Item 1A. Risk Factors
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
In the course of conducting our business operations, we are exposed to a variety of risks, some of which are inherent in our industry and others of which are more specific to our own business. In addition to the other information set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and other filings we have made and will make in the future with the SEC, you should carefully consider the following risk factors and uncertainties, which could materially affect the Company’s business, financial condition and operating results. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to management or that management currently deems immaterial also may materially, adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition or operating results.
Risks Relating to our Business
Our strategic focus on automating and modernizing the workplace through artificial intelligence involves significant execution risks, and failure to successfully develop or monetize these solutions could materially harm our business.
A key element of our corporate strategy is the deployment of artificial intelligence, including agentic AI, machine learning, and intelligent workflow automation, into our core platforms to automate enterprise workflows. Executing this strategy requires substantial upfront and ongoing investments in technology infrastructure, proprietary data modeling, and specialized engineering talent. The market for AI solutions is rapidly evolving, highly competitive, and subject to shifting client preferences. If our AI-enabled platforms fail to deliver anticipated efficiencies, if clients resist adopting these automated workflows, or if we are unable to keep pace with the technological advancements of larger, better-funded competitors, our strategy may not succeed. Furthermore, the increasing integration of AI into mission-critical and highly regulated workflows exposes us to complex regulatory, execution and implementation risks. As the Company deploys AI to automate workflows previously performed by its own workforce, it faces the risk that this automation displaces higher-margin managed service revenues faster than new AI-enabled revenue streams can replace them, compressing margins during the transition period. If we are unable to successfully develop, deploy, and monetize our AI-driven solutions, our competitive position, revenue growth, and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.
Many of the Company’s client contracts may be terminated without cause and with limited notice, and government contracts subject it to audits, investigations and potential penalties that could result in contract termination, financial liability and reputational damage.
Many of the Company’s client contracts may be terminated by its clients without cause and without any fee or penalty, with only limited notice. The Company may not be able to replace a client that elects to terminate or fails to renew its contract with it. In addition, a portion of the Company’s revenues is derived from contracts with the U.S. federal and state governments and their agencies and from contracts with foreign governments and their agencies. Government entities typically finance projects through appropriated funds. The public procurement environment is unpredictable and this could adversely affect the Company’s ability to perform work under new and existing contracts. Any such reductions in revenue could materially adversely affect the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition.
Moreover, government contracts are generally subject to a right to conduct audits and investigations by government agencies. If a government entity determines that there were contractual breaches or improper or illegal activities related to any government contracts, the Company may be subject to various civil and criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, which may include termination of contracts, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, fines and suspensions or debarment from doing business with the government. Further, the negative publicity that could arise from any such penalties, sanctions or findings in such audits or investigations could have an adverse effect on the Company’s reputation in the industry and reduce its ability to compete for new contracts and could materially adversely affect the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.
The Company’s long-term contracts are based on cost estimates that may prove inaccurate, and its inability to offset increased operational costs with corresponding fee increases could materially impact its financial performance.
The pricing and other terms of the Company’s client contracts are based on estimates and assumptions the Company makes at the time it enters into those contracts. These estimates reflect the Company’s best judgments
21
Table of Contents
regarding the nature of the engagement and its expected costs to provide the contracted services and could differ from actual results. Not all of the Company’s larger long-term contracts allow for escalation of fees as the Company’s costs of operation increase and those that allow for such escalations do not always allow fee increases at rates comparable to cost increases that the Company experiences. Where the Company cannot negotiate long-term contract terms that provide for fee adjustments to reflect increases in its cost of service delivery, the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially impacted. The Company has entered into, and expects to continue to enter into, contracts in which fees are contingent in whole or in part on achieving specified performance metrics or client outcomes. These arrangements introduce revenue variability and the risk that the Company bears costs without commensurate compensation if target outcomes are not met or are disputed.
The Company’s workflow automation solutions require extended selling cycles and implementation periods, which can strain finances through upfront expenses without immediate revenue and create risks of contract loss after significant investment.
The Company often faces long selling cycles to secure new contracts for its workflow automation solutions. If the Company is successful in obtaining an engagement, the selling cycle can be followed by a long implementation period. Delays in internal approvals, technology implementations or client decisions can prolong these cycles. Even if the Company succeeds in developing a relationship with a potential client and begins to discuss the services in detail, the potential client may choose a competitor or decide to retain the work in-house prior to the time a contract is signed. Additionally, the Company may not begin receiving revenue until after the implementation period and its solution is fully operational, leading to upfront expenses without immediate profits. These extended cycles can strain finances, especially when hiring new staff before revenue collection. The Company’s inability to obtain contractual commitments after a selling cycle, maintain contractual commitments after the implementation period or limit expenses prior to the receipt of corresponding revenue may have a material adverse effect on its business, results of operations and financial condition.
The Company operates in a highly competitive industry and faces significant competition from companies with stronger financial resources, better brand recognition and lower-cost operations, as well as from clients who may choose to perform services in-house.
The Company’s industry is highly competitive, fragmented and subject to rapid change. The Company competes primarily against local, national, regional and large multi-national information and payment technology companies, including focused workflow automation companies based in offshore locations, workflow automation divisions of information technology companies, other workflow automation and consulting services and digital transformation solution providers and the in-house capabilities of the Company’s clients and potential clients. These competitors may include entrants from adjacent industries or entrants in geographic locations with lower costs than those in which the Company operates.
As agentic AI, LLMs, and intelligent document processing tools become increasingly accessible, we expect competition to intensify. We may face new competitive pressures from AI-native software startups and major global technology companies entering the workflow automation space. Furthermore, the proliferation of highly capable, off-the-shelf AI tools may increasingly empower our clients and potential clients to seamlessly perform complex digital transformations and workflow automations in-house, significantly reducing their reliance on our services and managed platforms. Increased competition, the Company’s inability to compete successfully against competitors, pricing pressures or loss of market share could result in reduced operating margins, which could materially adversely affect the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition.
The Company operates in an industry characterized by rapid technological change, and failure to develop competitive technology solutions, adapt to digital transformation trends or respond to evolving client needs could result in loss of market share and revenue.
