This strategy is novel, involves exposure to emerging technologies and markets, and requires effective management of operational, technological, and financial resources. The successful implementation of this strategy will place substantial demands on our management team and infrastructure. Moreover, given the rapidly evolving regulatory and technological landscape surrounding crypto assets, there is no assurance that our strategy will be successful, or that it will result in improved financial performance or long-term shareholder value. We may, at any time, modify or abandon certain components of our business plan in response to market conditions, regulatory developments, or other factors. Additionally, our strategy is untested over extended market cycles, and unforeseen complications, operational failures, regulatory shifts, or insufficient demand for TAO could significantly our business objectives. If we are to effectively implement our strategy, or if the strategy does not yield the anticipated benefits, our business prospects, growth potential, and could be materially and impacted.
We may lack effective tools to hedge against TAO’s price volatility, as no established derivatives market exists for TAO and broader crypto hedging instruments are generally limited to major tokens like Bitcoin. This leaves us more exposed to adverse market swings and unable to mitigate downside risk through conventional strategies. Our concentrated TAO holdings also present liquidity challenges, as TAO’s trading volume is limited and large sales could depress prices and trigger steep losses. These constraints are compounded by the small number of platforms supporting TAO, some of which are offshore or decentralized. In adverse market conditions, we may be unable to liquidate TAO at reasonable prices, potentially impairing our ability to meet financial obligations. These combined factors make our treasury strategy more and less liquid than one based on traditional assets.
Managing crypto assets like TAO also introduces operational complexities and control risks distinct from traditional treasury functions. Our limited experience in large-scale crypto custody increases the risk that our procedures may be inadequate to safeguard assets or accurately record transactions. Effective crypto asset management requires strict private key security, wallet controls, and transaction protocols; failures in these areas could result in irreversible losses. Even with third-party custodians, we must ensure proper oversight, reconcile blockchain data with financial records, and comply with evolving accounting standards. Human error, phishing attacks, or insider misconduct could also expose us to theft or fraud. Our finance team may experience a steep learning curve in navigating blockchain-based accounting, and weaknesses in our systems could lead to delays, errors, or regulatory issues. While we are investing in controls and personnel, there is no guarantee our risk management will remain as the crypto landscape evolves.
Table of Contents
Our crypto asset strategy also relies heavily on evolving blockchain technology, which is subject to rapid change, technical challenges, and potential obsolescence. Protocols underlying TAO, including but not limited to key subnets, could experience security vulnerabilities, errors in code, malicious attacks, or other technical failures. Any such incidents could undermine confidence in TAO, result in significant financial losses, and materially impair our business. Additionally, future technological advances, including quantum computing, could potentially compromise the cryptographic foundations of blockchain technology underlying TAO, posing additional risk to the security and long-term viability of our crypto asset holdings.
Bittensor’s TAO token, generated via a decentralized “Proof-of-Intelligence” mining process, faces significant volatility, governance centralization risks, regulatory uncertainty, limited liquidity, and ongoing security vulnerabilities related to its AI-focused consensus model and underlying decentralized infrastructure.
Bittensor’s native token, TAO, was launched via a “fair launch” mining process in January 2021 and, according to public reports, without a pre-sale, ICO, or pre-mined allocation. Circulating tokens were earned by miners, promoting decentralization but potentially resulting in wealth concentration among early participants. The project is managed by the Opentensor Foundation, a small team of developers, making it heavily dependent on their ongoing involvement. Until early 2024, governance power was concentrated in a small number of validators, posing centralization risks. Although a new dynamic governance system was introduced in 2025, it remains untested and could present unforeseen challenges and conflicts of interest.
TAO tokens are generated through Bittensor’s “Proof-of-Intelligence” consensus mechanism, where validators assess AI contributions from miners to distribute rewards. This approach, however, introduces potential vulnerabilities such as subjective evaluations, collusion, and technical security risks. Notably, in July 2024, a supply-chain attack led to theft of private keys and prompted a temporary network shutdown, underscoring existing security concerns and highlighting the network’s reliance on centralized emergency controls. TAO has a capped supply of 21 million tokens, with about 9 million mined as of mid-2025, and a halving of token issuance every four years, the next scheduled for August 2025. These dynamics could influence miner incentives and affect market liquidity.
TAO’s value is speculative and highly dependent on future adoption and ecosystem growth. Trading liquidity is limited and primarily concentrated on offshore exchanges, increasing price volatility and counterparty risks. Currently, derivatives markets for TAO are limited, and while products such as the Grayscale Bittensor Trust may enhance market accessibility, they carry additional liquidity and regulatory uncertainties.
Bittensor, a decentralized AI blockchain network using a “Proof-of-Intelligence” consensus model tied to subnet output evaluation and performance for purposes of allocating token emissions and incentives (distinct from Subtensor’s separate mechanism for ordering transactions and finalizing blocks), faces significant technical, operational, scalability, governance, and regulatory risks, including dependence on third-party off-chain infrastructure, potential vulnerabilities in AI validation processes, limited scalability, decentralized governance inefficiencies, and regulatory uncertainties, all of which could adversely impact the value and adoption of its native TAO token.
TAO functions on the Bittensor network, which operates as a decentralized AI network built on a custom blockchain utilizing the Substrate framework and employs a novel consensus mechanism commonly referred to as “Proof-of-Intelligence,” whereby subnet output evaluation (and the resulting token emission and incentive allocations) are tied to performance within specialized subnets. this Proof-of-Intelligence consensus mechanism is distinct from Subtensor’s separate mechanism for transaction ordering and block finality. The complex architecture of this system introduces significant technical and operational risks. Given the sophisticated blockchain infrastructure and Bittensor’s specialized AI-focused subnets, there exists a heightened potential for software errors, system vulnerabilities, and unforeseen operational disruptions. Such events could result in extended network downtime, diminished user confidence, or even irreversible losses of digital assets.
Moreover, Bittensor heavily depends on off-chain infrastructure for executing AI computations, leading to inherent trust and transparency issues. Users must rely on third-party providers to execute AI tasks accurately and securely. Any inaccuracies, misreporting, malicious actions, or operational failures in these off-chain processes could significantly damage the reliability and overall reputation of the Bittensor network and negatively impact the TAO token’s value.
The decentralized nature of Bittensor further presents notable scalability challenges. As participation increases, the complexity and resource-intensiveness of validating and evaluating AI model contributions can create bottlenecks and degrade system performance.
Table of Contents
These scalability constraints could prevent Bittensor from effectively competing with centralized AI platforms, potentially limiting widespread adoption and constraining growth in demand for the TAO token.
In addition, maintaining robust quality control and verifying AI outputs within the Bittensor ecosystem pose ongoing challenges. While the platform employs a competitive, reputation-based reward system to incentivize quality contributions, this structure remains vulnerable to risks such as validator collusion, sabotage among competing model providers, and manipulation of reputation or reward mechanisms. Without robust on-chain verification processes, incorrect or deceptive AI outputs may proliferate, eroding trust and undermining the perceived value of services provided through the network.
The value and liquidity of the TAO token also depends substantially on its adoption among developers, researchers, and other users within decentralized AI markets. If Bittensor fails to expand beyond niche communities or becomes overshadowed by centralized AI alternatives, it may experience decreased demand for its services. This scenario would negatively impact the market price and liquidity of TAO, adversely affecting our financial position.
The decentralized governance structure of Bittensor, managed through consensus among TAO token holders, also introduces additional risks related to decision-making delays, political friction, and governance inefficiencies. Regulatory ambiguity and increased scrutiny surrounding decentralized AI systems and crypto tokens further compound these governance challenges. Adverse regulatory actions, unclear legal interpretations, or new compliance obligations could impose substantial additional costs or operational restrictions or potentially force cessation of certain business activities altogether. This regulatory uncertainty could also deter institutional adoption and broader acceptance of Bittensor, further limiting its potential growth and stability. Collectively, these technical, operational, market, governance, and regulatory risks could result in substantial volatility in the value of TAO, materially affecting our business strategy involving this asset.
In addition, Subtensor currently uses a proof-of-authority model under which a small, permissioned set of validators operated by the Opentensor Foundation produces and finalizes blocks. By contrast, Yuma Consensus is an on-chain emissions algorithm that computes reward allocations from validator rankings of model performance and does not provide transaction ordering, block production, or ledger finality. Reliance on this authority set centralizes transaction ordering and finality and increases the risk of network halts, delayed processing, or selective censorship if operators fail, are compromised, or change policies. Compromise or misuse of authority signing keys, software defects, or misconfiguration may require emergency coordination or restricted operating modes and could disrupt our ability to acquire, transfer, or dispose of TAO, potentially triggering exchange or custodian pauses, reduced liquidity, wider spreads, and price volatility. Concentration at the authority layer also creates a single point of operational and regulatory leverage: legal orders, sanctions, or jurisdictional restrictions directed at the Foundation or authority operators could compel blocking, reordering, or exclusion of transactions or participants. The composition, permissions, and parameters of the authority set may change on short notice, and elevated security and key-management demands increase the risk of or reorganizations; authority control can also amplify governance . Collectively, these factors may network reliability and perceived decentralization, reduce adoption and TAO liquidity, and affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
The open-source and decentralized design of crypto asset networks, including the Bittensor network on which the TAO crypto asset functions, exposes us to risks related to forks, air drops, incidental rights, and related technological and operational disruptions.
Blockchain networks like Bittensor can also undergo “hard forks,” splitting into separate networks due to planned upgrades, technical disagreements, or vulnerabilities. In addition, events such as air drops or the granting of incidental rights may occur, resulting in the distribution of new or derivative digital assets. These events can create or duplicate assets and raise practical and legal considerations regarding whether, and how, holders are able to receive, claim, or use such assets.
In the event of an airdrop, hard fork, or the granting of incidental rights, we will decide how to proceed using its best judgment and, where required, after obtaining advice from legal, tax, accounting, and cybersecurity professionals. Public blockchain events such as airdrops and hard forks may create new assets or duplicate existing assets. We may lack the technical capability, private keys, or custodial support to receive, claim, hold, transfer, or secure these assets. Hard forks can enable replay of transactions and may require changes to key management and software. Claiming mechanisms and unsolicited token transfers can expose us to phishing, malicious smart contracts, dusting, and other cyber threats. Exchanges, custodians, and payment processors may pause or refuse support for a new asset or chain, which can disrupt our products and increase costs. In addition, receipt of airdropped or forked assets may be treated as taxable income upon our ability to exercise control, even if we cannot promptly monetize the asset, which could result in tax liabilities that exceed any related proceeds. Valuation and timing for tax purposes are uncertain and may be by tax authorities.
Table of Contents
Regulators may also determine that certain airdropped or forked assets are securities, derivatives, or otherwise subject to registration, licensing, or compliance obligations, which could restrict our ability to hold, transfer, or monetize such assets and expose us to enforcement risk. The accounting treatment of these assets is complex and unsettled, and any misjudgment in recognition, valuation, or disclosure could lead to misstatements, restatements, or disagreements with our auditors. In addition, our custodians or other service providers may reserve contractual rights to retain or decline to support airdropped or forked assets, which could prevent us from realizing any economic benefit from these events. Any of these events could result in loss or theft of assets, unexpected tax obligations, service interruptions, or reduced revenue, and could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Our operating results are dependent on the price of TAO. If such price declines, our business, operating results, and financial condition would be adversely affected.
Any declines in the volume of crypto asset transactions, the price of crypto assets, or market liquidity for crypto assets generally may adversely affect our operating results. We have significant investments in TAO. As of October 31, 2025, we held digital intangible assets valued at approximately $29.0 million. Thus, changes in the value of TAO will generally have a significant impact on our results. Our operating results will be impacted by the revenues and profits we generate from the purchase, sale, and trading of crypto assets.
The market price of Bittensor’s TAO token has been highly volatile and could decline sharply at any time. For example, TAO’s price experienced a rise of over 1000% in 2024, reaching a high above $767 in April 2024, and subsequently corrected by roughly 45% from that peak. Such extreme fluctuations could significantly increase or reduce the value of our TAO holdings within a short period. The market price of TAO can be driven by a variety of factors beyond our control, including speculative investor behavior, regulatory developments, changes in market liquidity, the adoption and performance of the Bittensor network, cybersecurity incidents, macroeconomic events, or negative publicity about digital assets generally or TAO specifically. Because we have invested a substantial portion of our treasury in TAO, a major downturn in TAO’s market price could materially impair the value of our assets and even jeopardize our ability to meet cash needs or financial obligations.
The price of crypto assets and associated demand for buying, selling, and trading of crypto assets have also historically been subject to significant volatility. For instance, in 2017 and 2021, the value of certain crypto assets, including bitcoin, experienced steep increases in value, followed by steep declines in 2018 and 2022. After recovering from the 2018 decline and reaching record highs in December 2021, the value of the total crypto market cap declined by approximately 64% in the twelve months ended December 31, 2022. The collapse of several companies in the crypto asset industry such as Celsius, Voyager, and FTX impacted crypto asset prices in 2022 and the majority of 2023. We believe that the approval and launch of spot-based Bitcoin ETFs in the U.S. in the first quarter of 2024 and the election of President Donald Trump in the fourth quarter of 2024 contributed to an increase in the crypto market capitalization during 2024. However, the crypto market subsequently experienced a general decline in the first half of 2025.
The price and trading volume of any crypto asset is subject to significant uncertainty and volatility, and may significantly decline in the future, without recovery. Such uncertainty and volatility depend on a number of factors, including:
market conditions across the cryptoeconomy;
changes in liquidity, volume, and trading activities;
trading activities on crypto asset trading platforms worldwide, many of which may be unregulated, and may include manipulative activities;
investment and trading activities of highly active retail and institutional users, speculators, miners, and investors;
the speed and rate at which cryptocurrency is able to gain adoption as a medium of exchange, utility, store of value, consumptive asset, security instrument, or other financial asset worldwide, if at all;
decreased user and investor confidence in crypto assets and crypto asset trading platforms;
negative publicity and events relating to the cryptoeconomy;
Table of Contents
unpredictable social media coverage or “trending” of crypto assets;
the ability for crypto assets to meet user and investor demands;
the functionality and utility of crypto assets and their associated ecosystems and networks, including crypto assets designed for use in various applications;
consumer preferences and perceived value of crypto assets and crypto asset markets;
increased competition from other payment services or other crypto assets that exhibit better speed, security, scalability, or other characteristics;
regulatory (including enforcement) or legislative changes and updates affecting the cryptoeconomy;
the characterization of crypto assets under the laws of various jurisdictions around the world;
the maintenance, troubleshooting, and development of the blockchain networks underlying crypto assets, including by miners, validators, and developers worldwide;
the ability for cryptocurrency networks to attract and retain miners or validators to secure and confirm transactions accurately and efficiently;
ongoing technological viability and security of crypto assets and their associated smart contracts, applications, and networks, including vulnerabilities against hacks and scalability;
fees and speed associated with processing crypto asset transactions, including on the underlying blockchain networks and on crypto asset trading platforms;
financial strength of market participants;
the availability and cost of funding and capital;
the liquidity of crypto asset trading platforms;
interruptions in service from or failures of major crypto asset trading platforms;
availability of an active derivatives market for various crypto assets;
availability of banking and payment services to support cryptocurrency-related projects;
level of interest rates and inflation;
monetary policies of governments, trade restrictions, and fiat currency devaluations; and
national and international economic and political conditions.
Furthermore, crypto asset prices may be subject to market manipulation or distortion, including pump-and-dump schemes, wash trading, spoofing, and front-running, particularly on unregulated exchanges. Such manipulation could significantly impact the perceived value and trading volume of TAO and undermine investor confidence in the crypto asset market, adversely affecting our business.
Table of Contents
There is no assurance that any crypto asset will maintain its value or that there will be meaningful levels of trading activities. In the event that the price of crypto assets or the demand for trading crypto assets decline, our business, operating results, and financial condition could be adversely affected.
Our crypto asset holdings are illiquid and may be difficult to sell or use as collateral. Crypto asset holdings are less liquid than cash and cash equivalents and may not serve as a source of liquidity for us to the same extent. During times of market instability, we may not be able to sell our crypto assets at favorable prices, or at all. As a result, our crypto asset holdings may not be a reliable source of funds for working capital needs. Additionally, we may be unable to use our crypto assets as collateral for capital-raising transactions, particularly when the market is unstable or prices have declined significantly. This lack of liquidity could adversely affect our business and financial condition.
Certain of our directors, officers, employees and independent contractors may hold crypto assets.
