DNJR Golden Bull Ltd

RISK FACTORS

 An investment in our Ordinary Shares involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below together with all other information contained in this prospectus, including the matters discussed under the headings “Forward-Looking Statements” and “Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” before you decide to invest in our Ordinary Shares. The Company may be subject to various legal and operational risks as a result of its previously being a China-based Issuer with substantial amounts of the Company’s operations previously in China and Hong Kong. The legal and regulatory environment in China is in many respects different from the United States. These risks and others could result in a material change in the value of our securities and/or significantly limit or completely limit or completely hinder our ability to offer or continue to offer our securities to investors and cause the value of such securities to significantly decline or be worthless. If any of the following risks, or any other risks and uncertainties that are not presently foreseeable to us, actually occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and our future growth prospects could be materially and adversely affected.

Risks Related to this Offering

The sale or issuance of Ordinary Shares to Ionic may cause dilution, and the sale of Ordinary Shares acquired by Ionic, or the perception that such sales may occur, could cause the price of our Ordinary Shares to fall.

On January 11, 2021, we entered into the Purchase Agreement with Ionic pursuant to which Ionic has committed to purchase up to $80,000,000 of our Ordinary Shares. As of the date of this prospectus, an aggregate of approximately 16,962,521 Ordinary Shares were issued at a price of $58 Million. Of the 20,000,000 shares being registered hereunder which are issuable under the Purchase Agreement, up to 19,500,000 of such shares may be sold for cash and issued to Ionic under the Purchase Agreement at our discretion from time to time commencing after the satisfaction of certain conditions set forth in the Purchase Agreement including that the SEC has declared effective the registration statement that includes this prospectus, and up to 500,000 (2.5% of the number of shares sold for cash) of such shares being may be issued for no additional consideration as Commitment Shares. The purchase price for the Ordinary Shares that we may sell to Ionic under the Purchase Agreement will fluctuate based on the price of Ordinary Shares. Depending on market liquidity at the time, sales of such Ordinary Shares may cause the trading price of our Ordinary Shares to fall.

We generally have the right to control the timing and amount of any future sales of our Ordinary Shares to Ionic under the Purchase Agreement. Sales of our Ordinary Shares, if any, to Ionic will depend upon market conditions and other factors to be determined by us. We may ultimately decide to sell to Ionic all, some or none of the additional Ordinary Shares that may be available for us to sell pursuant to the Purchase Agreement. Therefore, sales to Ionic by us could result in substantial dilution to the interests of other holders of our Ordinary Shares. Additionally, the sale of a substantial number of Ordinary Shares to Ionic, or the anticipation of such sales, could make it more difficult for us to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future at a time and at a price that we might otherwise wish to effect sales. If and when we do sell Ordinary Shares to Ionic, after Ionic has acquired the Ordinary Shares, Ionic may resell all, some or none of those Ordinary Shares at any time or from time to time in its discretion.

We may not have access to the full amount available under the Purchase Agreement with Ionic.

Under the Purchase Agreement, from and after the Commencement Date, the Company has the right, from time to time in its sole discretion and subject to certain conditions and limitations set forth in the Purchase Agreement, to direct the Investor to purchase up to the lesser of (i) $2,500,000 in Ordinary Shares; and (ii) 75% of the average dollar volume of Ordinary Shares for the lowest 8 of 10 Trading Days prior to providing notice to the Investor. The Company may effect a regular purchase at the Regular Purchase Price equal to 85% of the arithmetic average of the three (3) lowest VWAPs calculated for the period five (5) Trading Days prior to and ending five (5) Trading Days after delivery of pre-settlement purchase shares based on an estimate and true-up. The Company may also effect an alternate purchase at the Alternate Purchase Price equal to 90% (as amended) of the arithmetic average of the VWAPs calculated for the period on and ending five (5) Trading Days after delivery of pre-settlement shares based on an estimate and true-up.

Although the Purchase Agreement provides that we may sell up to $80,000,000 of our Ordinary Shares to Ionic, only 16,962,521 Ordinary Shares were issued under two prior registration statements (No. 333-254060 - effective May 20, 2021, and No. 333-258330 – effective February 7, 2022). Twenty million (20,000,000) shares are being offered under this prospectus pursuant to the Purchase Agreement (of which up to 500,000 shares may be issued as Commitment Shares for no consideration and may be issued and sold to Ionic in the future, if and when we sell Ordinary Shares to Ionic under the Purchase Agreement). As a result, depending on the market prices of our Ordinary Shares, we may not be able to sell the remaining $22,000,000 commitment amount contemplated by the Purchase Agreement.

In the event that the market price of our Ordinary Shares decreases, we may be able to issue and sell more Ordinary Shares to Ionic of up to $22,000,000 remaining under the Purchase Agreement than can be represented by the 20,000,000 Ordinary Shares registered for resale under the registration statement that includes this prospectus. In such case we will need to register for resale under the Securities Act additional Ordinary Shares to represent such Ordinary Shares, which will require additional time, resources and cost to us. In addition, the issuance and sale of such additional Ordinary Shares could cause substantial dilution to our shareholders.

The extent to which we rely on Ionic as a source of funding through May 2024 will depend on a number of factors, including the prevailing market price of our Ordinary Shares and the extent to which we are able to secure working capital from other sources. Even if we sell all remaining $22,000,000 of Ordinary Shares under the Purchase Agreement to Ionic, we may still need additional capital to fully implement our business, operating and development plans. Should the financing we require to sustain our working capital needs be unavailable or prohibitively expensive when we require it, the consequences could be a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, financial condition and prospects.

Ionic will pay less than the then-prevailing market price for our Ordinary Shares, which could cause the price of our Ordinary Shares to decline.

The purchase price of Ordinary Shares sold to Ionic under the Purchase Agreement is derived from the market price of our Ordinary Shares on the Nasdaq Capital Market. The Ordinary Shares to be sold to Ionic pursuant to the Purchase Agreement will be purchased at a discounted price depending on the type of purchase. The Company may effect a regular purchase at the Regular Purchase Price equal to 85% of the arithmetic average of the three (3) lowest VWAPs calculated for the period five (5) Trading Days prior to and ending five (5) Trading Days after delivery of pre-settlement purchase shares based on an estimate and true-up. The Company may also effect an alternate purchase at the Alternate Purchase Price equal to 90% (as amended) of the arithmetic average of the VWAPs calculated for the period on and ending five (5) Trading Days after delivery of pre-settlement shares based on an estimate and true-up. As a result of this pricing structure, Ionic may sell the Ordinary Shares it receives immediately after receipt of the Ordinary Shares, which could cause the price of our Ordinary Shares to decrease. These sales may have a further impact on the price of our Ordinary Shares.

Risks Related to Doing Business in China

Prior to the commencement of the Company’s bitcoin mining business, and before the involvement of any of the Company’s current directors, officers or employees, Golden Bull Limited formerly operated a peer-to-peer lending business in the PRC, as discussed below. Additionally, from February 2020 to June 2021, the Company operated its bitcoin mining business in the PRC, but completed the migration of all of its bitcoin mining operations out of China by September 30, 2021. Risks related to the Company’s former operations in the PRC are discussed below.

Pursuant to laws and regulations of PRC, there are two ways for foreign legal persons/entities to be considered to be engaging in operation activities within the territory of China. One way is to establish a foreign-invested enterprise, that is incorporated, according to the Foreign Investment Law of PRC, within the territory of China and that is wholly or partly invested by a foreign investor. The organization form, institutional framework and standard of conduct of a foreign-invested enterprise are subject to the provisions of the Company Law of the PRC and the Partnership Enterprise Law of the PRC and other law related regulations. Another way to be deemed to be operating within China is to complete the approval and registration procedures with the relevant regulatory authorities in accordance with the provisions of Administrative Measures for the Registration of Enterprises of Foreign Countries (Regions) Engaging in Production and Operation Activities within the Territory of China (Revised in 2020), or Order No.31. Notwithstanding the fact that we no longer have bitcoin mining operations in China, our prior operations may subject us to the statutes and regulations of China, as the Company conducted its bitcoin mining operations in the PRC through its Hong Kong subsidiary and did not register to do business in the PRC and, as described below, we may be subject to fines, penalties and/or other sanctions.

There are risks to foreign investors in Chinese companies.

The Chinese government implements the management systems of pre-establishment national treatment and negative list for foreign investment. Pre-establishment national treatment refers to the treatment given to foreign investors and their investments during the investment access stage, which is not lower than that given to their domestic counterparts; negative list for foreign investment refers to special administrative measures for the restricted or prohibited access of foreign investment in specific fields as stipulated by the Chinese government.

Pursuant to the Special Administrative Measures for Access of Foreign Investment Access (2021 Edition), or the 2021 Edition Negative List for Foreign, issued by The Ministry of Commerce of the PRC (the “MOFCOM”) and the National Development and Reform Commission (the “NDRC”) on December 27, 2021, which came into effect on January 1, 2022, our bitcoin mining business does not fall into the Negative List for Foreign. However, the 2021 Edition Negative List for Foreign indicates that “Fields not mentioned in the Negative List for Foreign Investment Access shall be subject to administration under the principle of consistency for domestic and foreign investments. The relevant provisions of the Negative List for Market Access shall apply to domestic and foreign investors on a unified basis.”

Also, based on the Negative List for Market Access (2022 Edition), “the Catalogue for Guidance on Industrial Restructuring shall be included in the Negative List for Market Access”; plus, according to the Decision of the State Council on Promulgating and Implementing the “Temporary Provisions on Promoting Industrial Structure Adjustment,” valid from December. 2, 2005, “In principle, the ‘Guidance Catalogue for the Industrial Structure Adjustment “shall apply to various types of enterprises inside China.” “The industries of the eliminated category under the ‘Guidance Catalogue for the Industrial Structure Adjustment’ shall apply to the foreign investment enterprises.” and “Investments are prohibited from being contributed to projects under the eliminated category.” Additionally, the NDRC released on December 30, 2021 its No. 49 Decree, announcing that the Decision of the National Development and Reform Commission on Amending the Guiding Catalog for Industrial Restructuring (2019 Version) (the “Amended Catalog”). The Amended Catalog added ‘virtual currency mining activities’ to the eliminated category of ‘1. outdated production processing and equipment ‘under the original Catalog.” Therefore, foreign investment enterprises are prohibited from virtual currency activities and our bitcoin mining business are banned in China as well. There can be no assurance that our prior mining activities in China will not be subject to fines and penalties on a retroactive basis.

We may be subject to penalties as a result of the Chinese government suspension of our former P2P lending business

The Company is currently engaged in the bitcoin mining business, but previously, before the involvement of any of the Company’s current officers, directors or employees, was primarily an online finance marketplace, or “peer-to-peer” lending company, in China that provided borrowers access to loans. On October 24, 2019, the Pudong Branch of the Shanghai Public Security Bureau (the “Bureau”) announced that it was conducting an investigation of Shanghai Dianniu Internet Finance Information Service Co. Ltd, which was a variable interest entity (VIE) of the Company, for suspected illegal collection of public deposits. The Bureau took criminal enforcement measures against 17 suspects in the case and detained at least six of those suspects. On March 24, 2020, the Bureau announced that it had transferred seven suspects to the procuratorates for criminal prosecution and took criminal action against 14 defendants and is searching for our former CEO as of the date of this prospectus. While the Company has not been subject to any enforcement actions or investigations, nine persons, including a former director of the Company, have been found guilty of fund-raising fraud or illegally collecting public deposits by the People’s Court of Shanghai Pudong New District, and were sentenced to imprisonment and the confiscations and return all the illegal gains, which may or may not include assets of the Company. The Company’s current management believes that its former Chief Financial Officer, as well as members of the VIE’s management, may have been the subject of these proceedings. No current member of our management or board and none of our current employees was involved with the Company at the time of the events described above. As of the date of this prospectus, the final outcome of the investigation has not been published, and the impact of any such outcome on the Company cannot be estimated or determined with any certainty.

We may be subject to fines and penalties for any noncompliance with or liabilities in our former business in China in a certain period from now on.

Pursuant to the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Administrative Penalties (Revised in 2021), where an unlawful act conducted in China is not discovered within two years of its commission (the period shall be counted from the date on which the unlawful act is committed, or if the act is ongoing or continuous, from the date on which the act ends), the administrative penalty shall be exempted; and if it involves citizens’ life and health security or financial security, and causes harmful consequences, the above-mentioned period shall be extended to five years, except as otherwise prescribed by laws. We have not received any administrative penalty for our historical mining business as of the date of this prospectus. Nevertheless, uncertainties still exist since the administrative organs may impose administrative penalties on us in a certain period from now on for any noncompliance with or liabilities in our historical business in China, including, but not limited to, any noncompliance with or liabilities under Order No.31 and applicable environmental, health or safety regulations, which could materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

As a result of the May 21, 2021 Financial Stability Development Committee of the State Council in China targeting virtual currency mining in China, we suspended all mining operations in China and terminated our business operations in June 2021. However, as described in the next risk factor, it was not until September 2021 that all digital asset transactions were banned. In October 2020, the Company commenced the migration of miners out of China and believes it was in compliance with Chinese law on bitcoin mining while operating in China. However, according to Foreign Investment Law of PRC and Order No. 31, foreign enterprises engaged in profit-making activities in China are required to apply to the provincial market regulatory administration, or the registration authorities, for registration upon the approval of the State Council and the competent agencies authorized by the State Council, or the approving authorities. Without the approval of the approving authorities and the registration approval of the registration authorities, foreign enterprises may not conduct any production and operation activities within the territory of China, and foreign enterprises engaging in profit-making activities without proper authority may be subject to penalties, such as warnings, fines, confiscation of illegal income or suspension of business for rectification on a case-by-case basis of the PRC authorities under the PRC laws.

Before we terminated our business operations in China, our business in China was not carried out through any Chinese subsidiaries. In China, we made profits from mining equipment stored in facilities directly leased by Bit Digital Hong Kong, deemed to be a foreign enterprise. Bit Digital Hong Kong did not provide cloud mining services or similar services to any third parties. Nevertheless, the Company may be subject to penalties such as warnings, fines, confiscation of illegal income, or suspension of business for rectification on a case-by-case basis of the PRC authorities under the PRC laws, for not registering to do business in China or having authorization for its bitcoin mining operations.

The PRC government department does have the authority to issue licenses or approval in some industries directly to foreign companies, including Hong Kong companies, which has been provided in Order No. 31. A foreign company, including a Hong Kong company, is permitted to be engaged in production and operation within China in two ways--one is to obtain the license or approval, and the other is to establish a subsidiary in the territory of China, otherwise it may lead to a punishment of a warning, fine, confiscation of income and/or suspension of business for rectification and so on. Furthermore, although Hong Kong is one of the special administrative districts of the PRC, from the perspective of foreign investment supervision, Hong Kong companies are treated as foreign companies, and most of the laws and regulations related to the foreign investment also apply to Hong Kong companies. Considering that Bit Digital Hong Kong Limited (the “BT HK”) had already been engaged in bitcoin mining activities in the territory of China, and that BT HK had not obtained business licenses in relevant provinces, it would be much more difficult for Bit Digital Hong Kong to obtain licenses directly than to establish a subsidiary in PRC. From the perspective of compliance, the Company decided to initiate the process of forming a subsidiary to undertake operational activities in PRC. However, in view of the more recent ban on all new digital asset operations in China, we terminated the process of forming a subsidiary in mainland, China. Since BT HK had not obtained business licenses in relevant provinces where Bit Digital Hong Kong used to carry out business, it may lead to a punishment of a warning, fine, confiscation of income and/or suspension of business for rectification.

It is now illegal in China to engage in digital asset transactions, including bitcoin mining operations, which may adversely affect us.

China has taken significant regulatory action to ban digital asset mining operations and to severely restrict the right to acquire, own, hold, sell or use of bitcoin assets or to exchange them for fiat currency. Such restrictions may adversely affect us as the large-scale use of digital assets as a means of exchange is presently confined to certain regions globally. Ongoing and future regulatory actions in China may impact our ability to pursue part of our business strategy, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects or operations. 

On May 21, 2021, the Financial Stability and Development Committee of the State Council in China proposed to “crack down on bitcoin mining and trading.” However, it was not until September 24, 2021, as described below, that all digital asset transactions were banned in China. In the interim, we incurred significant costs in connection with the migration of our miners out of China and the time that our miners were not being operated. In May 2021, local governments began to issue corresponding measures in succession to respond to the central government, including Xinjiang Changji Hui Autonomous Prefecture Development and Reform Commission, where we previously had mining operations, issuing a notice on the immediate shutdown of enterprises engaged in digital asset mining on June 9, 2021. At the time of the announcement of the ban in Xinjiang, we had no mining operations in Xinjiang. On June 18, 2021, Sichuan Provincial Development and Reform Commission and Sichuan Energy Bureau issued a notice on the shutdown of digital asset mining projects with a deadline of June 25, 2021. Accordingly, we ceased all of our remaining operations in PRC on June 21, 2021. On September 24, 2021, the newly issued Notification of Overhauling the Mining Activity of Cryptocurrency (or the Notification No. 1283) banned all new digital asset operations in China. The NDRC notice set forth penalties on a going forward basis for all of the PRC. While we do not believe Sichuan Province will seek to impose retroactive fines, penalties or sanctions, there can be no assurance the province may not seek to do so.