If the Company fails to accurately anticipate and meet its clients’ needs through the development of new technologies and service offerings or if its new services are not widely accepted, the Company could lose market share and clients to its competitors, which could materially adversely affect its results of operations and financial condition. More specifically, the workflow automation industry is characterized by rapid technological change, evolving industry standards and changing client preferences, especially with regards to AI and intelligent workflow automation. While we
22
Table of Contents
have made investments in AI-related technologies, the rapid development of artificial general intelligence by third parties may render our proprietary decisioning engines less competitive. The success of the Company’s business depends, in part, upon its ability to develop technology and solutions that keep pace with changes in its industry and the industries of its clients. Although the Company has made, and will continue to make, investments in the research, design and development of new technology and platform-driven solutions, it may not be successful in addressing these changes on a timely basis or in marketing the changes it implements. In addition, products or technologies developed by others may render the Company’s services uncompetitive or obsolete. Failure to address these developments could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition.
In addition, existing and potential clients are actively shifting their businesses away from paper-based environments to electronic environments with reduced needs for physical document management and processing. This shift may result in decreased demand for the physical document management services the Company provides such that its business and revenues may become more reliant on technology-based services in electronic environments, which are typically provided at lower prices compared to physical document management services. Although the Company has solutions for clients seeking to make these types of transitions, a significant shift by its clients away from physical documents to non-paper-based technologies, whether now existing or developed in the future, could adversely affect its business, results of operations and financial condition.
The Company’s reliance on third-party hardware and software creates risks of service disruptions, increased costs and operational delays if vendors discontinue products or raise prices, or if it encounters defects in third-party components.
Although the Company has developed its platform-driven solutions internally, it relies, in some cases, on third-party hardware and software in connection with its service offerings, which it purchases, leases or licenses from third-party vendors. Detecting design defects or software errors in third-party hardware or software is challenging due to their complexity and unique specifications. Any errors or defects in third-party hardware or software incorporated into the Company’s service offerings may result in a delay or loss of revenue, diversion of resources, damage to its reputation or potential claims against the Company.
Further, such third-party hardware and software may not continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Any loss of the right to use any of this hardware or software, or any increases in the price charged by third-party vendors, could negatively affect the Company’s business until equivalent technology is either developed by the Company or, if available from other third-party vendors, is identified, obtained and integrated on commercially reasonable terms. Further, changing hardware vendors or software licensors could detract from management’s ability to focus on the ongoing operations of the Company’s business or could cause delays in the operations of its business.
Certain higher-risk engagements involving significant financial sums, sensitive data or complex legal matters could expose the Company to increased liability, reputational damage and operational disruption despite its risk mitigation efforts.
The Company provides certain workflow automation solutions for clients that, for financial, legal or other reasons, may present higher risks compared to other types of claims processing or document management engagements. Examples of higher risk engagements include class action and other legal distributions involving significant sums of money and engagements where the Company receives or processes sensitive data, including personal consumer or private health information.
As the Company’s clients use its services for important aspects of their businesses, any errors, defects, disruptions in service or other performance problems could hurt the Company’s reputation and may damage its clients’ businesses. As a result, clients could elect not to renew the Company’s services or delay or withhold payment. The Company could also lose future sales or clients may make warranty or other claims against it. These consequences have resulted, and may in the future result, in increased allowances for expected credit losses, lengthened collection cycles for accounts receivable, and increased expense and risk of litigation.
We rely on dedicated human-in-the-loop exception handling to oversee our agentic AI automation, and this control framework is subject to human error. Because our clients use our services for mission-critical aspects of their businesses—such as healthcare claims adjudication and large-scale legal settlement distributions—any failure by our
23
Table of Contents
human operators to identify sophisticated AI errors, hallucinations, or processing defects could hurt our reputation, severely damage our clients’ businesses, and expose us to substantial financial and legal liabilities
Any actual or alleged error or omission by the Company, its clients or other third parties or possible fraudulent activity in one or more of these higher-risk engagements could result in the diversion of management resources, damage to the Company’s reputation, increased service costs or impaired market acceptance of the Company’s services, any of which could materially adversely affect the Company’s business and financial condition.
The Company’s business depends on protecting its intellectual property and avoiding infringement claims from others, and failure in either area could result in loss of competitive advantage, substantial damages or operational restrictions.
The Company’s success depends in part on certain methodologies and practices it utilizes in developing and implementing applications and other proprietary intellectual property rights. In order to protect such rights, the Company relies upon a combination of nondisclosure and other contractual arrangements, as well as trade secret, copyright, trademark and patent laws. The Company also generally enters into confidentiality agreements with its employees, clients and potential clients and limits access to and distribution of its proprietary information. There can be no assurance that the laws, rules, regulations and treaties in effect in the United States, Europe, India and the other jurisdictions in which the Company operates and the contractual and other protective measures it takes are adequate to protect the Company from misappropriation or unauthorized use of its intellectual property, or that such laws will not change. There can be no assurance that the resources invested by the Company to protect its intellectual property will be sufficient or that its intellectual property portfolio will adequately deter misappropriation or improper use of its technology, and its intellectual property rights may not prevent competitors from independently developing or selling similar products and services. The Company may not be able to detect unauthorized use and take appropriate steps to enforce its rights, and any such steps may be costly and unsuccessful. Infringement by others of the Company’s intellectual property, including the costs of enforcing its intellectual property rights, may have a material adverse effect on its business, results of operations and financial condition. The Company could also face competition in some countries where it has not invested in an intellectual property portfolio.
If the Company is not able to protect its intellectual property, the value of its brand and other intangible assets may be diminished, and its business may be adversely affected. The value of, or the Company’s ability to use, its intellectual property may also be negatively impacted by dependencies on third parties, such as its ability to obtain or renew on commercially reasonable terms licenses that it needs in the future, or its ability to secure or retain ownership or rights to use data in certain software analytics or services offerings. In addition, if the Company is found to infringe any third-party rights, it could be required to pay substantial damages or it could be enjoined from offering some of its products and services. Any such circumstances may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition.
The Company’s revenues are concentrated, making it vulnerable to downturns, consolidation or regulatory changes in specific sectors.
