BTCS Inc. 10-K

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS INTRODUCTION The following discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our historical financial statements and the notes to those statements that appear elsewhere in this report. Certain statements in the discussion contain forward-looking statements based upon current expectations that involve risks and uncertainties, such as plans, objectives, expectations and intentions. Actual results and the timing of events could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including those set forth under “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this report. OVERVIEW BTCS is an early entrant in the Digital Asset market and one of the first U.S. publicly-traded companies to focus on Digital Assets and blockchain technologies. Through our blockchain-infrastructure operations, we secure disruptive next-generation blockchains and operate validator nodes on various proof of stake-based blockchain networks, earning rewards of additional Digital Assets by actively validating transactions on the networks. While this process is similar to Bitcoin mining the consensus mechanism is different. Now we are building on the foundation of our pre-established infrastructure with the development of a Digital Asset Platform. The first feature of the dashboard, which is an open beta, allows users to evaluate their Digital Asset portfolios from multiple exchanges on a single platform. We also are developing and plan to integrate into the platform a Staking-as-a-Service feature that, once launched, will allow users to participate in asset leveraging through securing blockchain protocols. Blockchain Infrastructure Blockchain infrastructure operations can broadly be defined as earning a reward for securing a blockchain by validating transactions on that blockchain. There are currently two main consensus mechanisms used to secure blockchains: i) proof-of-work (“PoW”), in which nodes dedicate computational resources, and ii) proof-of-stake (“PoS”), in which nodes dedicate financial resources. The intention behind both PoW and PoS is to make it practically impossible for any single malicious actor to have enough computational power or ownership stake to successfully attack the blockchain. In the case of PoW, a miner does “work” using energy-consuming computers and is rewarded for this “work” with Digital Assets. The miner, typically through pools running nodes, validates transactions on the blockchain, essentially converting electricity and computing power into a digital currency reward comprised of transaction fees and newly-minted Digital Assets. Bitcoin is an example of PoW and is by far the largest and most secure PoW blockchain. PoS miners, often referred to as validators in PoS systems, actively operate nodes and validate transactions. Validators are required to stake holdings of a digital currency to participate in the consensus algorithm and are rewarded in tokens for aligning behavior with the rules of the algorithm. Bad behavior can be penalized by “slashing” the validator’s holdings and/or rewards. Validators can also be removed from the network for breaking the rules. Ill-intentioned behavior among validators is discouraged, allowing for the blockchain to be properly maintained and secured. Compared to PoW, PoS blockchains require less energy. Depending on the PoS blockchain protocol, native token holders have the opportunity to leverage their asset holdings by either delegating their rights to a validator (“Delegating”), staking their token holdings in a staking pool (“Staking”), or running their own validator (“Pooling”). With Delegating, token holders indirectly participate by maintaining control of their private keys and delegating their tokens to an existing validator. Therefore, delegating is more akin to assigning voting rights of stock to another person or entity via a power of attorney. With Pooling, an operator and token holder combine tokens in order to improve the constituents’ collective odds of validating new blocks, and typically the operator takes custody of token holders funds i.e. private keys. If chosen for validation, the group is rewarded in tokens. With both Delegating and Pooling, the validator operators earn a fee for providing the technical capabilities of running a node 24/7 that requires regular, active maintenance and industry expertise. BTCS uses its blockchain infrastructure to operate validator nodes on various proof of stake-based blockchain networks. In connection with the validation of transactions occurring on those blockchain networks, BTCS will stake the Digital Assets native to those blockchains on the validator nodes it operates in order to earn staking rewards. BTCS may also use its blockchain infrastructure to validate and sign transactions on behalf of customers that delegate their validation and voting rights to BTCS-operated validator nodes (referred to as “Staking-as-a-Service” or “StaaS”). A StaaS provider maintains an active role in validating transactions on a given PoS network on behalf of its delegators by (1) arranging transactions using software to stake the relevant Digital Assets; (2) monitoring the nodes it is operating to ensure they remain online, ready to validate transactions; and (3) verifying transactions on the network when required to earn rewards. Apart from Bitcoin and Ethereum, all of the Company’s Digital Asset holdings are in tokens secured by PoS or similar consensus mechanisms that allow for Delegating and asset leveraging. The Company is currently actively operating validator nodes on Ethereum’s beacon chain, Cardano, Tezos, Avalanche, Kusama, and Cosmos. The Company has also staked the following tokens Polkadot, Terra, Algorand, and Solana. Building on that base, the Company plans to expand its PoS operations to secure other disruptive blockchain protocols that also allow for delegating. The Company believes its blockchain infrastructure efforts will form the core growth for its Digital Asset Platform. The Company utilizes cloud infrastructure to operate and run its validator nodes and does not maintain its own physical assets, but may add this infrastructure in the future. The Company currently holds the following Digital Assets which are core to its blockchain infrastructure efforts. The table also includes Bitcoin which is not core to our infrastructure operations. Digital Assets Held at Period End Asset 2020Q1 2020Q2 2020Q3 2020Q4 2021Q1 2021Q2 2021Q3 2021Q4 Bitcoin (BTC) 20.6 54.3 63.6 66.9 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 Ethereum (ETH) 985.0 2,304.6 2,554.7 2,674.2 7,732.5 7,878.6 7,992.4 8,097.6 Cardano (ADA) 257,757.4 257,757.4 257,757.4 Kusama (KSM) 123.4 374.2 374.2 Tezos (XTZ) 14,965.6 24,171.9 24,504.2 Solana (SOL) 4,787.5 4,778.6 Polkadot (DOT) 8,032.1 8,032.1 Terra (Luna) 3,584.2 3,584.2 Cosmos (Atom) 3,072.4 3,072.4 Polygon (Matic) 67,114.1 67,114.1 Avalanche (Avax) 2,024.7 2,072.8 Algorand (Algo) 50,583.9 51,102.6 Fair Market Value of Digital Assets at Period End Asset 2020Q1 2020Q2 2020Q3 2020Q4 2021Q1 2021Q2 2021Q3 2021Q4 Bitcoin (BTC) $ 132,831 $ 496,027 $ 686,580 $ 1,962,572 $ 5,302,695 $ 3,153,675 $ 3,941,180 $ 4,167,579 Ethereum (ETH)* $ 131,582 $ 521,552 $ 919,748 $ 1,976,126 $ 14,833,709 $ 17,920,148 $ 23,990,541 $ 29,820,477 Cardano (ADA) $ 356,600 $ 545,028 $ 337,716 Kusama (KSM) $ 26,501 $ 123,957 $ 103,866 Tezos (XTZ) $ 45,495 $ 146,914 $ 106,679 Solana (SOL) $ 675,373 $ 813,791 Polkadot (DOT) $ 229,558 $ 214,616 Terra (Luna) $ 138,351 $ 306,353 Cosmos (Atom) $ 111,252 $ 99,761 Polygon (Matic) $ 75,644 $ 169,604 Avalanche (Avax) $ 135,191 $ 226,499 Algorand (Algo) $ 82,381 $ 84,830 Total $ 264,413 $ 1,017,579 $ 1,606,328 $ 3,938,698 $ 20,136,404 $ 21,502,420 $ 30,195,370 $ 36,451,772 QoQ Change -4 % 285 % 58 % 145 % 411 % 7 % 40 % 21 % YoY Change 1,327 % 7,516 % 2,013 % 1,780 % 825 % * Approximately 9 ETH is not staked on Ethereum 2.0’s Beacon Chain. Prices of Digital Assets at Period End Asset 2020Q1 2020Q2 2020Q3 2020Q4 2021Q1 2021Q2 2021Q3 2021Q4 Bitcoin (BTC) $ 6,438.64 $ 9,137.99 $ 10,787.63 $ 29,325.50 $ 58,918.83 $ 35,040.84 $ 43,790.89 $ 46,306.45 Ethereum (ETH)* $ 133.59 $ 226.31 $ 360.02 $ 738.95 $ 1,918.36 $ 2,274.55 $ 3,001.68 $ 3,682.63 Cardano (ADA) $ 1.38 $ 2.11 $ 1.31 Kusama (KSM) $ 214.79 $ 331.24 $ 277.55 Tezos (XTZ) $ 3.04 $ 6.08 $ 4.35 Solana (SOL) $ 141.07 $ 170.30 Polkadot (DOT) $ 28.58 $ 26.72 Terra (Luna) $ 38.60 $ 85.47 Cosmos (Atom) $ 36.21 $ 32.47 Polygon (Matic) $ 1.13 $ 2.53 Avalanche (Avax) $ 66.77 $ 109.27 Algorand (Algo) $ 1.63 $ 1.66 12 Digital Asset Platform The Company is also developing a proprietary Digital Asset Platform aimed at allowing users to evaluate their crypto portfolio holdings across multiple exchanges and chains on a single platform. The internally-developed dashboard utilizes Digital Asset exchange APIs to read user data and does not allow for the trading of assets. In addition to portfolio monitoring, we are also working to integrate a full suite of other features including decentralized exchanges, wallets, risk metrics and potentially a way for users to calculate end-of year-reports for tax purposes. We believe that increasing the number of features we offer may create a sticky user experience across multiple, interrelated products. The Company is also currently developing and plans to integrate into the Digital Asset Platform a proprietary Staking-as-a-Service feature aimed at allowing users to delegate supported cryptocurrencies through a non-custodial platform to BTCS operated validator nodes. Staking allows users to generate an annual percentage yield (“APY”) on their staked assets whereas validator node operators charge a fee on users’ staked asset rewards earned in addition to earning an APY on staked assets. In turn, the highly scalable nature of both staking Digital Assets as well as allowing users to stake Digital Assets to earn token rewards is the premise behind BTCS’ Staking-as-a-Service platform. As a result of the pandemic, we have experienced delays in the development of the platform. Digital Asset Treasury Strategy The Company employs a Digital Asset treasury strategy with a primary focus on disruptive protocol layer assets such as Bitcoin which are not able to be staked (i.e. non-productive). They are distinct from Digital Assets used as the foundation for our blockchain infrastructure operations previously discussed. The Company’s Digital Asset treasury holding is comprised of 90 Bitcoins as set forth above. The Company is not limiting its assets to a single type of Digital Asset and may hold a variety of Digital Assets. The Company will carefully review its purchases of digital securities to avoid violating the 1940 Act and seek to reduce potential liabilities under the federal securities laws. The market is rapidly evolving and there can be no assurances that we will be competitive with industry participants that have or may have greater resources than us. Non-GAAP financial measure In addition to our results determined in accordance with GAAP, we believe Adjusted EBITDA, a non-GAAP measure, is useful in evaluating our operating performance. We believe that Adjusted EBITDA may be helpful to investors because it provides consistency and comparability with past financial performance and the economic realities of our business. However, Adjusted EBITDA is presented for supplemental informational purposes only, has limitations as an analytical tool, and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for financial information presented in accordance with GAAP. Among other non-cash and non-recurring items, Adjusted EBITDA excludes stock-based compensation expense (including stock-based compensation issued to service providers), which has recently been, and will continue to be for the foreseeable future, a significant recurring expense for our business and an important part of our compensation strategy. In addition, other companies, including companies in our industry, may calculate similarly titled non-GAAP measures differently or may use other measures to evaluate their performance, all of which could reduce the usefulness of our non-GAAP financial measures as tools for comparison. A reconciliation is provided below for each non-GAAP financial measure to the most directly comparable financial measure stated in accordance with GAAP. Investors are encouraged to review the related GAAP financial measures and the reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP financial measures, and not to rely on any single financial measure to evaluate our business. We calculate Adjusted EBITDA as net income (loss), adjusted to exclude, depreciation and amortization, interest expense, change in fair value of warrant liabilities, and stock-based compensation expense (including stock-based compensation issued to service providers). Adjusted EBITDA presented does not include adjustments for impairment of intangible Digital Assets. The following table provides a reconciliation of net income (loss) to Adjusted EBITDA: For the years ended December 31, 2021 2020 Net income (loss) $ (16,049,583 ) $ (2,556,094 ) Adjusted to exclude the following: Depreciation and amortization 1,868,997 355,546 Interest expense 186,740 48,231 Change in fair value of warrant liabilities (3,918,750 ) - Stock-based compensation 15,457,473 - Adjusted EBITDA $ (2,455,123 ) $ (2,152,317 ) 13 RESULTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2021 AND 2020 For the years ended December 31, $ Change % Change 2021 2020 2021 2021 Revenues Validator revenue $ 1,213,284 $ - $ 1,213,284 N/A % Total revenues 1,213,284 - 1,213,284 N/A Cost of revenues Validator expense 268,346 - 268,346 N/A Gross profit 944,938 - 944,938 N/A Operating expenses: General and administrative $ 1,590,707 $ 421,434 $ 1,169,273 277 % Research and development 712,736 45,450 667,286 1,468 Compensation and related expenses 15,583,258 1,513,015 14,070,243 930 Marketing 180,290 6,350 173,940 2,739 Total operating expenses 18,066,991 1,986,249 16,080,742 810 Other (expenses) income: Interest expense (186,740 ) (48,231 ) (138,509 ) 287 Amortization on debt discount (1,868,059 ) (354,432 ) (1,513,627 ) 427 Change in fair value of warrant liabilities 3,918,750 - 3,918,750 N/A Impairment loss on digital assets/currencies (3,845,899 ) (165,331 ) (3,680,568 ) 2,226 Realized gains (loss) on digital asset/currency transactions 3,054,418 (1,851 ) 3,056,269 165,114 Total other income (expenses) 1,072,470 (569,845 ) 1,642,315 288 Net loss $ (16,049,583 ) $ (2,556,094 ) (13,493,489 ) 528 Validator Revenue Revenue for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 were approximately $1.2 million and $0, respectively. The increase is from our blockchain infrastructure validating revenue as the Company began operating validator nodes during 2021. We believe revenues will increase as the Company continues to expand its blockchain infrastructure efforts. Cost of Revenues Cost of revenues for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 were approximately $0.3 million and $0, respectively. The increase is from our blockchain infrastructure validating