In consideration of the PRC government’s policies and general attitude toward our industry, as well as our business plans, we will not conduct any digital asset mining operations or digital asset trading operations in mainland PRC. All of our miners have been migrated out of the PRC as of September 30, 2021 and are expected to be fully operational in the U.S. during the second half of 2022. We have not had difficulties transferring the bitcoin mining equipment from our Hong Kong subsidiaries to our other subsidiaries, nor have we had difficulties in transferring cash to or from our Hong Kong subsidiaries. However, this could change in the event that our Hong Kong subsidiaries become subject to the direct oversight of the PRC government if the National laws of mainland China are applied in Hong Kong. All of our bitcoin mining equipment has been transferred from our Hong Kong subsidiaries to North America. See Risk Factor — “We may be subject to fines and penalties for any noncompliance with or liabilities in our former business in China in a certain period from now on” above, and “Changes in China’s economic, political or social conditions or government policies could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations” below.

Changes in China’s economic, political or social conditions or government policies could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Although we have completed the migration of miners to the United States and/or Canada, our bitcoin mining business is worldwide. We expect to continue to purchase bitcoin miners from manufacturers, and/or other sellers located in Hong Kong. Accordingly, our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations may be influenced to a significant degree by political, economic and social conditions in China generally and by continued economic growth in China as a whole.

The Chinese economy differs from the economies of most developed countries in many respects, including the amount of government involvement, level of development, growth rate, control of foreign exchange and allocation of resources. Although the Chinese government has implemented measures emphasizing the utilization of market forces for economic reform, the reduction of state ownership of productive assets and the establishment of improved corporate governance in business enterprises, a substantial portion of productive assets in China are still owned by the government. In addition, the Chinese government continues to play a significant role in regulating industry development by imposing industrial policies. The Chinese government also exercises significant control over China’s economic growth through allocating resources, controlling payment of foreign currency-denominated obligations, setting monetary policy, and providing preferential treatment to particular industries or companies.

While the Chinese economy has experienced significant growth over the past decades, growth has been uneven, both geographically and among various sectors of the economy. The Chinese government has implemented various measures to encourage economic growth and guide the allocation of resources. Some of these measures may benefit the overall Chinese economy but may have a negative effect on us. For example, our financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected by government control over capital investments or changes in tax regulations. In addition, in the past the Chinese government has implemented certain measures, including interest rate increases, to control the pace of economic growth. These measures may cause decreased economic activity in China, and since 2012, and in particular in 2020 as a result of COVID-19, China’s economic growth slowed down. Any prolonged slowdown in the Chinese economy may reduce the demand for our products and services and materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Uncertainties in the interpretation and enforcement of Chinese laws and regulations could limit the legal protections available to us.

The PRC legal system is based on written statutes, and prior court decisions have limited precedential value. Since the PRC legal system continues to rapidly evolve, the interpretations of many laws, regulations and rules are not always uniform and enforcement of these laws, regulations and rules involves uncertainties. The risks arising from the legal system in China include risks and uncertainties regarding the enforcement of laws and that rules and regulations in China can change quickly with little, if any, advance notice; and there is a risk that the Chinese government may intervene or influence our operations at any time, or may exert more control over offerings conducted overseas and/or foreign investment in China-based issuers, which could result in a material change in our operations and/or the value of our securities. Any risks that any actions by the Chinese government to exert more oversight and control over offerings that are conducted overseas and/or foreign investment in China-based issuers could significantly limit or completely hinder our ability to offer or continue to offer securities to investors and cause the value of such securities to significantly decline or be worthless.

China is one of the jurisdictions to implement strict foreign exchange control. The free flow of bitcoin presents novel issues in the context of Chinese foreign exchange control. In some public speeches, officials of the Chinese State Administration of Foreign Exchange (the “SAFE”) have expressed concerns about the challenges of digital asset to foreign exchange control. In the event regulators believe that the circulation of bitcoin has a significant adverse impact on financial security, they may restrict the trading of bitcoin, as they have done with bitcoin mining, in its jurisdiction.

From time to time, we may have to resort to administrative and court proceedings to enforce our legal rights. However, since PRC administrative and court authorities have significant discretion in interpreting and implementing statutory and contractual terms, it may be more difficult to evaluate the outcome of administrative and court proceedings and the level of legal protection we enjoy than in more developed legal systems. Furthermore, the PRC legal system is based in part on government policies and internal rules (some of which are not published in a timely manner or at all) that may have retroactive effect. Such uncertainties, including uncertainty over the scope and effect of our contractual, property (including intellectual property) and procedural rights, could materially and adversely affect our business and impede our ability to continue our operations.

In addition to the unified policies at the national level, the attitudes of the Chinese local or provincial governments towards mining enterprises have also changed from time to time. In recent years, local governments in Inner Mongolia, Sichuan and Xinjiang have taken action to inspect and clean up mining enterprises in their jurisdictions. These actions contributed to our decision to commence migration of miners out of China in October 2020.

We may be subject to recently announced measures from the Cyberspace Administration of China concerning the collection of data and required to obtain clearance from the CAC.

The Cybersecurity Review Measures (2021) (the “Measures”) were officially released to the public on December 28, 2021 and became effective on February 15, 2022. According to the Measures, to go public abroad, an online platform operator that possesses the personal information of more than 1 million users must seek cybersecurity review from the Office of Cybersecurity Review.

Currently, we have not been involved in any investigations on cybersecurity review initiated by the CAC or related governmental regulatory authorities, and we have not received any inquiry, notice, warning, or sanction in such respect.

We believe we currently are not required to obtain clearance from the CAC regarding our listing in the United States under the recently-enacted or proposed regulations or rules because we have never set an online platform for any user and we have not acted as an online platform operator. However, since these cybersecurity rules were recently enacted and uncertainties exist as to the interpretation or implementation of the Measures, if the Measures require us to obtain clearance or permissions from the CAC, we would file an application with CAC and seek to obtain the clearance or permissions from the CAC as required, however there can be no assurance we will obtain clearance or permission which could adversely affect our business. Compliance with the Measures, as well as additional laws, regulations and guidelines that the Chinese government promulgates in the future, may entail significant expenses and could materially affect our business. 

The M&A Rules and certain other PRC regulations establish complex procedures for some acquisitions of Chinese companies by foreign investors, which could make it more difficult for us to pursue growth through acquisitions in China.

The M&A Rules discussed under “Business-Regulation” in our Annual Report on Form 20-F, and certain other regulations and rules concerning mergers and acquisitions establish additional procedures and requirements in PRC that could make merger and acquisition activities by foreign investors more time consuming and complex, including requirements in some instances that MOFCOM be notified in advance of any change-of-control transaction in which a foreign investor takes control of a PRC domestic enterprise. Moreover, the Anti-Monopoly Law requires that the MOFCOM shall be notified in advance of any concentration of undertaking if certain thresholds are triggered. In addition, the security review rules issued by the MOFCOM that became effective in September 2011 specify that mergers and acquisitions by foreign investors that raise “national defense and security” concerns and mergers and acquisitions through which foreign investors may acquire de facto control over domestic enterprises that raise “national security” concerns are subject to strict review by the MOFCOM, and the rules prohibit any activities attempting to bypass a security review, including by structuring the transaction through a proxy or contractual control arrangement. Also, according to the Foreign Investment Law of the PRC, “Where a foreign investor acquires any domestic enterprise in China or participates in the concentration of undertakings by other means, it shall be subject to the review of concentration of undertakings according to the provisions of the Anti-monopoly Law of the PRC.” Complying with the requirements of the above-mentioned regulations and other relevant rules to complete such transactions (to the extent relevant)  could be time consuming, and any required approval processes, including obtaining approval from the MOFCOM or its local counterparts, may delay or inhibit our ability to complete such transactions, which could affect our ability to expand our business or maintain our market share.

PRC regulations relating to offshore investment activities by PRC residents may expose us or our PRC resident beneficial owners to liability and penalties under PRC law.

SAFE promulgated the Circular on Relevant Issues Relating to Domestic Resident’s Investment and Financing and Roundtrip Investment through Special Purpose Vehicles, or SAFE Circular 37, in July 2014, that requires PRC residents or entities to register with SAFE or its local branch in connection with their establishment or control of an offshore entity established for the purpose of overseas investment or financing. In addition, such PRC residents or entities must update their SAFE registrations when the offshore special purpose vehicle undergoes material events relating to any change of basic information (including change of such PRC citizens or residents, name and operation term), increases or decreases in investment amount, transfers or exchanges of shares, or mergers or divisions. SAFE Circular 37 is issued to replace the Notice on Relevant Issues Concerning Foreign Exchange Administration for PRC Residents Engaging in Financing and Roundtrip Investments via Overseas Special Purpose Vehicles, or SAFE Circular 75. SAFE promulgated the Notice on Further Simplifying and Improving the Administration of the Foreign Exchange Concerning Direct Investment in February 2015, which took effect on June 1, 2015. This notice has amended SAFE Circular 37 requiring PRC residents or entities to register with qualified banks rather than SAFE or its local branch in connection with their establishment or control of an offshore entity established for the purpose of overseas investment or financing.

Failure to comply with the SAFE registration described above could result in liability under PRC laws for evasion of applicable foreign exchange restrictions.

Some of our shareholders, who directly or indirectly hold shares in our Company and who were known to us as being PRC residents, have completed the foreign exchange registrations required in connection with our recent corporate restructuring.

However, we may not be informed of the identities of all the PRC residents or entities holding direct or indirect interest in our company, nor can we compel our beneficial owners to comply with SAFE registration requirements. As a result, we cannot assure you that all of our shareholders or beneficial owners who are PRC residents or entities have complied with and will in the future make or obtain any applicable registrations or approvals required by, SAFE regulations. Failure by such shareholders or beneficial owners to comply with SAFE regulations could subject us to fines or legal sanctions, restrict our overseas or cross-border investment activities or affect our ownership structure, which could adversely affect our business and prospects.

Any failure to comply with PRC regulations regarding the registration requirements for employee stock incentive plans may subject the PRC plan participants or us to fines and other legal or administrative sanctions.

In February 2012, SAFE promulgated the Notices on Issues Concerning the Foreign Exchange Administration for Domestic Individuals Participating in Stock Incentive Plan of Overseas Publicly-Listed Company, replacing earlier rules. Pursuant to these rules, PRC citizens and non-PRC citizens who reside in China for a continuous period of not less than one year who participate in any stock incentive plan of an overseas publicly listed company, subject to a few exceptions, are required to register with SAFE through a domestic qualified agent, which could be the PRC subsidiary of such overseas listed company, and complete certain other procedures. In addition, an overseas entrusted institution must be retained to handle matters in connection with the exercise or sale of stock options and the purchase or sale of shares and interests. We and our executive officers and other employees who are PRC citizens or who have resided in the PRC for a continuous period of not less than one year and who have been granted options or other awards are subject to these regulations because our company is an overseas listed company. Failure to complete the SAFE registrations may subject them to fines and legal sanctions.

If we are classified as a PRC resident enterprise for PRC income tax purposes, such classification could result in unfavorable tax consequences to us and our non-PRC shareholders.

Under the PRC Enterprise Income Tax Law and its implementation rules, an enterprise established outside of the PRC with a “de facto management body” within the PRC is considered a resident enterprise and will be subject to the enterprise income tax on its global income at the rate of 25%. The implementation rules define the term “de facto management body” as the body that exercises full and substantial control over and overall management of the business, productions, personnel, accounts and properties of an enterprise. In April 2009, the State Administration of Taxation issued a circular, known as Circular 82, (partly amended) which provides certain specific criteria for determining whether the “de facto management body” of a PRC-controlled enterprise that is incorporated offshore is located in China. Although this circular only applies to offshore enterprises controlled by PRC enterprises or PRC enterprise groups, not those controlled by PRC individuals or foreigners like us, the criteria set forth in the circular may reflect the State Administration of Taxation’s general position on how the “de facto management body” test should be applied in determining the tax resident status of all offshore enterprises. According to Circular 82, an offshore incorporated enterprise controlled by a PRC enterprise or a PRC enterprise group will be regarded as a PRC tax resident by virtue of having its “de facto management body” in China and will be subject to PRC enterprise income tax on its global income only if all of the following conditions are met: (i) the primary location of the day-to-day operational management is in the PRC; (ii) decisions relating to the enterprise’s financial and human resource matters are made or are subject to approval by organizations or personnel in the PRC; (iii) the enterprise’s primary assets, accounting books and records, company seals, and board and shareholder resolutions, are located or maintained in the PRC; and (iv) at least 50% of voting board members or senior executives habitually reside in the PRC.

We believe none of our entities outside of China is a PRC resident enterprise for PRC tax purposes. See “Taxation — People’s Republic of China Taxation.” However, the tax resident status of an enterprise is subject to determination by the PRC tax authorities and uncertainties remain with respect to the interpretation of the term “de facto management body.” Since a portion of our management members are not based in China, it remains unclear how the tax residency rule will apply to our case. If the PRC tax authorities determine that we or any of our subsidiaries outside of China is a PRC resident enterprise for PRC enterprise income tax purposes, then we or such subsidiary could be subject to PRC tax at a rate of 25% on its world-wide income, which could materially reduce our net income. In addition, we will also be subject to PRC enterprise income tax reporting obligations. Furthermore, if the PRC tax authorities determine that we are a PRC resident enterprise for enterprise income tax purposes, gains realized on the sale or other disposition of our Ordinary Shares may be subject to PRC tax, at a rate of 10% in the case of non-PRC enterprises or 20% in the case of non-PRC individuals (in each case, subject to the provisions of any applicable tax treaty), if such gains are deemed to be from PRC sources. It is unclear whether non-PRC shareholders of our company would be able to claim the benefits of any tax treaties between their country of tax residence and the PRC in the event that we are treated as a PRC resident enterprise. Any such tax may reduce the returns on your investment in our Ordinary Shares.

United States regulators may be limited in their ability to conduct investigations or inspections of our operations in Hong Kong.

The increased regulatory scrutiny of U.S.-listed companies with operations in China could add uncertainties to our business operations, share price and reputation. Although the audit reports of Audit Alliance LLP incorporated by reference into this prospectus are prepared by our auditors in Singapore who are subject to inspection by the Public Company Accounting Overnight Board (the “PCAOB”), there is no guarantee that future audit reports will be prepared by auditors that are completely inspected by the PCAOB, and, as such, future investors may be deprived of the benefit of such complete inspections, which could result in limitations or restrictions on our ability to access the U.S. capital markets. Furthermore, trading in our securities may be prohibited under the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (the “HFCA Act”) or the Accelerating Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, if the SEC subsequently determines our audit work is performed by auditors that the PCAOB is unable to inspect or investigate completely, and as a result, U.S. national securities exchanges, such as Nasdaq or the over-the-counter market, may determine to delist our securities.

U.S. public companies that have or had a substantial portion of their operations in China have been the subject of heightened scrutiny, criticism and negative publicity by investors, financial commentators and regulatory agencies, such as the SEC. Much of the scrutiny, criticism and negative publicity has centered on financial and accounting irregularities and mistakes, a lack of effective internal controls over financial accounting, inadequate corporate government policies or a lack of adherence thereto and, in many cases, allegations of fraud.

As part of increased regulatory focus in the United States on access to audit information, the United States enacted the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, or the HFCA Act, in December 2020. The HFCA Act includes requirements for the SEC to identify issuers whose audit reports are prepared by auditors that the PCAOB is unable to inspect or investigate completely because of a restriction imposed by a non-U.S. authority in the auditor’s local jurisdiction. The HFCA Act also requires public companies on this SEC list to certify that they are not owned or controlled by a foreign government and make certain additional disclosures in their SEC filings. In addition, under the HFCA Act, if the auditor of a U.S. listed company’s financial statements is not subject to PCAOB inspections for three consecutive “non-inspection” years after the law becomes effective, the SEC is required to prohibit the securities of such issuer from being traded on a U.S. national securities exchange, such as the NYSE and Nasdaq, or in the U.S. over-the-counter markets. On March 24, 2021, the SEC announced that it had adopted interim final amendments to implement the foregoing certification and disclosure requirements and that it was seeking public comment on the issuer identification process as well as the submission and disclosure requirements. On December 2, 2021, the SEC adopted amendments to finalize rules implementing the HFCA Act that require the SEC to prohibit an issuer’s securities from trading on any U.S. national securities exchange and on the over-the-counter market if the auditor is not subject to PCAOB inspections for three consecutive years. Accordingly, our securities may be prohibited from trading on Nasdaq or other U.S. stock exchange if our auditor is not inspected by the PCAOB for three consecutive years, and this ultimately could result in our Ordinary Shares being delisted.