A substantial portion of the Company’s revenues are derived from specific industries. The Company’s success largely depends on continued demand for its services from clients in these industries, and a downturn or reversal of the demand for workflow automation, or the introduction of regulations that restrict or discourage companies from engaging the Company’s services, could materially adversely affect its business, financial condition and results of operations. Further, consolidation in any of these industries or combinations or mergers, particularly involving the Company’s clients, may decrease the number of potential clients for its services. For example, the Company has been affected by the worsening of economic conditions and significant consolidation in the financial services industry and continuation of this trend may negatively affect its revenues and profitability.
The Company’s competitive bidding process for commercial and government contracts requires substantial upfront investment with uncertain returns and exposes it to protest risks, cost estimation challenges and opportunity costs.
Many of the contracts awarded to the Company through competitive bidding procedures are extremely complex and require the investment of significant resources in order to prepare accurate bids and proposals. Competitive bidding imposes substantial costs and presents a number of risks that may adversely affect the Company’s financial position,
24
Table of Contents
including: (i) the substantial cost and managerial time and effort that the Company spends to prepare bids and proposals for contracts that it may or may not be awarded; (ii) the need to estimate accurately the resources and costs that will be required to implement and service any contracts the Company is awarded, sometimes in advance of the final determination of its full scope and design; (iii) the expense and delay that may arise if the Company’s competitors protest or challenge awards made to it pursuant to competitive bidding and the risk that such protests or challenges could result in the requirement to resubmit bids and in the termination, reduction or modification of the awarded contracts, or may eventually lead to litigation; and (iv) the opportunity cost of not bidding on and winning other contracts the Company might otherwise pursue.
The Company’s profitability depends on its ability to obtain adequate pricing for its services in competitive markets and maintain cost efficiency through restructuring actions, technology initiatives and global delivery centers, and its failure to achieve productivity improvements or absorb pricing pressures could materially adversely affect its results of operations, particularly given operational risks in developing countries and increasingly stringent service requirements.
The Company’s success depends on its ability to obtain adequate pricing for its services. Depending on competitive market factors, prices the Company obtains for its services may decline from previous levels. If the Company is unable to obtain adequate pricing for its services, its results of operations and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, the Company’s contracts are increasingly requiring tighter timelines for implementation as well as more stringent service level metrics. These requirements make the bidding process for new contracts more difficult and require the Company to adequately consider these requirements in the pricing of its services.
The Company, from time to time, engages in restructuring actions to reduce its cost structure. If the Company is unable to maintain its cost base at or below current levels or sustain process and systems changes resulting from prior restructuring actions, such failures could materially adversely affect its results of operations and financial condition. The Company’s ability to sustain and improve profit margins depends on a number of factors, including its ability to continue improving the cost efficiency of its operations through programs such as process automation, its capacity to absorb pricing pressures on its services through cost improvements and the successful completion of information technology initiatives. If any of these factors adversely materialize or if the Company is unable to achieve and maintain productivity improvements through restructuring actions or information technology initiatives, its ability to offset labor cost inflation and competitive price pressures would be impaired, each of which could materially adversely affect its results of operations and financial condition.
Failure to comply with data privacy and data protection laws in processing and transferring personal data across jurisdictions may subject the Company to penalties and other adverse consequences, and the enactment of more stringent data privacy and data protection laws may increase its compliance costs.
Privacy and data security regulations continue to become more complex and have greater consequences. For example, Europe’s GDPR imposes several stringent requirements for controllers and processors of personal data, including higher standards for obtaining consent from individuals to process their personal data, more robust disclosures to individuals and a strengthened individual data rights regime, and shortened timelines for data breach notifications. Failure to comply with the requirements of the GDPR and the applicable national data protection laws of the European Union member states may result in fines of up to €20,000,000 or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year.
In addition, data privacy laws in the United States, similarly impose or may impose obligations on the Company and many of its clients, potentially as both businesses and service providers. These laws continue to evolve, and as various states introduce similar proposals, the Company and its clients could be exposed to additional regulatory burdens. In addition, India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act and its implementing rules impose consent, processing and breach notification obligations that may apply to the Company’s Indian operations and increase its compliance obligations and costs.
Evolving data privacy and data protection laws may require the Company to make changes to its practices and services and may also increase its potential liability exposure through new or higher potential penalties for noncompliance. Furthermore, privacy laws and regulations are subject to differing interpretations and may be inconsistent among jurisdictions. The Company’s clients expect it to meet voluntary certification and other standards
25
Table of Contents
established by third parties, such as PCI Data Security Standard. If the Company is unable to maintain these certifications or meet these standards, it could adversely affect the Company’s ability to provide its solutions to certain clients and could harm its business.
The costs of compliance with, and other burdens imposed by, privacy laws, regulations and standards may limit the use and adoption of the Company’s services, reduce overall demand for its services, make it more difficult to meet expectations from its commitments to clients and its clients’ customers, lead to significant fines, penalties or liabilities for noncompliance, impact its reputation or slow the pace at which it closes sales transactions, in particular where clients request specific warranties and indemnity for noncompliance with privacy laws, any of which could harm the Company’s business.
Furthermore, the uncertain and shifting regulatory environment may cause the Company’s clients or its clients’ customers to resist providing the data necessary to allow the Company’s clients to use its services effectively. In addition, new services developed or acquired in connection with changing events may expose the Company to liability or regulatory risk. Even the perception that the privacy and security of personal information are not satisfactorily protected or do not meet regulatory requirements could inhibit sales of the Company’s products or services and could limit adoption of its cloud-based solutions.
The Company must maintain strict physical and information security standards subject to regular client and third-party audits, and failure to meet these requirements or negative audit findings could result in contract termination and reputational damage.
Many of the Company’s client contracts require that it maintain certain physical and/or information security standards, and, in certain cases, the Company permits a client to audit its compliance with these standards. Any failure to meet such standards or pass such audits may have a material adverse impact on the Company’s business. Further, clients from time to time may require stricter physical and/or information security than they negotiated in their contracts and may condition continued volumes and business on the satisfaction of such additional requirements. Some of these requirements may be expensive to implement or maintain and may not be factored into the Company’s contract pricing. Further, on an annual basis, the Company obtains third-party audits of certain of its locations in accordance with third-party attestation standards. Many of the Company’s clients expect that it will engage in such procedures and report to them the results. Negative findings in such an audit and/or the failure to adequately remediate in a timely fashion such negative findings may cause clients to terminate their contracts or otherwise have a material adverse effect on the Company’s reputation, results of operations and financial condition.