Certain of our directors, officers, employees, and independent contractors may hold crypto assets, including the same crypto assets in which we invest, or have other crypto-related personal investments. Such persons may actively invest in crypto projects and crypto assets on their own behalf, which could incentivize them to take actions (or refrain from actions) that favor their personal crypto holdings or related business interests over our interests and the interests of our shareholders. Our affiliates may also have substantial direct investments in crypto assets and are under no obligation to prioritize or consider our interests when managing those investments, potentially leading to conflicts of interest. Certain of our directors, officers, employees, and independent contractors may have outside business ventures or participate in other crypto-related initiatives, potentially diverting their time, attention, and resources away from our Company. Our internal policies and procedures may not fully eliminate these conflicts, and there is no assurance that the personal or outside interests of these individuals will consistently align with our interests or those of our shareholders. If such conflicts are not adequately managed, our decision-making processes, corporate governance, market perception, and overall financial performance may be affected.
We are highly dependent on James Altucher and other key personnel, and our inability to retain or attract experienced individuals could materially harm our business.
We are highly dependent on the services of our TAO token consultant, James Altucher, for leading our TAO-based revenue generation strategy. Because we operate in a relatively new industry that requires highly skilled and technical personnel, our future success is highly dependent on the talents and contributions of Mr. Altucher. The loss of Mr. Altucher could disrupt our operations and have a material adverse effect on our business.
Mr. Altucher is free to engage in activities outside of the Company, although he is obligated under his consulting agreement to devote his TAO-related activities exclusively to us. Moreover, his contract expires on June 8, 2026. While Mr. Altucher has entered into a consulting agreement with the Company, Mr. Altucher is not expected to devote his full time, attention or efforts to us. Mr. Altucher may continue to manage significant crypto assets outside of the Company, which may consume some of his time, attention and efforts.
Additionally, our future growth and success depend on our ability to attract, retain, and motivate skilled employees and contractors in the crypto asset industry. Competition for qualified personnel in the crypto asset and blockchain industries is intense. The specialized nature of blockchain technology and crypto asset markets means there is limited availability of highly experienced personnel. Our growth strategy depends not only on retaining key individuals like Mr. Altucher but also on our ability to attract and retain additional experienced professionals. Any inability to secure or retain such personnel due to competitive pressures, reputational factors, regulatory uncertainty, or market conditions could adversely impact our ability to execute our strategic initiatives and could materially harm our business.
Our TAO holdings are likely to be less liquid than our existing cash and cash equivalents and may not be able to serve as a source of liquidity for us to the same extent as cash and cash equivalents.
Historically, the TAO market has been characterized by significant volatility in price, lower trading volumes, and less liquidity compared to major crypto assets like Bitcoin and traditional fiat currencies. During times of market instability, we may not be able to sell our TAO at favorable prices or at all. For example, TAO currently trades on a limited number of centralized and decentralized platforms, some of which may lack sufficient depth or infrastructure to support large-volume trades or institutional execution. As a result, our TAO holdings may not be able to serve as a source of liquidity for us to the same extent as cash and cash equivalents.
Table of Contents
Additionally, we may be unable to enter into term loans or other capital raising transactions collateralized by our unencumbered TAO or otherwise generate funds using our TAO holdings, particularly in times of market instability or when the price of TAO has declined significantly. If we are unable to sell our TAO, enter into additional capital raising transactions (including transactions using TAO as collateral), or otherwise generate funds using our TAO holdings, or if we are forced to sell our TAO at a significant loss in order to meet our working capital requirements, our business and financial condition could be negatively impacted.
Additionally, we rely on third-party exchanges and custodians to facilitate transactions in TAO. These platforms may face operational disruptions, security breaches, regulatory enforcement, insolvency, or other issues beyond our control. Any impairment of our ability to access or transact on these platforms could limit our liquidity, force us into unfavorable asset sales, or prevent us from timely managing our crypto asset holdings, thereby materially affecting our operations and financial condition.
Regulatory change classifying certain digital cryptocurrency assets as “securities” could lead to our being subject to extensive regulation, which could result in significant costs or force us to cease operations.
Under Sections 3(a)(1)(A) and (C) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “ 1940 Act ”), a company generally will be deemed to be an “investment company” for purposes of the 1940 Act if (1) it is, or holds itself out as being, engaged primarily, or proposes to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities or (2) it is engaged, or proposes to engage, in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and it owns or proposes to acquire investment securities having a value exceeding 40% of the value of its total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis. We do not believe that we are an “investment company,” as such term is defined in the 1940 Act, and are not registered as an “investment company” under the 1940 Act as of the date hereof.
The legal and regulatory status of digital assets under U.S. federal and state securities laws remains uncertain and continues to evolve, and the Commission has not provided formal or binding guidance as to whether particular digital assets constitute “securities” for purposes of the federal securities laws. If the Commission, a court of competent jurisdiction, or another regulatory authority were to determine that any of the digital assets we hold, or transactions involving those assets, constitute “investment securities,” could result in our being deemed to meet the definition of “investment company” under the 1940 Act if the portion of our assets that consists of investments in our Cryptocurrency exceeds the 40% limit prescribed in the 1940 Act, which would subject us to significant additional regulatory requirements that could have a material adverse effect on our business and operations and may also require us to change the manner in which we conduct our business.
If we were required to register as an investment company under the 1940 Act, we would become subject to extensive and restrictive regulatory requirements, including limitations on our capital structure and leverage, restrictions on transactions with affiliates, custodial and valuation requirements, governance obligations, and enhanced reporting and compliance obligations. Compliance with these requirements would impose substantial costs, divert management attention, and could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Moreover, our current business model is not designed to operate as a registered investment company, and registration may not be feasible.
The Commission has previously indicated that certain digital assets may be considered securities depending on their structure and use. Such determinations are highly fact-specific. Future developments could change the legal status of digital assets that we may hold, requiring us to comply with securities laws. Further, state regulators may conclude that the digital assets we hold are securities under state laws, requiring us to comply with state-specific securities regulations. States like California have stricter definitions of “investment contracts” than the Commission, increasing the risk of additional regulatory scrutiny. Such state-level determinations could subject us to additional regulatory obligations, enforcement actions, or limitations on our activities.
If any of our Cryptocurrencies are determined to be investment securities for purposes of the 1940 Act, we may be required to change our operations, wind down our operations, or register as an investment company under the 1940 Act. We could take steps to reduce our Cryptocurrency holdings as a percentage of our total assets, which may include, among others, selling Cryptocurrency that we might otherwise hold for the long term and deploying our cash in assets that are not considered to be investment securities under the 1940 Act, in which case we may be forced to sell Cryptocurrency at unattractive prices. In addition, we may seek to acquire additional assets that are not considered investment securities under the 1940 Act, restructure our operations, or incur indebtedness, issue additional equity, or enter into other financing arrangements that may be dilutive or otherwise unattractive to our business. Any of these actions could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Moreover, we can make no assurance that we would successfully be able to take the necessary steps to avoid meeting the definition of “investment company” under the 1940 Act and
Table of Contents
becoming subject to its requirements. If any of our Cryptocurrencies are determined to constitute securities for purposes of the federal securities laws, and if we are not able to come within an available exemption or exclusion under the 1940 Act, then we would have to register as an investment company and change the manner in which we conduct our business, which may not be feasible. In addition, such a determination could adversely affect the market price of our Cryptocurrency and in turn adversely affect the market price of our common stock. If the associated regulatory burdens or costs become too great, we may be required to materially modify or cease certain operations, and investors could lose all or a portion of their investment in us.
We will likely need to pursue additional equity or debt financings to meet our previously announced goal of acquiring $100 million of TAO.
Based on our current balance sheet, we will likely need to pursue additional equity or debt financings in order to accumulate enough capital to acquire our previously stated target amount of TAO. With uncertainty in the capital markets and other factors, such financing may not be available on terms favorable to us or at all. If we raise additional funds through further issuances of equity or convertible debt securities, our existing stockholders could suffer significant dilution, and any new equity securities we issue could have rights, preferences, and privileges superior to those of holders of our common stock. Any debt financing secured by us in the future could involve additional restrictive covenants relating to our capital-raising activities and other financial and operational matters, which may make it more difficult for us to obtain additional capital and to pursue business opportunities, including potential acquisitions. If we are unable to obtain adequate financing or financing on terms satisfactory to us, we could face significant limitations on our ability to invest in our operations and otherwise to our business.
Our historical financial statements do not reflect the potential variability in earnings that we may experience in the future relating to our proposed holdings of crypto assets.
Our historical financial statements do not fully reflect the potential variability in earnings that we may experience in the future from holding or selling crypto assets. We will need to perform an analysis each quarter to identify whether events or changes in circumstances indicate that our crypto assets are impaired. As a result, volatility in our earnings may be significantly more than what we experienced in prior periods.
The emergence or growth of other crypto assets, including those with significant private or public sector backing, could have a negative impact on the price of TAO and adversely affect our business.
Our assets are concentrated in a single crypto asset, TAO. Accordingly, the emergence or growth of crypto assets other than TAO may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. As of June 30, 2025, TAO remained significantly smaller than many other crypto assets by market capitalization and liquidity. TAO’s success hinges, in part, on Bittensor’s ability to compete effectively in the decentralized AI ecosystem. Direct competitors include SingularityNET (AGIX), Fetch.ai (FET), Ocean Protocol, and others. If these platforms gain broader adoption, due to better performance, more user-friendly tools, or superior incentives, TAO could lose market share and relevance.
In addition, there are numerous alternative crypto assets and many entities, including consortiums and financial institutions, that are researching and investing resources into private or permissioned blockchain platforms or crypto assets that do not rely on decentralized machine learning or proof-of-intelligence models like the Bittensor network. For example, in late 2022, the Ethereum network transitioned to a proof-of-stake mechanism for validating transactions that requires significantly less computing power than proof-of-work mining. The Ethereum network has completed another major upgrade since then and may undertake additional upgrades in the future. If the mechanisms for validating transactions in Ethereum and other alternative crypto assets are perceived as superior to Bittensor’s or as more attractive due to increased utility beyond Bittensor’s narrower focus, those crypto assets could gain market share relative to TAO. Other alternative crypto assets that compete with TAO in certain ways include “stablecoins,” which are designed to maintain a constant price because of, for instance, their issuers’ promise to hold high-quality liquid assets (such as U.S. dollar deposits and short-term U.S. Treasury securities) equal to the total value of stablecoins in circulation. Stablecoins have grown rapidly as an alternative to non-pegged crypto assets such as TAO as a medium of exchange and store of value, particularly on crypto asset trading platforms.
Additionally, central banks in some countries have started to introduce digital forms of legal tender. For example, China’s central bank digital currency (“CBDC”) project was made available to consumers in January 2022, and governments including the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and Israel have been discussing the potential creation of new CBDCs. Whether
Table of Contents
or not they incorporate blockchain or similar technology, CBDCs, as legal tender in the issuing jurisdiction, could also compete with, or replace, TAO and other crypto assets as a medium of exchange or store of value. As a result, the emergence or growth of these or other crypto assets could cause the market price of TAO to decrease, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition, and operating results.
Risks Related to the Custodian and Prime Broker
We face additional risks related to our reliance on BitGo Prime LLC (the “Prime Broker”) and BitGo Trust Company, Inc. (the “Custodian”), which are affiliated entities, for trading, custody, and settlement of TAO.
We rely on the Prime Broker’s proprietary trading system and the Custodian’s custodial and settlement services for executing and settling transactions in TAO. The Prime Broker’s trading system is subject to technical failures, operational errors, interruptions, or cyber-attacks that could lead to transaction failures, settlement delays, or loss of assets. Although the Prime Broker and the Custodian maintain policies and procedures to mitigate these risks, there is no guarantee these safeguards will prevent disruptions or losses. Any operational failures could materially harm our ability to conduct business operations.
Additionally, transactions executed through the Prime Broker’s trading system and settled via the Custodian’s settlement services are final and irreversible once completed. Upon confirmation of a trade, settlement occurs on a delivery-versus-payment basis, whereby the Prime Broker facilitates the simultaneous exchange of U.S. dollars from the Company’s custodial account maintained with the Custodian in consideration for the delivery of the corresponding TAO tokens to such account. This settlement mechanism is designed to mitigate counterparty risk by ensuring that the transfer of funds and digital assets occurs concurrently and that the Company’s TAO assets remain in the custody of the Custodian throughout the transaction lifecycle. If an error occurs (whether through human mistake, operational failure, or fraudulent activity) we may be unable to reverse or recover funds, resulting in potential significant losses. Except in cases involving fraud, gross negligence, or willful misconduct, the Custodian’s liability for direct arising from theft, operational , access, or similar may be limited to the fees paid or payable during the 6 months immediately preceding the . Both the Custodian’s and Prime Broker’s liability for direct caused by their gross or willful may be limited to the value of the affected digital assets or fiat currency. The Prime Broker otherwise may not be liable for relating to theft, operational , access, or similar . Consequently, our recourse, including for of TAO held by the Custodian, Prime Broker, or their service providers, may be substantially limited.
While the Custodian is a national trust bank chartered and regulated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, neither the Custodian nor the Prime Broker is a banking institution or a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) or a broker-dealer and member of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”). Therefore, deposits held with, or assets held by, the Custodian are not subject to the protections enjoyed by depositors with FDIC- or SIPC-member institutions. The Custodian has advised us that it maintains insurance policies in the amount of $250 million, in the aggregate, which are intended to cover the loss of client assets held by the Custodian. The insurance maintained by the Custodian may not be available or sufficient to protect us from all possible losses or sources of losses. The Custodian’s insurance may not cover the specific type of loss experienced by us. In addition, the TAO insurance markets are limited, and the level of insurance maintained by the Custodian may be substantially lower than the value of our assets. While the Custodian maintains certain capital reserve requirements based on the value of the assets under custody (which may provide additional means to cover client asset losses), we cannot be that the Custodian will maintain capital reserves sufficient to cover actual or potential with respect to our crypto assets.
Additionally, the security of crypto assets held by the Custodian depends significantly on how effectively the Custodian safeguards private cryptographic keys associated with such assets. Although the Custodian uses both “hot” (online) and “cold” (offline) storage mechanisms designed to balance security and operational needs, any crypto assets stored in hot wallets may be at increased risk of theft, hacking, or unauthorized access compared to those held solely in cold storage. Furthermore, the Custodian’s private key management practices, security protocols, and operational controls may not fully prevent cybersecurity breaches, human errors, or other security failures, which could result in partial or total loss of our crypto assets.
Moreover, in the event of an insolvency or bankruptcy of the Custodian in the future, given that the contractual protections and legal rights of customers with respect to crypto assets held on their behalf by third parties are relatively untested in a bankruptcy of an entity such as the Custodian in the crypto asset industry, there is a risk that our assets may be considered the property of the bankruptcy estate of the Custodian. We may be at risk of being treated as a general unsecured creditor of such entity and subject to the risk of total loss or significant impairment of the value of such assets.
Table of Contents
Furthermore, the Prime Broker may engage in trading activities strictly as principal, meaning it may act as our direct counterparty rather than as an agent, fiduciary, or financial advisor. The Prime Broker may simultaneously engage in hedging transactions or market-making activities, potentially creating conflicts of interest, including scenarios where the Prime Broker’s market activities negatively impact pricing or liquidity in our transactions. We do not have full visibility into these market-making or hedging activities, and these activities could result in less favorable execution terms than we might obtain elsewhere.
Additionally, the Custodian’s custodial and settlement services depend on complex proprietary technology platforms and APIs provided by affiliates and third-party service providers. We are entirely dependent on the reliability and security of this technology infrastructure. Any operational disruption at the Custodian, Prime Broker, or their third-party providers could lead to delays, transaction failures, asset losses, or increased vulnerability to security breaches.
Regulatory scrutiny or enforcement actions directed at the Prime Broker or Custodian could also adversely impact their ability to offer services, force changes in business practices, or cause operational disruptions. Such events could materially impair our business activities, operations, and the value of our crypto assets held by the Custodian.
Security threats to the Company’s account at the Custodian could result in the halting of the Company’s operations and a loss of the Company’s assets or damage to the reputation of the Company, each of which could materially and adversely affect the Company.
Security breaches, computer malware, and hacking attacks have been a prevalent concern in relation to crypto assets. The Company believes that its TAO held at the Custodian will be an appealing target to hackers or malware distributors seeking to destroy, damage, or steal the Company’s TAO — a threat that will only become more appealing if the Company’s TAO grows in value. To the extent that the Company and Custodian are unable to identify and mitigate or stop new security threats or adapt to technological changes in the crypto asset industry, the Company’s TAO may be subject to theft, loss, destruction, or other attack.