On June 22, 2021, the U.S. Senate passed the Accelerating Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, which if enacted into law, would amend the HFCA Act and require the SEC to prohibit an issuer’s securities from trading on U.S. stock exchanges if its auditors are not subject to PCAOB inspections for two consecutive “non-inspection” years instead of three. On September 22, 2021, the PCAOB adopted a final rule implementing the HFCA Act, which provides a framework for the PCAOB to use when determining, as contemplated under the HFCA Act, whether the Board is unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms located in a foreign jurisdiction because of a position taken by one or more authorities in that jurisdiction. On December 16, 2021, the PCAOB issued PCAOB Rule 6100 Board Determinations Under the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act. The PCAOB notified the SEC that it was unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms headquartered in mainland China and in Hong Kong because of the positions taken by authorities in mainland China and Hong Kong. On August 26, 2022, the PCAOB announced the signing of a Statement of Protocol with the Chinese Securities Regulatory Commission and the Ministry of Finance of the PRC granting the PCAOB complete access to audit PCAOB-registered accounting firms in China. The Statement of Protocol is a first step toward opening access for the PCAOB to inspect and investigate registered public accounting firms headquartered in mainland China and Hong Kong and that the PCAOB will be required to reassess its determination by the end of 2022. While the audit reports of Audit Alliance LLP incorporated by reference into this prospectus are prepared by auditors based in Singapore who are subject to inspection and investigation by the PCAOB, there can be no assurance that our auditor or we will be able to comply with these and other requirements imposed by U.S. regulators in the future. The market prices of our Ordinary Shares and/or other securities could be adversely affected as a result of possible negative impacts of the HFCA Act and other similar rules and regulations.

Our Hong Kong subsidiaries could become subject to the direct oversight of the PRC government at any time if the national laws of mainland China are applied to Hong Kong.

The national laws of the PRC, including, but not limited to (i) the Cybersecurity Review Measures that became effective on February 15, 2022; and (ii) approval by the Chinese Securities Regulatory Commission (“CSRC”) or any other Chinese regulatory authority to approve or permit our offering of securities in the U.S., do not currently apply to our Hong Kong subsidiaries, except for those listed in the Basic Law of Hong Kong. However, due to the uncertainty of the PRC legal system and changes in laws, regulations or policies, including how those laws, regulations or policies would be interpreted or implemented, and the national laws applicable in Hong Kong, the Basic Law might be revised in the future and our Hong Kong subsidiaries may be subject to future oversight by the PRC government.

Pursuant to Article 18 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the PRC (the “Basic Law”), “The laws in force in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be the Basic Law, the laws previously in force in Hong Kong as provided for in Article 8 of this Law, and the laws enacted by the legislature of the Region. National laws shall not be applied in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region except for those listed in Annex III to the Basic Law. The laws listed therein shall be applied locally by way of promulgation or legislation by the Region. Also, regarding the Annex III and several Instruments of the Basic Law, National Laws, which have applied in Hong Kong until now are as following:

Resolution on the Capital, Calendar, National Anthem and National Flag of the PRC; Resolution on the National Day of the PRC; Declaration of the Government of the PRC on the Territorial Sea; Nationality Law of the PRC; Regulations of the PRC Concerning Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities; Law of the PRC on the National Flag; Regulations of the PRC Concerning Consular Privileges and Immunities; Law of the PRC on the National Emblem; Law of the PRC on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone; Law of the PRC on Garrisoning the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region; Law of the PRC on the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf; Law of the PRC on Judicial Immunity from Compulsory Measures Concerning the Property of Foreign Central Banks; and Law of the PRC on the National Anthem; Law of the PRC on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

The CSRC released, on December 24, 2021, the Provisions of the State Council on the Administration of Domestic Companies Offering Securities for Overseas Listing (Revision Draft for Comments) (the “Provisions”) and the Administrative Measures for the Filing of Domestic Companies Seeking Overseas Securities Offering and Listing (the “Measures”) for public comment. According to the Provisions and Measures, “Domestic companies that seek to offer and list securities in overseas markets shall fulfill the filing procedure with the securities regulatory agency under the State Council and report relevant information;” and “An overseas offering and listing is prohibited under any of the following circumstances: (1) if the intended securities offering and listing falls under specific clauses in national laws and regulations and relevant provisions prohibiting such financing activities.” Furthermore, the Cybersecurity Review Measures (2021) were officially released to the public on December 28, 2021 and became effective on February 15, 2022. According to the Cybersecurity Review Measures (2021), “To go public abroad, an online platform operator who possesses the personal information of more than 1 million users shall declare to the Office of Cybersecurity Review for cybersecurity review.”

As of the date of this prospectus, the Hong Kong subsidiaries have not established any subsidiary or branch in mainland PRC and are not conducting any business operations in mainland PRC.

Based on the aforementioned Basic Law, the Hong Kong subsidiaries are not currently subject to the Cybersecurity Review Measures (2021) and the Provisions and the Measures. However, due to the uncertainty of the PRC legal system and changes in laws, regulations or policies, including how these laws, regulations or policies would be interpreted or implemented, the national laws applicable in Hong Kong in the Basic Law might be revised in the future. 

Therefore, we cannot assure you that we will not be affected by the foregoing or relevant laws, regulations or policies in the future, if there are any changes to the foregoing laws, regulations and policies, or if any new laws, regulations, and policies are published. We could not guarantee that the relevant laws, regulations, or policies would not be applied retroactively, so we might face penalties, and our reputation and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected

Enhanced scrutiny over acquisition transactions by the PRC tax authorities may have a negative impact on the indirect transfer of equity in the past and potential acquisitions we may pursue in the future.

The PRC tax authorities have enhanced their scrutiny over the direct or indirect transfer of certain taxable assets, including, in particular, equity interests in a PRC resident enterprise, by a non-resident enterprise by promulgating and implementing SAT Circular 59 and Circular 698, which became effective in January 2008, and a Circular 7 to replace some of the existing rules in Circular 698, which became effective in February 2015.

Under Circular 7, where a non-resident enterprise conducts an “indirect transfer” by transferring the equity interests of a PRC “resident enterprise” indirectly by disposing of the equity interests of an overseas holding company, the non-resident enterprise, being the transferor, may be subject to PRC enterprise income tax if the indirect transfer is considered to be an abusive use of company structure without reasonable commercial purposes. As a result, gains derived from such indirect transfer may be subject to PRC tax at a rate of up to 10%.

On October 17, 2017, the SAT issued the Announcement of the State Administration of Taxation on Issues Concerning the Withholding of Nonresident Enterprise Income Tax at Source partly revised, or SAT Circular 37, which came into effect on December 1, 2017. The SAT Circular 37 further clarifies the practice and procedure of the withholding of non-resident enterprise income tax. SAT Circular 698 was repealed from the date SAT Circular 37 was enacted.

Where a non-resident enterprise transfers taxable assets in China indirectly by disposing of the equity interests of an overseas holding company, which is an Indirect Transfer, the non-resident enterprise as either transferor or transferee, or the PRC entity whose equity is transferred, may report such Indirect Transfer to the relevant tax authority. Using a “substance over form” principle, the PRC tax authority may disregard the existence of the overseas holding company if it lacks a reasonable commercial purpose and was established for the purpose of reducing, avoiding or deferring PRC tax. As a result, gains derived from such Indirect Transfer may be subject to PRC enterprise income tax, and the transferee or other person who is obligated to pay for the transfer is obligated to withhold the applicable taxes, currently at a rate of 10% for the transfer of equity interests in a PRC resident enterprise. Both the transferor and the transferee may be subject to penalties under PRC tax laws if the transferee fails to withhold the taxes and the transferor fails to pay the taxes. We face uncertainties as to the reporting and other implications of certain past and future transactions where PRC taxable assets are involved, such as offshore restructuring, sale of the shares in our offshore subsidiaries and investments. Our Company may be subject to filing obligations or taxed if our company is transferor in such transactions and may be subject to withholding obligations if our company is transferee in such transactions, under Circular 7 and/or SAT Circular 37. For transfer of shares in our Company by investors who are non-PRC resident enterprises, our former  PRC subsidiaries may be requested to assist in the filing under SAT Circular 7 and/or Circular 37. As a result, we may be required to expend valuable resources to comply with SAT Circular 7 and/or Circular 37 or to request the relevant transferors from whom we purchase taxable assets to comply with these circulars, or to establish that our Company should not be taxed under these circulars, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Fluctuations in exchange rates could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and the value of your investment.

Historically, a portion of our revenues and expenditures have been denominated in RMB, whereas our reporting currency is the U.S. dollar. As a result, fluctuations in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and RMB have affected the relative purchasing power in RMB terms of our U.S. dollar assets. Gains and losses from the remeasurement of assets and liabilities that are receivable or payable in RMB are included in our historical consolidated statements of operations. Periodic remeasurements have caused the U.S. dollar value of our results of operations to vary with exchange rate fluctuations, and the U.S. dollar value of our results of operations may continue to vary with exchange rate fluctuations. A fluctuation in the value of RMB relative to the U.S. dollar could reduce our profits from operations and the translated value of our net assets when reported in U.S. dollars in our financial statements. This could have a negative impact on our business, financial condition or results of operations as reported in U.S. dollars. If we decide to convert our RMB into U.S. dollars for the purpose of making payments for dividends on our Ordinary Shares or for other business purposes, appreciation of the U.S. dollar against the RMB would have a negative effect on the U.S. dollar amount available to us. In addition, fluctuations in currencies relative to the periods in which the earnings are generated may make it more difficult to perform period-to-period comparisons of our reported results of operations.

There remains significant international pressure on the PRC government to adopt a flexible currency policy. Any significant appreciation or depreciation of the RMB may materially and adversely affect our revenues, earnings and financial position, and the value of, and any dividends payable on, our Ordinary Shares in U.S. dollars. For example, to the extent that we need to convert U.S. dollars into RMB to pay our operating expenses, appreciation of the RMB against the U.S. dollar would have an adverse effect on the RMB amount we would receive from the conversion. Conversely, a significant depreciation of the RMB against the U.S. dollar may significantly reduce the U.S. dollar equivalent of our earnings, which in turn could adversely affect the market price of our Ordinary Shares.

Very limited hedging options are available in China to reduce our exposure to exchange rate fluctuations. To date, we have not entered into any hedging transactions in an effort to reduce our exposure to foreign currency exchange risk. While we may decide to enter into hedging transactions in the future, the availability and effectiveness of these hedges may be limited, and we may not be able to hedge our exposure to exchange rate fluctuations adequately or at all. In addition, our currency exchange losses may be magnified by PRC exchange control regulations that restrict our ability to convert RMB into foreign currency. As a result, fluctuations in exchange rates may have a material adverse effect on your investment.

General Risks

We have a history of operating losses, and we may not be able to sustain profitability; we have recently shifted our bitcoin mining business, and we may not be continuously successful in this business.

We recently experienced profitability from our continuing bitcoin mining operations. However, as a result of the decline in value of bitcoin and the corresponding decline in revenue from digital assets mining, we recognized a net loss of $18,124,732 for the three (3) months ended June 30, 2022. We may continue incurring losses, as we continue to work to grow our bitcoin mining business. Prior to the commencement of the Company’s bitcoin mining business, and before the involvement of any of the Company’s current directors, officers or employees, Golden Bull Limited was previously engaged in a peer to peer (“P2P”) online lending business in China. Starting on or about November 2019, we made a decision to diversify into the bitcoin mining business, as well as the car rental business in the United States, which plans concerning the car rental business were suspended as a result of the coronavirus pandemic. In September 2020, we disposed of our P2P and Chinese car rental business and decided to focus primarily on our bitcoin mining business. Currently, our operations are focused on our bitcoin mining business located at our bitcoin mining facilities in the United States and Canada. Our current business, including our growth strategy for our business, involves an industry that is itself new and evolving and is subject risks, many of which are discussed below. Even though we are currently operating profitability, we may not be able to sustain profitability in subsequent periods. See “Bitcoin Related Risks” below.

Our results of operations may fluctuate significantly and may not fully reflect the underlying performance of our business.

Our results of operations, including the levels of our net revenues, expenses, net loss and other key metrics, may vary significantly in the future due to a variety of factors, some of which are outside of our control, and period-to-period comparisons of our operating results may not be meaningful, especially given our limited bitcoin mining operating history. In May 2021 when the Chinese government targeted virtual currency mining and put pressure on Chinese banks and payment companies to restrict digital asset transactions and otherwise signaled that China intended to further limit digital asset mining within the country, we suspended operations in China and continued to migrate all of our remaining miners in China to North America. We terminated all bitcoin mining operations in China in June 2021. Our results of operations for the second and third quarters of 2021 have been adversely affected by the material decrease in bitcoins mined during those periods, including, in part, due to the need to migrate and replace a portion of our miners. We have migrated all miners to the United States by the end of October 2021, and expect to have them and any newly purchased miners operational during the second quarter of 2022. However, there can be no assurance we will achieve the level of profitability we experienced in late 2020 or the first quarter of 2021.

The results for any one quarter are not necessarily an indication of future performance. Fluctuations in quarterly results may adversely affect the market price of our Ordinary Shares. Factors that may cause fluctuations in our annual financial results include:

Pursuant to a Share Purchase Agreement dated September 8, 2020, the Company sold Point Cattle Holdings Limited, one of the Company’s subsidiaries, together with its subsidiaries and VIEs to an unaffiliated third party, and, following the disposition, the operations of its peer-to-peer lending business were classified as discontinued operations. Since on or before September 8, 2020, the spun-off subsidiaries and VIEs engaging in peer-to-peer lending business have no current or ongoing relationship with the Company. See Item 4 - “Information of the Company - Legal Proceedings” in our Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2021.

We have not received any administrative penalty for our historical peer-to-peer lending business as of the date of this prospectus. Nevertheless, uncertainties still exist since the PRC law system also contains government policies and internal rules (some of which are not published in a timely manner or at all) that may have retroactive effect. According to the newly-issued Regulations on the Prevention and Treatment of Illegal Fundraising, which came into force on May 1, 2021, no one shall benefit from illegal fund-raising. Even if there is no criminal offense, the PRC governmental authorities or regulators have the right to seal up, freeze and/or seize the related assets, and the PRC governmental authority also could mandatorily request the person/entity who commits illegal fund-raising or who assists the illegal fund-raising which could involve the Company, to return or sell related assets which could be those of the Company, at the current price to recover the funds that were illegally raised. In addition, although the Company is not responsible for any potential claims by customers with losses, the filing of any such claims and/or government investigations or proceedings against the Company or any of its affiliates, even if not justified, may create negative publicity and have a material adverse effect on the Company. If such situations occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected even though we disposed of our former VIE entities that were involved in the P2P lending business.

We may acquire other businesses, form joint ventures or acquire other companies or businesses that could negatively affect our operating results, dilute our shareholders’ ownership, increase our debt or cause us to incur significant expense; notwithstanding the foregoing, our growth may depend on our success in uncovering and completing such transactions.

Having recently exited China, we are seeking to enter bitcoin mining related business around the globe. However, we cannot offer any assurance that acquisitions of businesses, assets and/or entering into strategic alliances or joint ventures will be successful. We may not be able to find suitable partners or acquisition candidates and may not be able to complete such transactions on favorable terms, if at all. If we make any acquisitions, we may not be able to integrate these acquisitions successfully into our existing infrastructure. In addition, in the event we acquire any existing businesses we could assume unknown or contingent liabilities.

Any future acquisitions also could result in the issuance of stock, incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities or future write-offs of intangible assets or goodwill, any of which could have a negative impact on our cash flows, financial condition and results of operations. Integration of an acquired company may also disrupt ongoing operations and require management resources that otherwise would be focused on developing and expanding our existing business. We may experience losses related to potential investments in other companies, which could harm our financial condition and results of operations. Further, we may not realize the anticipated benefits of any acquisition, strategic alliance or joint venture if such investments do not materialize.

To finance any acquisitions or joint ventures, we may choose to issue Ordinary Shares, preferred shares or a combination of debt and equity as consideration, which could significantly dilute the ownership of our existing shareholders or provide rights to such preferred shareholders in priority over our Ordinary Shareholders. Additional funds may not be available on terms that are favorable to us, or at all. If the price of our Ordinary Shares is low or volatile, we may not be able to acquire other companies or fund a joint venture project using stock as consideration.

From time to time we may evaluate and potentially consummate strategic investments or acquisitions, which could require significant management attention, disrupt our business and adversely affect our financial results.

We may evaluate and consider strategic investments, combinations, acquisitions or alliances in the bitcoin mining or other businesses. These transactions could be material to our financial condition and results of operations if consummated. If we are able to identify an appropriate business opportunity, we may not be able to successfully consummate the transaction and, even if we do consummate such a transaction, we may be unable to obtain the benefits or avoid the difficulties and risks of such transaction.