The Company faces significant cybersecurity risks and vulnerability to data breaches from sophisticated cyber threats, employee errors and third-party compromises, which could result in loss of client confidence, business disruption, legal liability and substantial financial costs.
The Company collects and retains large volumes of internal and client data, including personally identifiable information and other sensitive data, both physically and electronically, and its various information technology systems enter, process, summarize and report such data. The Company also maintains personally identifiable information about its employees. Safeguarding client, employee and its own data is a key priority for the Company, and its clients and employees have come to rely on the Company for the protection of its information.
Despite the Company’s efforts to protect sensitive, confidential or personal data or information, the Company can provide no assurances that its security measures designed to protect the data of its clients and its clients’ customers will always be effective. The Company’s services and underlying infrastructure may in the future be materially breached or compromised as a result of the following:
● third-party attempts to fraudulently induce the Company’s employees, partners or clients to disclose sensitive information such as usernames, passwords or other information to gain access to the data or IT systems of the Company or its clients;
● efforts by individuals or groups of hackers and sophisticated organizations, such as state-sponsored organizations or nation-states, to launch coordinated attacks, including ransomware, destructive malware and distributed denial-of-service attacks;
26
Table of Contents
● third-party attempts to abuse the Company’s marketing, advertising, messaging or social products and functionalities to impersonate persons or organizations and disseminate information that is false, misleading or malicious;
● cyberattacks on the Company’s internally built infrastructure on which many of its service offerings operate, or on third-party cloud-computing platform providers;
● vulnerabilities resulting from enhancements and updates to the Company’s existing service offerings;
● vulnerabilities in the products or components across the broad ecosystem that the Company’s services operate in conjunction with and are dependent on;
● vulnerabilities existing within new technologies and infrastructures;
● attacks on, or vulnerabilities in, the many different underlying networks and services that power the Internet that the Company’s products depend on, most of which are not under the control of the Company or its vendors, partners or clients; and
● employee or contractor errors or intentional acts that compromise the Company’s security systems.
The Company has experienced, and expects to continue to experience, attempted intrusions and security incidents of varying severity. A security breach or incident could result in unauthorized parties obtaining access to, or the denial of authorized access to, the Company’s IT systems or data, or its clients’ systems or data, including intellectual property and proprietary, sensitive or other confidential information. A security breach could also result in a loss of confidence in the security of the Company’s services, damage its reputation, negatively impact its future sales, disrupt its business and lead to increases in insurance premiums and legal, regulatory and financial exposure and liability. Any resulting interruptions in the Company’s services or the ability of its clients to access its services could result in a loss of potential or existing clients and harm its business.
The Company’s increasing integration of AI into its offerings presents risks of reputational harm, legal liability, increased costs, and competitive disadvantage if AI applications generate controversy, perform inadequately or require substantial investment in development and testing.
The Company is increasingly building Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) into many of its offerings. As with many innovations, AI presents additional risks and challenges that could affect the Company’s business. If the Company enables or offers AI-enabled solutions that draw controversy due to their perceived or actual impact on human rights, privacy, employment or in other social contexts, it may experience reputational harm, competitive harm or legal liability. Data practices by the Company or others that result in controversy could also impair the acceptance of AI solutions. This in turn could undermine the decisions, predictions or analysis that AI applications produce, subjecting the Company to competitive harm, legal liability or reputational harm. The rapid evolution of AI will require the application of resources to develop, test and maintain the Company’s products and services to help ensure that AI is implemented ethically in order to minimize unintended, harmful impact.
Geopolitical tensions and global macroeconomic uncertainty could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Our operations and the businesses of our clients are subject to risks associated with international geopolitical tensions and broader macroeconomic instability. Recent and ongoing global conflicts, such as those in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, as well as evolving trade policies and diplomatic tensions between the U.S. and other nations, have contributed to significant global economic uncertainty. These events have led to, and may continue to result in, increased inflationary pressures, currency exchange rate volatility, supply chain disruptions, and a heightened risk of state-sponsored cyberattacks. Changes in trade policy, including the imposition of new or increased tariffs on technology hardware, equipment, and components used in the Company’s operations, could increase operating costs and, to the extent such policies affect the cost structures of the Company’s clients, may reduce demand for the Company’s services. Furthermore, prolonged macroeconomic uncertainty could cause our current and prospective clients to delay, reduce, or cancel their spending on workflow automation and technology services, which would result in lower transaction volumes. If global economic conditions deteriorate or current geopolitical conflicts escalate, our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.
27
Table of Contents
Currency fluctuations between the U.S. Dollar and foreign currencies in the Company’s international operations could materially affect its recorded assets, liabilities, revenues, and operating margins.
The functional currencies of many of the Company’s businesses outside of the United States are the local currencies. Changes in exchange rates between these foreign currencies and the U.S. Dollar will affect the recorded levels of the Company’s assets, liabilities, net sales, cost of goods sold and operating margins and could result in exchange gains or losses. The primary foreign currencies to which the Company has exposure are the European Union Euro, Swedish Krona, British Pound Sterling, Canadian Dollar and Indian Rupee. Exchange rates between these currencies and the U.S. Dollar in recent years have fluctuated significantly and may do so in the future. The Company’s operating results and profitability may be affected by any volatility in currency exchange rates and its ability to effectively manage currency transaction and translation risks. To the extent the U.S. Dollar strengthens against foreign currencies, the Company’s foreign revenues and profits will be reduced when converted into and reported in U.S. Dollars.
Fluctuations in raw material costs, particularly paper, ink and energy, may increase the Company’s operational expenses and reduce demand for its printing services, and it may be unable to pass these costs on to clients or benefit from by-product sales.
Purchases of paper, ink, energy and other raw materials represent a large portion of the Company’s costs. Increases in the costs of these inputs may increase the Company’s costs and it may not be able to pass these costs on to clients through higher prices. In addition, the Company may not be able to resell wastepaper and other print-related by-products or may be adversely impacted by decreases in the prices for these by-products. Increases in the cost of materials may adversely impact clients’ demand for the Company’s printing and printing-related services.
The Company’s ability to attract and retain qualified personnel and to manage increasing labor costs and evolving employment law obligations across its global operations could materially affect its business and results of operations.