The Company believes that the security procedures in place for the Custodian, including, but not limited to, offline storage (cold storage) and other measures, are reasonably designed to safeguard the Company’s TAO. Nevertheless, no security procedure can guarantee the prevention of all loss due to a security breach, software defect, or act of God. Such events may have to be borne by the Company. Additionally, security procedures may not protect against all errors, software flaws, or other vulnerabilities in the technical infrastructure of the Company or Custodian, which could result in theft, loss, or damage of assets. The Company does not control the Custodian’s operations or their implementation of such security procedures, and there can be no assurance that such security procedures will work as designed or prove successful in safeguarding the Company’s assets against all possible sources of theft, , or . Assets not held in cold storage, such as assets held in a trading account, are more to security , hacking, or than assets held in cold storage.
The security procedures and operational infrastructure may be breached due to the actions of outside parties or error or malfeasance of an employee of the Company or Custodian. As a result, an unauthorized party may obtain access to the Company’s account at the Custodian, the relevant private keys (and therefore TAO), or other data or property of the Company. Additionally, outside parties may attempt to fraudulently induce employees of the Company or the Custodian to disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to the Company’s infrastructure. As the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems change frequently (or may be designed to remain dormant until a predetermined event and often are not recognized until launched against a target), the Company and the Custodian may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures.
An actual or perceived breach of the Company’s account at the Custodian could harm the Company’s operations or result in partial or total loss of the Company’s assets, resulting in a significant reduction or destruction in the value of the TAO.
Risks Related to Staking
Staking activities involve significant risks, including the risks of borrower default, operational failures and the potential loss of TAO, which could materially and adversely affect our financial performance and the value of our crypto assets.
Staking TAO tokens exposes us to a variety of operational, economic, technological, and regulatory risks. Although staking can generate rewards, the process involves locking or delegating our TAO tokens to a validator, thereby restricting our immediate liquidity and ability to freely trade or use these tokens and, for 18 months from November 5, 2025, limiting our ability to diversify
Table of Contents
validators for root subnet staking because we agreed to delegate at least 90% of TAO subject to root subnet staking to Yuma. Any operational disruptions, cybersecurity breaches, or software errors affecting our staking providers, validators, or the underlying blockchain network, including failures of the protocol to effect on-chain staking distributions, may result in partial or total loss of our staked TAO. In addition, the Yuma Agreement limits our recourse to a sole remedy for missed rewards, which does not include reward optimization, and generally caps Yuma’s aggregate liability at $5,000.
Unlike traditional financial instruments, staking and on-chain reward distributions are often final and irreversible once executed, increasing the risk associated with potential human errors, operational failures, or malicious activities. Additionally, the underlying validator operations and staking infrastructure may be subject to technical vulnerabilities or exploits. A failure, security breach, or operational deficiency in validator performance or infrastructure could significantly reduce or eliminate staking rewards or result in economic penalties that adversely affect our financial condition. Under our agreement with Yuma, our primary contractual remedy for service shortfalls is recovery of missed , subject to an aggregate $5,000 cap and an exclusion of consequential and similar .
We depend on third-party providers, such as our Custodian, and affiliated or independent validators, including Yuma, to facilitate and manage our staking activities. If our Custodian or validator experiences financial distress, insolvency, cybersecurity incidents, or other operational failures, we may experience significant delays or difficulty recovering staked tokens, lose expected staking rewards, or incur permanent loss of the underlying staked assets. Additionally, third-party staking providers, including our Custodian and Yuma, may not maintain sufficient insurance coverage to protect us against all types of loss scenarios, leaving us potentially exposed to substantial economic risk. For a discussion of our staking program, see Item 1. Business—Recent Developments—Our Cryptocurrency Asset Strategy—Our Staking Program.
Staking activities may also subject us to regulatory uncertainty and evolving interpretations of securities, commodities, and financial services laws. Regulators may impose licensing, registration, reporting, or other compliance requirements on our staking activities, leading to increased legal and operational burdens, costs, or interruptions. Furthermore, we may be required to alter, limit, or cease staking activities altogether in response to future regulatory or enforcement developments. Our agreement with Yuma permits immediate termination if services cannot be performed in compliance with applicable law or due to heightened regulatory risk or changes in law that render continued involvement undesirable, illegal, or impracticable, which could result in sudden disruption or cessation of our their staking services. Disputes are subject to confidential, binding arbitration with a class-action waiver, which may limit judicial remedies.
With respect to staking activities, the Custodian’s or an affiliate’s liability for direct damages, including slashing penalties or missed staking rewards, is also limited. Specifically, liability for slashing penalties may be capped at staking service fees collected during the 6-month period prior to the relevant incident. Liability for missed rewards may be capped at staking service fees collected during the preceding 3-month period. The Custodian or an affiliate also may not be not liable for blockchain protocol malfunctions, software bugs, third-party validator errors, or any staking-related losses below $1,000 USD. Separately, our agreement with Yuma generally caps Yuma’s aggregate liability at $5,000, and Yuma disclaims consequential damages and is not liable for protocol-wide or -majeure events related to the blockchain.
Moreover, if any on-chain or implied protocol terms conflict with the Yuma Agreement, the agreement prevails. As the Bittensor protocol evolves, this “paramountcy” may cause frictions with network norms or expectations and may limit our ability to rely on protocol-level terms if they diverge from our contract.
The occurrence of any of these risks could materially impair our crypto asset holdings, adversely affect the financial performance of our business, and significantly diminish the value of our TAO tokens. Our ability to recover losses may be further limited by contractual liability caps, exclusive remedies, and arbitration provisions in our agreements with key providers.
Our reliance on the Custodian and its third-party validator for TAO staking activities creates concentration and related risks.
We rely on the Custodian to facilitate our staking activities with respect to TAO tokens. Through its staking services, the Custodian holds and facilitates the staking of our TAO through third-party validators including Yuma. While we believe Yuma and any other validator have been selected by the Custodian due to their reputation for security, reliability, and operational performance, neither the Custodian nor any validator guarantees staking rewards, uninterrupted service, or protection against all operational or security risks. Our staked TAO could be subject to loss, reduction, or impaired liquidity due to validator performance issues, slashing-like economic
Table of Contents
penalties (in the form of reduced or eliminated rewards), cybersecurity breaches, network disruptions, regulatory actions, or technical failures affecting the Custodian’s staking infrastructure or the Bittensor blockchain itself. Moreover, we do not control Yuma’s operational practices or technical infrastructure, and we have limited visibility into or control over the processes by which staking rewards are generated and allocated. Yuma may terminate services immediately due to changes in law or heightened regulatory risk, which could disrupt our staking without advance notice.
In addition, our reliance on a limited number of third-party providers, notably our primary Custodian and the validator Yuma, creates a concentration of operational risk. The failure, underperformance, insolvency, or malfeasance of any key provider could materially and adversely affect our assets and staking operations. Given our significant reliance on Yuma as our principal validator, disruptions affecting Yuma, such as downtime, operational deficiencies, cybersecurity breaches, or withdrawal from the market, could leave us unable to promptly identify or transition to an equivalent validator. In addition, for 18 months from November 5, 2025, the Yuma Agreement requires us to delegate at least 90% of TAO subject to root submet staking to Yuma, which increases our concentration risk and may limit our ability to diversify or migrate quickly in response to performance or pricing changes. Yuma may assign its obligations to an affiliate or in connection with a change of control without our consent, which could change our counterparty risk profile. This could result in our TAO tokens remaining unstaked, thereby causing us to anticipated staking , or us to hurriedly redelegate our tokens, potentially to suboptimal returns or additional costs.
Furthermore, any material changes in the terms or fee structures imposed by our staking providers, including increased commission rates, more restrictive withdrawal conditions, or diminished service quality, may significantly reduce our net rewards, making our staking activities financially less attractive. Limited diversification among staking counterparties exacerbates our exposure to the operational, financial, and cybersecurity risks specific to these providers, analogous to counterparty risk in traditional financial services. Consequently, operational failures, security incidents, regulatory issues, or adverse business developments affecting our primary staking counterparties could significantly harm our business, financial condition, and the value of our crypto asset holdings.
Our TAO staking relies on the Custodian and our Validators, who may utilize subnet automated market maker (“AMM”) pools, exposing us to additional liquidity, market, and operational risks beyond our direct control.
We stake TAO tokens through arrangements facilitated and managed by the Custodian and its selected validators, tao5 and Yuma (together, the “Validators”). We do not currently engage in subnet staking or participate in AMM pools, but may do so in the future. Should we do so in the future, the economic viability of subnet AMM pools remains largely unproven, and these pools are subject to experimental and rapidly evolving technological and regulatory environments. Any adverse event affecting these AMM pools, including but not limited to unfavorable market conditions, liquidity shortages, smart contract vulnerabilities, cybersecurity breaches, or operational failures, could result in significant financial losses, impairment of the liquidity or value of our staked TAO, or even total loss of our crypto assets.
If crypto assets held by us are determined to be securities under U.S. federal or state law, we would become subject to significant regulatory burdens, which may materially and adversely affect its business, operations, and financial condition.
The legal characterization of crypto assets under U.S. securities laws remains unsettled and continues to evolve. If the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), another federal agency, or a state regulator determines that TAO or any other crypto asset held by us constitutes a security under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), or the Investment Company Act, we could become subject to extensive regulatory obligations. These obligations may include registration requirements, enhanced disclosure and reporting, restrictions on business activities, and compliance with corporate governance and custody standards.
We use a risk-based approach to evaluate whether TAO should be treated as a security under the U.S. federal securities laws. Our approach is informed by case law, SEC guidance, and evolving industry practices, and includes ongoing monitoring of regulatory developments and consultation with external legal and other advisors. However, the application of the securities laws to digital assets remains highly uncertain and subject to change. Our assessments could be challenged by regulators or courts, and a determination that TAO is, in fact, a security could subject us to significant regulatory, compliance, and enforcement risks, including potential restrictions on our ability to hold, transfer, or use TAO, registration or licensing obligations, or rescission rights for counterparties. Even if our policies and procedures are followed in good faith, they may not prevent adverse regulatory outcomes, and the process of defending our determinations could be costly and disruptive.
Table of Contents
The SEC has taken the position that certain crypto assets, depending on their characteristics, method of distribution, and functional use, may be classified as investment contracts or otherwise fall within the definition of a “security.” Although we do not believe that our current activities, including the holding and staking of TAO, involve investment securities or cause us to be an investment company within the meaning of the Investment Company Act, there can be no assurance that regulators will agree with our assessment, particularly as new guidance, enforcement actions, or legal precedents develop.
If we were required to register as an investment company, or if the crypto assets it holds were deemed to be unregistered securities, we could be forced to significantly alter, limit, or cease certain operations, including staking or other network participation activities. In such a scenario, we may also become subject to enforcement actions, penalties, or other remedial measures, any of which could result in reputational harm, legal liability, or the inability to continue its current business model. In addition to federal law, we may be subject to regulation under state securities laws, some of which apply broader definitions of a “security” than those used by the SEC. As a result, we could face additional regulatory scrutiny, registration requirements, or enforcement exposure at the state level, even if federal regulators do not classify its crypto assets as securities.
Regulatory uncertainty surrounding the classification of crypto assets presents a continuing risk to our operations. Any determination that the crypto assets held or activities conducted by us fall within the scope of U.S. securities laws could impose significant costs, create legal obstacles to continued operations, or materially impair the value of our assets and the returns available to our investors. If we decide to cease certain operations in response to new regulatory obligations, such actions could occur at a time that is unfavorable to investors.
Risks Related to Our Media Platform
Our ownership and operation of The TAO Daily, an online news publication and data provider in the digital asset industry, presents a number of significant risks, including those arising from perceived or actual conflicts of interest.
We recently announced the launch of The TAO Daily, an online news publication and data provider in the digital asset industry focused on the Bittensor ecosystem. The TAO Daily plays a large role in aggregating, creating and disseminating news and other editorial content focused on TAO and the Bittensor ecosystem across the global digital asset industry. It is possible that The TAO Daily’s news coverage could influence trading prices and demand for TAO, and it is also possible that consumers of The TAO Daily’s content may not appreciate that The TAO Daily’s owner has substantial financial interests in TAO, despite information to that effect on The TAO Daily’s website. As a result, some consumers of The TAO Daily’s content may place greater weight on such content than they would if they were aware of TAO Synergies’ ownership stake, and this could cause the trading prices of TAO or our common stock to be higher than they would otherwise.
In addition, as a public company, we expect to have access to material non-public information regarding market activities, trading volumes and other proprietary information from other businesses that could influence trading decisions. The TAO Daily, while intended to provide objective news coverage, may inadvertently become privy to such material non-public information. The sharing of such material non-public information, whether intentional or inadvertent, could lead to allegations of insider trading, market manipulation or other claims if The TAO Daily broadcasts or leverages this information in a manner that could advantage certain investors in TAO Synergies, or advantage holders of TAO.
TAO Synergies’ ownership and operation of The TAO Daily may also create a perception among market participants that The TAO Daily is biased in favor of TAO Synergies. Information regarding TAO Synergies’ ownership of The TAO Daily is publicly disclosed on The TAO Daily’s homepage. Investors may question the integrity of The TAO Daily’s reporting, fearing that it may be influenced by TAO Synergies’ business objectives or to manage its public image, particularly during periods of heightened volatility in the prices of our common stock or digital assets generally, or during periods of operational challenges. Any perceived or actual conflicts of interest could damage TAO Synergies’ or The TAO Daily’s reputation and undermine investor confidence. Negative press and public opinion could adversely impact our business and the price of our common stock.
Furthermore, the dual operation of a public company and a news publication may attract heightened scrutiny from regulatory bodies. Regulators may closely monitor TAO Synergies’ compliance with securities laws and regulations governing the use and dissemination of material non-public information, which could lead to investigations or sanctions if TAO Synergies or The TAO Daily are alleged to have violated any applicable laws. While we are implementing policies and procedures to limit and mitigate such risks, including information barriers to ensure compliance with securities laws relating to material non-public information, there is no
Table of Contents
assurance that such policies and procedures will be effective, or that we will be able to manage such conflicts of interest adequately. If we fail to manage these conflicts of interests, or if any of the foregoing risks were to materialize or be perceived negatively by market participants, we may be exposed to adverse media coverage, regulatory investigations and legal proceedings, leading to adverse impacts on our reputation, business, financial position and share price.
Our strategy and focus on delivering high-quality, regulated, easy-to-use, and secure digital asset-related information through our media platform The TAO Daily may not maximize short-term or medium-term financial results.
We have taken, and expect to continue to take, actions that we believe to be in the best interests of our existing and potential investors and the long-term interests of our business, even if those actions do not necessarily maximize short-term or medium-term results. These may include expending significant managerial, technical, and legal efforts on complying with laws and regulations that are applicable to our products and services and ensuring that products are secure. Our public and regulated status may also limit our ability to expand our product and services offerings or extend such offerings to certain markets and locations, which may result in us missing material opportunities to generate revenue. We also intend to focus on driving long-term engagement with users through innovation and developing new products and technologies. We may also make acquisitions or investments that may be highly speculative in nature and in some cases, the costs of such acquisitions may be substantial, and there is no assurance that we will receive a favorable return on investment for our acquisitions. Additionally, management decisions regarding capital allocation may not always yield the expected economic benefits. These decisions may not be consistent with the short-term and medium-term expectations of our shareholders and may not produce the long-term benefits that are expected, which could have an effect on our business, operating results, and financial condition.
Our success depends on our ability to effectively improve and scale our technical and data infrastructure.
Our ability to attract, retain, and protect our users is dependent upon the reliable performance and increasing capabilities and integration of our platform and our underlying technical and data infrastructure. As our business continues to grow in size, scope and complexity, and as legal requirements and consumer expectations continue to evolve, we must continue to invest significant resources to maintain, integrate, improve, upgrade, scale and protect our platform and technical and data infrastructure, including some legacy systems. Our failure to do so effectively, or any significant disruption in our service or adverse impact on user experience, could damage our reputation, result in a potential loss of users or missed opportunities, subject us to fines and civil liability and/or adversely affect our financial results.
As we periodically augment and enhance our financial systems, we may experience disruptions or difficulties that could adversely affect our operations, the management of our finances and the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, which in turn may negatively impact our ability to manage our business and to accurately forecast and report our results, which could harm our business.