Strategic investments or acquisitions will involve risks commonly encountered in business relationships, including:

We may not make any investments or acquisitions, or any future investments or acquisitions may not be successful, may not benefit our business strategy, may not generate sufficient revenues to offset the associated acquisition costs or may not otherwise result in the intended benefits. In addition, we cannot assure you that any future investment in or acquisition of new businesses or technology will achieve market acceptance or prove to be profitable.

The loss of any member of our management team, our inability to execute an effective succession plan, or our inability to attract and retain qualified personnel could adversely affect our business.

Our success and future growth will depend to a significant degree on the skills and services of our management team, including Mr. Bryan Bullett, our Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Erke Huang, our Chief Financial Officer, and Mr. Sam Tabar, our Chief Strategy Officer. We will need to continue to grow our management in order to alleviate pressure on our existing team and in order to continue to develop our business. If our management team, including any new hires that we may make, fails to work together effectively and to execute our plans and strategies on a timely basis, our business could be harmed. Furthermore, if we fail to execute an effective contingency or succession plan with the loss of any member of management, the loss of such management personnel may significantly disrupt our business.

The loss of key members of management could inhibit our growth prospects. Our future success also depends in large part on our ability to attract, retain and motivate key management and operating personnel. As we continue to develop and expand our operations, we may require personnel with different skills and experiences, and who have a sound understanding of our business and the bitcoin industry. The market for highly qualified personnel in this industry is very competitive, and we may be unable to attract or retain such personnel. If we are unable to attract or retain such personnel, our business could be harmed.

We incur significant costs and demands upon management and accounting and finance resources as a result of complying with the laws and regulations affecting public companies; if we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate and timely financial statements and otherwise make timely and accurate public disclosure could be impaired, which could harm our operating results, our ability to operate our business and our reputation.

As a public reporting company, we are required to, among other things, maintain a system of effective internal control over financial reporting. Ensuring that we have adequate internal financial and accounting controls and procedures in place so that we can produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis is a costly and time-consuming effort that needs to be re-evaluated frequently. Substantial work will continue to be required to further implement, document, assess, test and remediate our system of internal controls. As of December 31, 2021, our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective and management determined that we did not maintain effective internal control over financial reporting due to certain significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. Management is undertaking actions to remediate the material weaknesses, but there is no assurance they will be remediated this year. See Item 15 – “Controls and Procedures” in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2021.

If our internal control over financial reporting or our disclosure controls are not effective, we may be unable to issue our financial statements in a timely manner, we may be unable to obtain the required audit or review of our financial statements by our independent registered public accounting firm in a timely manner or we may be otherwise unable to comply with the periodic reporting requirements of the SEC, our Ordinary Shares listing on Nasdaq could be suspended or terminated and our share price could materially suffer. In addition, we or members of our management could be subject to investigation and sanction by the SEC and other regulatory authorities and to shareholder lawsuits, which could impose significant additional costs on us and divert management attention.

The coronavirus pandemic is a serious threat to health and economic wellbeing affecting our employees, investors and our sources of supply, which could significantly disrupt our operations and financial results.

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization announced that novel Coronavirus COVID-19 infections had become pandemic, and, on March 13, 2020, the U.S. President declared a national emergency relating to the virus. There has been and continues to be widespread infection in the United States with a second wave now appearing in China and elsewhere, with the potential for catastrophic impact. Mandatory business closures have had catastrophic impacts on worldwide economies of uncertain duration.

We believe that our results of operations, business and financial condition has continuously been adversely impacted by the effects of COVID-19. In addition to global macroeconomic effects, the COVID-19 outbreak and any other related adverse public health developments may cause disruption to our mining activities. If an outbreak occurs near our mining facilities, we may experience disruptions to our business operations resulting from quarantines, self-isolations, or other movement and restrictions on the ability of our mining consultants to perform their jobs. If we are unable to effectively service our miners, our ability to mine bitcoin will be adversely affected as miners go offline, which would have an adverse effect on our business and the results of our operations. COVID-19 or other disease outbreak has in the short-term, and may over the longer term, adversely affect the economies and financial markets of many countries, resulting in an economic downturn that may adversely affect demand for bitcoin and impact our operating results. Although the magnitude of the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on our business and operations remains uncertain, the continued global spread of COVID-19 or the occurrence of other epidemics and the imposition of related public health measures and travel and business restrictions will adversely impact our business, financial condition, operating results and cash flows. In addition, we have experienced and will experience disruptions to our business operations resulting from quarantines, self-isolations, or other movement and restrictions on the ability of our employees to perform their jobs. If we are unable to effectively service our miners, our ability to mine bitcoin will be adversely affected as miners go offline, which would have an adverse effect on our business and the results of our operations.

Our third-party manufacturers, suppliers, sub-contractors and customers have been and will continue to be disrupted by worker absenteeism, quarantines, restrictions on employees’ ability to work, office and factory closures, disruptions to ports and other shipping infrastructure, border closures, or other travel or health-related restrictions. Depending on the magnitude of such effects on our supply chain, shipments of parts for our existing miners, which are second-hand, as well as any new miners we purchase, may be delayed. As our miners require repair or become obsolete and require replacement, our ability to obtain adequate replacements or repair parts from their manufacturer may therefore be hampered. Supply chain disruptions could therefore negatively impact our operations. If not resolved quickly, the impact of the COVID-19 global pandemic could have a material adverse effect on our business.

The effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine and vaccination programs remains to be verified worldwide, including against variants of the virus. The sweeping nature of the COVID-19 pandemic makes it extremely difficult to predict how the company’s business and operations will be affected in the longer run. So far, the likely overall economic impact of the pandemic is widely viewed as highly negative to the global economy.

If we cannot maintain our corporate culture as we grow, we could lose the innovation, collaboration and focus that contribute to our business.

We believe that a critical component of our success is our corporate culture, which we believe fosters innovation, encourages teamwork and cultivates creativity. As we develop the infrastructure of a public company and continue to grow, we may find it difficult to maintain these valuable aspects of our corporate culture. Any failure to preserve our culture could negatively impact our future success, including our ability to attract and retain employees, encourage innovation and teamwork and effectively focus on and pursue our corporate objectives.

We do not have any business interruption or disruption insurance coverage.

Currently, we do not have any business liability or disruption insurance to cover our operations, other than director’s and officer’s liability insurance. We have determined that the costs of insuring for these risks and the difficulties associated with acquiring such insurance on commercially reasonable terms make it impractical for us to have such insurance. Any uninsured business disruptions may result in our incurring substantial costs and the diversion of resources, which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

If we are unable to successfully continue our bitcoin mining business plan, it would affect our financial and business condition and results of operations.

In October 2019, we decided to enter the bitcoin mining business. There are various risks related to these efforts, including the risk that these efforts may not provide the expected benefits in our anticipated time frame, if at all, and may prove costlier than expected; and the risk of adverse effects to our business, results of operations and liquidity if past and future undertakings, and the associated changes to our business, do not prove to be cost effective or do not result in the cost savings and other benefits at the levels that we anticipate. Our intentions and expectations with regard to the execution of our business plan, and the timing of any related initiatives, are subject to change at any time based on management’s subjective evaluation of our overall business needs. If we are unable to successfully execute our business plan, whether due to failure to realize the anticipated benefits from our business initiatives in the anticipated time frame or otherwise, we may be unable to achieve our financial targets.

Failure to manage our liquidity and cash flows may materially and adversely affect our financial conditions and results of operations. As a result, we may need additional capital, and financing may not be available on terms acceptable to us, or at all.

During the year ended December 31, 2020, we raised gross proceeds aggregating $5.2 million in cash and $14.6 million in U.S. digital coin in certain private placements, which enabled us to implement our new business strategy. Since May 20, 2021, we drew down an aggregate of $36,000,000 under the Purchase Agreement and raised $80,000,000 of gross proceeds in our September 2021 private placement. We incurred net losses of approximately $1.9 million and $9.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. We reported net income of approximately $4.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2021. We had negative cash flows from our operating activities of approximately $23.3 million, $3.4 million and $1.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively. Negative cash flow during fiscal 2021 resulted, in part, from $13,114.000 of depreciation of property and equipment and $20,461,000 of share-based compensation related to restricted stock units. We cannot assure you our business model will allow us to continue to generate positive cash, given our substantial expenses in relation to our revenue at this stage of our Company’s development. Our inability to offset our expenses with adequate revenue, will adversely affect our liquidity, financial condition and results of operations. Although we have adequate cash on hand from our September 2021 private placement and anticipated cash flows from operating activities are expected to be sufficient to meet our anticipated working capital requirements and capital expenditures in the ordinary course of business for the next 12 months, we cannot assure you that will be the case. We expect to need additional cash resources in the future as we wish to pursue opportunities for investment, acquisition, capital expenditure or similar actions in order to implement our business plan. The issuance and sale of additional equity would result in further dilution to our shareholders. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased fixed obligations and could result in operating covenants that would restrict our operations. We cannot assure you that financing will be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all.

Bitcoin-Related Risks

Our results of operations are expected to be impacted by significant fluctuation of Bitcoin price

The price of Bitcoin has experienced significant fluctuations over its relatively short existence and may continue to fluctuate significantly in the future. Bitcoin prices ranged from approximately US$3,792 per coin as of December 31, 2018; US$7,220 per coin as of December 31, 2019; US$28,922 per coin as of December 31, 2020; to US$34,755 per coin as of June 30, 2021 and a high of US$47,215.69 as of March 30, 2022; and a low of US$16,267.33 as of November 15, 2022, according to CoinMarketCap.

We expect our results of operations to continue to be affected by the bitcoin price as most of our revenue has been from bitcoin mining production. The price for bitcoin decreased substantially during the second quarter of 2022, reducing industrywide margins and forcing difficult decisions around the industry. During the three (3) months ended June 30, 2022, we recognized a net loss of $18,124,732, comprised of $13,639,386 impairment of digital assets as a result of the decline in value of digital assets and the decline in revenue from digital asset mining of seventy-six (76%) percent from $28,342,694 to $6,815,000. Continuing reductions in the price of bitcoin, during the three (3) months ended September 30, 2022, are expected to have had a material and adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. When those results are announced, we cannot assure you that the bitcoin price will remain high enough to sustain our operation or that the bitcoin price will not decline significantly in the future. Fluctuations in the bitcoin price can have had and are expected to continue to have an immediate impact on the trading price of our Ordinary Shares even before our financial performance is affected, if at all.

Various factors, mostly beyond our control, could impact the bitcoin price. For example, the usage of bitcoins in the retail and commercial marketplace is relatively low in comparison with the usage for speculation, which contributes to Bitcoin’s price volatility. Additionally, the reward for bitcoin mining will decline over time, with the most recent halving event occurred in May 2020 and next one to occur in or about March 2024, which may further contribute to Bitcoin price volatility.

Our future success will depend in large part upon the value of bitcoin; the value of bitcoin may be subject to pricing risk and has historically been subject to wide swings.

Our operating results depend in large part upon the value of bitcoin as it had been the sole digital asset we currently mine. Specifically, our revenues from our bitcoin mining operations are principally based upon two factors: (1) the number of bitcoin rewards we successfully mine and (2) the value of bitcoin. We also receive transaction fees paid in bitcoin by participants who initiated transactions associated with new blocks that we mine. In addition, our operating results are directly impacted by changes in the value of bitcoin, because under the value measurement model, both realized and unrealized changes are reflected in our statement of operations (i.e., we will be marking bitcoin to fair value each quarter). This means that our operating results are subject to swings based upon increases or decreases in the value of bitcoin. Furthermore, our strategy has focused primarily on bitcoin (as opposed to other digital assets). Further, our current application-specific integrated circuit (“ASIC”) machines (which we refer to as “miners”) are principally utilized for mining bitcoin and bitcoin cash and cannot mine other digital assets, such as ETH, that are not mined utilizing the “SHA-256 algorithm.” If other digital assets were to achieve acceptance at the expense of bitcoin or bitcoin cash (a variant form of bitcoin created in 2017 by a hard fork of the bitcoin blockchain) causing the value of bitcoin or bitcoin cash to decline, or if bitcoin were to switch its proof of work algorithm from SHA-256 to another algorithm for which our miners are not specialized, or the value of bitcoin or bitcoin cash were to decline for other reasons, particularly if such decline were significant or over an extended period of time, our operating results would be adversely affected, and there could be a material adverse effect 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, and harm investors.

Bitcoin and other bitcoin market prices, which have historically been volatile and are impacted by a variety of factors (including those discussed below), are determined primarily using data from various exchanges, over-the-counter markets and derivative platforms. Furthermore, such prices may be subject to factors such as those that impact commodities, more so than business activities, which could be subjected to additional influence from fraudulent or illegitimate actors, real or perceived scarcity, and political, economic, regulatory or other conditions. Pricing may be the result of, and may continue to result in, speculation regarding future appreciation in the value of digital assets, or our share price, inflating and making their market prices more volatile or creating “bubble” type risks for both bitcoin and our Ordinary Shares.

The impact of government responses to miner activity is uncertain.

Because of environmental-impact concerns related to the potential high demand for electricity to support digital asset mining activity, political concerns, and for other reasons, we may be required to cease mining operations in certain locations in the world without much or any prior notice by a national or local government’s formal or informal requirement or because of the anticipation of an impending requirement. For example, the Chinese government has required the mining of digital assets to be discontinued on very short notice. We were already in the process of migrating our bitcoin mining assets out of China to North America; however, in light of the Chinese government’s actions, we had to accelerate our migration efforts, which has had a material adverse effect on our operations in 2021.

Such government action had a negative impact not only on the value of existing miners owned by us but also on our ability to dispose of obsolete miners and to purchase new miners and the prices to acquire the same. Such government action also had a significant impact on the price of bitcoin, including an increase in the volatility of the price (both up and down) of bitcoin and the price and value of miners owned by us (both up and down). These events had a negative impact on our earnings for the second quarter of 2021.

Our discontinuance of mining operations in China in response to such government action caused us to migrate miners to North America. This process resulted in costs associated with the refurbishment and transfer to be incurred by us, as well as the transferred miners being off-line and not able to mine digital assets for some time. This has had an adverse impact on our earnings for the second and third quarters of 2021.

Our mining operating costs outpace our mining revenues, which could seriously harm our business or increase our losses.

Our mining operations are costly, and our expenses may increase in the future. We intend to use funds on hand and from shares sold under the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part to continue to purchase bitcoin mining machines if our operating costs are lower than the value of bitcoin. This expense increase may not be offset by a corresponding increase in revenue. Our expenses may be greater than we anticipate, and our investments to make our business more efficient may not succeed and may outpace monetization efforts. Increases in our costs without a corresponding increase in our revenue would increase our losses and could seriously harm our business and financial performance.

We have an evolving business model which is subject to various uncertainties.

As bitcoin assets may become more widely available, we expect the services and products associated with them to evolve. In order to stay current with the industry, our business model may need to evolve as well. From time to time, we may modify aspects of our business model relating to our strategy. We cannot offer any assurance that these or any other modifications will be successful or will not result in harm to our business. We may not be able to manage growth effectively, which could damage our reputation, limit our growth and negatively affect our operating results. Further, we cannot provide any assurance that we will successfully identify all emerging trends and growth opportunities in this business sector, and we may lose out on those opportunities. Such circumstances could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects or operations.

The properties included in our mining network may experience damage, including damage that is not covered by insurance.

Our current operations in the states of Texas, Nebraska, New York and Georgia in the United States and Canada are, and any future mining sites we may establish will be, subject to a variety of risks relating to physical condition and operation, including, but not limited to:

For example, our mines could be rendered inoperable, temporarily or permanently, as a result of a fire or other natural disaster, the coronavirus or another pandemic, or by a terrorist or other attack. The security and other measures we take to protect against these risks may not be sufficient. Additionally, our mines could be materially adversely affected by a power outage or loss of access to the electrical grid or loss by the grid of cost-effective sources of electrical power generating capacity. Given the power requirements of our mines, it would not be feasible to run miners on back-up power generators in the event of a power outage. We do not have any insurance to cover the replacement cost of any lost or damaged miners, or any interruption of our mining activities. In the event of an uninsured loss, such mines may not be adequately repaired in a timely manner or at all, and we may lose some or all of the future revenues anticipated to be derived from such mines.

From time to time, our service providers have been unable to supply sufficient electric power for us to operate our miners, which has adversely affected our operations, causing us to relocate some or all of our miners to an alternative facility, which may have a less advantageous cost structure and our business and results of operations may suffer as a result.

We have made a significant capital investment in purchasing second-hand miners in order to implement them rapidly to mine bitcoin at prices advantageous to us. Management believes, based on its knowledge of the industry, that the Hosting Agreements provide many advantages as opposed to other alternative arrangements. If we are required to deploy or move our miners from the current hosting service providers to other mining facilities, we may be forced to accept less advantageous terms. Further, during relocation to a new mining facility, we will not be able to operate our miners and therefore we will not be able to generate revenue.