operating costs, including, web service hosting fees, and cash and stock-based compensation related to services provided by vendors. We believe our cost of revenues will increase as we continue to ramp up our business. However, we believe gross margin will improve as we add scale to our blockchain infrastructure operations, leading to improved gross profits. Operating expenses Operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 were approximately $18.0 million and $2.0 million. The increase is primarily from $15.6 million non-cash contingent bonuses being earned for the achievement of performance milestones as well as $0.7 million in research and development expenses for development of our Digital Asset Platform. We believe operating expenses will remain consistent as the Company continues to utilize equity-based bonus incentives as a core part of its compensation strategy. Other Income (Expenses) Other income (expenses) for the year ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 was approximately $1.1 million and $(0.6) million, respectively. The increase in other income is primarily from $4.0 million change in fair value of warrant liabilities and $3.1 million realized gain on Digital Asset/currency transactions and is partially offset by $1.9 million amortization on convertible notes debt discounts and $3.8 million impairment of our Digital Asset holdings. Net loss Net loss for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020 were approximately $16.0 million and $2.6 million. The increase is primarily due to increase of both operating expenses and other expenses as discussed above. Net loss attributable to Common Stockholders We incurred approximately $46,000 and $0 related to amortization of beneficial conversion feature of Series C-2 convertible preferred stock, and $5.0 million and $0 of deemed dividends related to recognition of anti-dilution adjustment to conversion amount for Series C-2 convertible preferred stock for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively. LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES Recent Financing On September 14, 2021, the Company entered into an At-The-Market Offering Agreement (the “ATM Agreement”) with H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC, as agent (“H.C. Wainwright”), pursuant to which the Company may offer and sell, from time-to-time through H.C. Wainwright, shares of the Company’s Common Stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $98,767,500 million (the “Shares”). During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company sold a total of 466,791 shares of Common Stock under the ATM Agreement for aggregate total gross proceeds of approximately $2,979,000 at an average selling price of $6.38 per share, resulting in net proceeds of approximately $2,882,000 after deducting commissions and other transaction costs. Liquidit y The Company’s financial statements have been prepared assuming that it will continue as a going concern, which contemplates continuity of operations, realization of assets, and liquidation of liabilities in the normal course of business. Liquidity is the ability of a company to generate funds to support its current and future operations, satisfy its obligations, and otherwise operate on an ongoing basis. At December 31, 2021, the Company had approximately $3.1 million of liquid Digital Assets (i.e. non-staked) and $1.4 million of cash compared to $1.0 million of liquid Digital Assets and $0.5 million cash at December 31, 2020. As of December 31, 2021, we held approximately 90 bitcoins that composed a majority of our non-staked liquid Digital Asset balance. We do not believe we will need to sell any of our bitcoins within the next twelve months to meet our working capital requirements, although we may from time to time sell bitcoins as part of treasury management operations, including to increase our cash balances. The Bitcoin market historically has been characterized by significant volatility in its price, limited liquidity and trading volumes compared to sovereign currencies markets, relative anonymity, a developing regulatory landscape, susceptibility to market abuse and manipulation, and various other risks inherent in its entirely electronic, virtual form and decentralized network. During times of instability in the Bitcoin market, we may not be able to sell our bitcoins at reasonable prices or at all. As a result, our bitcoins are 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. In addition, upon sale of our bitcoin, we may incur additional taxes related to any realized gains or we may incur capital losses as to which the tax deduction may be limited. We view our crypto asset investments as long-term holdings and we do not plan to engage in regular trading of crypto assets. During times of instability in the market of crypto assets, we may not be able to sell our crypto assets at reasonable prices or at all. As a result, our crypto assets are 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. As of March 9, 2022, the Company had approximately $3.0 million of cash and the fair market value of the Company’s liquid Digital Assets was approximately $11.6 million. The Company had no notes payable or any other long-term debt outstanding. As of March 9, 2022, the Company also has approximately $18.2 million available under the At the Market Offering Agreement over the next twelve months under the Form S-3 baby shelf rules. The Company believes that the existing cash and liquid Digital Assets held by us, in addition to the funds available to the Company from the issuance of additional stock through the ATM Agreement, provide sufficient liquidity to meet working capital requirements, anticipated capital expenditures and contractual obligations for at least the next twelve months. Cash Flows Cash used in operating activities was $4.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to $3.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2020. Cash used in investing activities was $9.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to $0 million for the year ended December 31, 2020. Net cash outflow for investing activities was used primarily for the purchase of Digital Assets for blockchain infrastructure operations. Cash provided by financing activities was $15.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to $3.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2020. This increase was primarily from proceeds from the issuance of: Series C-2 convertible preferred stock ($1.1 million), a convertible note ($1.0 million), Common Stock and warrants issued pursuant to the Purchase agreement ($8.7 million), Common Stock issued pursuant to the Equity Line Purchase Agreement ($3.0 million), the cash exercise of warrants ($0.4 million), and the proceeds from the Common Stock sold pursuant to the ATM Agreement ($2.8 million). This was partially offset by $2 million repayment of convertible notes during the year. The Company has plans to continue to raise proceeds from the sale of Common Stock and issuance of debt to fund operations as needed. Off Balance Sheet Transactions As of December 31, 2021, there were no off balance sheet arrangement and we were not a party to any off-balance sheet transactions. We have no guarantees or obligations other than those which arise out of normal business operations. 14 CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES We believe that the following accounting policies are the most critical to aid you in fully understanding and evaluating this management discussion and analysis: Accounting Treatment of Digital Assets The Company accounts for its Digital Assets as indefinite-lived intangible assets in accordance with ASC 350, Intangibles –Goodwill and Other . An intangible asset with an indefinite useful life is not amortized but assessed for impairment annually, or more frequently, when events or changes in circumstances occur indicating that it is more likely than not that the indefinite-lived asset is impaired. Impairment exists when the carrying amount exceeds its fair value. In testing for impairment, the Company has the option to first perform a qualitative assessment to determine whether it is more likely than not that an impairment exists. If it is determined that it is not more likely than not that an impairment exists, a quantitative impairment test is not necessary. If the Company concludes otherwise, it is required to perform a quantitative impairment test. To the extent an impairment loss is recognized, the loss establishes the new cost basis of the asset. Subsequent reversal of impairment losses is not permitted. Digital Assets held are included in the balance sheets as either current assets or other assets if they are staked and locked up for over one year. The Company’s Digital Assets are initially recorded at fair value upon receipt (or “carrying value”). The fair value of Digital Assets is determined using the average U.S. dollar spot price of the related Digital Asset. On a quarterly basis, Digital Assets are measured at carrying value, net of any impairment losses incurred since receipt. The Company will record impairment losses as the fair value falls below the carrying value of the Digital Assets at any time during the period, as determined using the lowest U.S. dollar spot price of the related Digital Asset subsequent to its acquisition. The Digital Assets can only be marked down when impaired and not marked up when their value increases. Such impairment in the value of Digital Assets are recorded as a component of costs and expenses in our statements of operations. The Company recorded impairment losses of approximately $3.8 million and $0.2 million related to Digital Assets during the years ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively. Impairment losses cannot be recovered for any subsequent increase in fair value until the sale or disposal of the asset. Realized gain (loss) on sale of Digital Assets are included in other income (expense) in the statements of operations. The Company recorded realized gains (losses) on Digital Assets of approximately $3.1 million and ($2,000) during the years ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, respectively. The presentation of purchases and sales of Digital Assets on the Statement of Cash Flows is determined by the nature of the Digital Assets, which can be characterized as productive (i.e. purchased for purposes of staking) or non-productive. The purchase of non-productive Digital Assets and currencies are included as an operating activity, whereas the purchase of productive Digital Assets and currencies are included as investing activities in accordance with ASC 230-10-20 Investing activities. Productive Digital Assets that are staked with a lock-up period of less than 12 months are presented on the Balance Sheet as current assets. Staked Digital Assets with remaining lock-up periods of greater than 12 months are presented as long-term other assets on the Balance Sheet. Revenue Recognition The Company recognizes revenue under Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 606 , Revenue from Contracts with Customers . The core principle of the new revenue standard is that a company should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The following five steps are applied to achieve that core principle: ● Step 1: Identify the contract with the customer ● Step 2: Identify the performance obligations in the contract ● Step 3: Determine the transaction price ● Step 4: Allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract ● Step 5: Recognize revenue when the Company satisfies a performance obligation Revenue is recognized when control of the promised goods or services is transferred to the customers, in an amount that reflects the consideration the Company expects to be entitled to in exchange for those goods or services. The Company generates revenue through staking rewards. The Company runs its own Digital Asset validator nodes and has entered into network-based smart contracts. Through these contracts, the Company provides cryptocurrency to stake a node for the purpose of validating transactions and adding blocks to a respective blockchain network. The term of a smart contract can vary based on the rules of the respective blockchain and typically last a few weeks to months after it is cancelled by the operator and requires that the cryptocurrency staked remain locked up during the duration of the smart contract. In exchange for validating transactions and staking the cryptocurrency, the Company is entitled to all of the fixed cryptocurrency award for running the Company’s own node and successfully processing, validating and/or adding a block to the blockchain. The provision of validating blockchain transactions is an output of the Company’s ordinary activities. Each separate block creation or validation under a smart contract with a network represents a performance obligation. The transaction consideration the Company receives – the fixed cryptocurrency awards – is a non-cash consideration, which the Company measures at fair value on the date received. The fair value of the cryptocurrency award received is determined using the quoted price of the related cryptocurrency on the date of receipt. The satisfaction of the performance obligation for processing and validating blockchain transactions occurs at a point in time when confirmation is received from the network indicating that the validation is complete, and the awards are available for transfer. At that point, revenue is recognized. Stock-Based Compensation The Company accounts for stock-based compensation in accordance with ASC 718 Compensation - Stock Compensation (“ASC 718”). ASC 718 addresses all forms of share-based payment (“SBP”) awards including shares issued under employee stock purchase plans and stock incentive shares. Under ASC 718 awards result in a cost that is measured at fair value on the awards’ grant date, based on the estimated number of awards that are expected to vest and will result in a charge to operations. Share-based payment awards exchanged for services are accounted for at the fair value of the award on the estimated grant date. Stock options issued under the Company’s long-term incentive plans are granted with an exercise price equal to no less than the market price of the Company’s stock at the date of grant and expire up to ten years from the date of grant. These options often vest over a one-year period. The Company estimates the fair value of stock option grants using the Black-Scholes option pricing model and the assumptions used in calculating the fair value of stock-based awards represent management’s best estimates and involve inherent uncertainties and the application of management’s judgment. Expected Term - The expected term of options represents the period that the Company’s stock-based awards are expected to be outstanding based on the simplified method, which is the half-life from vesting to the end of its contractual term. Expected Volatility - The Company computes stock price volatility over expected terms based on its historical Common Stock trading prices. Risk-Free Interest Rate - The Company bases the risk-free interest rate on the implied yield available on U. S. Treasury zero-coupon issues with an equivalent remaining term. Expected Dividend - The Company has not historically declared or paid any cash dividends on its common shares and does not plan to pay any recurring cash dividends in the foreseeable future, and, therefore, uses an expected dividend yield of zero in its valuation models. Effective January 1, 2017, the Company elected to account for forfeited awards as they occur, as permitted by ASU 2016-09. Ultimately, the actual expenses recognized over the vesting period will be for those shares that vested. Prior to making this election, the Company estimated a forfeiture rate for awards at 0%, as the Company did not have a significant history of forfeitures. Recent Accounting Pronouncements See Note 3 to the financial statements for a discussion of recent accounting standards and pronouncements. 