Security incidents and other network and information systems disruptions could affect our ability to conduct our business effectively, cause us to incur significant costs, subject us to significant liability and/or damage our reputation.
Our operations depend on our ability to protect our information systems against interruption, breach or other damage. Our systems store and process confidential user, employee and other sensitive personal and Company data. In addition, we rely on the technology, systems and services provided by third-party vendors (including cloud-based service providers) for a variety of operations, including encryption and authentication technology, employee email, domain name registration, content delivery, administrative functions (including payroll processing and certain finance and accounting functions) and other operations.
We regularly face attempts to breach our security and compromise our information technology systems from a broad range of actors. These actors, whether internal or external to the Company, may use a blend of technology and social engineering techniques (including denial of service attacks, ransomware, phishing or business email compromise attempts intended to induce our employees, business affiliates and users to disclose information or unwittingly provide access to systems or data, and other techniques) to disrupt service, exfiltrate data or otherwise interfere with our business. Information security threats are constantly evolving in sophistication and volume and attackers may use generative AI and machine learning to launch more automated, targeted, sophisticated and coordinated attacks against targets, potentially increasing the difficulty of detecting and successfully defending against them. A successful could occur and for an extended period of time before being detected. We and the third parties with which we work may be more to the risk from activities of this nature as a result of factors such as the high-profile nature of our business operations and
Table of Contents
the various jurisdictions in which we and our third-party providers operate; the use of generative AI tools; remote and hybrid working; employee use of personal devices, which may not have the same level of protection as Company devices and networks; and use of legacy software systems. Cybersecurity vulnerabilities can also arise from human error, fraud or malice on the part of our employees, other insiders or third parties, or from technology or product enhancements or the migration of information and data to new technology platforms, systems or applications. From time to time, we experience security incidents and other network and information systems disruptions. To date, no incidents have had a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. However, there is no assurance that incidents or disruptions will not have a material adverse effect in the future. There is also no guarantee that a series of related issues may not be determined to be material at a later date in the aggregate, even if they may not be material individually at the time of their occurrence.
In addition, our systems, and those of the third parties with which we work and on which we rely, may be vulnerable to interruption or damage that can result from the effects of power, systems or connectivity outages; natural disasters (including increased storm severity and flooding), which may occur more frequently or with more severity as a result of climate change; fires; human error, fraud or malice; public health conditions; acts of terrorism; or other similar events.
We have implemented controls and taken other preventative measures designed to strengthen our systems and to improve the resiliency of our business against such incidents and attacks, including measures designed to reduce the impact of a security incident at our third-party vendors. These efforts are expensive to develop, implement and maintain; require ongoing monitoring and updating as technologies change and as efforts to overcome security measures become more sophisticated; and may limit the functionality of or otherwise negatively impact our products, services and systems. Although the costs of the controls and other measures we have taken to date have not had a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity, the costs and effort to respond to and recover from a security incident and/or to mitigate any security vulnerabilities that may be identified in the future could be significant. Additionally, any contractual protections with our third-party vendors, including our right to indemnification, if any at all, may be limited or to prevent a impact on our business from a security .
There can also be no assurance that the actions, measures and controls we have implemented will be effective or that they will be sufficient to prevent a future security incident or other disruption, and our disaster recovery planning cannot account for all eventualities. Such an event could result in a disruption of our services; improper access, use, alteration or disclosure of personal data or other confidential information; loss of information; or theft or misuse of our intellectual property. In addition, if we experience or are perceived to experience a security incident, or are perceived to fail to respond appropriately to any security incident that we may experience, it could divert management’s attention; require us to expend resources to investigate, respond to and recover from such a security or further attacks; subject us to , regulatory or other government inquiries or and/or liability; our reputation; or otherwise affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.
While we maintain cyber risk insurance, the costs relating to certain kinds of security incidents could be substantial, and our insurance may not be sufficient to cover losses related to any future incidents involving our data or systems, and we cannot be certain our insurance coverage will continue to be available to us on commercially reasonable terms (if at all) or that any insurer will not deny coverage as to any future claim.
We may be unable to adequately protect our information systems from cyberattacks, which could result in the disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, including personal data, damage our reputation, and subject us to significant financial and legal exposure.
We rely on information technology systems that we or our third-party providers operate to process, transmit and store electronic information in the operation of our media platform, The TAO Daily and in our day-to-day operations. In connection with the operation of The TAO Daily, and in our product discovery efforts we may collect and use a variety of personal data, such as name, mailing address, email addresses, phone number and clinical trial information. A successful cyberattack could result in the theft or destruction of intellectual property, data, or other misappropriation of assets, or otherwise compromise our confidential or proprietary information and disrupt our operations. Cyberattacks are increasing in their frequency, sophistication and intensity, and have become increasingly difficult to detect. Cyberattacks could include wrongful conduct by hostile foreign governments, industrial espionage, wire fraud and other forms of cyber , the deployment of malware, -of-service, social engineering or other means to data security, confidentiality, and availability. A could cause consequences for us, including, without , the of operations, the of confidential business information, including financial information, trade secrets, financial and the disclosure of corporate strategic plans. Although we devote resources to protect our
Table of Contents
information systems, we realize that cyberattacks are a threat, and there can be no assurance that our efforts will prevent information security breaches that would result in business, legal, financial or reputational harm to us, or would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Any failure to prevent or mitigate security breaches or improper access to, use of, or disclosure of our clinical data or patients’ personal data could result in significant liability under state (e.g., state breach notification laws), federal (e.g., HIPAA, as amended by HITECH), and international law (e.g., the GDPR) and may cause a material adverse impact to our reputation, affect our ability to conduct new studies and potentially disrupt our business.
In addition, the computer systems of various third parties on which we rely, and other contractors, consultants and law and accounting firms, may sustain damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, data breaches, phishing attacks, cybercriminals, natural disasters (including hurricanes and earthquakes), terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. We rely on our third-party providers to implement effective security measures and identify and correct for any such failures, deficiencies or breaches. If we or our third-party providers fail to maintain or protect our information technology systems and data integrity effectively or fail to anticipate, plan for or manage significant disruptions to our information technology systems, we or our third-party providers could have , detecting and controlling such cyber-attacks and any such attacks could result in described above as well as with physicians, patients and our partners, regulatory sanctions or , increases in operating expenses, expenses or revenues or other consequences, any of which could have a material effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, prospects and cash flows. Any by such third parties to prevent or mitigate security or access to or disclosure of such information could have similarly consequences for us. If we are to prevent or mitigate the impact of such security or data privacy , we could be to and governmental , which could lead to a potential to our business.
Our failure to comply with data protection laws and regulations could lead to government enforcement actions, private litigation and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business.
We are subject to data protection laws and regulations that address privacy and data security with respect to our new media platform, The TAO Daily. The legislative and regulatory landscape for data protection continues to evolve, and there has been an increasing focus on privacy and data security issues with the potential to affect our business. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws, and federal consumer protection laws govern the collection, use, disclosure and protection of health-related and other personal data. Many U.S. states are also enacting consumer privacy statutes to enhance protections for personal data and to provide residents with more choices concerning their data collected by businesses, increasing compliance complexity and increasing risks of failures to comply.
In addition, foreign data protection, privacy, and other laws and regulations can be more restrictive than those in the United States. Data localization laws in some countries generally mandate that certain types of data collected in a particular country be stored and/or processed within that country. We could be subject to audits in Europe and around the world, particularly in the areas of consumer and data protection, as we operate our business. Legislators and regulators may make legal and regulatory changes, or interpret and apply existing laws, in ways that require us to incur substantial costs, expose us to unanticipated civil or criminal liability, or cause us to change our business practices. These changes or increased costs could negatively impact our business and results of operations in material ways. For example, the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) imposes requirements in the European Economic Area relating to, among other things, consent to process personal data of individuals, the information provided to individuals regarding the processing of their personal data, the security and confidentiality of personal data, notifications in the event of data breaches and use of third-party processors. GDPR also imposes restrictions on the transfer of personal data from the EEA to third countries like the United States.
Applicable data privacy and data protection laws may conflict with each other, and by complying with the laws or regulations of one jurisdiction, we cannot be assured of compliance with the laws or regulations of another jurisdiction. Despite our efforts, we may not have fully complied in the past and may not in the future. Furthermore, the number of government investigations related to data security incidents and privacy violations continues to increase and government investigations typically require significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our business and reputation. Failure to comply with data protection laws may expose us to risk of enforcement actions taken by data protection authorities or other regulatory agencies, private rights of action in some jurisdictions, potential significant fines and penalties if we are found to be non-compliant, and/or publicity, any of which could affect our operating results and business.
Table of Contents
Our business depends on continued and unimpeded access to the internet and cloud-based hosting services we utilize.
We currently utilize third-party subscription-based software services as well as public cloud infrastructure services to provide solutions for many of our computing, storage and bandwidth needs. Any interruptions to these services could result in interruptions in service to our users, advertisers and/or our critical business functions, notwithstanding business continuity or disaster recovery plans or agreements that may currently be in place with these providers. This could result in unanticipated downtime and/or harm to our operations, reputation and operating results. A transition of these services to different cloud providers would be difficult, time-consuming and costly to implement. In addition, if hosting costs increase over time and/or if we require more computing or storage capacity as a result of subscriber growth or otherwise, our costs could increase disproportionately.
In addition, if we or those who engage with our content experience disruptions in internet service or if internet service providers are able to block, degrade or charge for access to our content, it could decrease the demand for, or the usage of, our content and products, increase our cost of doing business and adversely affect our operating results.
Our advertising revenues are affected by numerous factors, including market dynamics, evolving digital advertising trends and the evolution of our strategy.
We may derive revenue from the sale of advertising on our media platform The TAO Daily. Our advertising revenue may be sensitive to the macroeconomic environment, as advertiser budgets can fluctuate substantially in response to changing economic conditions. Our ability to compete successfully for advertising budgets will depend on, among other things, our ability to engage and grow audiences, collect and leverage data, and demonstrate the value of our advertising and the effectiveness of our platform to advertisers. In determining whether to buy advertising with us, advertisers may consider factors such as the demand for our platform, focus of our coverage, size and demographics of our audience, public sentiment about our platform, advertising rates, targeting capabilities, results observed by advertisers, and perceived effectiveness of advertising offerings and alternative advertising options.
Companies with large digital platforms, which have greater audience reach, audience data and targeting capabilities than we do, command a large share of the digital advertising market, and we anticipate that this will continue. In addition, there is increasing demand for digital advertising in formats that are dominated by these platforms, particularly vertical short-form video and streaming, and we may not be able to compete effectively in these formats. The remaining market is subject to significant competition among publishers and other content providers, and audience fragmentation. These dynamics have affected, and will likely continue to affect, our ability to attract and retain advertisers and to maintain or increase our advertising rates and resulting revenues.
Digital advertising networks and exchanges with real-time bidding and other programmatic buying channels that allow advertisers to buy audiences at scale also play a significant role in the marketplace and represent another source of competition. They have caused and may continue to cause further downward pricing pressure and the loss of a direct relationship with marketers, especially during periods of economic downturn.
The evolving standards for delivery of digital advertising, as well as the development and implementation of technology, regulations, policies, practices and consumer expectations that adversely affect our ability to deliver, target or measure the effectiveness of advertising (including blocking the display of advertising, the phase-out of browser support for third-party cookies and of mobile operating systems for advertising identifiers, rapidly evolving privacy regulations and platform requirements providing for additional consumer rights), may also adversely affect our advertising revenues if we are unable to develop effective solutions to mitigate their impact.
Our digital advertising offerings include products that use proprietary first-party data to target and generate predictive insights and help inform our clients’ advertising strategies. Our ability to quickly and effectively evolve these products; the volume, quality, and price of competitive products; and continued changes to industry regulation all have the potential to impact the success of this strategy. Our digital advertising operations also rely on technologies (particularly ad servers) that, if interrupted or meaningfully changed, or if the providers leverage their power to alter the economic structure, could have an adverse impact on our potential advertising revenues, operating costs and/or operating results.
Table of Contents
The open-source structure of crypto asset networks, including the Bittensor network on which the TAO crypto asset functions, exposes us to risks related to software development, security vulnerabilities, and potential disruptions.
The open-source structure of the Bittensor network, on which the TAO crypto asset operates, exposes us to risks related to software development, security vulnerabilities, and potential disruptions. Bittensor is designed as a decentralized, open-source protocol for collaborative machine intelligence, and although key contributors and the Opentensor Foundation play significant roles, no single entity formally controls the network as a whole.
Development, maintenance, and security depend heavily on voluntary contributions, community incentives, and ongoing engagement. Without mandated funding or guaranteed resources, efforts to address emerging issues, security updates, or network improvements may lag, exposing the protocol to risk. For example, the network faced a significant security incident in July 2024 when a malicious upload to PyPI led to a wallet exploit affecting users, prompting urgent mitigations by the Opentensor Foundation.
If the Bittensor software is not properly maintained or updated, the network (and by extension the TAO token) could become vulnerable to security threats, operational inefficiencies, or loss of user confidence, which could reduce the long-term viability of TAO and negatively impact our business.
The irreversibility of crypto asset transactions exposes us to risks of theft, loss and human error, which could negatively impact our business.
Crypto asset transactions are not, from an administrative perspective, reversible without the consent and active participation of the recipient of the transaction or, in theory, control or consent of a majority of the processing power on that crypto asset network. Once a transaction has been verified and recorded in a block that is added to the blockchain, an incorrect transfer of crypto assets or a theft of crypto assets generally will not be reversible, and we may not be capable of seeking compensation for any such transfer or theft.
It is possible that, through computer or human error, or through theft or criminal action, crypto assets could be transferred in incorrect amounts or to unauthorized third parties. To the extent we are unable to seek a corrective transaction to identify the third party which has received our crypto assets through error or theft, we will be unable to revert or otherwise recover the impacted crypto assets, and any such loss could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Decentralized AI networks, such as Bittensor, involve special risks related to unclear regulatory requirements, technical difficulties, limited transparency, intense competition, and complex intellectual property considerations.
Regulatory oversight of AI remains fragmented, evolving, and lacking consistent standards or uniform frameworks. In the absence of clear global AI regulations, decentralized AI platforms, including Bittensor, face heightened uncertainty concerning compliance obligations, ethical governance standards, transparency, accountability, and intellectual property rights associated with AI model development and deployment.
Decentralized AI technologies inherently face increased technical risks, including model inaccuracies, embedded biases, scalability constraints, and vulnerabilities arising from complex model evaluation and validation processes. Unlike centralized AI systems, decentralized networks lack unified oversight or consistent quality standards for model training data, increasing the risk that AI models produce biased, inaccurate, discriminatory, or otherwise controversial outputs. Such issues may lead to reputational harm, diminished user trust, public criticism, and possible regulatory inquiries specifically targeting AI ethics and fairness.
Moreover, the inherent opacity of advanced decentralized AI models, such as deep neural networks, presents material transparency and explainability risks. As regulatory bodies increasingly demand clear interpretability and accountability of AI model decisions, particularly in high-risk or sensitive applications including healthcare, the inability to adequately explain or audit decentralized AI model behaviors could lead to regulatory scrutiny, litigation, or decreased consumer confidence.
The rapidly evolving AI landscape also introduces substantial competitive and technological obsolescence risks. Emerging AI platforms, research initiatives, or large technology companies may achieve superior innovations, broader adoption, or set higher benchmarks for AI performance and ethical standards. Failure to rapidly adapt to these advancements could diminish the competitive relevance and perceived value of decentralized AI platforms and the value of our TAO holdings.
Table of Contents
Additionally, decentralized AI platforms present unique intellectual property (“IP”) risks due to the collaborative and open-source nature of model and data contributions. Ambiguity surrounding IP ownership, potential infringement of third-party rights, difficulties in licensing enforcement, and disputes over intellectual property rights could lead to litigation, financial liabilities, reputational harm, or disruption of network operations, adversely affecting the Bittensor network.
Crypto Asset Regulatory Risks
We are not subject to legal and regulatory obligations that apply to investment companies such as mutual funds, or to obligations applicable to investment advisers or other regulated entities.
Mutual funds and other registered investment companies are subject to extensive federal regulation as “investment companies” under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Investment Company Act”). Additionally, firms that manage the assets of registered investment companies generally must register as “investment advisers” under the U.S. Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the “Advisers Act”). These regulatory regimes impose stringent requirements relating to custody of assets, restrictions on transactions with affiliated parties, limits on investment activities, mandated governance structures, and detailed disclosure obligations designed to protect investors.