From May until September 2022, power was offline at the Niagara Falls, NY facility hosted by BlockFusion, due to an explosion and subsequent fire. We have estimated the loss of revenue at the Blockfusion site through June 30, 2022 (the date for which financial statements are available) to be approximately $1,500,000. Our methodology is based on the historical rate for those impacted miners and the average bitcoin and ETH earned during the above period. Shortly after power was restored, the Company and BlockFusion received a notice directing BlockFusion to cease and desist its cryptocurrency mining activities at Blockfusion’s Niagara Falls facility. While Blockfusion has advised the Company that it is preparing applications for new permits based on new city ordinances, there can be no assurance as to when we will restart operations.

During the same time, a portion of our miners were offline and power has only been partially restored at our hosting partner Digihost’s facility at North Tonawanda, New York. We have not yet powered on our miners at the Digihost facilities, as it is not currently economical to do so. Based on the historical miner model hosted by Digihost, we calculated our loss at Digihost (based on a hash rate of 60 TH/s and power consumption of 3000W) to be non-material. The loss of power at Blockfusion facilities has had and will continue to have a material adverse effect on our operations.

If we are unable to secure sufficient power supply from the current hosting service providers, or if the current hosting service providers are unable to supply sufficient electric power, we may be forced to seek out alternative mining facilities. Should this occur, our operations may be disrupted, which may have a material adverse effect on our operations.

We are currently unable to assess the economic impact of Compute North’s bankruptcy filing upon our operations.

On September 22, 2022, Compute North filed for bankruptcy protection. To date, our mining operations at Compute North’s hosting facilities in Nebraska and Texas have not been curtailed. However, not all of our miners maintained by Compute North have been accounted for and those delivered to Wolf Hollow, Texas have not yet been powered on. Under our Master Agreement, Compute North and any successors were permitted to file UCC1 Financing Statements to evidence security interests in our miners, although we maintain ownership. We have been advised that our Master Agreement with Compute North was assigned to a third party prior to the bankruptcy filing, and who is operating the contract and is not subject to the bankruptcy proceedings. However, there is a material risk that our approximate 7,628 miners and security deposits totaling approximately $1,476,071 may have been lost or could have been wrongfully repossessed by Compute North and/or its lender.

If our Hosting Agreements with the current hosting service providers in the U.S. and Canada are terminated, we may be forced to seek a replacement facility to operate our miners on acceptable terms; should this occur, our operations may be disrupted, which may have a material adverse effect on our operations.

If we are forced to relocate to a new mining facility, we may not be successful in identifying adequate replacement facilities to house our miners. Even if we do identify such facilities, we may not be able to secure use of those facilities at rates that are economically viable to support our mining activities. Relocating our miners, as we did to migrate from China, will require us to incur costs to transition to a new facility including, but not limited to, transportation expenses and insurance, downtime while we are unable to mine, legal fees to negotiate the new lease, de-installation at our current facility and, ultimately, installation at any new facility we identify. These costs may be substantial, and we cannot guarantee that we will be successful in transitioning our miners to a new facility. If we are required to move our miners, our business may suffer, and our results of operations would be expected to be materially adversely affected.

The development and acceptance of cryptographic and algorithmic protocols governing the issuance of and transactions in digital assets is 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 bitcoin assets based upon a computer-generated mathematical and/or cryptographic protocol. Large-scale acceptance of digital assets as a means of payment has not, and may never, occur. The growth of this industry in general, and the use of bitcoin, in particular, is subject to a high degree of uncertainty, and the slowing or stopping of the development or acceptance of developing protocols may occur unpredictably. The factors include, but are not limited to:

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 or other digital assets we mine or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account, which would harm investors in our securities.

Banks and financial institutions may not provide banking services, or may cut off services, to businesses that engage in bitcoin-related activities or that accept digital assets as payment, including financial institutions of investors in our securities.

A number of companies that engage in bitcoin and/or other bitcoin-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 digital assets 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 digital assets has been to exclude their use for ordinary consumer transactions within its jurisdiction.

Subject to such restrictions, we also may be unable to obtain or maintain these services for our business. The difficulty that many businesses in our industry and in related industries have and may continue to have in finding banks and financial institutions willing to provide them services may now, and in the future, decrease the usefulness of digital assets as a payment system, harm public perception of digital assets and decrease their usefulness.

The usefulness of digital assets as a payment system and the public perception of digital assets could be damaged if banks or financial institutions were to close the accounts of businesses engaging in bitcoin and/or other bitcoin-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 digital assets to fiat currencies. Such factors 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 harm investors.

We may face risks of Internet disruptions, which could have an adverse effect on the price of digital assets.

A disruption of the Internet may affect the use of digital assets and subsequently the value of our securities. Generally, digital assets and our business of mining digital assets is dependent upon the Internet. A significant disruption in Internet connectivity could disrupt a currency’s network operations until the disruption is resolved and have an adverse effect on the price of digital assets and our ability to mine digital assets.

The impact of geopolitical and economic events on the supply and demand for digital assets is uncertain.

Geopolitical crises may motivate large-scale purchases of bitcoin and other digital assets, which could increase the price of bitcoin and other digital assets rapidly. This may increase the likelihood of a subsequent price decrease as crisis-driven purchasing behavior dissipates, adversely affecting the value of our inventory following such downward adjustment. Such risks are similar to the risks of purchasing commodities in general uncertain times, such as the risk of purchasing, holding or selling gold. 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, which are relatively new, are subject to supply and demand forces. How such supply and demand will be impacted by geopolitical events is largely uncertain but could be harmful to us and investors in our Ordinary Shares. Political or economic crises may motivate large-scale acquisitions or sales of digital assets either globally or locally. Such events 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 or any other digital assets we mine or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account.

Acceptance and/or widespread use of bitcoin is uncertain.

Currently, there is a relatively limited use of any bitcoin in the retail and commercial marketplace, thus contributing to price volatility that could adversely affect an investment in our securities. Banks and other established financial institutions may refuse to process funds for bitcoin transactions, process wire transfers to or from bitcoin exchanges, bitcoin-related companies or service providers, or maintain accounts for persons or entities transacting in bitcoin. Conversely, a significant portion of bitcoin demand is generated by investors seeking a long-term store of value or speculators seeking to profit from the short- or long-term holding of the asset. Price volatility undermines any bitcoin’s role as a medium of exchange, as retailers are much less likely to accept it as a form of payment. Market capitalization for a bitcoin as a medium of exchange and payment method may always be low.

The relative lack of acceptance of bitcoins in the retail and commercial marketplace, or a reduction of such use, limits the ability of end users to use them to pay for goods and services. Such lack of acceptance or decline in acceptances could have a material adverse effect 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 and potentially the value of bitcoins we mine or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account.

Transactional fees may decrease demand for bitcoin and prevent expansion.

Currently, miners receive both rewards of new bitcoin and transaction fees paid in bitcoin by persons engaging in bitcoin transactions on the bitcoin blockchain for being the first to solve bitcoin blocks. As the number of bitcoins currency rewards awarded for solving a block in a blockchain decreases, the incentive for miners to continue to contribute to the bitcoin network may transition from a set reward and transaction fees to solely transaction fees. This transition could be accomplished by miners independently electing to record in the blocks they solve only those transactions that include payment of the highest transaction fees. If transaction fees paid for bitcoin transactions become too high, the marketplace may be reluctant to accept bitcoin as a means of payment and existing users may be motivated to switch from bitcoin to another digital asset or to fiat currency. Either the requirement from miners of higher transaction fees in exchange for recording transactions in a blockchain or a software upgrade that automatically charges fees for all transactions may decrease demand for bitcoin and prevent the expansion of the bitcoin network to retail merchants and commercial businesses, resulting in a reduction in the price of bitcoin that could adversely impact an investment in our securities. Decreased use of and demand for bitcoin may adversely affect its value and result in a reduction in the price of bitcoin and, consequently, the value of our Ordinary Shares.

The decentralized nature of the governance of bitcoin systems may lead to ineffective decision making that slows development or prevents a network from overcoming emergent obstacles. Governance of many bitcoin 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 bitcoin systems leads to ineffective decision making that slows development and growth of such digital assets, the value of our Ordinary Shares may be adversely affected.

There is a lack of liquid markets for digital assets, and blockchain/bitcoin-based assets are susceptible to potential manipulation.

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 bitcoin 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 of investment securities or other assets trading on a ledger-based system, which may adversely affect us. Such circumstances could have a material adverse effect 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 and potentially the value of any bitcoin or other digital assets we mine or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account, and harm investors.

Our operations, investment strategies and profitability may be adversely affected by competition from other methods of investing in digital assets.

We compete with other users and/or companies that are mining digital assets and other potential financial vehicles, including securities backed by or linked to digital assets through entities similar to us. Market and financial conditions, and other conditions beyond our control, may make it more attractive to invest in other financial vehicles, or to invest in digital assets directly, which could limit the market for our shares and reduce their liquidity. The emergence of other financial vehicles and exchange-traded funds have been scrutinized by regulators and such scrutiny and the negative impressions or conclusions resulting from such scrutiny could be applicable to us and impact our ability to successfully pursue our business strategy or operate at all, or to maintain a public market for our securities. Such circumstances could have a material adverse effect 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 and potentially the value of any bitcoin or other digital assets we mine or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account, and harm investors.

The development and acceptance of competing blockchain platforms or technologies may cause consumers to use alternative distributed ledgers or other alternatives.

The development and acceptance of competing blockchain platforms or technologies may cause consumers to use alternative distributed ledgers or an alternative to distributed ledgers altogether. Our business utilizes presently existent digital ledgers and blockchains and we could face difficulty adapting to emergent digital ledgers, blockchains, or alternatives thereto. This may adversely affect us and our exposure to various blockchain technologies and prevent us from realizing the anticipated profits from our investments. Such circumstances could have a material adverse effect 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 and potentially the value of any bitcoin or other digital assets we mine or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account, and harm investors.

Our bitcoins may be subject to loss, theft or restriction on access.

There is a risk that some or all of our bitcoins could be lost or stolen. Digital Assets are stored in platforms commonly referred to as “wallets” by holders of bitcoins which may be accessed to exchange a holder’s bitcoin assets. Access to our bitcoin assets could also be restricted by cybercrime (such as a denial-of-service attack) against a service at which we maintain a hosted hot wallet. A hot wallet refers to any bitcoin wallet that is connected to the Internet. Generally, hot wallets are easier to set up and access than wallets in cold storage, but they are also more susceptible to hackers and other technical vulnerabilities. Cold storage refers to any bitcoin wallet that is not connected to the Internet. Cold storage is generally more secure from external attack than hot storage but is not ideal for quick or regular transactions and we may experience lag time in our ability to respond to market fluctuations in the price of our bitcoin assets. Moreover, cold storage may increase the risk of internal theft or malfeasance. We hold our digital assets in hot and cold  wallets through third party custodians to reduce the risk of external malfeasance, but the risk of loss of our bitcoin assets cannot be wholly eliminated. If any of our bitcoin were lost or stolen, it is unlikely that we would ever be able to recover such bitcoin.

Hackers or malicious actors may launch attacks to steal, compromise or secure digital assets, such as by attacking the bitcoin network source code, exchange miners, third-party platforms, cold and hot storage locations or software, or by other means. We may be in control and possession of one of the more substantial holdings of bitcoins. As we increase in size, we may become a more appealing target of hackers, malware, cyber-attacks or other security threats. Any of these events may adversely affect our operations and, consequently, our investments and profitability. The loss or destruction of a private key required to access our digital wallets may be irreversible and we may be denied access for all time to our bitcoin holdings or the holdings of others held in those compromised wallets. Our loss of access to our private keys or our experience of a data loss relating to our digital wallets could adversely affect our investments and assets.

Digital assets are controllable only by the possessor of both the unique public and private keys relating to the local or online digital wallet in which they are held, which wallet’s public key or address is reflected in the network’s public blockchain. We will publish the public key relating to digital wallets in use when we verify the receipt of transfers and disseminate such information into the network, but we will need to safeguard the private keys relating to such digital wallets. To the extent such private keys are lost, destroyed or otherwise compromised, we will be unable to access our bitcoin rewards and such private keys may not be capable of being restored by any network. Any loss of private keys relating to digital wallets used to store our digital assets could have a material adverse effect 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 and potentially the value of any bitcoin or other digital assets we mine or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account.

We may suffer significant and adverse effects due to hacking or one or more adverse software events.

In order to minimize risk, we have established processes to manage wallets that are associated with our bitcoin holdings. There can be no assurances that any processes we have adopted or will adopt in the future are or will be secure or effective, and we would suffer significant and immediate adverse effects if we suffered a loss of our bitcoin due to an adverse software or cybersecurity event. We utilize several layers of threat reduction techniques, including: (i) the use of hardware wallets to store sensitive private key information; (ii) performance of transactions offline; and (iii) offline generation storage and use of private keys.

At present, the Company is evaluating several third-party custodian wallet alternatives, but there can be no assurance that such services will be more secure than those the Company presently employs. Human error and the constantly evolving state of cybercrime and hacking techniques may render present security protocols and procedures ineffective in ways which we cannot predict. If our security procedures and protocols are ineffectual and our bitcoin assets are compromised by cybercriminals, we may not have adequate recourse to recover our losses stemming from such compromise and we may lose much of the accumulated value of our bitcoin mining activities. This would have a material adverse impact on our business and operations.

Incorrect or fraudulent bitcoin transactions may be irreversible.

Bitcoin transactions are irrevocable and stolen or incorrectly transferred digital assets may be irretrievable. As a result, any incorrectly executed or fraudulent bitcoin transactions could adversely affect our investments and assets.

Bitcoin transactions are not, from an administrative perspective, reversible without the consent and active participation of the recipient of the digital assets from the transaction. In theory, bitcoin transactions may be reversible with the control or consent of a majority of processing power on the network, however, we do not now, nor is it feasible that we could in the future, possess sufficient processing power to affect this reversal. Once a transaction has been verified and recorded in a block that is added to a blockchain, an incorrect transfer of a bitcoin or a theft thereof generally will not be reversible, and we may not have sufficient recourse to recover our losses from any such transfer or theft. It is possible that, through computer or human error, or through theft or criminal action, our bitcoin rewards could be transferred in incorrect amounts or to unauthorized third parties, or to uncontrolled accounts. Further, according to the SEC, at this time, there is no specifically enumerated U.S. or foreign governmental, regulatory, investigative or prosecutorial authority or mechanism through which to bring an action or complaint regarding missing or stolen bitcoin. We are, therefore, presently reliant on existing private investigative entities, such as Chain Analysis and Kroll to investigate any potential loss of our bitcoin assets. These third-party service providers rely on data analysis and compliance of ISPs with traditional court orders to reveal information such as the IP addresses of any attackers who may have targeted us. To the extent that we are unable to recover our losses from such action, error or theft, such events could have a material adverse effect 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 of and potentially the value of any bitcoin or other digital assets we mine or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account.

Our reliance primarily on a few models of miners may subject our operations to increased risk of mining failure.

The performance and reliability of our miners and our technology is critical to our reputation and our operations. Because we currently use MicroBT and Bitmain miners, if there are issues with those machines, our entire system could be affected. Any system error or failure may significantly delay response times or even cause our system to fail. Any disruption in our ability to continue mining could result in lower yields and harm our reputation and business. Any exploitable weakness, flaw, or error common to MicroBT and Bitmain miners affects all our miners, if a defect other flaw is exploited, our entire mining operations could go offline simultaneously. Any interruption, delay or system failure could result in financial losses, a decrease in the trading price of our Ordinary Shares and/or damage to our reputation.

The Company’s reliance on a third-party mining pool service provider for our mining revenue payouts may have a negative impact on the Company’s operations.

We use third–party mining pools to receive our mining rewards from the network. Mining pools allow miners to combine their processing power, increasing their chances of solving a block and getting paid by the network. The rewards are distributed by the pool operator, proportionally to our contribution to the pool’s overall mining power, used to generate each block. Should the pool operator’s system suffer downtime due to a cyber-attack, software malfunction or other similar issues, it will negatively impact our ability to mine and receive revenue. Furthermore, we are dependent on the accuracy of the mining pool operator’s record keeping to accurately record the total processing power provided to the pool for a given bitcoin mining application in order to assess the proportion of that total processing power we provided. While we have internal methods of tracking both our power provided and the total used by the pool, the mining pool operator uses its own record-keeping to determine our proportion of a given reward. We have little means of recourse against the mining pool operator if we determine the proportion of the reward paid out to us by the mining pool operator is incorrect, other than leaving the pool. If we are unable to consistently obtain accurate proportionate rewards from our mining pool operators, we may experience reduced reward for our efforts, which would have an adverse effect on our business and operations.

The limited rights of legal recourse available to us and our lack of insurance protection for risk of loss of our digital assets exposes us and our shareholders to the risk of loss of our digital assets for which no person may ultimately be held liable and we may not be able to recover our losses.