15 RISK FACTORS There are numerous and varied risks, known and unknown, that may prevent us from achieving our goals. If any of these risks actually occur, our business, financial condition or results of operation may be materially adversely affected. In such case, the trading price of our Common Stock could decline and investors could lose all or part of their investment. Summary Risk Factors Our business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties that you should consider before investing in our common stock. Set forth below is a summary of the principal risks we face: ● We have a limited operating history, particularly with respect to our developing blockchain infrastructure solutions business, Digital Asset platform and potential staking-as-a -service operations ● We have a history of operating losses and expect to continue to experience operating losses in future periods. ● We have an evolving business model which we may be unable to develop, adapt or execute effectively, and we may be unable to manage our growth or implement our business plan as intended or at all. ● We are highly dependent on our executive officers, particularly Charles Allen, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and Michal Handerhan, our Chief Operating Officer, and the loss of the services of these individuals or other key personnel could materially harm our business. ● Our critical accounting policies may prove to be incorrect, we may need to implement additional finance and accounting systems, procedures and controls, and we face challenges inherent in operating a Digital Asset business which is subject to evolving accounting treatment for which there is limited precedent. ● We may be subject to regulatory actions, private causes of actions such as intellectual property infringement claims, and restrictions and limited access to baking and financial services due to our operations in the Digital Asset industry. ● We face uncertainty arising from large scale events including the recent Omicron variant of the COVID-19 virus and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. ● A particular Digital Asset’s status as a “security” in any relevant jurisdiction is subject to a high degree of uncertainty, and if we are unable to correctly characterize a Digital Asset, we may be subject to regulatory scrutiny, investigations, fines, sanctions, penalties and other adverse consequences, including potentially becoming subject to the Investment Company Act of 1940 which would impose significant regulatory burdens and compliance costs. ● Digital Assets and our related activities are characterized by numerous other risks and uncertainties, including the possibility for adverse regulatory developments such as bans or restrictions, theft, fraud, hacking, manipulation or malicious coding, price volatility, inaccurate mining pool calculations, the potential for one cryptocurrency to branch into two, variations among and the potential for adverse changes to blockchain algorithms, and other external forces beyond our control described more fully below. ● The future development and growth of Digital Assets such as cryptocurrencies is subject to a variety of factors that are difficult to predict and evaluate, and the market for the Digital Assets we obtain and hold may not grow as we expect or the prices may decline, including due to political or economic crises or other factors which we neither predict nor control. ● The Digital Asset space is subject to continuous regulatory uncertainty, and any adverse regulatory changes or other developments with respect to our operations or the Digital Assets with which we transact may require us to alter our business model or suspend or cease some or all of our operations. ● Our focus on PoS blockhain networks exposes us to risk of loss due to features unique to those networks, including by virtue of being locked in by smart contracts such that we cannot liquidate a portion of the relevant Digital Assets for a period of time during and after the staking process, during which the price or value of the Digital Assets may depreciate. ● We are reliant on a single service provider for cloud computing infrastructure deployed in our blockchain infrastructure solutions business, and are therefore exposed to the risks which may arise from potential adverse developments that may be caused or experienced by such service provider. ● Our Digital Asset platform is still under development and may never be commercialized, and its current or potential additional functions may expose us to additional risks such as cybersecurity threats and the application of data privacy and security laws which are onerous, and could give rise to penalties, compliance costs and other losses or expenses. ● Our stock price may be subject to significant volatility due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control, including its potential connection to the price of one or more of the Digital Assets with which we are or may become involved. Risks Related to Our Company We have a limited operating history, particularly with respect to our new blockchain infrastructure operations which recently commenced and our planned platform and potential Staking-as-a-Service operations that are still under development, and we have a history of operating losses, and expect to incur significant additional operating losses. We have a limited operating history, and only recently commenced our new blockchain infrastructure operations in 2021. Further, we lack an operating history with respect to our planned additional Digital Asset Platform functions and a potential separate Staking-as-a-Service operations, each of which are still in the development stages and may never be fully developed and commercialized as intended or at all. In addition, the PoS blockchain networks on which our operations are centered are a relatively new and evolving means of validating Digital Asset transactions. Therefore, there is limited historical financial information upon which to base an evaluation of our performance. Our prospects must be considered in light of the uncertainties, risks, expenses, and difficulties frequently encountered by companies in their early stages of operations in general, and in the Digital Assets industry in particular with itself remains a relatively new space imbued with risk and uncertainty. We have generated net losses of $16.0 million and $2.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, respectively. We expect to incur additional net losses over the next several years as we seek to expand operations. The amount of future losses and when, if ever, we will achieve profitability are uncertain. If we are unsuccessful at executing on our business plan, our business, prospects, and results of operations may be materially adversely affected. We have an evolving business model which we may be unable to develop, adapt or execute effectively. As Digital Assets and blockchain technologies become more widely available, we expect the services and products associated with them to evolve. In 2017, the SEC issued a DAO Report that promoters that use initial coin offerings or token sales to raise capital may be engaged in the offer and sale of securities in violation of the Securities Act and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). This may cause us to potentially change our future business in order to comply fully with the federal securities laws as well as applicable state securities laws. As a result, to stay current with the industry, our business model may need to evolve in the future as well. From time to time we may modify aspects of our business model relating to our product mix and service offerings. For example, a main component of our current business objective is developing a comprehensive Digital Asset analytics platform which enables users to perform or utilize a variety of functions related to Digital Assets, such as portfolio monitoring, risk assessment and potentially tax preparation all in one place in the hopes of attracting, maintaining and growing a customer base in the long term. However, our investments into and efforts with respect this goal may not come to fruition, including due to adverse developments in regulatory, technological, competitive or other aspects that are beyond our control. We cannot offer any assurance that our current business plan or any other modifications or undertakings with respect thereto will be successful or will not result in harm to the business. In addition, we may not be able to manage our growth effectively, which could damage our reputation, limit our growth and negatively affect our operating results. If we are unable to effectively develop, execute and adjust our business plan, or successfully manage our growth, you could lose some or all of your investment. The loss of our executive officers could have a material adverse effect on us. Our success depends on the continued services of our executive officers, particularly Charles Allen, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and Michal Handerhan, our Chief Operating Officer, who have extensive market knowledge and long-standing industry relationships. In particular, our reputation among and our relationships with key Digital Asset industry leaders are the direct result of a significant investment of time and effort by these individuals to build our credibility in a highly specialized industry. The loss of services of either Charles Allen or Michal Handerhan, could diminish our business and growth opportunities and our relationships with key leaders in the Digital Asset industry and could have a material adverse effect on us. We may need to implement additional finance and accounting systems, procedures and controls as we grow our business and organization and to satisfy new reporting requirements . We are required to comply with a variety of reporting, accounting and other rules and regulations. Compliance with existing requirements is expensive. We may need to implement additional finance and accounting systems, procedures and controls to satisfy our reporting requirements and such further requirements may increase our costs and require additional management time and resources. For example, many Digital Assets, including those on PoS blockchain networks with which we are or may become involved, demonstrate novel and unique accounting challenges, including due to smart contracts affecting the underlying Digital Assets. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020, our internal control over financial reporting was determined to be ineffective, and while management believes the deficiencies have been remediated as of December 31, 2021, similar deficiencies could arise in the future. Any such deficiencies, should they arise, could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, negatively affect the market price of our Common Stock, subject us to regulatory investigations and penalties, and adversely impact our business and financial condition. 16 Changes in accounting standards and subjective assumptions, estimates and judgments by management related to complex accounting matters could significantly affect our financial results . Generally accepted accounting principles and related accounting pronouncements, implementation guidelines and interpretations with regard to a wide range of matters that are relevant to our business, including but not limited to revenue recognition, estimating valuation allowances and accrued liabilities (including allowances for returns, credit card chargebacks, doubtful accounts and obsolete and damaged inventory), internal use software and website development (acquired and developed internally), accounting for income taxes, valuation of long-lived and intangible assets and goodwill, stock-based compensation and loss contingencies, are highly complex and involve many subjective assumptions, estimates and judgments by our management. Additional complexities can arise with respect to Digital Asset operations. Changes in these rules or their interpretation or changes in underlying assumptions, estimates or judgments by our management could significantly change our reported or expected financial performance. Since there has been limited precedence set for financial accounting of Digital Assets other than Digital Securities, it is unclear how we will be required to account for Digital Asset transactions in the future. Since there has been limited precedence set for the financial accounting of Digital Assets other than Digital Securities, it is unclear how we will be required to account for Digital Asset transactions or assets. Furthermore, a change in regulatory or financial accounting standards could result in the necessity to restate our financial statements as has happened in the past. Such a restatement could negatively impact our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operation. If our estimates or judgment relating to our critical accounting policies prove to be incorrect, our operating results could be adversely affected. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, as provided in the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates” in Part II, Item. 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The results of these estimates form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets, liabilities, and equity, and the amount of revenue and expenses that are not readily apparent from other sources. Significant estimates and judgments involve the identification of performance obligations in revenue recognition, evaluation of tax positions, and the valuation of stock-based awards and Digital Assets we hold, among others. Our operating results may be adversely affected if our assumptions change or if actual circumstances differ from those in our assumptions, which could cause our operating results to fall below the expectations of analysts and investors, resulting in a decline in the trading price of our Common Stock. We are subject to the information and reporting requirements of the Exchange Act), and other federal securities laws, including compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”). The costs of preparing and filing annual and quarterly reports and other information with the SEC and furnishing audited reports to shareholders will cause our expenses to be higher than they would have been if we were privately held. It may be time consuming, difficult and costly for us to develop, implement and maintain the internal controls and reporting procedures required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We may need to hire additional financial reporting, internal controls and other finance personnel in order to develop and implement appropriate internal controls and reporting procedures. 