The Company’s operations depend significantly on attracting and retaining personnel with specialized expertise in workflow automation, AI, and technology integration. Competition for such talent is intense, particularly from larger technology companies with greater compensation resources, and the Company’s ability to attract and retain key technical and managerial personnel may be further affected by uncertainty associated with the Restructuring. The failure to attract or retain such personnel could impair the Company’s ability to execute its strategy and adversely affect its operations. Competition for skilled labor is intense and the costs associated with recruiting and training employees can be significant. Increased labor costs due to competition, increased minimum wage or employee benefits costs (including various federal, state and local actions to increase minimum wages), unionization activity or other factors would adversely impact our cost of sales and operating expenses.
The Company is also subject to applicable rules and regulations relating to its relationship with its employees, including minimum wage and break requirements, health benefits, unemployment and sales taxes, overtime, working conditions and immigration status. Legislated increases in the minimum wage and increases in additional labor cost components, such as employee benefit costs, workers’ compensation insurance rates, compliance costs and fines, as well as the cost of litigation in connection with these regulations, would increase our labor costs. In addition, many employers, including the Company, have been subject to actions brought by governmental agencies and private individuals under wage-hour laws on a variety of claims, such as improper classification of workers as exempt from overtime pay requirements and failure to pay overtime wages or record breaks properly, with such actions sometimes brought as class actions or under “private attorney general” statutes. Employment litigation risks, including wage-hour disputes, could result in substantial liabilities and expenses, diverting management attention and elevating labor costs.
The Company has significant operations in India, where India’s evolving Labour Codes may alter the Company’s obligations with respect to wages, employee benefits, provident fund contributions, gratuity accruals, and social security. The extent and timing of adoption at the state level introduce compliance uncertainty and could adversely impact the Company’s cost of sales and operating expenses.
28
Table of Contents
The Company has identified material weaknesses in its internal control over financial reporting, and a failure to remediate such material weaknesses in a timely manner could impair its ability to produce accurate financial statements, result in restatements, damage investor confidence and potentially lead to delisting from Nasdaq.
As a public company, the Company is subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and the listing standards of Nasdaq. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that the Company maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. In order to maintain and improve the effectiveness of its disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting, the Company has expended, and anticipates that it will continue to expend, significant resources, including accounting-related costs and significant management oversight.
As disclosed in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2025, the Company has previously identified material weaknesses in the areas of goodwill impairment and financial reporting processes, risk assessment, information and communication, and monitoring activities and the control environment. These material weaknesses were the result of the Company’s acquisition of BPA. Material weakness in BPAs internal control over financial reporting were previously reported in the risk factors section of the Company’s Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 filed with the SEC on July 15, 2025. BPA had concluded its internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2024 due to pervasive material weaknesses in its internal control over financial reporting. The Company reassessed the controls of the combined entity (XBP Global Holdings, Inc.) after the Business Combination and determined that the material weakness discussed above persisted.
A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Based on the results of its evaluation, management concluded that as of December 31, 2025, the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were not effective due to the material weaknesses in financial reporting, ineffective control environment, and ineffective information and communication, as described above.
In order to remediate these material weaknesses, the Company is taking remediation measures with appropriate executive sponsorship and with the assistance of third-party specialists. These remediation measures may be time-consuming and costly and there is no assurance that these measures will ultimately have the intended effects. Additionally, the measures taken to date, and actions that may be taken in the future, may not be sufficient to (a) remediate in a timely manner or at all the control deficiencies that led to the material weaknesses or (b) prevent or avoid potential future material weaknesses due to a failure to implement and maintain adequate internal control over financial reporting or circumvention of these controls. In addition, even if the Company is successful in strengthening its controls and procedures, in the future these controls and procedures may not be adequate to prevent or identify irregularities or errors or to facilitate the fair presentation of its financial statements.
If the Company is unable to remediate the material weaknesses, or if any new material weaknesses are discovered in the future, then it may be unable to maintain compliance with the requirements of securities laws, stock exchange listing rules or debt instrument covenants regarding timely filing of information; it could lose access to sources of capital or liquidity; and investors may lose confidence in its financial reporting and its stock price may decline as a result. Remediation measures that have been taken to date, or any future remediation measures, may be insufficient to remediate the material weaknesses or avoid potential future material weaknesses or the perception thereof.
As a result of the material weaknesses described above and other related matters raised or that may in the future be identified, the Company faces potential for adverse regulatory consequences, including investigations, penalties or suspensions by the SEC or Nasdaq, litigation or other disputes which may include, among others, claims invoking the federal and state securities laws, contractual claims or other claims arising from the material weaknesses in its internal control over financial reporting and the preparation of its consolidated financial statements. Any such regulatory consequences, litigation, claim or dispute, whether successful or not, could subject the Company to additional costs, divert the attention of its management, or impair its reputation. Each of these consequences could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, reputation, results of operations and financial condition.
The Company may identify future material weaknesses in its internal controls over financial reporting or fail to meet the demands that will be placed upon it as a public company, including the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley
29
Table of Contents
Act, and it may be unable to accurately report its financial results, or report them within the timeframes required by law or stock exchange regulations. We can provide no assurance that the Company’s existing material weaknesses will be remediated or that additional material weaknesses will not exist or otherwise be discovered, any of which could adversely affect its reputation, results of operations and financial condition.
For a discussion of management’s evaluation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and the material weaknesses identified, see Part II, Item 9A, “Controls and Procedures.”
Risks Relating to our Indebtedness
The Company’s substantial level of indebtedness could place it at a competitive disadvantage and limit its operational flexibility compared to less leveraged competitors.
As of December 31, 2025, the Company had total indebtedness of approximately $387.6 million, which could place the Company at a competitive disadvantage to less leveraged competitors because, among other things: it could affect the Company’s ability to satisfy its obligations under its indebtedness; a portion of its cash flow from operations will be used for debt service and therefore will be unavailable to support operations or for working capital, capital expenditures, expansion, acquisitions or general corporate or other purposes; the Company’s ability to refinance its then-existing debt, obtain additional debt financing or equity financing or pursue mergers, acquisitions and asset sales, on terms acceptable to them or at all, may be limited and its costs of borrowing may be increased; as a result of its significant indebtedness, the Company may be more vulnerable to economic downturns and its ability to withstand competitive pressures may be limited; and the Company’s operational flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes, opportunities and challenges in its businesses, including changes in the market sector in which it competes, changes in its business and strategic opportunities and adverse developments in its operations, may be severely limited.