The digital assets held by us are not insured. Further, banking institutions will not accept our digital assets and they are therefore not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) or the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”). Therefore, a loss may be suffered with respect to our digital assets which is not covered by insurance and we may not be able to recover any of our carried value in these digital assets if they are lost or stolen or suffer significant and sustained reduction in conversion spot price. If we are not otherwise able to recover damages from a malicious actor in connection with these losses, our business and results of operations may suffer, which may have a material negative impact on our share price. Currently, we do not have any insurance to cover our digital assets or mining equipment. The market for such insurance is in the early stages, and we intend to purchase such insurance in the future. One of our digital asset custodians, Cactus Custody, is self-insured for $4 million plus annual additions. Any uninsured losses may have an adverse effect on our results of operations and/or financial condition.

Digital assets face significant scaling obstacles that can lead to high fees or slow transaction settlement times.

Digital assets face significant scaling obstacles that can lead to high fees or slow transaction settlement times and attempts to increase the volume of transactions may not be effective. Scaling digital assets is essential to the widespread acceptance of digital assets as a means of payment, which widespread acceptance is necessary to the continued growth and development of our business. Many bitcoin networks face significant scaling challenges. For example, digital assets are limited with respect to how many transactions can occur per second. Participants in the bitcoin ecosystem debate potential approaches to increasing the average number of transactions per second that the network can handle and have implemented mechanisms or are researching ways to increase scale, such as increasing the allowable sizes of blocks, and therefore the number of transactions per block, and sharding (a horizontal partition of data in a database or search engine), which would not require every single transaction to be included in every single miner’s or validator’s block. However, there is no guarantee that any of the mechanisms in place or being explored for increasing the scale of settlement of bitcoin transactions will be effective, or how long they will take to become effective, which could adversely affect an investment in our securities.

The price of digital assets may be affected by the sale of such digital assets by other vehicles investing in digital assets or tracking bitcoin markets.

The global market for bitcoin 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 digital assets 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 bitcoin 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 bitcoin prices and therefore affect the value of the bitcoin inventory we hold. Such events could have a material adverse effect 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 and potentially the value of any bitcoin or other digital assets we mine or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account.

There are risks related to technological obsolescence, the vulnerability of the global supply chain for bitcoin hardware disruption, and difficulty in obtaining new hardware which may have a negative effect on our business.

Our mining operations can only be successful and ultimately profitable if the costs, including hardware and electricity costs, associated with mining digital assets are lower than the price of a bitcoin. As our mining facility operates, our miners experience ordinary wear and tear, and may also face more significant malfunctions caused by a number of extraneous factors beyond our control. To date, we have purchased second-hand miners from third parties. The degradation of our miners will require us to, over time, replace those miners which are no longer functional. Additionally, as the technology evolves, we may be required to acquire newer models of miners to remain competitive in the market. Reports have been released which indicate that miner manufacturers or sellers adjust the prices of their miners according to bitcoin prices, so the cost of new machines is unpredictable but could be extremely high. As a result, at times, we may obtain miners and other hardware from third parties at premium prices, to the extent they are available. This upgrading process requires substantial capital investment, and we may face challenges. Further, the global supply chain for bitcoin miners is presently heavily dependent on China-based manufacturers. In addition, there have been reports of shortages of the semiconductors, which are key components in miner production. The global reliance on China as a main supplier of bitcoin miners has been called into question particularly in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Should similar outbreaks or other disruptions to the China-based global supply chain for bitcoin hardware on the spot market or otherwise occur, we may not be able to obtain adequate replacement parts for our existing miners or to obtain additional miners from the manufacturer or third parties on a timely basis. Such events could have a material adverse effect on our ability to pursue our business strategy, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and the value of our Ordinary Shares.

The bitcoin we mine is subject to halving; the bitcoin reward for successfully uncovering a block will halve several times in the future and bitcoin’s value may not adjust to compensate us for the reduction in the rewards we receive from our mining efforts.

Halving is a process designed to control the overall supply and reduce the risk of inflation in digital assets using a Proof-of-Work consensus algorithm. At a predetermined block, the mining reward is cut in half, hence the term “halving.” For bitcoin, the reward was initially set at 50 bitcoin currency rewards per block and this was cut in half to 25 in November 28, 2012 at block 210,000 and again to 12.5 on July 9, 2016 at block 420,000. The next halving for bitcoin occurred in May 2020 at block 630,000 when the reward was reduced to 6.25. This process will reoccur until the total amount of bitcoin currency rewards issued reaches 21 million, which is expected around 2140. If the award of bitcoin rewards for solving blocks and transaction fees are not sufficiently high, we may not have an adequate incentive to continue mining and may cease our mining operations. Halving may result in a reduction in the aggregate hash rate of the bitcoin network as the incentive for miners decreases. Miners ceasing operations would reduce the collective processing power on the network, which would adversely affect the confirmation process for transactions (i.e., temporarily decreasing the speed at which blocks are added to a blockchain until the next scheduled adjustment in difficulty for block solutions) and make bitcoin networks more vulnerable to a malicious actor or botnet obtaining control in excess of 50 percent of the processing power active on a blockchain, potentially permitting such actor or botnet to manipulate a blockchain in a manner that adversely affects our activities. A reduction in confidence in the confirmation process or processing power of the network could result and be irreversible. Such events could have a material adverse effect on our ability to continue to pursue our business strategy at all, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects or operations and potentially the value of any bitcoin or other digital assets we mine, whether now or in the future, or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account. While bitcoin prices have had a history of price fluctuations around the halving of its bitcoin rewards, there is no guarantee that the price change will be favorable or would compensate for the reduction in mining reward. If a corresponding and proportionate increase in the trading price of bitcoin does not follow these anticipated halving events, the revenue we earn from our mining operations would see a corresponding decrease, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.

The impact of social media and influencers on the price for digital assets is uncertain.

Renowned persons, including social media influencers, may publicly discuss their holdings (or the holdings of companies with which they are affiliated) of bitcoin or their intent to buy or sell large quantities of bitcoin. This may have a dramatic impact on the price of bitcoin, both up and down. At a minimum, these public statements delivered through social media, such as Twitter, may cause the price of bitcoin to experience significant volatility. These episodes could have a material adverse impact on the value of our bitcoin holdings as well as the prices of bitcoin that we may sell.

We may not be able to realize the benefits of forks.

To the extent that a significant majority of users and miners on a bitcoin network install software that changes the bitcoin network or properties of a bitcoin, including the irreversibility of transactions and limitations on the mining of new bitcoin, the bitcoin network would be subject to new protocols and software. However, if less than a significant majority of users and miners on the bitcoin network consent to the proposed modification, and the modification is not compatible with the software prior to its modification, the consequence would be what is known as a “fork” of the network, with one prong running the pre-modified software and the other running the modified software. The effect of such a fork would be the existence of two versions of the bitcoin running in parallel yet lacking interchangeability and necessitating exchange-type transaction to convert currencies between the two forks. Additionally, it may be unclear following a fork which fork represents the original asset and which is the new asset. Different metrics adopted by industry participants to determine which is the original asset include: referring to the wishes of the core developers of a bitcoin, blockchains with the greatest amount of hashing power contributed by miners or validators; or blockchains with the longest chain. A fork in the network of a particular bitcoin could adversely affect an investment in our Company or our ability to operate.

We may not be able to realize the economic benefit of a fork, either immediately or ever, which could adversely affect an investment in our securities. If we hold a bitcoin at the time of a hard fork into two digital assets, industry standards would dictate that we would be expected to hold an equivalent amount of the old and new assets following the fork. However, we may not be able, or it may not be practical, to secure or realize the economic benefit of the new asset for various reasons. For instance, we may determine that there is no safe or practical way to custody the new asset, that trying to do so may pose an unacceptable risk to our holdings in the old asset, or that the costs of taking possession and/or maintaining ownership of the new bitcoin exceed the benefits of owning the new bitcoin. Additionally, laws, regulation or other factors may prevent us from benefitting from the new asset even if there is a safe and practical way to custody and secure the new asset.

There is a possibility of bitcoin mining algorithms transitioning to proof of stake validation and other mining related risks, which could make us less competitive and ultimately adversely affect our business and the value of our shares.

The protocol pursuant to which transactions are confirmed automatically on the bitcoin blockchain through mining is known as proof of work. Proof of stake is an alternative method in validating digital asset transactions. Should the bitcoin algorithm shift from a proof of work validation method to a proof of stake method, mining would require less energy and may render any company that maintains advantages in the current climate (for example, from lower priced electricity, processing, real estate, or hosting) less competitive. We, as a result of our efforts to optimize and improve the efficiency of our bitcoin mining operations, may be exposed to the risk in the future of losing the benefit of our capital investments and the competitive advantage we hope to gain form this as a result, and may be negatively impacted if a switch to proof of stake validation were to occur. This may additionally have an impact on other various investments of ours. Such events could have a material adverse effect 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 and potentially the value of any bitcoin or other digital assets we mine or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account.

To the extent that the profit margins of bitcoin mining operations are not high, operators of bitcoin mining operations are more likely to immediately sell bitcoin rewards earned by mining in the market, thereby constraining growth of the price of bitcoin that could adversely impact us, and similar actions could affect other digital assets.

Over the past several years, bitcoin mining operations have evolved from individual users mining with computer processors, graphics processing units and first-generation ASIC servers. Currently, new processing power is predominantly added by incorporated and unincorporated “professionalized” mining operations. Professionalized mining operations may use proprietary hardware or sophisticated ASIC machines acquired from ASIC manufacturers. They require the investment of significant capital for the acquisition of this hardware, the leasing of operating space (often in data centers or warehousing facilities), incurring of electricity costs and the employment of technicians to operate the mining farms. As a result, professionalized mining operations are of a greater scale than prior miners and have more defined and regular expenses and liabilities. These regular expenses and liabilities require professionalized mining operations to maintain profit margins on the sale of bitcoin. To the extent the price of bitcoin declines and such profit margin is constrained, professionalized miners are incentivized to more immediately sell bitcoin earned from mining operations, whereas it is believed that individual miners in past years were more likely to hold newly mined bitcoin for more extended periods. The immediate selling of newly mined bitcoin greatly increases the trading volume of bitcoin, creating downward pressure on the market price of bitcoin rewards.

The extent to which the value of bitcoin mined by a professionalized mining operation exceeds the allocable capital and operating costs determines the profit margin of such operation. A professionalized mining operation may be more likely to sell a higher percentage of its newly mined bitcoin rapidly if it is operating at a low profit margin and it may partially or completely cease operations if its profit margin is negative. In a low profit margin environment, a higher percentage could be sold more rapidly, thereby potentially depressing bitcoin prices. Lower bitcoin prices could result in further tightening of profit margins for professionalized mining operations creating a network effect that may further reduce the price of bitcoin until mining operations with higher operating costs become unprofitable forcing them to reduce mining power or cease mining operations temporarily.

If a malicious actor or botnet obtains control of more than 50% of the processing power on a bitcoin network, such actor or botnet could manipulate blockchains to adversely affect us, which would adversely affect an investment in us or our ability to operate.

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 bitcoin, it may be able to alter blockchains on which transactions of bitcoin 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 is believed that it could not generate new units or transactions using such control. The malicious actor could “double-spend” its own bitcoin (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 yields its control of the processing power on the network or the bitcoin 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 digital assets 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, which may adversely affect an investment in our Ordinary Shares. 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 or other digital assets we mine or otherwise acquire or hold for our own account, and harm investors.

We are subject to risks associated with our need for significant electrical power. Government regulators may potentially restrict the ability of electricity suppliers to provide electricity to mining operations, such as ours.

The operation of a bitcoin or other bitcoin mine can require massive amounts of electrical power. Further, our mining operations can only be successful and ultimately profitable if the costs, including electrical power costs, associated with mining a bitcoin are lower than the price of a bitcoin. As a result, any mine we establish can only be successful if we can obtain sufficient electrical power for that mine on a cost-effective basis, and our establishment of new mines requires us to find locations where that is the case. There may be significant competition for suitable mine locations, and government regulators may potentially restrict the ability of electricity suppliers to provide electricity to mining operations in times of electricity shortage or may otherwise potentially restrict or prohibit the provision or electricity to mining operations.

Any shortage of electricity supply or increase in electricity cost in a jurisdiction may negatively impact the viability and the expected economic return for bitcoin mining activities in that jurisdiction. In addition, the significant consumption of electricity may have a negative environmental impact, including contribution to climate change, which may give rise to public opinion against allowing the use of electricity for bitcoin mining activities or government measures restricting or prohibiting the use of electricity for bitcoin mining activities. 

We may not adequately respond to price fluctuations and rapidly changing technology, which may negatively affect our business.

Competitive conditions within the bitcoin industry require that we use sophisticated technology in the operation of our business. The industry for blockchain technology is characterized by rapid technological changes, new product introductions, enhancements and evolving industry standards. New technologies, techniques or products could emerge that might offer better performance than the software and other technologies we currently utilize, and we may have to manage transitions to these new technologies to remain competitive. We may not be successful, generally or relative to our competitors in the bitcoin industry, in timely implementing new technology into our systems, or doing so in a cost-effective manner. During the course of implementing any such new technology into our operations, we may experience system interruptions and failures during such implementation. Furthermore, there can be no assurances that we will recognize, in a timely manner or at all, the benefits that we may expect as a result of our implementing new technology into our operations. As a result, our business and operations may suffer, and there may be adverse effects on the price of our Ordinary Shares.

Ethereum Risk Factors

Risks Associated with Staking on Ethereum 2.0

In connection with the transition of the Ethereum network from PoW to PoS, the Company is deploying ETH to the beacon chain with a view to earning an ETH-denominated return thereon. The inability of the Company to transfer or withdraw its ETH from the beacon chain may materially and adversely affect the market price and value of such ETH and, in turn, the value of the Company’s securities. In addition, by running a validator node, the Company will be exposed to the risk of loss of its staked digital assets if it fails to operate the node in accordance with applicable protocol rules, as the Company’s digital assets may be “slashed” or inactivity penalties may be applied if the validator node “double signs” or is offline for a prescribed period of time. The Company intends to mitigate this risk by utilizing experienced service providers such as Blockdaemon and by carefully monitoring the staking activities performed by the Company in reliance on such services.

Risks under the Federal securities laws associated with Staking

The Merge and the switch from PoW to PoS did not change our characterization of ETH as a digital asset. We intend to hold our staked ETH for our own account. In the event we exchange ETH for other digital assets (such as liquid staking tokens) which may be deemed to be securities, it would be for our own account. We do not believe if we hold for our own account a particular digital asset which may be deemed to be a security, it will be a risk to our business operations. Nevertheless, we will continue to implement a compliance infrastructure to ensure full compliance with the Federal securities laws. However, we would also need to undertake a regulatory review to ensure compliance with the Federal securities laws if and when we decide to offer staking-as-a-service to third parties for value. The Company would need to install a fully compliant organic infrastructure or hire third-party contractors.

Speculative and Volatile Nature of Ether

To date, the Company has deployed a small portion of the capital it has raised into Ether. The price of Ether is subject to significant volatility. In addition, there is no guarantee that the Company will be able to sell its Ether at prices quoted on various cryptocurrency trading platforms or at all if it determines to do so. In addition, the supply of Ether is currently controlled by the source code of the Ethereum platform, and there is a risk that the developers of the code and the participants in the Ethereum network could develop and/or adopt new versions of the Ethereum software that significantly increase the supply of Ether in circulation, negatively impacting the trading price of Ether. Any significant decrease in the price of Ether may materially and adversely affect the value of the Company’s securities and, in turn, the Company’s business and financial condition.

The ETH markets are sensitive to new developments, and since volumes are still maturing, any significant changes in market sentiment (by way of sensationalism in the media or otherwise) can induce large swings in volume and subsequent price changes. Such volatility can adversely affect the business and financial condition of the Company.

Momentum pricing typically is associated with growth stocks and other assets whose valuation, as determined by the public, accounts for anticipated future appreciation in value. The Company believes that momentum pricing of ETH has resulted, and may continue to result, in speculation regarding future appreciation in the value of ETH, inflating and making more volatile the value of ETH. As a result, ETH may be more likely to fluctuate in value due to changing investor confidence in future appreciation, which could adversely affect the business and financial condition of the Company.

Underlying Value Risk

ETH represents a new form of digital value that is still being digested by society. Its underlying value is driven by its utility as a store of value, means of exchange, and unit of account, and notably, the demand for ETH within various use cases of the Ethereum network. Just as oil is priced by the supply and demand of global markets, as a function of its utility to, for instance, power machines and create plastics, so too is ETH priced by the supply and demand of global markets for its own utility within Ethereum’s use cases.

Top ETH Holders May Control a Significant Percentage of the Outstanding ETH

The founders of the Ethereum network may control large amounts of ETH. There are several addresses outside of digital asset trading platforms that have large holdings of ETH, which can be found at: https://etherscan.io/accounts. While there appear to be few concentrated holders of ETH based on individual addresses, some holders may have their ETH spread across multiple addresses.