17 Public company compliance may make it more difficult to attract and retain officers and directors. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and rules implemented by the SEC have required changes in corporate governance practices of public companies. As a public company, we expect these rules and regulations to increase our compliance costs and make certain activities more time consuming and costly. The impact of the SEC’s July 25, 2017 report on Digital Securities (the “DAO Report”) as well as enforcement actions and speeches made by the SEC’s Chairman will increase our compliance and legal costs. As a public company, we also expect that these rules and regulations will make it more difficult and expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance in the future and we may be required to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors or as executive officers, and to maintain insurance at reasonable rates, or at all. We may be accused of infringing intellectual property rights of third parties. We may be subject to legal claims of alleged infringement of the intellectual property rights of third parties. We expect this risk to increase as we continue to develop and roll-out additional functions in our Digital Asset Platform and potential StaaS operations in the future. The ready availability of damages, royalties and the potential for injunctive relief has increased the defense litigation costs of patent infringement claims, especially those asserted by third parties whose sole or primary business is to assert such claims. Such claims, even if not meritorious, may result in significant expenditure of financial and managerial resources, and the payment of damages or settlement amounts. Additionally, we may become subject to injunctions prohibiting us from using software or business processes we currently use or may need to use in the future or requiring us to obtain licenses from third parties when such licenses may not be available on financially feasible terms or terms acceptable to us or at all. In addition, we may not be able to obtain on favorable terms, or at all, licenses or other rights with respect to intellectual property we do not own in providing ecommerce services to other businesses and individuals under commercial agreements. 18 Banks and financial institutions may not provide banking services, or may cut off services, to businesses that engage in cryptocurrency-related activities. A number of companies that engage in Digital Asset and/or other cryptocurrency-related activities have been unable to find banks or financial institutions that are willing to provide them with bank accounts and other services. Similarly, a number of companies and individuals or businesses associated with cryptocurrencies may have had and may continue to have their existing bank accounts closed or services discontinued with financial institutions in response to government action, particularly in China, where regulatory response to cryptocurrencies has been to exclude their use for ordinary consumer transactions within China. We also may be unable to obtain or maintain these services for our business. The difficulty that many businesses that provide Bitcoin and/or derivatives on other cryptocurrency-related activities have and may continue to have in finding banks and financial institutions willing to provide them services may be decreasing the usefulness of cryptocurrencies as a payment system and harming public perception of cryptocurrencies, and could decrease their usefulness and harm their public perception in the future. The usefulness of cryptocurrencies as a payment system and the public perception of cryptocurrencies could be damaged if banks or financial institutions were to close the accounts of businesses engaging in Bitcoin and/or other cryptocurrency-related activities. This could occur as a result of compliance risk, cost, government regulation or public pressure. The risk applies to securities firms, clearance and settlement firms, national stock and derivatives on commodities exchanges, the over-the-counter market, and the Depository Trust Company, which, if any of such entities adopts or implements similar policies, rules or regulations, could negatively affect our relationships with financial institutions and impede our ability to convert cryptocurrencies to fiat currencies. Such factors could have a material adverse effect on our ability to continue as a going concern or to pursue our strategy at all, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects or operations and harm investors. Because of the uncertainty arising from the recent strain of the COVID-19 virus, we may sustain a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and future prospects depending upon a variety of factors. The global COVID-19 pandemic and the unprecedented actions taken by U.S. federal, state and local governments and governments around the world in order to stop the spread of the virus had a profound impact on the U.S. and global economy, disrupting global supply chains and creating significant volatility in the oil and gas markets. Although according to the information of the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, the U.S. economy recovered to pre-pandemic levels in the second quarter of 2021 as vaccine rollout and federal aid fueled a surge in consumer spending, there is no guarantee that this growth will be sustained or will not be reversed as the result of the emergence of new variants of the virus, which could be significantly more contagious and cause more severe symptoms, including the Omicron variant. The spread of the Omicron variant and the surge in infections has in the past and may in the future create adverse effects upon our economy and our business. For example, the pandemic, including the recent Omicron variant, has delayed our development efforts with respect to out Digital Asset Platform. It is difficult to project how the pandemic will affect us in the future and whether it will have adverse effects upon the economy or the Company. Because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the effect on the capital markets and the economy is uncertain, we may have to deal with a recessionary economy and economic uncertainty including possible adverse affects upon the Digital Asset market and our Common Stock. As a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, certain events are beginning to affect the global and U.S. economy including increased inflation, substantial increases in the prices of oil and gas, large Western companies ceasing to do business in Russia and uncertain capital markets with declines in leading market indexes. The duration of this war and its impact are at best uncertain and continuation may result in Internet access issues if Russia, for example, began illicit cyber activities. Ultimately the economy may turn into a recession with uncertain and potentially severe impacts upon our industry. We cannot predict how this will affect our business, our Common Stock price or the market for Digital Assets but the impact may be adverse. Risks Related to Digital Assets A particular Digital Asset’s status as a “security” in any relevant jurisdiction is subject to a high degree of uncertainty and if we are unable to properly characterize a Digital Asset, we may be subject to regulatory scrutiny, investigations, fines, and other penalties, which may adversely affect our business, operating results, and financial condition. The SEC and its staff have taken the position that certain Digital Assets fall within the definition of a “security” under the U.S. federal securities laws. The legal test for determining whether any given Digital Asset is a security is a highly complex, fact-driven analysis that evolves over time, and the outcome is difficult to predict. The SEC generally does not provide advance guidance or confirmation on the status of any particular Digital Asset as a security. Furthermore, the SEC’s views in this area have evolved over time and it is difficult to predict the direction or timing of any continuing evolution. It is also possible that a change in the governing administration or the appointment of new SEC commissioners could substantially impact the views of the SEC and its staff. Public statements by senior officials at the SEC indicate that the SEC does not intend to take the position that Bitcoin or Ethereum are securities (in their current form). Bitcoin and Ethereum are the only Digital Assets as to which senior officials at the SEC have publicly expressed such a view. Moreover, such statements are not official policy statements by the SEC and reflect only the speakers’ views, which are not binding on the SEC or any other agency or court and cannot be generalized to any other Digital Asset. With respect to all other Digital Assets, there is currently no certainty under the applicable legal test that such assets are not securities, notwithstanding the conclusions we may draw based on our risk-based assessment regarding the likelihood that a particular Digital Asset could be deemed a “security” under applicable laws. Similarly, though the SEC’s Strategic Hub for Innovation and Financial Technology published a framework for analyzing whether any given Digital Asset is a security in April 2019, this framework is also not a rule, regulation or statement of the SEC and is not binding on the SEC. 19 Several foreign jurisdictions have taken a broad-based approach to classifying Digital Assets as “securities,” while other foreign jurisdictions, such as Switzerland, Malta, and Singapore, have adopted a narrower approach. As a result, certain Digital Assets may be deemed to be a “security” under the laws of some jurisdictions but not others. Various foreign jurisdictions may, in the future, adopt additional laws, regulations, or directives that affect the characterization of Digital Assets as “securities,” The classification of a Digital Asset as a security under applicable law has wide-ranging implications for the regulatory obligations that flow from the offer, sale, trading, and clearing of such assets. For example, a Digital Asset that is a security in the U.S. may generally only be offered or sold in the U.S. pursuant to a registration statement filed with the SEC or in an offering that qualifies for an exemption from registration. Persons that effect transactions in Digital Assets that are securities in the U.S. may be subject to registration with the SEC as a “broker” or “dealer.” Platforms that bring together purchasers and sellers to trade Digital Assets that are securities in the U.S. are generally subject to registration as national securities exchanges, or must qualify for an exemption, such as by being operated by a registered broker-dealer as an alternative trading system, or ATS, in compliance with rules for ATSs. Persons facilitating clearing and settlement of securities may be subject to registration with the SEC as a clearing agency. Foreign jurisdictions may have similar licensing, registration, and qualification requirements. While we do not currently, nor do we plan to, offer, sell, trade, and clear Digital Assets or take custody of others Digital Assets as part of any potential Staking-as-a-Service operations we may undertake, however, Digital Assets we stake and validate transactions for could be deemed to be a “security” under applicable laws. Our blockchain infrastructure operations which entails securing blockchains by processing and validating blockchain transactions (most analogous to Bitcoin mining or operating a Bitcoin mining pool) could be construed as facilitating transactions in Digital Assets; as such we could be subject to legal or regulatory action in the event the SEC, a foreign regulatory authority, or a court were to determine that a blockchain we secure is a “security” under applicable laws. Because our platform is not registered or licensed with the SEC or foreign authorities as a broker-dealer, national securities exchange, or ATS (or foreign equivalents), and we do not seek to register or rely on an exemption from such registration or license to secure blockchains. We are currently seeking legal guidance on the implications of running public validator nodes for delegated proof-of-stake blockchains. Pending that determination, we have disabled the blockchain networks we secure from making payouts to those who delegate to our validator nodes and do not plan to enable such payments unless and until we have received satisfactory legal guidance. We believe that this plan reflects a comprehensive and thorough process to facilitate the application of legal guidance once available to Digital Assets to make an informed risk-based business judgment. However, we recognize that the application of securities laws to the specific facts and circumstances of Digital Assets is a complex and often unpredictable process and subject to change, and staking and securing a blockchain, while similar to Bitcoin mining, does not guarantee any conclusion under the U.S. federal securities laws, particularly given that each Digital Asset and blockchain network is unique. Therefore, if we do conclude that a particular Digital Asset is not a security on advice of our legal counsel, and the SEC or other government agencies or courts disagree with this assessment, we could be held liable for violation of securities laws. In addition, new laws may be implemented that prevent or hinder us from operating in the manner we currently conduct our business or plan to conduct our business, in which case our business may be materially harmed. Further, if any Digital Asset is deemed to be a security under any U.S. federal, state, or foreign jurisdiction, or in a proceeding in a court of law or otherwise, it may have adverse consequences for such Digital Asset. For instance, the networks on which such Digital Assets are utilized may be required to be regulated as securities intermediaries, and subject to applicable rules, which could effectively render the network impracticable for its existing purposes. Further, it could draw negative publicity and a decline in the general acceptance of the Digital Asset. Also, such a development may make it difficult for such supported Digital Asset to be traded, cleared, and custodied as compared to other Digital Asset that are not considered to be securities. 