We are not an investment company and do not manage third-party assets. Therefore, we are neither registered nor required to register as an investment company or investment adviser. Although one of our key treasury reserve assets is a crypto asset (TAO) and we engage in activities such as staking, we conduct these activities solely for our own corporate treasury management and not on behalf of external investors. Consequently, our operations involving TAO, including custody arrangements, transactions with affiliates, investment decisions, and general business practices, are not subject to the extensive regulatory framework applicable to mutual funds and registered investment advisers. Investors in our company therefore do not benefit from the heightened protections provided under the Investment Company Act or the Investment Advisers Act.
For example, although significant changes to our crypto asset strategy require approval by our board of directors, these changes do not necessitate shareholder votes or regulatory approvals mandated for registered investment companies. As a result, our board retains broad discretion regarding investment and cash management policies, including the authority to modify, suspend, or expand our strategy of acquiring, holding, or staking TAO, without being subject to regulatory procedures applicable to investment companies.
If crypto assets held by us are determined to be securities under U.S. federal or state law, we would become subject to significant regulatory burdens, which may materially and adversely affect its business, operations, and financial condition.
The legal characterization of crypto assets under U.S. securities laws remains unsettled and continues to evolve. If the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), another federal agency, or a state regulator determines that TAO or any other crypto asset held by us constitutes a security under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), or the Investment Company Act, we could become subject to extensive regulatory obligations. These obligations may include registration requirements, enhanced disclosure and reporting, restrictions on business activities, and compliance with corporate governance and custody standards.
We use a risk-based approach to evaluate whether TAO should be treated as a security under the U.S. federal securities laws. Our approach is informed by case law, SEC guidance, and evolving industry practices, and includes ongoing monitoring of regulatory developments and consultation with external legal and other advisors. However, the application of the securities laws to digital assets remains highly uncertain and subject to change. Our assessments could be challenged by regulators or courts, and a determination that TAO is, in fact, a security could subject us to significant regulatory, compliance, and enforcement risks, including potential restrictions on our ability to hold, transfer, or use TAO, registration or licensing obligations, or rescission rights for counterparties. Even if our policies and procedures are followed in good faith, they may not prevent adverse regulatory outcomes, and the process of defending our determinations could be costly and disruptive.
The SEC has taken the position that certain crypto assets, depending on their characteristics, method of distribution, and functional use, may be classified as investment contracts or otherwise fall within the definition of a “security.” Although we do not believe that our current activities, including the holding and staking of TAO, involve investment securities or cause us to be an investment company within the meaning of the Investment Company Act, there can be no assurance that regulators will agree with our assessment, particularly as new guidance, enforcement actions, or legal precedents develop.
Table of Contents
If we were required to register as an investment company, or if the crypto assets it holds were deemed to be unregistered securities, we could be forced to significantly alter, limit, or cease certain operations, including staking or other network participation activities. In such a scenario, we may also become subject to enforcement actions, penalties, or other remedial measures, any of which could result in reputational harm, legal liability, or the inability to continue its current business model. In addition to federal law, we may be subject to regulation under state securities laws, some of which apply broader definitions of a “security” than those used by the SEC. As a result, we could face additional regulatory scrutiny, registration requirements, or enforcement exposure at the state level, even if federal regulators do not classify its crypto assets as securities.
Regulatory uncertainty surrounding the classification of crypto assets presents a continuing risk to our operations. Any determination that the crypto assets held or activities conducted by us fall within the scope of U.S. securities laws could impose significant costs, create legal obstacles to continued operations, or materially impair the value of our assets and the returns available to our investors. If we decide to cease certain operations in response to new regulatory obligations, such actions could occur at a time that is unfavorable to investors.
Engaging in certain activities involving crypto assets classified as commodities, such as offering futures, derivatives, leveraged transactions, or providing trading advice or brokerage services, could subject us to additional regulation by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”), and potentially oversight by the National Futures Association (“NFA”).
If our activities require CFTC registration, we may be required to comply with extensive regulatory obligations, which could result in significant costs and operational disruptions. For example, depending on our activities, we could be required to register a commodity pool, commodity pool operator, and/or commodity trading advisor with the CFTC through the NFA. Compliance with these additional regulatory requirements could result in substantial, non-recurring expenses, adversely affecting an investment in our securities. If we determine not to comply with such regulations, we may be forced to cease certain operations, which could negatively impact our investors. Additionally, current and future legislative or regulatory developments, including new CFTC interpretations, could impact how crypto assets are classified and traded.
Potential classification of our crypto asset activities including staking as money transmission could subject us to additional regulatory requirements, resulting in significant compliance costs or the cessation of certain operations.
If regulatory changes or interpretations require us to register as a money services business (“MSB”) with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) under the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”), or as a money transmitter (an entity licensed to transfer money or monetary value between parties) under applicable state laws, we may become subject to extensive regulatory obligations, including anti-money laundering (“AML”) programs, reporting, recordkeeping, licensing, and periodic examinations. Compliance with these requirements could result in significant expenses and operational burdens. If such requirements apply, we may incur extraordinary costs to maintain compliance, or alternatively, we may determine that continuing certain business activities is no longer economically viable.
Regulatory scrutiny or shifting enforcement priorities could subject our crypto asset activities to significant compliance costs, legal liabilities, and operational disruptions, even absent formal classification as securities or commodities.
Our crypto asset activities are subject to a rapidly evolving and uncertain regulatory environment involving multiple jurisdictions and regulatory authorities, including the SEC, CFTC, FinCEN, and various state and foreign regulators. Regulatory authorities across different countries often adopt inconsistent or conflicting approaches toward cryptocurrencies and related services, leading to uncertainty in regulatory application. Even absent formal classification of our crypto assets as securities, commodities, or other regulated products, shifting regulatory interpretations or enforcement priorities could significantly increase scrutiny of our activities.
Recent enforcement actions in the cryptocurrency industry illustrate the potential for rapid and unforeseen changes in regulatory stances. Should regulators assert jurisdiction over our crypto asset activities, we may face substantial compliance costs, legal liabilities, operational disruptions, reputational harm, or be compelled to substantially alter or discontinue certain activities altogether. In particular, the regulatory status of specific crypto assets, including TAO, remains unclear, and if regulators classify TAO as a security or other regulated instrument, we could be subject to regulatory inquiries and penalties.
Table of Contents
This regulatory uncertainty elevates the risk of inadvertent violations, potentially resulting in enforcement actions, sanctions, or cease-and-desist orders requiring immediate changes to our business operations. Furthermore, new legislation or regulatory actions could ban, restrict, or impose stringent licensing or operational requirements on crypto asset activities. Given the interconnected nature of global regulatory oversight, regulatory developments in one jurisdiction can prompt similar actions elsewhere, amplifying the compliance burdens we face and further increasing operational complexity and costs.
We may also face litigation or regulatory enforcement actions related to crypto asset transactions, custody, disclosures, staking, or compliance practices. Regulatory agencies, including the SEC, CFTC, state regulators, or private plaintiffs, could assert claims alleging violations of securities laws, fraud, fiduciary breaches, or other misconduct. Defending such actions would involve significant costs, consume substantial management resources, and could result in adverse judgments, regulatory fines, cease-and-desist orders, forced operational modifications, or reputational damage that materially impact our business.
Companies that adopt crypto asset treasury or similar activities have also historically been subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, investors, and the public. Some transitions have triggered enforcement actions, investigations, and litigation relating to inadequate or misleading disclosures, potential insider trading, regulatory noncompliance, and operational deficiencies. We may similarly face heightened regulatory oversight and investor scrutiny, increasing the risk of litigation or regulatory investigations.
Additional Crypto Asset Risks
Changes in tax law or adverse positions by tax authorities regarding crypto assets could result in increased tax burdens, reporting requirements, or other negative consequences.
The tax treatment of cryptocurrencies and related transactions, including staking rewards, is an evolving area of law characterized by rapid changes, regulatory uncertainty, and ongoing debate. Currently, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) classifies cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, as property rather than currency, meaning transactions involving crypto assets are generally treated as dispositions subject to capital gains taxation. However, this classification and related tax positions could abruptly change as lawmakers, regulators, or courts respond to the increasing adoption and use of crypto assets.
New legislation, regulatory interpretations, or judicial rulings may significantly alter the existing tax framework, including any changes to reporting requirements. For instance, reclassification of cryptocurrencies as currencies or introduction of new transaction taxes, withholding requirements, or stringent reporting obligations could materially increase our tax liabilities and compliance costs. Due to the complexity and continuously changing nature of crypto taxation, we could inadvertently incur unexpected tax obligations, reporting deficiencies, or penalties for non-compliance, negatively affecting our financial position, operational efficiency, and reputation. Moreover, uncertainty surrounding crypto taxation could deter users from engaging in crypto transactions, indirectly reducing demand and adversely impacting our business.
Specifically, the taxation of staking rewards remains subject to significant uncertainty. Under IRS guidance provided in Revenue Ruling 2023-14 (the “2023 Revenue Ruling”), staking rewards are taxable as income at the time a cash-method taxpayer gains “dominion and control” over newly received tokens. However, the applicability of the 2023 Revenue Ruling to accrual method taxpayers, particularly those taxpayers with “applicable financial statements,” is currently unclear. Consequently, we may incur immediate tax liabilities denominated in USD upon receipt of staking rewards, such as TAO tokens, irrespective of whether those tokens are liquidated or converted into cash. During periods of significant staking activity, we may face substantial tax obligations payable in USD, potentially necessitating the liquidation of holdings under unfavorable market conditions. Sudden declines in token values after the recognition of taxable income could create disproportionate tax liabilities relative to current token values, adversely affecting our liquidity and financial .
Furthermore, ongoing litigation is challenging the IRS’s position on staking rewards taxation. Judicial decisions or future regulatory interpretations resulting from such cases could alter the timing, characterization, or taxable amounts related to staking income. Such changes would further complicate our accounting and tax planning, requiring rapid adjustments to internal procedures. We must maintain rigorous processes for accurately tracking, valuing, and reporting staking rewards, which is particularly challenging due to crypto market volatility. Any inaccuracies or process failures could lead to underpayment penalties, financial restatements, or adverse audit findings, materially impacting our financial results.
Table of Contents
If our operations expand internationally, we may encounter additional complexities related to international taxation. Exposure to multiple foreign tax regimes, each with distinct approaches to crypto taxation, would significantly increase our compliance burdens, risks of double taxation, and the potential for inadvertent non-compliance.
Environmental and social risks associated with crypto assets could lead to negative market perceptions of TAO and materially harm its value.
Growing regulatory and public scrutiny regarding the environmental and energy consumption impact of blockchain technologies could negatively affect our reputation and operational freedom. Although TAO’s consensus mechanism differs significantly from energy-intensive proof-of-work models, broader industry-wide environmental criticisms may negatively influence market perceptions and lead to restrictive regulations or reduced investor appetite for crypto assets. Any resulting decline in public acceptance or regulatory tightening could materially harm TAO’s market value and our business prospects.
Risks Related to Our Business and Financial Condition
Our exploration and pursuit of strategic alternatives may not be successful.
In December 2024, our board of directors formed an independent special committee (the “Special Committee”) to explore strategic opportunities to create and enhance value for investors, including promising drug development platforms and/or compelling new technologies and services with the goal of maximizing stakeholder value.
Despite our plan to devote significant efforts to identify and evaluate potential strategic options, the process may not result in any definitive offer to consummate such a transaction, or, if we receive such a definitive offer, the terms may not be as favorable as anticipated or may not result in the execution or approval of a definitive agreement. Even if we enter into a definitive agreement, we may not be successful in completing a transaction or, if we complete such a transaction, it may not enhance stockholder value or deliver expected benefits. Since we may not ultimately pursue or consummate a strategic transaction, we have begun to evaluate other options for maximizing the value of Bryostatin-1, which may include seeking to raise capital to support the commercialization of Bryostatin-1.
In the event that we do not successfully identify a viable strategic option or, consummate such a transaction, or if we are unable to raise sufficient capital to fund our operations and commercialize Bryostatin-1, our board of directors may determine that a liquidation and dissolution of our business approved by stockholders is the best method to seek to maximize stockholder value.
In the event that we do not successfully identify a viable strategic option or, consummate such a transaction, or if we are unable to raise sufficient capital to fund our operations and commercialize Bryostatin-1, our board of directors may determine that a liquidation and dissolution of our business approved by stockholders is the best method to seek to maximize stockholder value. In such an event, the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders, if any, will depend heavily on the timing of such liquidation as well as the amount of cash that will need to be reserved for commitments and contingent liabilities.
There can be no assurance that the process to identify a strategic alternative for our business will result in a successfully consummated transaction. If we are unable to identify a viable strategic option or if such a transaction is not completed in a timely manner, or if we are unable to raise sufficient capital to fund our operations and commercialize Bryostatin-1, our board of directors may determine that a liquidation and dissolution of our business approved by stockholders is the best method to seek to maximize stakeholder value. In such an event, the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders, if any, will depend heavily on the timing of such decision and, ultimately, such liquidation, since the amount of cash available for distribution continues to decrease as we fund our operations while we evaluate our strategic options.
In addition, if our board of directors were to approve and recommend, and our stockholders were to approve, a dissolution and liquidation of our business, we would be required to pay our outstanding obligations, as well as to make reasonable provisions for contingent and unknown obligations, prior to making any distributions in liquidation to our stockholders. As a result of this requirement, a portion of our assets may need to be reserved pending the satisfaction of such obligations. In addition, we may be subject to litigation or other claims related to a liquidation and dissolution of our business. If a liquidation and dissolution are pursued, our board of directors, in consultation with its legal and financial advisors, would need to evaluate these matters and make a determination about a reasonable amount to reserve.
Table of Contents
Accordingly, holders of our common stock and other securities could lose all or a significant portion of their investment in the event of a liquidation and dissolution of the Company.
Our ongoing viability as a company partially depends on our ability to successfully develop and commercialize our licensed technology.
Prior to our recent transition to our differentiated cryptocurrency treasury strategy, we were principally focused on developing a drug, Bryostatin-1, for the treatment of AD and other diseases, which is still in the clinical testing stage and has not yet been fully developed. Our potential success is highly uncertain since Bryostatin-1 did not achieve statistical significance on the primary endpoint, in its Phase 2 of development. On December 16, 2022, we announced that an extended confirmatory Phase 2 study of Bryostatin-1 in moderate to severe AD (Study #204) did not achieve statistical significance on the primary endpoint, which was change from baseline to week 13 in the SIB total score assessment obtained after completion of the second seven-dose course of treatment (week 28 of trial). Our other product candidate (use of Bryostatin-1 to treat Fragile X Syndrome) are earlier in their development cycles. Bryostatin-1 is also subject to regulatory approval. The potential success of our biopharmaceutical business depends upon our ability to raise more capital, complete development of and successfully commercialize Bryostatin-1 in a timely manner for the treatment of AD or other diseases. If we are unable to develop Bryostatin-1 for indications other than AD, the future growth of our biopharmaceutical business could be impacted. We must develop Bryostatin-1, test it for safety and efficacy in the targeted patient population, and manufacture the finished dosage form on a commercial scale to meet regulatory standards and receive regulatory approvals. The development and commercialization process is both time-consuming and , and involves a high degree of business risk. Bryostatin-1 is still at an early stage in its product development cycle, and any follow-on product candidates are still at the concept stage. The results of pre-clinical and clinical testing of our product candidates are uncertain and we cannot anybody that we will be to obtain regulatory approvals of our product candidates. If obtained, regulatory approval may take longer or be more expensive than anticipated. Furthermore, even if regulatory approvals are obtained, our products may not perform as we expect and we may not be to and produce and market any products. in any part of the process or our to obtain regulatory approval of our products could affect the future operating results of our biopharmaceutical business by restricting (or even prohibiting) the introduction and sale of our products.
If the CRE License were terminated, we may be required to cease product development operations.
Our rights to develop, commercialize and sell certain of our proposed products, including Bryostatin-1, is, in part, dependent upon the CRE License. CRE has the right to terminate this agreement after 30 days prior notice in certain circumstances, including if we were to materially breach any provisions of the agreement after a 60-day cure period for breaches that are capable of being cured, in the event of certain bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings. Additionally, the CRE License provides that the license may not be assigned, including by means of a change of control of the Company, or sublicensed without the consent of CRE. If the CRE License were terminated, we would lose rights to a substantial portion of the intellectual property currently being developed by us and no longer have the rights to develop, commercialize and sell some of our proposed products. As a result, we may be required to cease our product development operations under such circumstance, which would negatively impact our biopharmaceutical business.