Development of the Ethereum Platform

The Ethereum platform is an open-source project being developed by a network of software developers, including Vitalik Buterin, a founder of Ethereum. Mr. Buterin or another key participant within the core development group could cease to be involved with the Ethereum platform. Factions could form within the Ethereum community, resulting in different and competing versions of Ethereum being adopted by network participants. Furthermore, network participants running the Ethereum software may choose not to update their versions of the software, resulting in different versions of the Ethereum software running on the network. Any of the foregoing developments could have a significant negative impact on the viability and overall health of the Ethereum platform, the value of Ether and the Company’s business model and assets.

In particular, the Ethereum network, as part of the Ethereum 2.0 upgrades, is anticipated to shift from the use of a PoW (Proof-of-Work) validation model to a PoS (Proof-of-Stake) model. The current proposal for Ethereum’s shift to a PoS model, and other Ethereum 2.0 upgrades, have a number of unknown variables, including uncertainty over timing, execution and ultimate adoption. Although the beacon chain (the PoS successor to the Ethereum PoW chain) launched in December 2020 and the “merging” of the Ethereum PoW chain into Ethereum 2.0 occurred on September 15, 2022, there is no assurance that the balance of the Ethereum 2.0 upgrades, will occur on the timeline anticipated, or at all. In addition, although management believes that these upcoming changes to the Ethereum platform will positively impact its potential for mainstream adoption, no assurance can be given that such impact will materialize. If the Company cannot successfully anticipate and react to the impacts of this shift, its business and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Uncertainty Regarding the Growth of Blockchain and Web 3 Technologies

The further development and use of blockchain, Web 3 technologies and digital assets are subject to a variety of factors that are difficult to evaluate and predict, many of which are beyond the Company’s control. The slowing of or stopping of the development or acceptance of blockchain networks, specifically Ethereum, and blockchain assets would be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company. Furthermore, blockchain and Web 3 technologies, including Ethereum, may never be implemented to a scale that provides identifiable economic benefit to blockchain-based businesses, including the Company.

The Ethereum network and ETH as digital asset have a limited history. Due to this short history, it is not clear how all elements of ETH will unfold over time, specifically with regard to governance between miners, developers and users, as well as the long-term security model as the rate of inflation of ETH decreases. Since the ETH community has successfully navigated a considerable number of technical and political challenges since its inception, the Company believes that it will continue to engineer its way around future challenges. The history of open-source software development would indicate that vibrant communities are able to change the software under development at a pace sufficient to stay relevant. The continuation of such vibrant communities is not guaranteed, and insufficient software development or any other unforeseen challenges that the community is not able to navigate could have an adverse impact on the business of the Company.

Smart Contract Risk

The Ethereum network is based upon the development and deployment of smart contracts, which are self-executing contracts with the terms of the agreement written into software code. There are thousands of smart contracts currently running on Ethereum network. Like all software code, smart contracts are exposed to risk that the code contains a bug or other security vulnerability, which can lead to loss of assets that are held on or transacted through the contract. The smart contract deployed on Ethereum and, as such, may contain a bug or other vulnerability that may lead to the loss of digital assets held in the wallet. The Ethereum developer community audits widely used smart contracts frequently and publishes the results of such audits on public forums. The Company currently relies on Blockdaemon for its staking solution. The smart contract code via Blockdaemon is scheduled to be audited by Quantstamp. Governance of the smart contracts utilizes a multi-signature approach and keys are stored in both hot and cold storage to ensure maximum security. Nevertheless, there is no guaranty against a bug or other vulnerability leading to a loss of digital assets.

Risks Associated with the Ethereum Network

Dependence on Ethereum Network Developers

While many contributors to the Ethereum network’s open-source software are employed by companies in the industry, most of them are not directly compensated for helping to maintain the protocol. As a result, there are no contracts or guarantees that they will continue to contribute to the Ethereum network’s software (https://github.com/ether and https://github.com/orgs/ether/people).

Issues with the Cryptography Underlying the Ethereum Network

Although the Ethereum network is one of the world’s most established digital asset networks, the Ethereum network and other cryptographic and algorithmic protocols governing the issuance of digital assets represent a new and rapidly evolving industry that is subject to a variety of factors that are difficult to evaluate. In the past, flaws in the source code for digital assets have been exposed and exploited, including flaws that disabled some functionality for users, exposed users’ personal information and/or resulted in the theft of users’ digital assets. The cryptography underlying ETH could prove to be flawed or ineffective, or developments in mathematics and/or technology, including advances in digital computing, algebraic geometry and quantum computing, could result in such cryptography becoming ineffective. In any of these circumstances, a malicious actor may be able to take the ETH held by the Company. Moreover, functionality of the Ethereum network may be negatively affected such that it is no longer attractive to users, thereby dampening demand for ETH. Even if digital assets other than ETH were affected by similar circumstances, any reduction in confidence in the source code or cryptography underlying digital assets generally could negatively affect the demand for digital assets and therefore adversely affect the business of the Company.

Disputes on the Development of the Ethereum Network may lead to Delays in the Development of the Network

There can be disputes between contributors on the best paths forward in building and maintaining the Ethereum network’s software. Furthermore, the miners and/or stakers supporting the network and other developers and users of the network can disagree with the contributors as well, creating greater debate. Therefore, the Ethereum community often iterates slowly upon contentious protocol issues, which many perceive as prudently conservative, while others worry that it inhibits innovation. It will be important for the community to continue to develop at a pace that meets the demand for transacting in ETH, otherwise users may become frustrated and lose faith in the network. As a decentralized network, strong consensus and unity is particularly important to respond to potential growth and scalability challenges.

The Ethereum Blockchain may Temporarily or Permanently Fork and/or Split

The Ethereum network’s software and protocol are open source. When a modification is released by the developers and a substantial majority of participants consent to the modification, the change is implemented and the Ethereum network continues uninterrupted. However, if a change were activated with less than a substantial majority consenting to the proposed modification, and the modification is not compatible with the software prior to its modification, the consequence would be what is known as a “hard fork” (i.e., a split) of the Ethereum network (and the blockchain). One blockchain would be maintained by the pre-modification software and the other by the post-modification software. The effect is that both blockchain algorithms would be running parallel to one another, but each would be building an independent blockchain with independent native assets.

A hard fork could present problems such as two copies of a token for the same NFT. It could also present a problem for a customer having to choose to provide services with respect to digital assets resulting from a fork. In addition, digital asset loan agreements often dictate when and how each of the lender or the borrower of a digital asset pledging a certain digital asset gets the benefit of forked coins in the event of a hard fork. Similarly, derivative counterparties using ISDA-based contractual documentation may be subject to hard fork-related termination events.

Although forks are likely to be addressed by a community-led effort to merge the two groups, such a fork could still adversely affect ETH’s viability.

Risk if a Person Gains a 51% Share of the Ethereum Network

If an individual gains controls over 51% of the compute power (hash rate), the person could use his (her) majority share to double spend ETH. Essentially, the person would send ETH to one recipient, which is confirmed in the existing blockchain, while also creating a shadow blockchain that sends that same ETH to another person under his control. After a period of time, the person will release his hidden blockchain and reverse previously confirmed transactions, and due to the way mining works, that new blockchain will become the record of truth. This would significantly erode trust in the Ethereum network to store value and serve as a means of exchange which may significantly decrease the value of the ETH. The risk of two or more of the largest miners or pools of Ethereum controlling in the aggregate more than 51% of the Ethereum network is expected to be substantially mitigated on Ethereum 2.0, as the PoS method of validating transactions is expected to improve the decentralization and security of the network.

Dependence on the Internet

ETH miners and beacon chain validators relay transactions to one another via the internet, and when blocks are mined, they are also forwarded via the Internet. Users and developers access Ethereum via the Internet. Thus, the Ethereum network is dependent upon the continued functioning of the Internet.

Attacks on the Ethereum Network

The Ethereum network is periodically subject to distributed denial of service attacks to clog the list of transactions being tabulated by miners, which can slow the confirmation of authentic transactions. Another avenue of attack would be if a large number of miners were taken offline then it could take some time before the difficulty of the mining process algorithmically adjusts, which would stall block creation time and therefore transaction confirmation time. Thus far these scenarios have not plagued the network for long or in a systemic manner. This risk is expected to be substantially mitigated on Ethereum 2.0, as the PoS method of validating transactions is expected to improve the speed and efficiency of the network.

Decrease in Block Reward or Yield

In the event of a material decrease in the block reward to the Ethereum network, miners may cease to provide their computational power to the consensus mechanism for the Ethereum network blockchain. This risk is expected to be mitigated in part on Ethereum 2.0, as the rewards earned by stakers of ETH will proportionately decline as more stakers participate in the network. Conversely, if some stakers decide to stop participating because the yield is too low, remaining stakers will enjoy a higher yield. Consequently, Ethereum 2.0 is expected to attract a sufficient number of stakers and validators to keep the network running efficiently.

Competitors to ETH and the Ethereum Network

Currently, ETH is the second largest digital asset by market capitalization, with Coingecko citing more than 5,000 alternative digital assets. To the extent a competitor to ETH gains popularity and greater market share, the use and price of ETH could be negatively impacted, which may adversely affect the investments of the Company. Similarly, the price of ETH could be negatively impacted by competition from incumbents in the credit card and payments industries or from other developing blockchain protocols.

Significant Energy Consumption to Run the Ethereum Network

Because of the significant computing power required to mine ETH, the network’s energy consumption as a whole may ultimately be deemed to be or indeed become unsustainable (barring improvements in efficiency which could be designed for the protocol). This could pose a risk to broader and sustained acceptance of the network as a peer-to-peer transactional platform. This risk is expected to be substantially mitigated on Ethereum 2.0, as the PoS method of validating transactions requires significantly less energy consumption than the PoW method.

Financial Institutions may Refuse to Support Transactions Involving ETH

In the uncertain regulatory climate for digital assets, including ETH, regulated financial institutions may refuse to support transactions involving digital assets, including the receipt of cash proceeds from sales of digital asset. Should this occur, the Company’s business, prospects, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows could be materially adversely affected.

Risks Related to United States Government Regulation

We are subject to an extensive and rapidly-evolving regulatory landscape and any adverse changes to, or our failure to comply with, any laws and regulations could adversely affect our brand, reputation, business, operating results and financial condition.

Our business may be or may become subject to extensive laws, rules, regulations, policies, orders, determinations, directives, treaties, and legal and regulatory interpretations and guidance in the markets in which we operate, including those typically applied to financial services and banking, securities, commodities, the exchange, and transfer of digital assets, cross-border and domestic money and digital asset transmission businesses, as well as those governing data privacy, data governance, data protection, cybersecurity, fraud detection, payment services (including payment processing and settlement services), consumer protection, antitrust and competition, bankruptcy, tax, anti-bribery, economic and trade sanctions, anti-money laundering, and counter-terrorist financing. Many of these legal and regulatory regimes were adopted prior to the advent of the internet, mobile technologies, digital assets, and related technologies. As a result, they often do not contemplate or address unique issues associated with digital assets, are subject to significant uncertainty, and vary widely across U.S. federal, state, and local jurisdictions. These legal and regulatory regimes, including the laws, rules, and regulations thereunder, evolve frequently and may be modified, interpreted, and applied in an inconsistent manner from one jurisdiction to another, and may conflict with one another. Moreover, the relative novelty and evolving nature of our business and the significant uncertainty surrounding the regulation of digital assets requires us to exercise our judgement as to whether certain laws, rules, and regulations apply to us, and it is possible that governmental bodies and regulators may disagree with our conclusions. To the extent we have not complied with such laws, rules, and regulations, we could be subject to significant fines, limitations on our business, reputational harm, and other regulatory consequences, as well as criminal penalties, each of which may be significant and could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

In addition to existing laws and regulations, various governmental and regulatory bodies, including legislative and executive bodies, in the United States, as well as in other countries may adopt new laws and regulations, or new interpretations of existing laws and regulations may be issued by such bodies or the judiciary, which may adversely impact the development and use of digital assets as a whole, digital asset mining operations, and our legal and regulatory status in particular by changing how we operate our business, how our operations are regulated, and what products or services we and our competitors can offer, requiring changes to our compliance and risk mitigation measures, imposing new licensing requirements or new costs of doing business, or imposing a total ban on certain activities or transactions with respect to digital assets, as has occurred in certain jurisdictions in the past.

Due to our business activities, if laws or regulations or their respective interpretation change, we may become subject to ongoing examinations, oversight, and reviews by U.S. federal and state regulators, which would have broad discretion to audit and examine our business if we become subject to their oversight. Adverse changes to, or our failure to comply with, any laws and regulations have had, and may continue to have, an adverse effect on our reputation and brand and our business, operating results and financial condition.

We are subject to governmental regulation and other legal obligations related to data privacy, data protection and information security. If we are unable to comply with these, we may be subject to governmental enforcement actions, litigation, fines and penalties or adverse publicity.

We collect and process data, including personal, financial and confidential information about individuals, including our employees and business partners; however, not of any customers or other third parties. The collection, use and processing of such data about individuals are governed by data privacy laws and regulations enacted in the U.S. (federal and state), and other jurisdictions around the world. These data privacy laws and regulations are complex, continue to evolve, and on occasion may be inconsistent between jurisdictions leading to uncertainty in interpreting such laws and it is possible that these laws, regulations and requirements may be interpreted and applied in a manner that is inconsistent with our existing information processing practices, and many of these laws are significantly litigated and/or subject to regulatory enforcement. The implication of this includes that various federal, state and foreign legislative or regulatory bodies may enact or adopt new or additional laws and regulations concerning data privacy, data retention, data transfer, and data protection. Such laws may continue to restrict or dictate how we collect, maintain, combine and disseminate information and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

In the United States, there are numerous federal and state laws and regulations that could apply to our operations or the operations of our partners, including data breach notification laws, financial information and other data privacy laws, and consumer protection laws and regulations (e.g., Section 5 of the FTC Act), that govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of personal information.

We are subject to extensive environmental, health and safety laws and regulations that may expose us to significant liabilities for penalties, damages or costs of remediation or compliance.

Our operations and properties are subject to extensive laws and regulations governing occupational health and safety, the discharge of pollutants into the environment or otherwise relating to health, safety and environmental protection requirements in the United States. These laws and regulations may impose numerous obligations that are applicable to our operations, including acquisition of a permit or other approval before conducting construction or regulated activities; restrictions on the types, quantities and concentration of materials that can be released into the environment; limitation or prohibition of construction and operating activities in environmentally sensitive areas, such as wetlands; imposing specific health and safety standards addressing worker protection; and imposition of significant liabilities for pollution resulting from our operations, including investigation, remedial and clean-up costs. Failure to comply with these requirements may expose us to fines, penalties and/or interruptions in our operations that could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. Certain environmental laws may impose strict, joint and several liability for costs required to clean up and restore sites where hazardous substances have been disposed or otherwise released into the environment, even under circumstances where the hazardous substances were released by prior owners or operators or the activities conducted and from which a release emanated complied with applicable law. Moreover, it is not uncommon for neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by noise or the release of hazardous substances into the environment.

The trend in environmental regulation has been to place more restrictions and limitations on activities that may be perceived to impact the environment, and thus there can be no assurance as to the amount or timing of future expenditures for environmental regulation compliance or remediation. New or revised regulations that result in increased compliance costs or additional operating restrictions could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

The regulatory and legislative developments related to climate change, may materially adversely affect our brand, reputation, business, operating results and financial condition.

A number of governments or governmental bodies have introduced or are contemplating legislative and regulatory changes in response to various climate change interest groups and the potential impact of climate change. Given the very significant amount of electrical power required to operate digital asset mining machines, as well the environmental impact of mining for the rare earth metals used in the production of mining servers, the digital asset mining industry may become a target for future environmental and energy regulation. For example, in June and July of 2021, the Chinese government prohibited the operation of mining machines and supply of energy to mining businesses, citing concerns regarding high levels of energy consumption, which resulted in our suspension of mining operations in China. United States legislation and increased regulation regarding climate change could impose significant costs on us and our suppliers, including costs related to increased energy requirements, capital equipment, environmental monitoring and reporting, and other costs to comply with such regulations. Specifically, imposition of a carbon tax or other regulatory fee in a jurisdiction where we operate or on electricity that we purchase could result in substantially higher energy costs, and due to the significant amount of electrical power required to operate digital asset mining machines, could in turn put our facilities at a competitive disadvantage. Any future climate change regulations could also negatively impact our ability to compete with companies situated in areas not subject to such limitations. Given the political significance and uncertainty around the impact of climate change and how it should be addressed, we cannot predict how legislation and regulation will affect our financial condition, operating performance and ability to compete. Furthermore, even without such regulation, increased awareness and any adverse publicity in the global marketplace about potential impacts on climate change by us or other companies in our industry could harm our reputation. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

A particular digital asset’s status as a “security” in any relevant jurisdiction is subject to a high degree of uncertainty and if a regulator disagrees with our characterization of 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. Furthermore, a determination that Bitcoin or any other digital asset that we own or mine is a “security” may adversely affect the value of Bitcoin and our business.