The Company faces significant interest expense and principal repayment obligations, and its ability to service this debt depends on future performance and cash generation that is subject to factors beyond its control.
The Company’s ability to make payments on and to refinance its debt will depend on its future financial and operating performance and its ability to generate cash in the future. This, to a certain extent, is subject to general economic, business, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that are beyond the Company’s control.
There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to generate sufficient cash flow from operations or that sufficient future borrowings will be available to pay off the Company’s debt obligations. The Company may need to refinance all or a portion of its debt on or before maturity; however, there can be no assurance that it will be able to refinance any of its debt on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If the Company’s cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund its debt service obligations and other cash requirements, the Company could face substantial liquidity problems and could be forced to reduce or delay investments and capital expenditures, or to sell assets or operations, seek additional capital or restructure or refinance its indebtedness and settlement obligations. The Company may not be able to effect any such alternative measures, if necessary, on commercially reasonable terms or at all and, even if successful, such alternative actions may not allow the Company to meet its scheduled debt service obligations and settlement obligations. The agreements governing the Company’s indebtedness (a) have terms and conditions that restrict its ability to dispose of assets and the use of proceeds from any such disposition and (b) restrict its ability to raise debt capital.
The Company’s inability to generate sufficient cash flows to satisfy its debt obligations, or to refinance its indebtedness on commercially reasonable terms or at all, would materially and adversely affect its financial position and results of operations. If the Company cannot make scheduled payments on its debt, an event of default may result. An event of default may allow the creditors to accelerate the related debt as well as any other debt to which a cross-acceleration or cross-default provision applies. Significant fluctuations in prevailing interest rates, whether driven by inflationary pressures, central bank policy or broader macroeconomic conditions, could affect the Company's ability to refinance or service its substantial indebtedness on acceptable terms or at all. If the Company is unable to repay amounts outstanding under its financing agreements when due, the lenders thereunder could, subject to the terms of the financing agreements, seek to foreclose on the collateral that is pledged to secure the indebtedness outstanding under such facility.
30
Table of Contents
Substantially all of the Company’s assets are subject to liens that secure its indebtedness, giving secured lenders superior claims and foreclosure rights in the event of insolvency, liquidation or default.
Substantially all of the Company’s assets are subject to liens that secure its indebtedness. If the Company becomes insolvent or is liquidated, or if there is a default under certain financing agreements, and payment on any obligation thereunder is accelerated, its lenders would be entitled, subject to the applicable credit documents, to exercise the remedies available to a secured lender under applicable law, including foreclosure on the collateral that is pledged to secure the indebtedness thereunder, and they would have a claim on the assets securing the obligations under the applicable facility that would be superior to any claim of the holders of unsecured debt.
Restrictive covenants in the Company’s financing agreements, including financial, affirmative and negative covenants, limit management’s discretion and the Company’s operational and financial flexibility, and failure to comply could result in defaults, waivers, increased costs or acceleration of indebtedness.
The financing agreements governing the Company’s indebtedness contain customary financial covenants, affirmative covenants and negative covenants that restrict the Company’s ability to operate its business and pursue strategic objectives. These covenants, among other things, require the Company to satisfy specified financial ratios and performance metrics, comply with reporting and operational requirements, and limit its ability to incur additional indebtedness or liens, make restricted payments, dispose of certain assets, make certain investments, enter into transactions with affiliates, or engage in mergers, consolidations or other fundamental transactions.
Compliance with the Company’s restrictive financial covenants is tested as of specified measurement dates and may, from time to time, depend on the Company’s operating performance and the successful execution of planned transactions, including asset dispositions or other balance-sheet actions. Our ability to meet those financial covenants can be affected by events beyond our control, and we may not be able to meet those covenants. There can be no assurance that any planned transactions will be completed on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. Even if the Company is in compliance with its debt covenants as of the date of filing of this Annual Report, subsequent developments, or our inability to successfully execute planned transactions, could result in non-compliance in future periods.
As a result of these covenant restrictions, the Company may be limited in its ability to respond to changing market conditions, pursue business opportunities, fund operations or execute its growth strategy, any of which could materially and adversely affect its business, financial condition and results of operations. Any failure to comply with the restrictive covenants in the Company’s financing agreements could result in an event of default. In such circumstances, the Company may be required to seek waivers or amendments from its lenders, which may not be granted, and, if granted, could impose additional costs, more restrictive terms or other adverse conditions. The need to obtain waivers or amendments, or the occurrence of a default, may also require public disclosure and could adversely affect the Company’s liquidity, access to capital, reputation and business prospects. An event of default could permit lenders to accelerate the Company’s indebtedness and exercise remedies against collateral securing such indebtedness. A significant portion of our indebtedness could become immediately due and payable. We cannot be certain whether we would have, or would be able to obtain, sufficient funds to make these accelerated payments. If any such indebtedness is accelerated, our assets may not be sufficient to repay in full such indebtedness and our other indebtedness. If the Company is unable to repay amounts outstanding under its financing agreements when due, the lenders thereunder could, subject to the terms of the financing agreements, seek to foreclose on the collateral that is pledged to secure the indebtedness outstanding under such facility.
Despite restrictions in the Company’s debt agreements, it may be able to incur substantial additional indebtedness in the future, which could intensify current financial risks and strain its ability to obtain necessary financing for corporate purposes on acceptable terms.
The Company may be able to incur substantial additional indebtedness in the future, which could intensify the related risks that it currently faces. Although agreements governing the Company’s indebtedness restrict the incurrence of additional indebtedness, these restrictions are subject to a number of qualifications and exceptions and the additional indebtedness incurred in compliance with these restrictions could be substantial.
Moreover, the Company may need to seek additional financing for general corporate purposes. For example, it may need funds to make acquisitions or for capital expenditures needed to remain competitive in its market sector. The
31
Table of Contents
Company may be unable to obtain any desired additional financing on terms that are favorable or acceptable, including as a result of its debt levels or if there is a decline in the demand for its services or in the solvency of its clients, vendors or suppliers or other significantly unfavorable changes in economic conditions occur. Depending on market conditions, adequate funds may not be available to the Company on acceptable terms or at all, and it may be unable to fund expansion, successfully develop or enhance products or respond to competitive pressures, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Risks Resulting from the Restructuring
BPA recently emerged from bankruptcy, which may adversely affect the Company’s business and relationships.