We rely on independent third-party contract research organizations to perform clinical and non-clinical studies of our drug candidate and to perform other research and development services.
The CRE License requires us to use CRE to provide research and development services and other scientific assistance and support services, including clinical trials, under certain conditions. The CRE License limits our ability to make certain decisions, including those relating to our drug candidate, without CRE’s consent. Under certain conditions, we may, however, also rely on independent third-party contract research organizations (“CROs”), to perform clinical and non-clinical studies of our drug candidate. We have previously entered into services agreements with WCT relating to our clinical trials of Bryostatin-1. Many important aspects of the services that may be performed for us by CROs are out of our direct control. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each clinical trial we sponsor is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards, and our reliance on third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and these third parties are required to comply with GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for product candidates in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCP requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, clinical investigators and clinical trial sites. If we or any of these third parties fail to comply with applicable GCP requirements, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to or these trials or perform additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials before
Table of Contents
approving our marketing applications. If there were to be any dispute or disruption in our relationship with such CROs, including WCT, the development of our drug candidate may be delayed. Moreover, in our regulatory submissions, we would expect to rely on the quality and validity of the clinical work performed by our CROs. If any of our CROs’ processes, methodologies or results were determined to be invalid or inadequate, our own clinical data and results and related regulatory approvals could be materially adversely impacted.
We have relied on the representations and materials provided by CRE, including scientific, peer-reviewed and non-peer reviewed publications, abstracts, slides, internal documents, verbal communications, patents and related patent filings, with respect to the results of its research related to our proposed products.
CRE began the development of the intellectual property that forms the basis for our proposed products in 1999. We have relied on the quality and validity of the research results obtained by CRE with respect to this intellectual property, and we have conducted limited verification of the raw preclinical and clinical data produced by CRE. No independent third-party has verified any such data. If any of CRE’s basic processes, methodologies or results were determined to be invalid or inadequate, our own clinical data and results and related regulatory approvals, could be materially adversely impacted.
We have a limited operating history upon which investors can evaluate our future prospects.
Our drug product candidate, Bryostatin-1, is in an early development stage and we are subject to all of the risks inherent in the establishment of a new business enterprise. While development of our product candidates was started in 1999 by CRE, we were incorporated on October 31, 2012 and on that same date entered into the Technology License and Services Agreement with CRE and NRV II, LLC for the continuing development and commercialization of our product candidates. Our proposed products are currently in the research and development stage and we have not generated any revenues, nor do we expect our products to generate revenues for the near term, if ever. As a result, any investment in our securities must be evaluated in light of the potential problems, delays, uncertainties and complications encountered in connection with a newly established pharmaceutical development business. The risks include, but are not limited to, the possibilities that any or all of our potential products will be found to be unsafe, ineffective or, that the products once developed, although effective, are not economical to market; that our competitors hold proprietary rights that preclude us from marketing such products; that our competitors market a or equivalent product; or the to receive necessary regulatory clearances for our proposed products. To operations, we must develop, obtain regulatory approval for, introduce and market, sell or license at a profit, product candidates that are currently in the research and development phase. We only have one product candidate in clinical development, i.e., Bryostatin-1 to treat AD. On December 16, 2022, we announced that an extended confirmatory Phase 2 study of Bryostatin-1 in moderate to AD (Study #204) did not statistical significance on the primary endpoint, which was change from baseline to Week 13 in the SIB total score assessment obtained after completion of the second seven-dose course of treatment (week 28 of trial). We are currently evaluating the data and determining next steps with the development of Bryostatin-1 for AD as well as for other potential indications. No assurance can be given that our research and development efforts will be , that required regulatory approvals will be obtained, that any of our candidates will be safe and , that any products, if developed and introduced, will be marketed, sold or licensed or market acceptance or that products will be marketed at prices necessary to generate profits. to develop, obtain regulatory approvals for, or introduce and market, sell or license our products would have material effects on our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
If we do not obtain the necessary regulatory approvals in the United States and/or other countries, we will not be able to sell our drug candidate(s).
We cannot assure you that we will receive the approvals necessary to commercialize Bryostatin-1, or any other potential drug candidates we acquire or attempt to develop in the future. We will need approval from the FDA to commercialize our drug candidates in the United States and approvals from similar regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions to commercialize our drug candidates in those jurisdictions. In order to obtain FDA approval of Bryostatin-1 or any other drug candidate for the treatment of AD or any other indication, we must submit first an IND application and then an NDA to the FDA, demonstrating that the drug candidate is safe, pure and potent, and effective for its intended use. This demonstration requires significant research including completion of clinical trials. Satisfaction of the FDA’s regulatory requirements typically takes many years, depending upon the type, complexity and novelty of the drug candidate and requires substantial resources for research, development and testing. We cannot predict whether our clinical trials will demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our drug candidates or if the results of any clinical trials will be sufficient to advance to the next phase of development or for approval from the FDA. We also cannot predict whether our research and clinical approaches will result in drugs or therapeutics that the FDA considers safe and effective for the proposed indications. The FDA has substantial discretion
Table of Contents
in the drug approval process. The approval process may be delayed by changes in government regulation, future legislation or administrative action or changes in FDA policy that occur prior to or during any future regulatory review of our drug candidates. Delays in obtaining regulatory approvals may prevent or delay commercialization of, and our ability to derive revenues from, our drug candidates and diminish any competitive advantages that we may otherwise believe that we hold. Even if we comply with all FDA requests, the FDA may ultimately reject one or more of our applications. We may never obtain regulatory approval for any of our drug candidates. Failure to obtain FDA approval of our drug candidates will leave us without a saleable product and which would adversely affect our future revenues. In addition, the FDA may require us to conduct additional clinical testing or to perform post-marketing studies, as a condition to granting marketing approval of a drug product or permit continued marketing, if previously approved. If conditional marketing approval is obtained, the results generated after approval could result in of marketing approval, changes in product labeling, and/or new or increased about the side effects or efficacy of a product. The FDA has significant post-market authority, including the explicit authority to require post-market studies and clinical trials, labeling changes based on new safety information and compliance with FDA-approved risk evaluation and mitigation strategies. The FDA’s exercise of its authority has in some cases resulted, and in the future could result, in or increased costs during product development, clinical trials and regulatory review, increased costs to comply with additional post-approval regulatory requirements and potential restrictions on sales of approved drugs. In foreign jurisdictions, the regulatory approval processes generally include the same or similar risks as those associated with the FDA approval procedures described above. We cannot you that we will receive the approvals necessary to commercialize our drug candidates for sale either within or outside the United States.
The commencement and completion of clinical trials can be delayed or prevented for a number of reasons.
On December 16, 2022, we issued a press release announcing that the expanded confirmatory Phase 2 study of Bryostatin-1 in moderate to severe AD did not achieve statistical significance on the primary endpoint. On March 7, 2023, we announced results of our analysis of secondary endpoints and post hoc analysis from our Phase 2 study of Bryostatin-1. In the secondary endpoint analysis, changes from baseline at Weeks 9, 20, 24, 30, and 42 in the SIB (Severe Impairment Battery) total score were not statistically significant in the total patient population, and no pre-specified secondary endpoints were met with statistical significance in the low-to-moderately severe AD patient stratum. However, nearly all pre-specified secondary endpoints in the most advanced and severe AD (MMSE: 10-14) patient population, with baseline MMSE-2 (Mini-Mental State Examination, 2nd Edition) scores of 10-14, were achieved with statistical significance (p = <0.05, 2-tailed). Data also showed statistical significance in exploratory secondary endpoints for the MMSE-2 10-14 stratum, and post hoc analysis was positive. On July 19, 2023, we announced the commencement of Phase 1 clinical trials of Bryostatin-1 in multiple sclerosis with the Cleveland Clinic. On December 20, 2024, we also the of our agreement with the Cleveland Clinic due to the pace of enrollment in the Phase 1 clinical trial. We are continuing to determine how to proceed with respect to our current development programs for Bryostatin-1. Drug development is a long, expensive and uncertain process, and or can occur at any stage of any of our clinical trials. Clinical trials can be or prevented for a number of reasons, including:
difficulties obtaining regulatory approval to commence a clinical trial or complying with conditions imposed by a regulatory authority regarding the scope or term of a clinical trial;
delays in reaching or failing to reach agreement on acceptable terms with prospective CROs, contract manufacturing organizations, and trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly;
failure of our third-party contractors, such as CROs and contract manufacturing organizations, or our investigators to comply with regulatory requirements or otherwise meet their contractual obligations in a timely manner;
insufficient or inadequate supply or quality of a product candidate or other materials necessary to conduct our clinical trials;
difficulties obtaining institutional review board, or IRB, or ethics committee approval to conduct a clinical trial at a prospective site;
the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authority requiring alterations to any of our study designs, our pre-clinical strategy or our manufacturing plans;
Table of Contents
various challenges recruiting and enrolling subjects to participate in clinical trials, including size and nature of subject population, proximity of subjects to clinical sites, eligibility criteria for the trial, budgetary limitations, nature of trial protocol, change in the readiness of subjects to volunteer for a trial, the availability of approved effective treatments for the relevant disease and competition from other clinical trial programs for similar indications;
difficulties in maintaining contact with subjects after treatment, which results in incomplete data;
governmental or regulatory delays and changes in regulatory requirements, policy and guidelines; and
varying interpretations of data by the FDA and foreign regulatory agencies.
Changes in regulatory requirements and guidance may also occur and we may need to significantly amend clinical trial protocols or submit new clinical trial protocols with appropriate regulatory authorities to reflect these changes. Amendments may require us to renegotiate terms with CROs or resubmit clinical trial protocols to IRBs or ethics committees for re-examination, which may impact the costs, timing or successful completion of a clinical trial. Our clinical trials may be suspended or terminated at any time by the FDA, other regulatory authorities, the IRB or ethics committee overseeing the clinical trial at issue, any of our clinical trial sites with respect to that site, or us, due to a number of factors, including:
failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols;
inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial sites by the FDA or other regulatory authorities;
unforeseen issues, including unexpected serious adverse events associated with a product candidate, or lack of effectiveness or any determination that a clinical trial presents unacceptable health risks;
lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial due to unforeseen costs or other business decisions; and
upon a breach or pursuant to the terms of any agreement with, or for any other reason by, current or future collaborators that have responsibility for the clinical development of any of our product candidates.
Moreover, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA. The FDA may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the trial. FDA may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of one or more of our product candidates.
If we do not succeed in conducting and managing our preclinical development activities or clinical trials, or in obtaining regulatory approvals, we might not be able to commercialize our product candidates, or might be significantly delayed in doing so, which could have a material adverse effect on the prospects, financial condition and results of operations of our biopharmaceutical business.
Even if regulatory approvals are obtained for our product candidates, we will be subject to ongoing government regulation. If we fail to comply with applicable current and future laws and government regulations, it could delay or prevent the promotion, marketing or sale of our products.
Even if marketing approval is obtained, a regulatory authority may still impose significant restrictions on a product’s indications, conditions for use, distribution or marketing or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-market surveillance, post-approval studies or clinical trials, all of which may result in significant expense and limit our ability to commercialize our products. Our products will also be subject to ongoing requirements governing the labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, distribution, promotion, recordkeeping and submission of safety and other post-market information, including adverse events, and any changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are
Table of Contents
subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with current good manufacturing practice, or cGMP, requirements and other regulations.
If we, our drug products or the manufacturing facilities for our drug products fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency may:
issue warning letters or untitled letters;
seek an injunction or impose civil or criminal penalties or monetary fines;
suspend or withdraw marketing approval;
suspend any ongoing clinical trials;
refuse to approve pending applications or supplements to applications;
suspend or impose restrictions on operations, including costly new manufacturing requirements;
seize or detain products, refuse to permit the import or export of products or request that we initiate a product recall; or
refuse to allow us to enter into supply contracts, including government contracts.
We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad, and compliance with such regulation may be expensive and consume substantial financial and management resources. If we or any future marketing collaborators or contract manufacturers are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies or are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, it could delay or prevent the promotion, marketing or sale of our products, which would adversely affect our biopharmaceutical business and results of operations thereof.
Data from our Bryostatin-1 Phase 2 clinical trial, from our confirmatory Phase 2 clinical trial and our expanded Phase 2 clinical trial may be subject to differing interpretations, and regulatory agencies, medical and scientific experts and others may not share the Company’s views of the data.
On May 1, 2017, we reported topline results from our Phase 2 clinical trial of Bryostatin-1 for the treatment of moderate to severe AD. In January 2018, we reported the secondary analysis of data from the Phase 2 clinical trial. Further, on September 9, 2019, we reported topline results from our confirmatory Phase 2 clinical trial. On January 22, 2020, we reported additional analysis in connection with the confirmatory Phase 2 clinical trial. On December 16, 2022, we announced that an extended confirmatory Phase 2 study of Bryostatin-1 in moderate to severe AD (Study #204) did not achieve statistical significance on the primary endpoint, which was change from baseline to Week 13 in the SIB total score assessment obtained after completion of the second seven-dose course of treatment (week 28 of trial). On July 19, 2023, we announced the commencement of Phase 1 clinical trials of Bryostatin-1 in multiple sclerosis with the Cleveland Clinic. On December 20, 2024, we also disclosed the termination of our agreement with the Cleveland Clinic due to the slow pace of enrollment in the Phase 1 clinical trial. We are currently evaluating the data and determining next steps with the development of Bryostatin-1 for AD as well as for other potential indications. Further analyses of the Phase 2 data and confirmatory Phase 2 data may lead to different interpretations of the respective data than the analyses conducted to date and/or may identify important implications of the Phase 2 data, Phase 2 confirmatory data and Phase 2 extended confirmatory trial data, respectively, that are not currently known. Topline data are subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the data we previously published. As a result, any topline data should be viewed with until the final data are available. In addition, clinical trial data are subject to differing interpretations, and regulatory agencies, medical and scientific experts and others may not share our views of the data. There can be no assurance that the clinical program for Bryostatin-1 will be in demonstrating safety and/or efficacy that we will not encounter or in clinical development, or that Bryostatin-1 will ever receive regulatory approval or be commercialized.
Table of Contents
Our commercial success will depend, in part, on our ability, and the ability of our licensors, to obtain and maintain patent protection. Our licensors’ failure to obtain and maintain patent protection for our products may have a material adverse effect on our product development business.
Pursuant to the CRE License, we have obtained rights to certain patents owned by CRE or licensed to NRV II, LLC by CRE as of or subsequent to October 31, 2012. In the future, we may seek rights from third parties to other patents or patent applications. Our success will depend, in part, on our ability and the ability of our licensors to maintain and/or obtain and enforce patent protection for our proposed products and to preserve our trade secrets, and to operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of third parties. Patent positions in the field of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals are generally highly uncertain and involve complex legal and scientific questions. We cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first inventors of inventions covered by our licensed patents or that we or they were the first to file. Accordingly, the patents licensed to us may not be valid or afford us protection against competitors with similar technology. The failure to maintain and/or obtain patent protection on the technologies underlying our proposed products may have material adverse effects on our competitive position and business prospects.
Our licensed patented technologies may infringe on other patents, which may expose us to costly litigation.
It is possible that our licensed patented technologies may infringe on patents or other rights owned by others. We may have to alter our products or processes, pay additional licensing fees, pay to defend an infringement action or challenge the validity of the patents in court or cease activities altogether because of patent rights of third parties, thereby causing additional unexpected costs and delays to us. Patent litigation is costly and time consuming, and we may not have sufficient resources to pay for such litigation. Pursuant to the CRE License, CRE has the exclusive right (but not the obligation) to apply for, file, prosecute or maintain patents and patent applications for our licensed technologies. However, in order to maintain our rights to use our licensed technologies, we must reimburse CRE for all of the attorney’s fees and other costs and expenses related to any of the foregoing. For additional information regarding the CRE License, see “Item 1. Business — Intellectual Property — Technology License and Services Agreement.” If the patents licensed to us are determined to a patent owned by a third party and we do not obtain a license under such third-party patents, or if we are found liable for or are not to have such third-party patents declared , we may be liable for significant money , we may encounter significant in bringing products to market or we may be from participating in the manufacture, use or sale of products or methods of treatment requiring such licenses.