20 Because Digital Assets may be determined to be Digital Securities, we may inadvertently violate the 1940 Act and incur large losses as a result and potentially be required to register as an investment company. This would have a material adverse effect on an investment in us. We plan to acquire a portfolio of Digital Assets including Bitcoin, Ethereum and other Digital Assets. There is an increased regulatory examination of Digital Assets and Digital Securities. This has led to regulatory and enforcement activities. As of the date of this filing, we are not aware of any rules that have been proposed to regulate the Digital Assets we hold as securities. We cannot be certain as to how future regulatory developments will impact the treatment of Bitcoins, Ethereum and other Digital Assets under the law. Under the 1940 Act, a company may be deemed an investment company under if the value of its investment securities is more than 40% of its total assets (exclusive of government securities and cash items) on a consolidated basis. Digital Assets we may own in the future may be determined to be Digital Securities by the SEC or a court. Additionally, one or more states may conclude Bitcoin, Ethereum, or other Digital Assets held by us in the future are securities under state securities laws which would require registration under state laws including merit review laws. For example, California defines the term “investment contract” more strictly than the SEC. Future legislation and SEC rulemaking and other regulatory developments, including interpretations released by a regulatory authority, may impact the manner in which Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other Digital Assets are treated for classification and clearing purposes. The SEC’s July 25, 2017 DAO Report expressed its view that Digital Assets may be securities depending on the facts and circumstances. If a Digital Asset we hold were later determined to be a Digital Security, we could inadvertently become an investment company, as defined by the 1940 Act, if the value of the Digital Securities we owned exceeded 40% of our assets excluding cash. We are subject to the following risks: ● Contrary to legal advice, the SEC or a court may conclude that Bitcoin, Ethereum, or other Digital Assets we later acquire to be securities; ● based on legal advice, we may acquire other Digital Assets which we have been advised are not securities but later are held to be securities; and ● we may knowingly acquire Digital Assets that are securities and acquire minority investments in businesses which investments are securities. 21 In the event that the Digital Assets held by us exceed 40% of our total assets, exclusive of cash, we may inadvertently become an investment company. In order to limit our acquisition of Digital Securities to stay within the 40% threshold, we will examine the manner in which a Digital Assets was initially marketed to determine if it may be deemed a Digital Security and subject to federal and state securities laws. Even if we conclude that a particular Digital Asset is not a security under the 1940 Act, certain states take a stricter view which means the Digital Asset may have violated applicable state securities laws. Should the total value of securities which we hold rise to more than 40% of our assets (exclusive of cash) SEC Rule 3a-2 under the 1940 Act allows an issuer to prevent itself from being deemed an investment company if it reduces its holdings of securities to less than 40% of its assets (exclusive of cash) and does not go above the 40% threshold more than once every three years. Accordingly, if changes in the classification of Digital Assets causes us to exceed the 40% threshold, we may experience large losses when we liquidate digital securities as a result of continued volatility. The 40% requirement may limit our ability to make certain investments or enter into joint ventures that could otherwise have a positive impact on our earnings. In any event, we do not intend to become an investment company engaged in the business of investing and trading securities. To the extent that Digital Assets held by us are deemed by the SEC or a state legislator to fall within the definition of a security, we may be required to register and comply with additional regulation under the Investment Company Act, including additional periodic reporting and disclosure standards and requirements and the registration of our Company as an investment company. Such additional registrations: i) would result in extraordinary, non-recurring expenses, ii) is time consuming and restrictive, iii) would require a restructuring of our operations, and iv) we would be very constrained in the kind of business we could do as a registered investment company, thereby materially and adversely impacting an investment in us. Further, if our examination of a Digital Asset is incorrect, we may incur regulatory penalties and private investor liabilities since Section 5 of the Securities Act is a strict liability statute much like selling spoiled milk and state securities laws generally impose liability for negligence for misrepresentations. In order to comply with the 1940 Act, we anticipate having increased management time and legal expenses in order to analyze which Digital Assets are securities and periodically analyze our total holdings to ensure that we do not maintain more than 40% of our total assets (exclusive of cash) as securities. If our view that the Digital Assets we hold are not securities is challenged by the SEC and courts uphold the challenge, we may inadvertently violate the 1940 Act and incur substantial legal fees in defending our position. The cost of such compliance would result in the Company incurring substantial additional expenses, and the failure to register if required would have a materially adverse impact to conduct our operations. The further development and acceptance of cryptographic and algorithmic protocols governing the issuance of and transactions in cryptocurrencies, which represent a rapidly changing industry, are subject to a variety of factors that are difficult to evaluate. The use of Digital Assets to, among other things, buy and sell goods and services and complete transactions, is part of a new and rapidly evolving industry that employs cryptocurrency assets based upon a computer-generated mathematical and/or cryptographic protocol. Large-scale acceptance of cryptocurrencies as a means of payment has not, and may never, occur. The growth of the Digital Assets industry in general, and the use of Digital Assets in particular, is subject to a high degree of uncertainty. The factors affecting the further development of the Digital Assets industry, include but are not limited to: ● continued worldwide growth in the adoption and use of Digital Assets as a medium of exchange; ● government and quasi-government regulation of Digital Assets and their use, or restrictions on or regulation of access to and operation of the Digital Assets systems; ● the maintenance and development of the open-source software protocol of Digital Asset Networks; ● changes in consumer demographics and public tastes and preferences; ● the availability and popularity of other forms or methods of buying and selling goods and services, including new means of using fiat currencies and digital forms of fiat currencies; ● general economic conditions and the regulatory environment relating to Digital Assets; and ● the impact of regulators focusing on Digital Assets and Digital Securities and the costs associated with such regulatory oversight. 22 A decline in the popularity or acceptance of the Bitcoin Network could adversely affect an investment in us. The outcome of these factors could have negative effects on our ability to continue as a going concern or to pursue our business strategy at all, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects or operations as well as potentially negative effect on the value of any Bitcoin, Ethereum or other Digital Assets we hold or acquire, which would harm investors in our securities. Currently, there is relatively small use of Bitcoins in the retail and commercial marketplace in comparison to relatively large use by speculators, thus contributing to price volatility that could adversely affect an investment in us. As relatively new products and technologies, Bitcoins and the Bitcoin Network have only recently become widely accepted as a means of payment for goods and services by many major retail and commercial outlets, and use of Bitcoins by consumers to pay such retail and commercial outlets remains limited. Conversely, a significant portion of Bitcoin demand is generated by speculators and investors seeking to profit from the short- or long-term holding of Bitcoins. A lack of expansion by Bitcoins into retail and commercial markets, or a contraction of such use, may result in increased volatility or a reduction in the price of Bitcoin, either of which could adversely impact an investment in us. If a malicious actor or botnet obtains control in excess of 50% of the processing power active on a Digital Asset Network, it is possible that such actor or botnet could manipulate a blockchain in a manner that adversely affects an investment in us. If a malicious actor or botnet (a volunteer or hacked collection of computers controlled by networked software coordinating the actions of the computers) obtains a majority of the processing power dedicated to mining a cryptocurrency, it may be able to alter blockchains on which transactions of cryptocurrency reside and rely by constructing fraudulent blocks or preventing certain transactions from completing in a timely manner, or at all. The malicious actor or botnet could control, exclude or modify the ordering of transactions, though it could not generate new units or transactions using such control. The malicious actor could “double-spend” its own cryptocurrency (i.e., spend the same Bitcoin in more than one transaction) and prevent the confirmation of other users’ transactions for as long as it maintained control. To the extent that such malicious actor or botnet does not yield its control of the processing power on the network, or the cryptocurrency community does not reject the fraudulent blocks as malicious, reversing any changes made to blockchains may not be possible. The foregoing description is not the only means by which the entirety of blockchains or cryptocurrencies may be compromised but is only an example. Although there are no known reports of malicious activity or control of blockchains achieved through controlling over 50% of the processing power on the network, it is believed that certain mining pools may have exceeded the 50% threshold in Bitcoin. The possible crossing of the 50% threshold indicates a greater risk that a single mining pool could exert authority over the validation of Bitcoin transactions. To the extent that the Bitcoin ecosystem, and the administrators of mining pools, do not act to ensure greater decentralization of Bitcoin mining processing power, the feasibility of a malicious actor obtaining control of the processing power will increase because the botnet or malicious actor could compromise more than 50% mining pool and thereby gain control of blockchain, whereas if the blockchain remains decentralized it is inherently more difficult for the botnet of malicious actor to aggregate enough processing power to gain control of the blockchain, may adversely affect an investment in our Common Stock. Such lack of controls and responses to such circumstances could have a material adverse effect on our ability to continue as a going concern or to pursue our new strategy at all, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects or operations and potentially the value of any Bitcoin, Ethereum or other Digital Assets we acquire or hold, and harm investors. Bitcoin has forked at least three times and additional forks may occur in the future which may affect the value of Bitcoin held by the Company. Since August 1, 2017, Bitcoin’s blockchain was forked at least three times, each time creating new cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold and Bitcoin SV. The forks resulted in a new blockchain being created with a shared history, and a new path forward. The value of the newly created Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold and Bitcoin SV may or may not have value in the long run and may affect the price of Bitcoin if interest is shifted away from Bitcoin to the newly created Digital Assets. The value of Bitcoin after the creation of a fork is subject to many factors including the value of the fork product, market reaction to the creation of the fork product, and the occurrence of forks in the future. As such, the value of Bitcoin could be materially reduced if existing and future forks have a negative effect on Bitcoin’s value. 23 The decentralized nature of Digital Asset systems may lead to slow or inadequate responses to crises, which may negatively affect our business . The decentralized nature of the governance of Digital Asset systems may lead to ineffective decision making that slows development or prevents a network from overcoming emergent obstacles. Governance of many Digital Asset systems is by voluntary consensus and open competition with no clear leadership structure or authority. To the extent lack of clarity in corporate governance of cryptocurrency systems leads to ineffective decision making that slows development and growth of such Digital Assets, the value of our Common Stock may be adversely affected. Digital Asset Exchanges are relatively new and therefore may be more exposed to fraud and failure than established, regulated exchanges for other products. To the extent that large Digital Asset Exchanges representing a substantial portion of the Digital Asset volume are involved in fraud or experience security failures or other operational issues, such Exchanges’ failures may result in a reduction in the price of Digital Assets and adversely affect an investment in us. A number of Digital Asset Exchanges have been closed due to fraud, failure or security breaches. In many of these instances, the customers of such Exchanges were not compensated or made whole for the partial or complete losses of their account balances in such Exchanges. While smaller Exchanges are less likely to have the infrastructure and capitalization that make larger Exchanges more stable, larger Exchanges are more likely to be appealing targets for hackers and “malware” (i.e., software used or programmed by attackers to disrupt computer operation, gather sensitive information or gain access to private computer systems). A lack of stability in an Exchange Market and the closure or temporary shutdown of larger Digital Asset Exchanges due to fraud, business failure, hackers or malware, or government-mandated regulation may reduce confidence in Digital Assets overall and result in greater volatility in Digital Asset values. These potential consequences of an Exchange’s failure could adversely affect an investment in us. There is a lack of liquid markets, and possible manipulation of blockchain/cryptocurrency-based Digital Assets. Digital Assets that are represented and trade on a ledger-based