BPA emerged from bankruptcy on July 29, 2025. It is possible that BPA’s bankruptcy filing, and its subsequent emergence from bankruptcy, may adversely affect the Company’s business and relationships with clients, vendors, contractors or employees. Due to uncertainties, many risks exist, including the following:
● key vendors or other contract counterparties may terminate their relationships with the Company or require additional financial assurances or enhanced performance;
● the Company’s ability to renew existing contracts and compete for new business may be adversely affected;
● the Company’s ability to attract, motivate and/or retain key executives and employees may be adversely affected; and
● competitors may take business away from the Company, and its ability to attract and retain clients may be negatively impacted.
The occurrence of one or more of these events could have a material and adverse effect on the Company’s reputation, results of operations and financial condition.
The Company’s historical financial statements are not comparable to the information contained in the Company’s financial statements after the application of fresh-start accounting following the Restructuring.
Following the Restructuring, the Predecessor (as defined below) met the criteria and was required to adopt fresh start accounting in accordance with ASC 852, Reorganizations , which on the Emergence Date resulted in a new entity, the Successor, for financial reporting purposes, with no beginning retained earnings or deficit as of the fresh start reporting date. Financial information prior to the Emergence Date is referred to as “Predecessor” company information, which reflects the combined historical financial statements of BPA prepared using BPA’s previous combined basis of accounting. The financial information beginning August 1, 2025 is referred to as “Successor” company information and reflects the consolidated financial statements of XBP Global, including the financial statement effects of recording fair value adjustments and the capital structure resulting from the Business Combination and fresh start accounting of BPA.
Fresh start accounting requires that new fair values be established for BPA’s assets, liabilities and equity as of the Convenience Date (July 31, 2025), and therefore certain values and operational results of the consolidated financial statements subsequent to July 31, 2025 are not comparable to those in the Company’s consolidated financial statements prior to and including July 31, 2025. The Convenience Date fair values of the Successor’s assets and liabilities differ materially from their recorded values as reflected on the historical balance sheet of the Predecessor. As a result, it may be difficult for stockholders to assess the Company’s performance in relation to prior periods.
The allocation of fair value is dependent upon a number of estimates and assumptions. Whether actual future results and developments will be consistent with the Company’s estimates and assumptions depends on a number of factors, including but not limited to: (i) prices received for its services; (ii) its ability to maintain customers’ confidence in its viability as a continuing entity and to attract and retain sufficient business from them; and (iii) the overall strength and stability of general economic conditions of its industry. To the extent that the Company’s estimates, assumptions, valuations, appraisals and the financial projections used to develop the allocation of fair value are not realized, it has recorded, and in the future may be required to record, impairment charges.
During the period August 1, 2025 to September 30, 2025, the Company experienced a sustained and significant decline in its market capitalization causing the market capitalization to fall below the Company’s book value after the
32
Table of Contents
application of fresh start accounting at Emergence Date. Management concluded that this sustained decline, combined with revised long-term projections compared to those used to compute enterprise value of the reconstituted Successor as set forth in the Disclosure Statement for Joint Plan of Reorganization approved by the Bankruptcy Court, represented a triggering event under ASC 350. In connection with the completion of the interim impairment test, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $215.8 million and $80.0 million to goodwill relating to the reporting units reported under the Applied Workflow Automation segment and Technology segment, respectively, during the period August 1, 2025 to September 30, 2025. Additionally, later during the fourth quarter of 2025, the Company conducted its annual budgeting process along with an update to its long-range plan. Following the completion of that process, the Company made an evaluation based on changes in the Company’s long-term projections, concluding that a triggering event for an impairment analysis had occurred for certain reporting units reported under the Applied Workflow Automation segment. Revised long-term projections resulted in lower than previously projected long-term future cash flows for certain reporting units which reduced the estimated fair values to below their carrying values. Accordingly, the Company performed quantitative impairment test as of December 31, 2025, resulting in an impairment charge of $24.5 million to goodwill relating to the reporting units reported under the Applied Workflow Automation segment. Therefore, as a result of these two interim impairment assessments performed on September 30, 2025 and December 31, 2025, impairment charges totaling $320.3 million, were recorded to goodwill for the period August 1, 2025 to December 31, 2025.
It is also possible that additional restructuring and related charges may be identified and recorded in future periods. Such sales, disposals, liquidations, settlements, or charges could be material to the Company’s results of operations and financial condition in any given period.
Uncertainty regarding the tax treatment of the Business Combination and Restructuring could have a material adverse effect on the Company.
The tax treatment of the Business Combination and related Restructuring is complex and involves uncertainty under applicable U.S. federal, state and international tax laws. While steps have been taken in an effort to mitigate these risks in accordance with applicable laws, there can be no assurance that taxing authorities in any relevant jurisdiction will agree with the intended treatment. Any adverse determination could negatively impact the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. In addition, although certain tax indemnity arrangements have been established with ETI in connection with the Business Combination, there is no guarantee that they will fully protect the Company from adverse tax exposures. This risk is heightened if ETI, as the indemnifying party, experiences financial or liquidity constraints that impair its ability to satisfy its obligations.
Risks Related to Our Common Stock
The Company has a limited public float, which adversely affects trading volume and liquidity, and may adversely affect the price of the Common Stock and access to additional capital.
As of December 31, 2025, ETI, Gates Capital Management and Avenue Capital held approximately 25.7%, 24.4% and 9.3% of the Company’s outstanding shares of Common Stock, respectively, in each case assuming the exercise of all warrants held by the Consenting ETI Parties. Due to the limited public float, the trading price of our Common Stock may fluctuate widely due to various factors, including the volume of purchases or sales of Common Stock relative to the public float. The limited public float could adversely affect the Company’s business and financing opportunities and negatively impact the price of our Common Stock.
The Company is a “smaller reporting company,” and its reliance on associated disclosure exemptions could make its securities less attractive to investors.