We may not be able to protect our trade secrets and other unpatented proprietary technologies, which could give our competitors an advantage over us.
In addition to our reliance on patents and pending patents owned by CRE, we rely upon trade secrets and other unpatented proprietary technologies. We may not be able to adequately protect our rights with regard to such unpatented proprietary technologies or competitors may independently develop substantially equivalent technologies. We seek to protect trade secrets and proprietary knowledge, in part through confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, advisors and collaborators. Nevertheless, these agreements may not effectively prevent disclosure of our confidential information and may not provide us with an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of such information and, as a result, our competitors could gain a competitive advantage over us.
If we are unable to hire additional qualified personnel, our business prospects may suffer.
Our success and achievement of our business plans depend upon our ability to recruit, hire, train and retain other highly qualified technical and managerial personnel. Competition for qualified employees among pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies is intense, and the loss of any of such persons, or an inability to attract, retain and motivate any additional highly skilled employees required for the implementation of our business plans and activities could have a material adverse effect on us. Our inability to attract and retain the necessary technical and managerial personnel and consultants and scientific and/or regulatory consultants and advisors could have a material adverse effect on our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
We may not be able to in-license or acquire new development-stage products or technologies.
Our product commercialization strategy relies, to some extent, on our ability to in-license or acquire product formulation techniques, new chemical entities, or related know-how that has proprietary protection. If resources permit, we may also seek to acquire, by license or otherwise, other development stage products that are consistent with our product portfolio objectives and commercialization strategy. The acquisition of products requires the identification of appropriate candidates, negotiation of terms of acquisition, and
Table of Contents
financing for the acquisition and integration of the candidates into our portfolio. Failure to accomplish any of these tasks may diminish our growth rate and adversely alter our competitive position.
We are partly dependent upon the NCI to supply bryostatin for our clinical trials.
CRE has entered into a material transfer agreement with the NCI, pursuant to which the NCI has agreed to supply bryostatin required to synthesize Bryostatin-1 for our pre-clinical research and clinical trials. This agreement does not provide for a sufficient amount of bryostatin to support the completion of our clinical trials that we are required to conduct in order to seek FDA approval of Bryostatin-1 for the treatment of AD. Therefore, CRE or we will have to enter into one or more subsequent agreements with the NCI for the supply of additional amounts of bryostatin. If CRE or we are unable to secure such additional agreements or if the NCI otherwise discontinues for any reason supplying us with bryostatin, then we would have to either secure another source of bryostatin or discontinue our efforts to develop and commercialize Bryostatin-1 for the treatment of AD. In the interest of mitigating this risk, we have entered into license agreements with Stanford for the development of bryostatin structural derivatives known as “bryologs” and an accelerated synthesis of Bryostatin-1 as alternative potential sources of bryostatin. In addition, we entered into the Supply Agreement with BryoLogyx on June 9, 2020, pursuant to which BryoLogyx agreed to serve as our exclusive supplier of synthetic bryostatin. There can be no assurance that we will be able to secure future bryostatin supplies from any source on commercially reasonable terms, if at all.
We expect to rely on third parties to manufacture our proposed products and, as a result, we may not be able to control our product development or commercialization.
We currently do not have an FDA approved manufacturing facility. We expect to rely on contract manufacturers to produce quantities of products and substances necessary for product commercialization. See also the risk factor above captioned “We are partly dependent upon the NCI to supply bryostatin for our clinical trials.” Contract manufacturers that we use must adhere to cGMP enforced by the FDA through its facilities inspection program. If the facilities of such manufacturers cannot pass a pre-approval plant inspection, the FDA pre-market approval of our products will not be granted. As a result:
there are a limited number of manufacturers that could produce the products for us and we may not be able to identify and enter into acceptable agreements with any manufacturers;
the products may not be produced at costs or in quantities necessary to make them commercially viable;
the quality of the products may not be acceptable to us and/or regulatory authorities;
our manufacturing partners may go out of business or file for bankruptcy;
our manufacturing partners may decide not to manufacture our products for us;
our manufacturing partners could fail to manufacture to our specifications;
there could be delays in the delivery of quantities needed;
we could be unable to fulfill our commercial needs in the event we obtain regulatory approvals and there is strong market demand; or
ongoing inspections by the FDA or other regulatory authorities may result in suspensions, seizures, recalls, fines, injunctions, revocations and/or criminal prosecutions.
there are a limited number of manufacturers that could produce the products for us and we may not be able to identify and enter into acceptable agreements with any manufacturers;
the products may not be produced at costs or in quantities necessary to make them commercially viable;
the quality of the products may not be acceptable to us and/or regulatory authorities;
Table of Contents
our manufacturing partners may go out of business or file for bankruptcy;
our manufacturing partners may decide not to manufacture our products for us;
our manufacturing partners could fail to manufacture to our specifications;
there could be delays in the delivery of quantities needed;
we could be unable to fulfill our commercial needs in the event we obtain regulatory approvals and there is strong market demand; or
ongoing inspections by the FDA or other regulatory authorities may result in suspensions, seizures, recalls, fines, injunctions, revocations and/or criminal prosecutions.
If we are unable to engage contract manufacturers or suppliers to manufacture or package our products, or if we are unable to contract for a sufficient supply of required products and substances on acceptable terms, or if we encounter delays or difficulties in our relationships with these manufacturers, or with a regulatory agency, then the submission of products for regulatory approval and subsequent sales of such products would be delayed. Any such delay may have a material adverse effect on our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
We may rely on third parties for marketing and sales and our revenue prospects may depend on their efforts.
We currently have no experience in sales, marketing or distribution. We do not anticipate having the resources in the foreseeable future to allocate to the sales and marketing of our proposed products. As a result, if our product development is successful, our future success will likely depend, in part, on our ability to enter into and maintain collaborative relationships with one or more third parties for sales, marketing or distribution, on the collaborator’s strategic interest in the products we have under development and on such collaborator’s ability to successfully market and sell any such products. We intend to pursue collaborative arrangements regarding the sales and marketing of our products as appropriate. However, we may not be able to establish or maintain such collaborative arrangements or, if we are able to do so, they may not have effective sales forces. To the extent that we decide not to, or are to, enter into arrangements with respect to the sales and marketing of our proposed products, significant capital expenditures, management resources and time will be required to establish and develop an in-house marketing and sales with technical expertise. To the extent that we depend on third parties for marketing and distribution, any revenues received by us will depend upon the efforts of such third parties, which may not be .
If our products are not accepted by patients, the medical community or health insurance companies, our business prospects will suffer.
Commercial sales of any products we successfully develop will substantially depend upon the products’ efficacy and on their acceptance by patients, the medical community, providers of comprehensive healthcare insurance, healthcare benefit plan managers, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) (which is the U.S. federal agency which administers Medicare, Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program), and other organizations. Widespread acceptance of our products will require educating patients, the medical community and third-party payors of medical treatments as to the benefits and reliability of the products. Our proposed products may not be accepted, and, even if they are accepted, we are unable to estimate the length of time it would take to gain such acceptance.
The branded prescription segment of the pharmaceutical industry in which we operate is competitive, and we are particularly subject to the risks of such competition.
The branded prescription segment of the pharmaceutical industry in which we operate is competitive, in part because the products that are sold require extensive sales and marketing resources invested in their commercialization. The increasing cost of prescription pharmaceuticals has caused providers of comprehensive healthcare insurance, healthcare benefit plan managers, CMS, as well as other organizations, collectively known as third-party payors, to tightly control and dictate their drug formulary plans to control the costs associated with the use of prescription pharmaceutical products by enrollees in these plans. Our ability to gain formulary access
Table of Contents
to drug plans supported by these third-party payors is substantially dependent on the differentiated patient benefit that our proposed products can provide, compared closely to similar products claiming the same benefits or advantages. We may not be able to differentiate our proposed products from those of our competitors, successfully develop or introduce new products that are less costly or offer better performance than those of our competitors, or offer purchasers of our proposed products payment and other commercial terms as favorable as those offered by our competitors. We expect that some of our proposed products, even if successfully developed and commercialized, will eventually face competition from a significant number of biotechnology or large pharmaceutical companies. Because most of our competitors have substantially greater financial and other resources than we have, we are particularly subject to the risks inherent in competing with them. The effects of this competition could materially affect our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
We compete with many companies, research institutes, hospitals, governments and universities that are working to develop products and processes to treat or diagnose AD. We believe that others are doing research on Fragile X syndrome. Many of these entities have substantially greater financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, distribution and other resources than we do. However, there has been a limited number of new product introductions in the last 20 years for the treatment of AD symptoms in patients who begin exhibiting the memory and cognitive disorders associated with the disease. All of the products introduced to date for the treatment of AD have yielded negative or marginal results with little effect on the progression of AD and no improvement in the memory or cognitive performance of the patients receiving these therapies. The absolute determination of AD in patients is currently achieved only upon autopsy. We believe we are the only company currently pursuing PKC ε activation as a mechanism to treat AD and neurodegenerative diseases. Although we believe that we have no direct competitors working in this same field on product candidates using the same mechanism of action, we cannot provide assurance that our competitors will not discover compounds or processes that may be competitive with our products and introduce such products or processes before us.
We are developing our product candidates to address unmet medical needs in the treatment of AD and other neurodegenerative diseases. Our competition will be determined in part by the potential indications for which drugs are developed and ultimately approved by regulatory authorities. Additionally, the timing of market introduction of some of our potential products or of competitors’ products may be an important competitive factor. Accordingly, the relative speed with which we can develop our product candidates, complete preclinical testing, clinical trials and approval processes and supply commercial quantities to market are expected to be important competitive factors. We expect that competition among products approved for sale will be based on various factors, including product efficacy, safety, reliability, availability, price and patent position.
Our business will expose us to potential product liability risks, which could result in significant product liability exposure.
Our business will expose us to potential product liability risks that are inherent in the testing, designing, manufacturing and marketing of human therapeutic products. Product liability insurance in the pharmaceutical industry is generally expensive, and we may not be able to obtain or maintain product liability insurance in the future on acceptable terms or with adequate coverage against potential liabilities, if at all. A successful products liability claim brought against us could have a material adverse effect on our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
A successful clinical trial liability claim against us could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition even with such insurance coverage.
Our business will expose us to potential liability that results from risks associated with conducting clinical trials of our product candidates. Although we have procured clinical trial product liability insurance coverage for our Bryostatin-1 product candidate with coverages and deductibles we believe are adequate, there is no guarantee that our coverage will be adequate to satisfy any liability we may incur. We do not currently have insurance with respect to any other drug product. A successful clinical trial liability claim brought against us could have a material adverse effect on our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations even if we successfully obtain clinical trial insurance.
A successful liability claim against us could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.
Our business and actions can expose us to potential liability risks that are inherent in business, generally, and in the pharmaceutical industry, specifically. While we maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverages and deductibles we believe are adequate, there is no guarantee that our coverage will be adequate to satisfy any liability we may incur. A successful liability claim brought against us could have a material adverse effect on our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
Table of Contents
Reforms in the healthcare industry and the uncertainty associated with pharmaceutical and laboratory test pricing, reimbursement and related matters could adversely affect the marketing, pricing and demand for our products.
All aspects of our business, including research and development, manufacturing, marketing, pricing, sales, litigation, and intellectual property rights, are subject to extensive legislation and regulation. Changes in applicable U.S. federal and state laws and agency regulation, as well as foreign laws and regulations, could have a materially negative impact on our business. In the United States and in some other jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the health care system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates or any of our potential future product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, or affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing testing and other requirements. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether any of the FDA’s regulations, guidances or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the agency and its scientific review staff, if any, may be.
Our ability to commercialize any product candidates successfully also will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for these product candidates and related treatments will be available from governmental authorities or health care programs, private health plans, and other organizations. Even if we succeed in bringing one or more products to the market, such products may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective, and the amount reimbursed for the products may be insufficient to allow us to sell them on a competitive basis. Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in health care systems with the stated goals of containing health care costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. For examples, see the section above titled “Governmental Regulation and Product Approval – Healthcare Reform.”
Increasingly, third-party payors are challenging the prices charged for medical products and requiring that pharmaceutical companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices. Novel medical products, if covered at all, may be subject to enhanced utilization management controls designed to ensure that the products are used only when medically necessary. Such utilization management controls may discourage the prescription or use of a medical product by increasing the administrative burden associated with its prescription or creating coverage uncertainties for prescribers and patients. We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for any product candidate we may be able to commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, that the level of reimbursement will be adequate. Reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. If reimbursement is not available or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval.
We cannot predict the nature of any measures that may be adopted by governmental authorities or private payors or their effect on our competitive position. Our ability to market our products depends, in part, on reimbursement levels for them and related treatment established by healthcare providers, private health insurers and other organizations, including health maintenance organizations and managed care organizations. In the event that governmental authorities enact additional legislation or adopt regulations that affect third party coverage and reimbursement, demand for our products may be reduced, which may materially adversely affect our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
Inadequate funding for the FDA, the SEC and other government agencies could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent our drug candidates from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business rely, which could negatively impact our business.
The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of the SEC and other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.
Future legislative and regulatory proposals may materially impact the ability of the FDA and other regulatory agencies to operate as they have historically operated. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes or executive orders will be enacted, or whether any of the FDA’s regulations, guidances or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the agency
Table of Contents
and its scientific review staff, if any, may be. For example, the FDA has experienced significant and rapid fluctuations in leadership and scientific review personnel, which may be key contributing factors in multiple reported delays in agency decision making on marketing applications and agency requests for additional data that are inconsistent with prior regulatory feedback. In addition, the next FDA user fee reauthorization package is expected to enter stakeholder negotiations beginning in mid-2025, with any agreement sent to Congress in early 2027 for purposes of initiating the legislative process. Reauthorization of the prescription drug user fee program would need to be finalized by Congress by the end of September 2027 in order to avoid a disruption in FDA’s review goals for NDAs and other activities supported by user fees assessed against industry.
In addition, disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may slow the time necessary for new drug products to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, political disputes in Congress may result in a shutdown of the U.S. government, and in such cases certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, would have to furlough employees and cease critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown or slowdown occurs, it could significantly affect the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, in our operations as a public company, future government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.
Our business and operations would suffer in the event of computer system failures.
Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of our CROs and other third parties on which we rely, are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, fire, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. Like other companies, we may from time to time experience threats to our data and systems, including malware and computer virus attacks, unauthorized access, systems failures and disruptions. See “We may be unable to adequately protect our information systems from cyberattacks, which could result in the disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, including personal data, damage our reputation, and subject us to significant financial and legal exposure” below for more information regarding risks related to possible .
If a disruption event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our drug development programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed, ongoing or planned clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach results in a loss of or damage to our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and the further development of Bryostatin-1 could be delayed.
Consolidation in the pharmaceutical industry could materially affect our ability to operate as an independent entity.
The pressure to grow revenues while containing the escalating costs of basic research and development has resulted in an increase in mergers and acquisitions in our industry. More consolidation in the pharmaceutical industry is expected over the next five years. We could become an acquisition target by a larger competitor and, as a consequence, suffer serious disruptions to our business model or even lose control of our ability to operate as an independent entity. Such events could have a material adverse effect on our product development efforts or the commercialization of our proposed products.
We are currently operating in a period of economic uncertainty and capital markets disruption, which has been significantly impacted by geopolitical instability due to the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine and armed conflicts between Israel and Hamas. Our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected by any negative impact on the global economy and capital markets resulting from the conflicts in Ukraine, the Gaza Strip or any other geopolitical tensions.
U.S. and global markets have experienced volatility and disruption following the escalation of geopolitical tensions, including the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine, armed conflicts between Israel and Hamas and the related Red Sea crisis, where Houthi forces based in Yemen have been attacking freighters. Although the length and impact of the ongoing conflicts is highly unpredictable, such conflicts could lead to market disruptions, including significant volatility in commodity prices, credit and capital markets, as well as supply chain interruptions. We are continuing to monitor the situations in Ukraine, the Gaza Strip and globally and assessing their potential impacts on our business. In addition, sanctions on Russia and hostilities involving Israel could adversely affect the global economy and financial markets and lead to instability and of liquidity in capital markets, potentially making it more for us to obtain additional funds.
Table of Contents
Any of the above-mentioned factors could affect our business, prospects, financial condition, and operating results. The extent and duration of the military actions, sanctions and resulting market disruptions are impossible to predict, but could be substantial.
Failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act could materially and adversely affect us.