platform may not necessarily benefit from viable trading markets. Stock exchanges have listing requirements and vet issuers; requiring them to be subjected to rigorous listing standards and rules, and monitor investors transacting on such platform for fraud and other improprieties. These conditions may not necessarily be replicated on a distributed ledger platform, depending on the platform’s controls and other policies. The laxer a distributed ledger platform is about vetting issuers of cryptocurrency assets or users that transact on the platform, the higher the potential risk for fraud or the manipulation of the ledger due to a control event. These factors may decrease liquidity or volume or may otherwise increase volatility or other assets trading on a ledger-based system, which may adversely affect us. Such circumstances could adversely affect an investment in us. Political or economic crises may motivate large-scale sales of Digital Assets, which could result in a reduction in Digital Asset values and adversely affect an investment in us. Geopolitical or economic crises may motivate large-scale sales of Digital Assets, which could rapidly decrease the price of Digital Assets. For example, market analysts have indicated that in some cases, such as during large scale adverse economic events, trading and market prices of cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum have correlated to some extent with the movement of equity markets, regardless of the stock or asset class. For example, in March 2020, as global shutdowns ramped up in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the price of Bitcoin plummeted together with stock prices globally. This trend is contrary to a commonly held conception that buying and holding cryptocurrencies can be used as a “hedge” to investing in the more conventional equity markets, and may eventually result in diminished popularity of cryptocurrencies or Digital Assets in general by the public. Alternatively, as an emerging asset class with limited acceptance as a payment system or commodity, global crises and general economic downturn may discourage investment in Digital Assets as investors focus their investment on less volatile asset classes as a means of hedging their investment risk. As an alternative to fiat currencies that are backed by central governments, Digital Assets such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, which are relatively new, are subject to supply and demand forces based upon the desirability of an alternative, decentralized means of buying and selling goods and services, and it is unclear how such supply and demand will be impacted by geopolitical events. Nevertheless, political or economic crises may motivate large-scale acquisitions or sales of Digital Assets either globally or locally. Large-scale sales of Digital Assets would result in a reduction in Digital Asset values and could adversely affect an investment in us. The price of Digital Assets may be affected by the sale of such Digital Assets by other vehicles investing in Digital Assets or tracking cryptocurrency markets. The global market for Digital Assets is characterized by supply constraints that differ from those present in the markets for commodities or other assets such as gold and silver. The mathematical protocols under which certain cryptocurrencies are mined permit the creation of a limited, predetermined amount of currency, while others have no limit established on total supply. To the extent that other vehicles investing in Digital Assets or tracking Digital Asset markets form and come to represent a significant proportion of the demand for Digital Assets, large redemptions of the securities of those vehicles and the subsequent sale of Digital Assets by such vehicles could negatively affect Digital Asset prices and therefore affect the value of our Digital Assets. Such events could have a material adversely affect an investment in us. 24 Regulatory changes or actions may alter the nature of an investment in us or restrict the use of Digital Assets in a manner that adversely affects our business, prospects or operations. As Digital Assets have grown in both popularity and market size, governments around the world have reacted differently to Digital Assets; certain governments have deemed them illegal, and others have allowed their use and trade without restriction, while in some jurisdictions, such as in the U.S., subject to extensive, and in some cases overlapping, unclear and evolving regulatory requirements. In addition, lawmakers and regulators continue to focus in on the evolving world of Digital Assets, with a view towards designing and implementing an appropriate regulatory framework. For example, in November 2021, President Biden’s Working Group on Financial Markets, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, issued a joint report that recommended legislation that would subject issuers and wallet providers for stablecoins, described as Digital Assets that are designed to maintain a stable value relative to a national currency or other reference asset, to increased federal oversight. There are substantial uncertainties on how these or other requirements that may arise would apply in practice, and we may face substantial compliance costs to adjust our current or future operations and product offerings to react to and comply with any laws and regulations which may result. Ongoing and future regulatory actions may impact our ability to continue to operate, and such actions could affect our ability to continue as a going concern or to pursue our new strategy at all, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects or operations. Current interpretations require the regulation of Bitcoins and other Digital Assets under the CEA by the CFTC, we may be required to register and comply with such regulations. To the extent that we decide to continue operations, the required registrations and regulatory compliance steps may result in extraordinary, non-recurring expenses to us. We may also decide to cease certain operations. Any disruption of our operations in response to the changed regulatory circumstances may be at a time that is disadvantageous to investors. Current and future legislation, CFTC and other regulatory developments, including interpretations released by a regulatory authority, may impact the manner in which Bitcoins and other Digital Assets are treated for classification and clearing purposes. In particular, derivatives on these assets are not excluded from the definition of “commodity future” by the CFTC. We cannot be certain as to how future regulatory developments will impact the treatment of Bitcoins and other Digital Assets under the law. Bitcoins have been deemed to fall within the definition of a commodity and, we may be required to register and comply with additional regulation under the CEA, including additional periodic report and disclosure standards and requirements. Moreover, we may be required to register as a commodity pool operator and to register us as a commodity pool with the CFTC through the National Futures Association. Such additional registrations may result in extraordinary, non-recurring expenses, thereby materially and adversely impacting an investment in us. If we determine not to comply with such additional regulatory and registration requirements, we may seek to cease certain of our operations. Any such action may adversely affect an investment in us. Our interactions with a blockchain may expose us to SDN or blocked persons or cause us to violate provisions of law that did not contemplate distribute ledger technology. The Office of Financial Assets Control of the U.S. Department of Treasury requires us to comply with its sanction program and not conduct business with persons named on its specially designated nationals (“SDN”) list. However, because of the pseudonymous nature of blockchain transactions we may inadvertently and without our knowledge engage in transactions with persons named on OFAC’s SDN list. Our Company’s policy prohibits any transactions with such SDN individuals, but we may not be adequately capable of determining the ultimate identity of the individual with whom we transact with respect to selling cryptocurrency assets. Moreover, federal law prohibits any U.S. person from knowingly or unknowingly possessing any visual depiction commonly known as child pornography. Recent media reports have suggested that persons have imbedded such depictions on one or more blockchains. Additionally, the U.S Department of Treasury recently has added sanctions that prevent U.S. persons from using cryptocurrencies to circumnavigate financial sanctions placed on Russia. Because our business requires us to download and retain one or more blockchains to effectuate our ongoing business, it is possible that such digital ledgers contain prohibited depictions without our knowledge or consent. To the extent government enforcement authorities literally enforce these and other laws and regulations that are impacted by decentralized distributed ledger technology, we may be subject to investigation, administrative or court proceedings, and civil or criminal monetary fines and penalties, all of which could harm our reputation and affect the value of our Common Stock. If federal or state legislatures or agencies initiate or release tax determinations that change the classification of Bitcoins, Ethereum or other Digital Assets as property for tax purposes (in the context of when such Digital Assets are held as an investment), such determination could have a negative tax consequence on our Company or our shareholders. Current IRS guidance indicates that Digital Assets such as Bitcoins should be treated and taxed as property, and that transactions involving the payment of Bitcoins for goods and services should be treated as barter transactions. While this treatment creates a potential tax reporting requirement for any circumstance where the ownership of a Bitcoin passes from one person to another, usually by means of Bitcoin transactions (including off-blockchain transactions), it preserves the right to apply capital gains treatment to those transactions which may have adversely affect an investment in our Company. 25 On December 5, 2014, the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance issued guidance regarding the application of state tax law to Digital Assets such as Bitcoins. The agency determined that New York State would follow IRS guidance with respect to the treatment of Digital Assets such as Bitcoins for state income tax purposes. Furthermore, they defined Digital Assets such as Bitcoin to be a form of “intangible property,” meaning the purchase and sale of Bitcoins for fiat currency is not subject to state income tax (although transactions of Bitcoin for other goods and services maybe subject to sales tax under barter transaction treatment). It is unclear if other states will follow the guidance of the IRS and the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance with respect to the treatment of Digital Assets such as Bitcoins for income tax and sales tax purposes. If a state adopts a different treatment, such treatment may have negative consequences including the imposition of greater a greater tax burden on investors in Bitcoin or imposing a greater cost on the acquisition and disposition of Bitcoins, generally; in either case potentially having a negative effect on prices in the Bitcoin Exchange Market and may adversely affect an investment in our Company. Foreign jurisdictions may also elect to treat Digital Assets such as Bitcoins differently for tax purposes than the IRS or the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance. To the extent that a foreign jurisdiction with a significant share of the market of Bitcoin users imposes onerous tax burdens on Bitcoin users, or imposes sales or value added tax on purchases and sales of Bitcoins for fiat currency, such actions could result in decreased demand for Bitcoins in such jurisdiction, which could impact the price of Bitcoins and negatively impact an investment in our Company. We may suffer losses due to staking, delegating, and other related services. Digital Assets which utilize PoS consensus mechanisms enable holders to earn rewards by operating nodes and participating in decentralized governance, bookkeeping and transaction confirmation activities on their underlying blockchain networks. We stake certain of our Digital Assets and operate nodes on blockchain networks through our transaction verification services business segment. Most PoS networks require Digital Assets to be transferred into smart contracts on the underlying blockchain networks not under our or anyone’s control. If our validators, any third-party service providers, or smart contracts fail to behave as expected, suffer cybersecurity attacks, experience security issues, or encounter other problems, our Digital Assets may be irretrievably lost. In addition, most PoS blockchain networks dictate requirements for participation in the relevant decentralized governance activity, and may impose penalties, or “slashing,” if the relevant activities are not performed correctly, such as if the node operator acts maliciously on the network, “double signs” any transactions, or experience extended downtimes. Slashing penalties can apply due to prolonged inactivity on the blockchain network and inadvertent errors such as computing or hardware issues, as well as more serious behavior such as intentional malfeasance. If we are slashed by the underlying blockchain network, our Digital Assets may be confiscated, withdrawn, or burnt by the network, resulting in permanent losses. Any penalties or slashing events could damage our brand and reputation, cause us to suffer financial losses, and adversely impact our business. Our blockchain infrastructure operations, including Company owned and run validator nodes on PoS blockchains, are subject to concentration risk as they are consolidated on Amazon Web Services The development and operation of the Company’s validator nodes for staking, as well as the development of the Digital Asset Platform, is hosted on cloud computing by Amazon Web Services (“AWS”). The consolidation of our proprietary technology on AWS subjects the Company to cyber security and other risks that face AWS. We have limited control over AWS, the services it provides us and the safety and security measures related thereto. If AWS fails to maintain the continuous functionality or security of its networks and related hardware on which we rely for our operations, we may be unable to meet our continued obligations or generate revenue we otherwise would, and could suffer substantial losses. For example, some PoS networks implement the slashing penalties described above, wherein the Digital Assets that were staked to allow us to participate in the validation process are taken away from us, if a validator node on which the Digital Asset is staked is offline for a certain amount of time. Additionally, if our or our users’ Digital Assets become subject to unauthorized access or theft due to a cybersecurity breach or any security weaknesses experienced or existing in AWS’s systems, we could experience significant losses, both directly and/or from resulting claims against us by the customer, as well as reputational harm and lost customer relationships. If any of the foregoing or other adverse developments occur as a result of our reliance on a single service provider for our PoS validating operations, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. 