The Company is a “smaller reporting company” within the meaning of the Securities Act, and intends to elect to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not smaller reporting companies including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor internal controls attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. As a result, holders of our securities and potential investors may not have access to certain information they may deem important. There can be no assurances whether investors will find the Company’s securities less attractive because of such exemptions. If some investors find the securities less attractive as a result of reliance on these exemptions, the trading prices of the Company’s securities
33
Table of Contents
may be lower than they otherwise would be, there may be a less active trading market for the Company’s securities and the trading prices of the securities may be more volatile.
Substantial future sales of shares of Common Stock could cause the market price of the Company’s Common Stock to decline.
As of December 31, 2025, ETI, Gates Capital Management and Avenue Capital held approximately 25.7%, 24.4% and 9.3% of the outstanding shares of Common Stock, respectively, in each case assuming the exercise of all warrants held by the Consenting ETI Parties. ETI, Gates Capital Management and Avenue Capital are each permitted to resell all of their shares pursuant to resale registration statements previously filed with the SEC. In addition, our board of directors could designate and sell a class of preferred stock with preferential rights over the Common Stock with respect to dividends or other distributions. We also filed a universal shelf registration statement on Form S-3 with the SEC that registers the sale of up to $250.0 million of any combination of our common stock, preferred stock, debt securities, warrants, rights or units from time to time and at prices and on terms that we may determine. The sale or resale of a substantial number of shares of Common Stock in the public market (or the market perception that such sales or resales could occur) could adversely affect the market price for shares of Common Stock. Furthermore, the selling security holders under the resale registration statements may continue to offer the securities for a significant period of time, the precise duration of which cannot be predicted. Accordingly, the adverse market and price pressures resulting from an offering may continue for an extended period of time.
The Company has entered into a Shareholder Rights Agreement that may delay, defer or prevent a tender offer or takeover attempt that public stockholders might consider in their best interest.
On July 29, 2025, the Company entered into a Shareholder Rights Agreement (the “Shareholder Rights Agreement”), which provides for the issuance of one right per share of Common Stock, exercisable if any person or entity acquires 30% or more of the Common Stock (subject to certain exceptions). Each Right entitles the registered holder to purchase from the Company one one-thousandth of a share of Series A Preferred Stock. The Shareholder Rights Agreement is intended to protect against unsolicited takeovers and expires on January 29, 2027, unless redeemed or exchanged earlier.
The provision of the Company’s Charter that authorizes the Board to issue preferred stock from time to time based on terms approved by the Board, such as pursuant to the Shareholder Rights Agreement, may delay, defer or prevent a tender offer or takeover attempt. Authorized but unissued preferred stock may enable the Board to render it more difficult or to discourage an attempt to obtain control of the Company and thereby protect continuity of or entrench its management, which may negatively impact the market price of the Common Stock. If, in the due exercise of its fiduciary obligations, for example, the Board was to determine that a takeover proposal was not in the best interests of the Company, such preferred stock could be issued by the Board without stockholder approval in one or more private placements or other transactions that might prevent or render more difficult or make more costly the completion of any attempted takeover transaction by diluting voting or other rights of the proposed acquirer or an insurgent stockholder group, by creating a substantial voting bloc in institutional or other hands that might support the position of the incumbent board of directors, by effecting an acquisition that might complicate or preclude the takeover, or otherwise.
The Company’s Charter contains forum limitations for certain disputes between the Company and its stockholders that could limit the ability of stockholders to bring claims against the Company or its directors, officers and employees in jurisdictions preferred by stockholders.
The Company’s Charter provides that, unless the Company consents in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the sole and exclusive forum for (i) any derivative lawsuit brought on the Company’s behalf, (ii) any lawsuit against the Company’s current or former directors, officers or employees or asserting a breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any such person to the Company or its stockholders, (iii) any lawsuit asserting a claim arising under any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law, the Company’s Charter or Bylaws (each, as in effect from time to time) or (iv) any lawsuit governed by the internal affairs doctrine of the State of Delaware. The foregoing forum provisions do not apply to claims arising under the Securities Act, the Exchange Act or other federal securities laws for which there is exclusive federal or concurrent federal and state jurisdiction. The Company’s Charter also provides that, unless the Company consents in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the United States of America are the sole and exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act, the Exchange Act and the rules
34
Table of Contents
and regulations thereunder. The foregoing forum provisions may prevent or limit a stockholder’s ability to file a lawsuit in a judicial forum that it prefers for disputes with the Company or its directors, officers, employees or stockholders, which may discourage such lawsuits, make them more difficult or expensive to pursue, and result in outcomes that are less favorable to such stockholders than outcomes that may have been attainable in other jurisdictions, although stockholders will not be deemed to have waived the Company’s compliance with federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.
There is uncertainty as to whether a court would enforce such a forum selection provision as written in connection with claims arising under the Securities Act because Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all such Securities Act claims.
In addition, notwithstanding the inclusion of the foregoing forum provisions in the Company’s Charter, courts may find the foregoing forum provisions to be inapplicable or unenforceable in certain cases that the foregoing forum provisions purport to address, including claims brought under the Securities Act. If this were to occur in any particular lawsuit, the Company may incur additional costs associated with resolving such lawsuit in other jurisdictions or resolving lawsuits involving similar claims in multiple jurisdictions, all of which could harm the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition.
The Company’s Common Stock may be delisted from the Nasdaq Capital Market if it is unable to maintain compliance with Nasdaq's continued listing standards.
As previously disclosed, on September 16, 2025, the Company received a letter from Nasdaq notifying the Company that it was not in compliance with Nasdaq’s minimum bid price requirements. On December 12, 2025, the Company effected a 1-for-10 reverse stock split of the Company’s Common Stock. On December 31, 2025, Nasdaq indicated that the Company had regained compliance with Nasdaq’s minimum bid price requirements. However, there can be no assurance that the Company will be able to maintain compliance with Nasdaq’s continued listing standards. If the Company does not maintain compliance with these standards, its Common Stock may be delisted from Nasdaq. Any delisting of the Company’s Common Stock would have significant adverse effects, including but not limited to a substantial reduction in the liquidity and market price of its Common Stock and impairment of its ability to raise additional capital on acceptable terms, or at all.
If the Company’s Common Stock is delisted, there can be no assurance that it will be listed or quoted on another national securities exchange or quotation service. Consequently, it may be more difficult for investors to buy or sell the Company’s Common Stock and warrants, at prices equal to or greater than the price paid or at all.
35
Table of Contents