As a public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the Dodd-Frank Act and are required to prepare our financial statements according to the rules and regulations required by the SEC. In addition, the Exchange Act requires that we file annual, quarterly and current reports. Our failure to prepare and disclose this information in a timely manner or to otherwise comply with applicable law could subject us to penalties under federal securities laws, expose us to lawsuits and restrict our ability to access financing. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires that, among other things, that we establish and maintain effective internal controls and procedures for financial reporting and disclosure purposes. Internal control over financial reporting is complex and may be revised over time to adapt to changes in our business, or changes in applicable accounting rules. We cannot assure you that our internal control over financial reporting will be effective in the future or that a material weakness will not be discovered with respect to a prior period for which we had previously believed that internal controls were .
We have identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. Matters affecting our internal controls may cause us to be unable to report our financial information on a timely basis or may cause us to restate previously issued financial information, and thereby subject us to adverse regulatory consequences, including sanctions or investigations by the SEC, or violations of applicable stock exchange listing rules. There could also be a negative reaction in the financial markets due to a loss of investor confidence in our company and the reliability of our financial statements. Confidence in the reliability of our financial statements is also likely to suffer if we or our independent registered public accounting firm reports a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting. This could have a material and adverse effect on us by, for example, leading to a in our share price and our ability to raise additional capital. Further, there are inherent to the effectiveness of any system of controls and procedures, including the possibility of human and the or overriding of the controls and procedures. We could face additional exposure and a likelihood of an SEC enforcement or other regulatory action if further were to occur or other accounting-related emerge.
We may be unable to adequately protect our information systems from cyberattacks, which could result in the disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, including personal data, damage our reputation, and subject us to significant financial and legal exposure.
We rely on information technology systems that we or our third-party providers operate to process, transmit and store electronic information in our day-to-day operations. In connection with our product discovery efforts, we may collect and use a variety of personal data, such as name, mailing address, email addresses, phone number and clinical trial information. A successful cyberattack could result in the theft or destruction of intellectual property, data, or other misappropriation of assets, or otherwise compromise our confidential or proprietary information and disrupt our operations. Cyberattacks are increasing in their frequency, sophistication and intensity, and have become increasingly difficult to detect. Cyberattacks could include wrongful conduct by hostile foreign governments, industrial espionage, wire fraud and other forms of cyber fraud, the deployment of malware, -of-service, social engineering or other means to data security, confidentiality, and availability. A could cause consequences for us, including, without , the of operations, the of confidential business information, including financial information, trade secrets, financial and the disclosure of corporate strategic plans. Although we devote resources to protect our information systems, we realize that are a , and there can be no assurance that our efforts will prevent information security that would result in business, legal, financial or reputational to us, or would have a material effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Any to prevent or mitigate security or access to, use of, or disclosure of our clinical data or patients’ personal data could result in significant liability under state (e.g., state notification laws), federal (e.g., HIPAA, as amended by HITECH), and international law (e.g., the GDPR) and may cause a material impact to our reputation, affect our ability to conduct new studies and potentially our business.
In addition, the computer systems of various third parties on which we rely, and other contractors, consultants and law and accounting firms, may sustain damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, data breaches, phishing attacks, cybercriminals, natural disasters (including hurricanes and earthquakes), terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. We rely on our third-party providers to implement effective security measures and identify and correct for any such failures, deficiencies or breaches. If we or our third-party providers fail to maintain or protect our information technology systems and data integrity effectively or fail to
Table of Contents
anticipate, plan for or manage significant disruptions to our information technology systems, we or our third-party providers could have difficulty preventing, detecting and controlling such cyber-attacks and any such attacks could result in losses described above as well as disputes with physicians, patients and our partners, regulatory sanctions or penalties, increases in operating expenses, expenses or lost revenues or other adverse consequences, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, prospects and cash flows. Any failure by such third parties to prevent or mitigate security breaches or improper access to or disclosure of such information could have similarly adverse consequences for us. If we are unable to prevent or mitigate the impact of such security or data privacy , we could be to and governmental , which could lead to a potential to our business.
Our failure to comply with data protection laws and regulations could lead to government enforcement actions, private litigation and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business.
We are subject to data protection laws and regulations that address privacy and data security. The legislative and regulatory landscape for data protection continues to evolve, and there has been an increasing focus on privacy and data security issues with the potential to affect our business. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including data breach notification laws, health information privacy laws, and consumer protection laws, govern the collection, use, disclosure and protection of health-related and other personal data. Many U.S. states are also enacting consumer privacy statutes to enhance protections for personal data and to provide residents with more choices concerning their data collected by businesses, increasing compliance complexity and increasing risks of failures to comply.
In addition, foreign data protection, privacy, and other laws and regulations can be more restrictive than those in the United States. Data localization laws in some countries generally mandate that certain types of data collected in a particular country be stored and/or processed within that country. We could be subject to audits in Europe and around the world, particularly in the areas of consumer and data protection, as we operate our business. Legislators and regulators may make legal and regulatory changes, or interpret and apply existing laws, in ways that require us to incur substantial costs, expose us to unanticipated civil or criminal liability, or cause us to change our business practices. These changes or increased costs could negatively impact our business and results of operations in material ways. For example, the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) imposes requirements in the European Economic Area relating to, among other things, consent to process personal data of individuals, the information provided to individuals regarding the processing of their personal data, the security and confidentiality of personal data, notifications in the event of data breaches and use of third-party processors. GDPR also imposes restrictions on the transfer of personal data from the EEA to third countries like the United States.
Applicable data privacy and data protection laws may conflict with each other, and by complying with the laws or regulations of one jurisdiction, we cannot be assured of compliance with the laws or regulations of another jurisdiction. Despite our efforts, we may not have fully complied in the past and may not in the future. Furthermore, the number of government investigations related to data security incidents and privacy violations continues to increase and government investigations typically require significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our business and reputation. Failure to comply with data protection laws may expose us to risk of enforcement actions taken by data protection authorities or other regulatory agencies, private rights of action in some jurisdictions, potential significant fines and penalties if we are found to be non-compliant, and/or publicity, any of which could affect our operating results and business.
Our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, contract research organizations, consultants or vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.
We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, contract research organizations, consultants or vendors may engage in fraudulent or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or disclosure of unauthorized activities to us that violates: FDA regulations, including those laws requiring the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to the FDA; manufacturing standards; federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations; or laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. In addition, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Activities subject to these laws also involve the use or of information obtained in the course of clinical trials or creating data in our nonclinical studies or clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and to our reputation.
Table of Contents
It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by our employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of civil, criminal and administrative , , monetary , possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, contractual , reputational , potential profits and future earnings, and of our operations, any of which could affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects.
Risks Relating to our Common Stock and the Securities Market
The market price of our common stock has been volatile.
The market price of our Common Stock has fluctuated substantially due to a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control and may not be related to our operating performance. These fluctuations could cause you to lose all or part of your investment in our Common Stock since you might be unable to sell your shares at or above the price you paid. Factors that could cause fluctuations in the trading price of our common stock include the following:
price and volume fluctuations in the overall stock market from time to time;
volatility in the trading prices and trading volumes of stocks in our industry;
changes in operating performance and stock market valuations of other companies generally, or those in our industry in particular;
sales of shares of our Common Stock by us or our stockholders;
failure of securities analysts to maintain coverage of us, changes in financial estimates by securities analysts who follow our company or our failure to meet these estimates or the expectations of investors;
the financial projections we may provide to the public, any changes in those projections or our failure to meet those projections;
announcements by us or our competitors of new offerings or features;
the public’s reaction to our press releases, other public announcements and filings with the SEC;
rumors and market speculation involving us or other companies in our industry;
actual or anticipated changes in our results of operations or fluctuations in our results of operations;
actual or anticipated developments in our business, our competitors’ businesses or the competitive landscape generally;
litigation involving us, our industry or both, or investigations by regulators into our operations or those of our competitors;
developments or disputes concerning our intellectual property or other proprietary rights;
announced or completed acquisitions of businesses, services or technologies by us or our competitors;
new laws or regulations or new interpretations of existing laws or regulations applicable to our business;
Table of Contents
changes in accounting standards, policies, guidelines, interpretations or principles;
any significant change in our management; and
general economic conditions and slow or negative growth of our markets.
In addition, in the past, following periods of volatility in the overall market and the market price of a particular company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against these companies. This litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.
If we fail to meet the continued listing standards of Nasdaq, our common stock may be delisted, which may adversely affect the market price and liquidity of our common stock.
Our common stock is currently traded on Nasdaq. Nasdaq requires us to meet certain financial, public float, bid price and liquidity standards on an ongoing basis in order to continue the listing of our common stock, including that we maintain a minimum closing bid price of $1.00 per share (the “Minimum Bid Price Requirement”).
There can be no assurance that we will remain in compliance with the Minimum Bid Price Requirement or that we will be able to maintain compliance with the other requirements for continued listing of our common stock on Nasdaq. If our common stock is delisted and we are unable to list our common stock on another U.S. national securities exchange, we expect our securities would be quoted on an over-the-counter market. If this were to occur, our stockholders could face significant material adverse consequences, including limited availability of market quotations for our common stock and reduced liquidity for the trading of our securities. Furthermore, if our common stock were delisted it could adversely affect our ability to obtain financing for the continuation of our operations and/or result in the loss of confidence by investors, customers, suppliers and employees.
A significant number of our shares of Common Stock are or will be eligible for future sale, which may cause the market price for our Common Stock to decline.
As of December 31, 2025, we had an aggregate of 7,448,343 shares of Common Stock outstanding. Except for 163,540 shares, all of those shares are freely tradable without restriction or registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”).
On October 13, 2025, we entered into a securities purchase agreement (the “Series E Purchase Agreement”) with certain accredited investors (the “Series E Investors”), pursuant to which we agreed to sell to the Series E Investors (i) in a private placement offering, an aggregate of 11,000 shares of the Company’s newly-designated Series E convertible preferred stock, par value $0.001, with a stated value of $1,000 per share (the “Series E Preferred Stock”), initially convertible into up to 1,375,000 shares of Common Stock (the “Conversion Shares”) and (ii) warrants (the “Series E Warrants”) to acquire up to an aggregate of 1,375,000 shares of Common Stock (the “Series E Warrant Shares”)(the “Series E Offering”). In connection with the Series E Purchase Agreement, on October 13, 2025, we and the Series E Investors entered into a Registration Rights Agreement (the “Series E Registration Rights Agreement”), pursuant to which we were required to file a resale registration statement with the SEC to register for resale 150% of the Conversion Shares and 150% of the Series E Warrant Shares. We filed a registration statement for the resale of such securities on November 12, 2025, which was declared effective by the SEC on November 21, 2025.
We are unable to predict whether large amounts of our Common Stock will be sold in the open market. We are also unable to predict whether a sufficient number of buyers of our Common Stock to meet the demand to sell shares of our Common Stock at attractive prices would exist at that time. It is possible that our stockholders will sell the shares of our Common Stock for various reasons. For example, such stockholders may not believe that our business profile or our level of market capitalization as an independent company fit their investment objectives. The sale of significant amounts of our Common Stock or the perception in the market that this will occur may lower the market price of our Common Stock.
Table of Contents
If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish misleading or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.
The trading market for our Common Stock will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. We do not currently have and may never obtain research coverage for our Common Stock. If there is no research coverage of our Common Stock, the trading price for shares of our Common Stock may be negatively impacted. If we obtain research coverage for our Common Stock and if one or more of the analysts downgrades our stock or publishes misleading or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more analyst ceases coverage of our Common Stock or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our Common Stock could decrease, which could cause our Common Stock price or trading volume to decline.
We do not expect to pay any cash dividends for the foreseeable future.
We do not expect to declare or pay any cash dividend for the foreseeable future. We expect to use future earnings, if any, to fund business growth. Therefore, stockholders will not likely receive any funds absent a sale of their shares. If we do not pay dividends, our Common Stock may be less valuable because a return on your investment will only occur if our stock price appreciates. We cannot assure stockholders of a positive return on their investment when they sell their shares, nor can we assure that stockholders will not lose the entire amount of their investment.
Provisions in our certificate of incorporation, our bylaws or Delaware law might discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company or changes in our management and, therefore, depress the trading price of our Common Stock.
Provisions of our articles of incorporation, bylaws, shareholder rights plan or Delaware law may discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control that stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which our stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares. These provisions may also prevent or frustrate attempts by our stockholders to change the composition of our Board or to replace or remove our management. These provisions include:
limitations on the removal of directors;
advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals and nominations;
limitations on the ability of stockholders to call and bring business before special meetings and to take action by written consent in lieu of a meeting;
limitations on the liability of, and the provision of indemnification to, our director and officers; and
the ability of our Board to authorize the issuance of blank check preferred stock, which could be issued with voting, liquidation, dividend and other rights superior to our Common Stock.
In addition, we are subject to Section 203 of the DGCL, Section 203 prohibits a publicly held Delaware corporation from engaging in a business combination with an interested stockholder for a period of three years following the date such person becomes an interested stockholder, unless the business combination or the transaction in which such person becomes an interested stockholder is approved in a prescribed manner. Generally, a “business combination” includes a merger, asset or stock sale, or other transaction resulting in a financial benefit to the interested stockholder. Generally, an “interested stockholder” is a person that, together with affiliates and associates, owns, or within three years prior to the determination of interested stockholder status did own, 15.0% or more of a corporation’s voting stock. The existence of this provision may have an anti-takeover effect with respect to transactions not approved in advance by our Board and the anti-takeover effect includes discouraging attempts that might result in a premium over the market price for the shares of our Common Stock.
In addition, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, to the fullest extent permitted by law, provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the exclusive forum for any stockholder (including a beneficial owner) to bring: (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any current or former director, officer or other employee, to us or to our stockholders, (iii) any action or proceeding asserting a claim against us or
Table of Contents
any current or former director, officer or other employee arising out of or pursuant to any provision of the DGCL, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our bylaws (in each case, as they may be amended from time to time), (iv) any action or proceeding to interpret, apply, enforce or determine the validity of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our bylaws (including any right, obligation, or remedy thereunder); (v) any action or proceeding as to which the DGCL confers jurisdiction to the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware; or (vi) any action asserting a claim governed by the internal affairs doctrine against us or any of our directors, officers or other employees, in all cases to the fullest extent permitted by law and subject to the court’s having personal jurisdiction over the indispensable parties named as defendants. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this exclusive forum provision will not apply to suits brought to enforce any liability or duty created by the Securities Act or the Exchange Act or any other claim for which the federal district courts of the United States of America shall be the sole and exclusive forum.
This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provisions contained in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.
The existence of the foregoing provisions and anti-takeover measures could limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our Common Stock. They could also deter potential acquirers of our company, thereby reducing the likelihood that investors could receive a premium for their shares of our Common Stock in an acquisition.
You may experience dilution of your ownership interests because of the future issuance of additional shares of our Common Stock.
Any future issuance of our equity or equity-backed securities will dilute then-current stockholders’ ownership percentages and could also result in a decrease in the fair market value of our equity securities, because our assets would be owned by a larger pool of outstanding equity. As described above, we will need additional financing to continue our operations and may raise additional capital through public or private offerings of our common or preferred stock or other securities that are convertible into or exercisable for our common or preferred stock. We may also issue such securities in connection with hiring or retaining employees and consultants (including stock options and other equity compensation issued under our equity incentive plans), as payment to providers of goods and services, in connection with future acquisitions or for other business purposes. Our Board may at any time authorize the issuance of additional common or preferred stock without common stockholder approval, subject only to the total number of authorized common and preferred shares set forth in our Articles of Incorporation. The terms of equity securities issued by us in future transactions may be more favorable to new investors, and may include dividend and/or liquidation preferences, superior voting rights and the issuance of warrants or other derivative securities, which may have a further dilutive effect. Also, the future issuance of any such additional shares of our common or preferred stock or other securities may create pressure on the trading price of our Common Stock. There can be no assurance that any such future issuances will not be at a price (or exercise prices) below the price at which shares of our Common Stock are then traded.
We may obtain additional capital through the issuance of preferred stock, which may limit your rights as a holder of our Common Stock.
Without any stockholder vote or action, our Board may designate and approve for issuance shares of our preferred stock. The terms of any preferred stock may include priority claims to assets and dividends and special voting rights which could limit the rights of the holders of our Common Stock. The designation and issuance of preferred stock favorable to current management or stockholders could make any possible takeover of us or the removal of our management more difficult.