26 Digital Assets staked on Proof of Stake blockchains are locked in smart contracts and may not be accessible and liquid. Digital Assets which utilize PoS consensus mechanisms are locked in smart contracts while staked which limits liquidity of the underlying Digital Asset. This is because under PoS network protocols, in order to participate in the staking process validators such as us are required to enter into smart contracts which, among other things, require the validator to continue to keep a specified number of the Digital Assets owned by the validator “locked-up” in the network for a specified period of time before they can again be sold or transferred by such validator. This lock-up period often extends beyond the time at which the transaction is validated. We currently stake certain of our Digital Assets and operate nodes on blockchain networks through our blockchain infrastructure services business. During times of high volatility or downturns, which are common among Digital Assets for many reasons including those described elsewhere in these Risk Factors, we may be unable to liquidate certain Digital Assets to the extent desired. Further Ethereum staked on Ethereum’s Beacon Chain is locked in a smart contract until Ethereum transitions to its PoS beacon chain and a market exists. We currently carry our staked Ethereum as a non-current long-term asset on our balance sheet. Staked Digital Assets which can be unlocked from a smart contract in less than one year are carried as current assets on our balance sheet. As such we may experience large losses when and if we are able to liquidate our Digital Assets as a result of continued volatility, further if we are unable to liquidate our Digital Assets or Ethereum does not transition to its PoS beacon chain we could suffer material financial losses, which would adversely impact our business. Our obligations to comply with the laws, rules, regulations, and policies of a variety of jurisdictions is uncertain and untested, and we are subject to uncertainty with respect to our potential non-custodial Staking-as-a-Service business and we may be subject to investigations and enforcement actions by U.S. and non-U.S. regulators and governmental authorities. Laws regulating financial services, the internet, mobile technologies, digital, and related technologies inside and outside of the U.S. may impose obligations on us, as well as broader liability. For example, we are required to comply with laws and regulations related to sanctions and export controls enforced by U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, or OFAC, and U.S. anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing laws and regulations, enforced by FinCEN and certain state financial services regulators. U.S. sanctions laws and regulations generally restrict dealings by persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction with certain governments, countries, or territories that are the target of comprehensive sanctions, currently the Crimea Region of Ukraine, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria, and Venezuela as well as with persons identified on certain prohibited lists. In May 2019, FinCEN issued guidance on the application of FinCEN regulations to certain business models. While the guidance directly addressed Bitcoin mining, it did not address securing PoS blockchains which while similar to Bitcoin mining have technical nuanced differences which could alter the analysis. As such, there can be no guarantee that securing (mining) on PoS blockchain networks will be viewed as compliant, notwithstanding the May 2019 FinCEN guidance. In particular, the nature of blockchains make it technically impossible in all circumstances to prevent or identify transactions with particular persons or addresses. If our current or planned activities are found to constitute “facilitating” or assisting the actions of non-U.S. persons that would be prohibited for U.S. persons to perform directly due to U.S. sanctions, even though we do not take custody of the Digital Assets nor pay delegators to our pools, that could result in material negative consequences for us, including costs related to government investigations, harsh financial penalties, and harm to our reputation. The impact on us related to these matters could be substantial. We are seeking legal guidance on what, if any, controls and procedures need to be put in place and whether our activities could constitute facilitation of any illicit activities under the current regulatory framework. Regulators worldwide frequently study each other’s approaches to the regulation of the digital economy. Consequently, developments in any jurisdiction may influence other jurisdictions. New developments in one jurisdiction may be extended to additional services and other jurisdictions. In addition, digital economies themselves are subject to rapid and unpredictable change that regulators could decide warrants updates or additions to existing regulatory regimes. As a result, the risks created by any new law or regulation in one jurisdiction are magnified by the potential that they may be replicated, affecting our business in another place. Conversely, if regulations diverge worldwide, we may face difficulty adjusting aspects of our business. The complexity of U.S. federal and state and international regulatory and enforcement regimes, coupled with the evolving global regulatory environment, could result in a single event prompting a large number of overlapping investigations and legal and regulatory proceedings by multiple government authorities in different jurisdictions. Any of the foregoing could, individually or in the aggregate, harm our reputation, damage our brands and business, and adversely affect our operating results and financial condition. Due to the uncertain application of existing laws and regulations, it may be that, despite our planned regulatory and legal analysis that certain products and services are currently unregulated, such products or services may indeed be subject to financial regulation, licensing, or authorization obligations that we have not obtained or with which we have not complied. As a result, we are at a heightened risk of enforcement action, litigation, regulatory, and legal scrutiny which could lead to sanctions, cease, and desist orders, or other penalties and censures which could significantly and adversely affect our continued operations and financial condition. 27 Security Risks Related to Our Digital Assets Holdings Our Digital Assets may be subject to loss, damage, theft or restriction on access. There is a risk that part or all of our Digital Assets could be lost, stolen, destroyed or become inaccessible. We believe that our Digital Assets will be an appealing target to hackers or malware distributors seeking to destroy, damage or steal our Digital Assets. To minimize the risk of loss, damage and theft, security breaches, and unauthorized access we hold our Digital Assets at exchanges and have also relied on Bitgo Inc.’s (“Bitgo”) enterprise multi-signature storage solution. Nevertheless, the exchanges we utilize or Bitgo’s security systems may not be impenetrable and may not be free from defect or immune to acts of God, and any loss due to a security breach, software defect or act of God will be borne by us. Any of these events may adversely affect our operations and, consequently, an investment in us. To the extent that any of our Digital Assets are held by Exchanges, we may face heightened risks from cybersecurity attacks and financial stability of the Exchanges. All Digital Assets not held in a Company’s controlled wallet such as Bitgo’s storage solutions will be held at Exchanges and subject to the risks encountered by those Exchange including DDoS Attacks, other malicious hacking, a sale of the exchange, loss of the Digital Assets by the exchange, security breaches, and unauthorized access of our account by hackers. The Company may not maintain a custodian agreement with the Exchanges that it holds its Digital Assets at. Exchanges do not provide insurance and may lack the resources to protect against hacking and theft. We may be materially and adversely affected if the Exchanges suffer cyberattacks or incur financial problems. The loss or destruction of a private key required to access a Digital Assets may be irreversible. Our loss of access to our private keys could adversely affect an investment in our Company. Digital Assets such as Bitcoin are controllable only by the possessor of both the unique public key and private key relating to the local or online digital wallet in which the Digital Assets are held. We are required by the operation of the Digital Asset Network to publish the public key relating to a digital wallet in use by us when it first verifies a spending transaction from that digital wallet and disseminates such information into the Network. We safeguard and keep private the private keys relating to our Digital Assets not held at exchanges by utilizing Bitgo’s multi-signature storage solution; to the extent a private key is lost, destroyed or otherwise compromised and no backup of the private key is accessible, we will be unable to access the Digital Assets held by it and the private key will not be capable of being restored by the Network. Any loss of private keys relating to digital wallets used to store our Digital Assets could adversely affect an investment in us. Security threats to us could result in, a loss of Company’s Digital Assets. Security breaches, computer malware and computer hacking attacks have been a prevalent concern in the Bitcoin Exchange Market since the launch of the Bitcoin Network. Any security breach caused by hacking, which involves efforts to gain unauthorized access to information or systems, or to cause intentional malfunctions or loss or corruption of data, software, hardware or other computer equipment, and the inadvertent transmission of computer viruses, could harm our business operations or result in loss of our Bitcoins and other Digital Assets. Any breach of our infrastructure could result in damage to our reputation which could adversely affect an investment in us. Furthermore, we believe that, as our assets continues to grow, it may become a more appealing target for security threats such as hackers and malware. 28 The security system and operational infrastructure may be breached due to the actions of outside parties, error or malfeasance of an employee of ours, or otherwise, and, as a result, an unauthorized party may obtain access to our, private keys, data or Bitcoins. Additionally, outside parties may attempt to fraudulently induce employees of ours to disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to our 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, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. If an actual or perceived breach of our security system occurs, the market perception of the effectiveness of our security system could be harmed, which could adversely affect an investment in us. In the event of a security breach, we may be forced to cease operations, or suffer a reduction in assets, the occurrence of each of which could adversely affect an investment in us. Incorrect or fraudulent Digital Asset transactions may be irreversible. Digital Asset transactions are not, from an administrative perspective, reversible without the consent and active participation of the recipient of the transaction. Once a transaction has been verified and recorded in a block that is added to a blockchain, an incorrect transfer of Digital Assets or a theft of Digital 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, our Digital Assets could be transferred from us in incorrect amounts or to unauthorized third parties. To the extent that we are unable to seek a corrective transaction with such third party or are incapable of identifying the third party which has received our Digital Assets through error or theft, we will be unable to revert or otherwise recover incorrectly transferred Digital Assets. To the extent that we are unable to seek redress for such error or theft, such loss could adversely affect an investment in us. The limited rights of legal recourse against us, and our lack of insurance protection expose us and our shareholders to the risk of loss of our Digital Assets for which no person is liable. The Digital Assets held by us are not insured. Therefore, a loss may be suffered with respect to our Digital Assets which is not covered by insurance and for which no person is liable in damages which could adversely affect our operations and, consequently, an investment in us. Digital Assets held by us are not subject to FDIC or SIPC protections. We do not and will not hold our Bitcoins and other Digital Assets with a banking institution or a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) or the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) and, therefore, our Digital Assets are not subject to the protections enjoyed by depositors with FDIC or SIPC member institutions. Risks Related to Our Digital Asset Platform Development There is substantial doubt that we will be able to develop or commercialize our Digital Asset Platform. We are currently developing a Digital Asset Platform with the ultimate goal of consolidating users’ information so that it can be more easily accessed and reviewed by users. We may not successfully develop this platform in a cost-efficient manner, to the extent sought or at all. If we fail to develop a Digital Asset Platform as intended, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, especially to the extent that we allocate significant capital, labor and other resources to this endeavor rather than focusing on other business opportunities which may prove to have been more lucrative in hindsight. Even if we do successfully develop our platform and bring it to the marketplace, there is no guarantee that we will attract enough users to generate revenue or become profitable. Our competitors, most of whom have greater capital and human resources than we do, may develop technologies that are superior to our platform or commercialize comparable technologies before us, in which case our ability to attract users and generate revenue therefrom could be rendered unlikely or even impossible. If we fail to obtain users for our platform or find an alternative means of commercializing our platform to recoup our investment therein, it will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. Even if we develop and commercialize our Digital Asset Platform, we may not be able to generate material revenues. The Digital Asset Platform that we are currently developing will require significant time and capital. Even if we do develop this platform and acquire a sufficient number of users to generate revenue, we cannot guarantee the revenue would be material or sufficient to justify the costs we anticipate incurring to develop the platform. Our ability to capitalize on any platform we do develop will depend on a variety of factors and uncertainties beyond our control, including the competition we face and similar or superior services that may already exist by the time we begin marketing our platform, the volatile nature of the blockchain industry generally and the unknown demand for the services we plan to offer through our platform as it is currently envisioned, and the advancement of new technologies which could arise in the future and render our platform partially or completely obsolete. If any of these or other risks come to fruition to prevent our platform from generating material revenue to justify its costs of production, it would have a material adverse effect on our business. 29 The development of our Digital Asset Platform will depend on the successful efforts of our employees. Our platform development effort is completely dependent on our infrastructure. We use internally developed systems for the platform. Any future difficulties developing aspects of our platform may cause delays in bringing our platform to market. If the location where all of our computer and communications hardware is located is compromised, our platform, prospects, could be harmed. We do not currently have a disaster recovery plan which could result in a loss of the platform software. Despite our implementation of network security measures, our servers are vulnerable to computer viruses, physical or electronic break-ins and similar disruptions, the occurrence of any of which could lead to interruptions, delays, loss of critical data or the inability to launch our platform. The occurrence of any of the foregoing risks could harm our business. We are subject to cyber security risks and may incur delays in platform development in an effort to minimize those risks and to respond to cyber incidents. Our Digital Asset Platform is and will continue to be dependent on the secure operation of our website and systems as well as the operation of the Internet generally. The platform involves reading user data, and storage of user data, and security breaches could expose us to a risk of loss or misuse of this information, litigation, and potential liability. A number of large Internet companies have suffered security breaches, some of which have involved intentional attacks. From time to time, we and many other Internet businesses also may be subject to a denial of service attacks wherein attackers attempt to block customers’ access to our Website. If we are unable to avert a denial of service attack for any significant period, we could sustain delays in the development of the platform and when launched risk losing future users and have user dissatisfaction. We may not have the resources or technical sophistication to anticipate or prevent rapidly evolving types of cyber-attacks. Cyber attacks may target us, our users, or exchanges we read data from in general or the communication infrastructure on which we depend. If an actual or perceived attack or breach of our security occurs, user perception of the effectiveness of our security measures could be harmed and we could lose our future user. Actual or anticipated attacks and risks may cause us to incur increasing costs, and delay development. A person who is able to circumvent our security measures might be able to misappropriate our or our users’ proprietary information, cause interruption in our operations, damage our computers or those of our users, or otherwise damage our reputation and platform. Any compromise of our security could result in a violation of applicable privacy and other laws, significant legal and financial exposure, damage to our reputation, and a loss of confidence in our security measures, which could harm our business. We may become subject to data privacy and data security laws and regulations by virtue of our Digital Asset Platform, which could force us to incur significant compliance costs and expose us to liabilities. By virtue of our platform, including planned additional functions, we may become subject to the various local, state, federal, and international laws and regulations that apply to the collection, use, retention, protection, disclosure, transfer, and processing of personal data. These data protection and privacy laws and regulations and their applicability to our current and future operations and offerings are subject to uncertainty and continue to evolve in ways that could adversely impact our business. These laws could have a substantial impact on our operations, depending in large part on the location of our operations, users, employees and other stakeholders with which we are or become involved. 30 In the United States, state and federal lawmakers and regulatory authorities have increased their attention on the collection and use of user data. For example, California enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act, or CCPA, which became effective in 2020. The CCPA requires covered companies to, among other things, provide new disclosures to California users, and affords such users new privacy rights such as the ability to opt-out of certain sales of personal information and expanded rights to access and require deletion of their personal information, opt out of certain personal information sharing, and receive detailed information about how their personal information is collected, used, and shared. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for security breaches that may increase security breach litigation. Potential uncertainty surrounding the CCPA and CPRA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability, particularly in the event of a data breach, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, including how we use personal information, our financial condition, the results of our operations or prospects. Since the CCPA was enacted, other states including Nevada, Maine, Colorado and Virginia have enacted similar legislation designed to protect the personal information of consumers and penalize companies that fail to comply, and other states have also proposed similar legislation. The costs of compliance with, and other burdens imposed by, the CCPA, and similar laws may limit our prospective customer base or the use and adoption of our products and services and/or require us to incur substantial compliance costs, which could have an adverse impact on our business. Additionally, many foreign countries and governmental bodies in which our users may reside, have laws and regulations concerning the collection, use, processing, storage, and deletion of personal information obtained from their residents or by businesses operating within their jurisdiction. These laws and regulations are often more restrictive than those in the United States. Such laws and regulations may require companies to implement new privacy and security policies, permit individuals to access, correct, and delete personal information stored or maintained by such companies, inform individuals of security breaches that affect their personal information, require that certain types of data be retained on local servers within these jurisdictions, and, in some cases, obtain individuals’ affirmative opt-in consent to collect and use personal information for certain purposes. There is a risk that as we develop and offer our platform and other services, we may become subject to one or more of these data privacy and security laws. Despite our efforts to comply with applicable laws, regulations and other obligations relating to privacy, data protection, and information security, it is possible that our practices, offerings, or platform, or third parties on which we rely, could fail. For instance, the overall regulatory framework governing the application of privacy laws to blockchain technology is still highly undeveloped and likely to evolve. Our failure, or the failure by our third-party providers or partners, to comply with applicable laws or regulations and to prevent unauthorized access to, or use or release of personal data, or the perception that any of the foregoing types of failure has occurred, even if unfounded, could subject us to audits, inquiries, whistleblower complaints, adverse media coverage, investigations, potential severe criminal or civil sanctions, fines or damages, reputational harm, or expensive and time-consuming proceedings by governmental agencies and private claims and litigation, any of which could materially adversely affect our business, operating results, and financial condition. We may infringe the intellectual property rights of others, which may prevent or delay our product development efforts and stop us from commercializing or increase the costs of commercializing the Digital Asset Platform. Our commercial success depends significantly on our ability to operate without infringing the patents and other intellectual property rights of third parties however, we may not always be able to determine that we are using or accessing protected information or software. For example, there could be issued patents of which we are not aware that our products infringe. There also could be patents that we believe we do not infringe, but that we may ultimately be found to infringe. Moreover, patent applications are in some cases maintained in secrecy until patents are issued. The publication of discoveries in scientific or patent literature frequently occurs substantially later than the date on which the underlying discoveries were made and patent applications were filed. Because patents can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending applications of which we are unaware that may later result in issued patents that our products infringe. Accordingly, we could expend significant resources defending against patent infringement and other intellectual property right claims; which could require us to divert resources away from operations. Any damages we are required to pay or injunctions against our continued use of such intellectual property in resolution of such claims may cause a material adverse effect to our business and operations, which could adversely affect the trading price of our securities and harm our investors. 31 Risks Related to our Common Stock Our stock price may be volatile. The market price of our Common Stock is likely to be highly volatile and could fluctuate widely in price in response to various factors, many of which are beyond our control, including the following: ● changes in our industry including changes which adversely affect Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other Digital Assets; ● continued volatility in the price of Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other Digital Assets; ● our ability to obtain working capital financing; ● sales of our securities or those of other companies, or of Digital Assets, due to external forces such as geopolitical turmoil, inflation, federal interest rate adjustments or other events; ● additions or departures of key personnel including our executive officers; ● sales of our Common Stock; ● exercise of our warrants and the subsequent sale of the underlying Common Stock; ● conversion of our convertible notes and the subsequent sale of the underlying Common Stock; ● our ability to execute our business plan; ● operating results that fall below expectations; ● loss of any strategic relationship; ● adverse regulatory developments; and ● economic and other external factors. In addition, the securities markets have from time-to-time experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that are unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. These market fluctuations may also materially and adversely affect the market price of our Common Stock. As a result, you may be unable to resell your shares at a desired price. We have not paid cash dividends in the past and, while we have declared a cash dividend in 2022, we do not expect to pay regular or recurring dividends in the future. Any return on investment may be limited to the value of our Common Stock. We have never paid cash dividends on our Common Stock and, while we declared a cash dividend (which may be paid in Bitcoin if elected by the shareholder) payable to holders of our Common Stock as of March 17, 2022, we do not anticipate paying dividends on a regular or recurring basis for the foreseeable future. Any future payment of dividends on our Common Stock will depend on earnings, financial condition and other business and economic factors affecting us at such time as our board of directors may consider relevant. 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. 32 Our articles of incorporation allow for our board to create new series of preferred stock without further approval by our shareholders, which could adversely affect the rights of the holders of our Common Stock. Our board of directors has the authority to fix and determine the relative rights and preferences of preferred stock. Our board of directors also has the authority to issue preferred stock without further shareholder approval. As a result, our board of directors could authorize the issuance of a series of preferred stock that would grant to holders the preferred right to our assets upon liquidation, provide holders of the preferred anti-dilution protection, the right to receive dividend payments before dividends are distributed to the holders of Common Stock and the right to the redemption of the shares, together with a premium, prior to the redemption of our Common Stock. In addition, our board of directors could authorize the issuance of a series of preferred stock that has greater voting power than our Common Stock or that is convertible into our Common Stock, which could decrease the relative voting power of our Common Stock or result in dilution to our existing shareholders. Substantial future sales of our Common Stock by us or by our existing shareholders could cause our stock price to fall. Additional equity financings (in addition to the shares issued under the ATM Agreement) or other share issuances by us, including shares issued in connection with strategic alliances and corporate partnering transactions, and shares issued on the conversion of outstanding notes, could adversely affect the market price of our Common Stock. Sales by existing shareholders of a large number of shares of our Common Stock in the public market or the perception that additional sales could occur could cause the market price of our Common Stock to drop. ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK We are a smaller reporting company as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act and are not required to provide the information under this item. ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA See Item 15(a)(1) ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE None 33