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. Our determination that the digital assets we hold are not securities is a risk-based assessment and not a legal standard or binding on regulators. The SEC generally does not provide advance guidance or confirmation on the status of any particular digital asset as a security. 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 made by senior officials at the SEC indicate that the SEC does not intend to take the position that Bitcoin is a security (as currently offered and sold). However, 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. As of the date of this prospectus, with the exception of certain centrally issued digital assets that have received “no-action” letters from the SEC staff, Bitcoin and ETH are the only digital assets which senior officials at the SEC have publicly stated are unlikely to be considered securities. Chairman Gensler stated (at the Penn Law Capital Markets Association Annual Conference on April 4, 2022) that “Issuers of crypto tokens that are securities must register their offers and sales of these assets with the SEC and comply with our disclosure requirements or meet an exemption.” As a bitcoin mining company, we do not believe we are an issuer of any “securities” as defined under the federal securities laws. Our internal process for determining whether the digital assets we hold or plan to hold is based upon the public statements of the SEC and existing case law. The digital assets we hold or plan to hold, other than bitcoin and ETH, may have been created by an issuer as an investment contract under the Howey test, SEC v. Howey Co., 328 U.S. 293 (1946), and may be deemed to be securities by the SEC. However, the Company was not the issuer that created these digital assets and is holding them on an interim basis until liquidated. Should the SEC state in the future that bitcoin, ETH or USDC tokens we hold are securities, we may no longer be able to hold any of these digital assets. It will then likely become difficult or impossible for such digital asset to be traded, cleared or custodied in the United States through the same channels used by non-security digital assets, which in addition to materially and adversely affecting the trading value of the digital asset is likely to cause substantial volatility and significantly impact its liquidity and market participants’ ability to convert the digital asset into U.S. dollars. Our inability to exchange bitcoin for fiat currency or other digital assets (and vice versa) to administer our treasury management objectives may decrease our earnings potential and have an adverse impact on our business and financial condition.

Under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, a company may fall within the definition of an investment company under section 3(c)(1)(A) thereof if it is or holds itself out as being engaged primarily, or proposes to engage primarily in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities, or under section 3(a)(1)(C) thereof if it is engaged or proposes to engage in business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding, or trading in securities, and owns or proposes to acquire “investment securities” (as defined) having a value exceeding 40% of its total assets (exclusive of government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis. There is no authoritative law, rule or binding guidance published by the SEC regarding the status of digital assets as “securities” or “investment securities” under the Investment Company Act. Although we believe that we are not engaged in the business of investing, reinvesting, or trading in investment securities, and we do not hold ourselves out as being primarily engaged, or proposing to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities, to the extent the digital assets which we mine, own, or otherwise acquire may be deemed “securities” or ” investment securities” by the SEC or a court of competent jurisdiction, we may meet the definition of an investment company. If we fall within the definition of an investment company under the Investment Company Act, we would be required to register with the SEC. If an investment company fails to register, it likely would have to stop doing almost all business, and its contracts would become voidable. Generally non-U.S. issuers may not register as an investment company without an SEC order.

The classification of a digital asset as a security under applicable law has wide-ranging implications for the regulatory obligations that flow from the mining, sale and trading of such assets. For example, a digital asset that is a security in the United States may generally only be offered or sold in the United States 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 United States may be subject to registration with the SEC as a “broker” or “dealer.”

There can be no assurances that we will properly characterize any given digital asset as a security or non-security for purposes of determining which digital assets to mine, hold and trade, or that the SEC, or a court, if the question was presented to it, would agree with our assessment. We could be subject to judicial or administrative sanctions for failing to offer or sell digital assets in compliance with the registration requirements, or for acting as a broker or dealer without appropriate registration. Such an action could result in injunctions, cease and desist orders, as well as civil monetary penalties, fines, and disgorgement, criminal liability, and reputational harm. Further, if bitcoin is deemed to be a security under the laws of 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, all transactions in such supported digital asset would have to be registered with the SEC, or conducted in accordance with an exemption from registration, which could severely limit its liquidity, usability and transactability. For instance, all transactions in such supported digital asset would have to be registered with the SEC, or conducted in accordance with an exemption from registration, which could severely limit its liquidity, usability and transactability. Further, it could draw negative publicity and a decline in the general acceptance of the digital asset. Also, it may make it difficult for such digital asset to be traded, cleared, and custodied as compared to other digital assets that are not considered to be securities.

Failure to comply with anti-corruption and anti-money laundering laws, including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (the “FCPA”) and similar laws associated with our activities outside of the United States, could subject us to penalties and other adverse consequences.

We operate an international business and may have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or state-owned or affiliated entities. We are subject to the FCPA, and other applicable anti-corruption and anti-money laundering laws in certain countries in which we conduct activities. The FCPA prohibits providing, offering, promising, or authorizing, directly or indirectly, anything of value to government officials, political parties, or political candidates for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business or securing any improper business advantage. In addition, U.S. public companies are required to maintain records that accurately and fairly represent their transactions and have an adequate system of internal accounting controls.

In many foreign countries, including countries in which we may conduct business, it may be a local custom that businesses engage in practices that are prohibited by the FCPA, or other applicable laws and regulations. We face significant risks if we or any of our directors, officers, employees, contractors, agents or other partners or representatives fail to comply with these laws and governmental authorities in the United States and elsewhere could seek to impose substantial civil and/or criminal fines and penalties which could have a material adverse effect on our business, reputation, operating results, prospects and financial condition.

Any violation of the FCPA, other applicable anti-corruption laws, or anti-money laundering laws could result in whistleblower complaints, adverse media coverage, investigations, loss of export privileges, severe criminal or civil sanctions and, in the case of the FCPA, suspension or debarment from U.S. government contracts, any of which could have a materially adverse effect on our reputation, business, operating results, prospects and financial condition. In addition, responding to any enforcement action or internal investigation related to alleged misconduct may result in a significant diversion of management’s attention and resources and significant defense costs and other professional fees.

Enactment of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 (the “Infrastructure Act”) may have an adverse impact on our business and financial condition.

On November 15, 2021, President Joseph R. Biden signed the Infrastructure Act. Section 80603 of the Infrastructure Act modifies and amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”) by requiring brokers of digital asset transactions to report their customers to the IRS. This provision was included to enforce the taxability of digital asset transactions. Section 80603 defines “broker” as “any person who (for consideration) is responsible for regularly providing any service effectuating transfers of digital assets on behalf of another person.” That could potentially include miners, validators, and developers of decentralized applications. These functions play a critical role in our business and in the functioning of the blockchain ecosystem. Importantly, these functions have no way of identifying their anonymous users. Indeed, bitcoin’s blockchain was designed for anonymity.

This reporting requirement does not take effect until January 1, 2023 and will impact tax returns filed in 2024. The implementation of these requirements will require further guidance from the federal government. Disclosing the identity of our bitcoin mining operations and associated accounts to ensure they can be taxed by the IRS could cause a significant devaluing of our business, the bitcoin currency, and the entire digital assets market. Additionally, noncompliance with this provision could lead to significant fines and or regulatory actions against our company.

Our interactions with a blockchain and mining pools may expose us to SDN or blocked persons or cause us to violate provisions of law that did not contemplate distributive ledger technology.

The Office of Financial Assets Control of the U.S. Department of Treasury (“OFAC”) 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 or from countries on OFAC’s sanctioned countries’ list. We also rely on a third-party mining pool service provider for our mining revenue payments and other participants in the mining pool, unknown to us, may also be persons from countries on OFAC’s SDN list or from countries on OFAC’s sanctioned countries list. Our Company’s policy prohibits any transactions with such SDN individuals or persons from sanctioned countries, but we may not be adequately capable of determining the ultimate identity of the individual with whom we transact with respect to selling bitcoin 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. 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 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 Ordinary Shares.

If regulatory changes or interpretations of our activities require our registration as a money services business (“MSB”) under the regulations promulgated by FinCEN under the authority of the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, or otherwise under state laws, we may incur significant compliance costs, which could be substantial or cost-prohibitive. If we become subject to these regulations, our costs in complying with them may have a material negative effect on our business and the results of our operations.

To the extent that our activities cause us to be deemed an MSB under the regulations promulgated by FinCEN under the authority of the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, we may be required to comply with FinCEN regulations, including those that would mandate us to implement anti-money laundering programs, make certain reports to FinCEN and maintain certain records.

To the extent that our activities cause us to be deemed a “money transmitter” (“MT”) or equivalent designation, under state law in any state in which we operate (currently, Nebraska, Georgia and Texas), we may be required to seek a license or otherwise register with a state regulator and comply with state regulations that may include the implementation of anti-money laundering programs, maintenance of certain records and other operational requirements. Such additional federal or state regulatory obligations may cause us to incur extraordinary expenses, possibly affecting an investment in our securities in a materially adverse manner. Furthermore, the Company and our service providers may not be capable of complying with certain federal or state regulatory obligations applicable to MSBs and MTs. If we are deemed to be subject to and determine not to comply with such additional regulatory and registration requirements, we may act to leave a particular state or the U.S. completely. Any such action would be expected to materially adversely affect our operations.

Current regulation of the exchange of bitcoins under the CEA by the CFTC is unclear; to the extent we become subject to regulation under the CFTC in connection with our exchange of bitcoin, we may incur additional compliance costs, which may be significant.

Current legislation, including the Commodities Exchange Act of 1936, as amended (the “CEA”) is unclear with respect to the exchange of bitcoins. Changes in the CEA or the regulations promulgated thereunder, as well as interpretations thereof and official promulgations by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”), which oversees the CEA, may impact the classification of bitcoins and therefore may subject them to additional regulatory oversight by the CFTC.

Presently, bitcoin derivatives are not excluded from the definition of a “commodity future” by the CFTC. We cannot be certain as to how future regulatory developments will impact the treatment of bitcoins 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 or 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 curtail our U.S. operations. Any such action would be expected to materially adversely affect our operations. As of the date of this prospectus, no CFTC orders or rulings are applicable to our business.

Because there has been limited precedent set for financial accounting of bitcoin and other bitcoin assets, the determination that we have made for how to account for bitcoin assets transactions may be subject to change.

Because there has been limited precedent set for the financial accounting of digital assets and related revenue recognition and no official guidance has yet been provided by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board or the SEC, it is unclear how companies may in the future be required to account for bitcoin transactions and assets and related revenue recognition. A change in regulatory or financial accounting standards could result in the necessity to change our accounting methods and restate our financial statements. Such a restatement could adversely affect the accounting for our newly mined bitcoin rewards and more generally negatively impact our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operation. Such circumstances would have a material adverse effect on our ability to continue as a going concern or to pursue our business strategy at all, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects or operations as well as and potentially the value of any digital assets we hold or expects to acquire for our own account and harm investors.

Risks Related to Canadian Government Regulations 

The Alberta Utilities Commission (“AUC”) and AUC’s Decision 26379-D02-2021 had an adverse impact on our Canadian operations.

The Alberta Utilities Commission (“AUC”) is the Province of Alberta’s electric generation regulatory agency. AUC regulates and oversees the development of and generation of electricity under the Hydro and Electric Act (the “Act”). AUC ensures that proposed electric generation activities are in the public interest while considering related environmental and social issues. As such, AUC must approve all digital asset miners seeking to develop their own electric generation in Alberta, unless their operations are exempt. Our hosting partner, Link Global Technologies (“Link”) that had supplied approximately 3.3 MW for hosting our miners was required to discontinue operations as a result of the hereinafter described AUC proceedings which had an adverse effect on our operations. The Company has sent Link a termination notice and is seeking a refund of its $129,845 deposit. Pending a termination, the Company has redirected miners formerly hosted with Link to other hosting partners.

We are subject to Canadian restrictions on export.

Under Canadian law, we cannot export, re-export, transfer, or make available, whether directly or indirectly, any regulated item or information to anyone outside Canada in connection with an Agreement with Blockbreakers without first complying with all export control laws and regulations which may be imposed by applicable governmental authorities of any country or organization of nations within whose jurisdiction we operate or do business.

Risks Involving Intellectual Property

We rely upon licenses of third-party intellectual property rights and may be unable to protect our software codes.

We actively use specific hardware and software for our bitcoin mining operation. In certain cases, source code and other software assets may be subject to an open-source license, as much technology development underway in this sector is open source. For these works, the Company intends to adhere to the terms of any license agreements that may be in place.

We do not currently own, and do not have any current plans to seek, any patents in connection with our existing and planned blockchain and digital asset related operations. We rely upon trade secrets, trademarks, service marks, trade names, copyrights and other intellectual property rights and expect to license the use of intellectual property rights owned and controlled by others. In addition, we have developed and may further develop certain proprietary software applications for purposes of our digital asset mining operation. Our open-source licenses may not afford us the protection we need to protect our intellectual property.

Our internal systems rely on software that is highly technical, and, if it contains undetected errors, our business could be adversely affected.

Our internal systems rely on software that is highly technical and complex. In addition, our internal systems depend on the ability of such software to store, retrieve, process and manage immense amounts of data. The software on which we rely has contained, and may now or in the future contain, undetected errors or bugs. Some errors may only be discovered after the code has been released for external or internal use. Any errors, bugs or defects discovered in the software on which we rely could result in harm to our reputation, or liability for damages, any of which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial conditions.

We may not be able to prevent others from unauthorized use of our intellectual property, which could harm our business and competitive position.

We regard trademarks, domain names, know-how, proprietary technologies and similar intellectual property as critical to our success, and we rely on a combination of intellectual property laws and contractual arrangements, including confidentiality and non-compete agreements with our employees and others, to protect our proprietary rights. See “Business-Intellectual Property” and “Regulation—Regulation on Intellectual Property Rights” in our Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2021. Thus, we cannot assure you that any of our intellectual property rights would not be challenged, invalidated, circumvented or misappropriated, or such intellectual property will be sufficient to provide us with competitive advantages. In addition, because of the rapid pace of technological change in our industry, parts of our business rely on technologies developed or licensed by third parties, and we may not be able to obtain or continue to obtain licenses and technologies from these third parties on reasonable terms, or at all.

Preventing any unauthorized use of our intellectual property is difficult and costly and the steps we take may be inadequate to prevent the misappropriation of our intellectual property. In the event that we resort to litigation to enforce our intellectual property rights, such litigation could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our managerial and financial resources. We can provide no assurance that we will prevail in such litigation. In addition, our trade secrets may be leaked or otherwise become available to, or be independently discovered by, our competitors. To the extent that our employees or consultants use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related know-how and inventions. Any failure in protecting or enforcing our intellectual property rights could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may be subject to intellectual property infringement claims, which may be expensive to defend and may disrupt our business and operations.

We cannot be certain that our operations or any aspects of our business do not or will not infringe upon or otherwise violate trademarks, patents, copyrights, know-how or other intellectual property rights held by third parties. We may be, from time to time in the future, subject to legal proceedings and claims relating to the intellectual property rights of others. In addition, there may be third-party trademarks, patents, copyrights, know-how or other intellectual property rights that are infringed by our products, services or other aspects of our business without our awareness. Holders of such intellectual property rights may seek to enforce such intellectual property rights against us in China, the United States or other jurisdictions. If any third-party infringement claims are brought against us, we may be forced to divert management’s time and other resources from our business and operations to defend against these claims, regardless of their merits. If we were found to have violated the intellectual property rights of others, we may be subject to liability for our infringement activities or may be prohibited from using such intellectual property, and we may incur licensing fees or be forced to develop alternatives of our own. As a result, our business and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.

Risks Related to Our Ordinary Shares

The trading price of our Ordinary Shares is subject to pricing factors that are not necessarily associated with traditional factors that influence stock prices or the value of non-bitcoin assets such as revenue, cash flows, profitability, growth prospects or business activity levels since the value and price, as determined by the investing public, may be influenced by future anticipated adoption or appreciation in value of digital assets or blockchains generally, factors over which we have little or no influence or control.

Other factors that could cause volatility in the market price of our Ordinary Shares include, but are not limited to:

In addition, the stock markets in general have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of issuers. These broad market fluctuations may negatively impact the price or liquidity of our Ordinary Shares. When the price of a stock has been volatile, holders of that stock have sometimes instituted securities class action litigation against the issuer, and we have been impacted in that way. See Item 4 - “Information on the Company - Legal Proceedings” in our Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ending December 31, 2021 and the risk factor below titled “We are defendants in securities class action litigation which could result in substantial costs and liabilities for the Company.” The pending lawsuit has required significant management time and attention, resulting in significant legal expenses and potential damages.

Our Chief Financial Officer and Chairman currently have voting power to control all significant corporate actions.

Erke Huang, our Chief Financial Officer and a director, and Zhaohui Deng, our Chairman of the Board, collectively beneficially own 1,000,000 preferred shares, each having fifty (50) votes, which equals approximately 60.6% of the voting power of our 82,482,849 currently outstanding Ordinary Shares as of November 11, 2022 or approximately 37.7% of all votes cast on an as-converted basis. The Board authorized the exchange by Messrs. Huang and Deng of 1,000,000 Ordinary Shares for an equivalent number of preferred shares, in the form of a poison pill, to enable them to carry out the Company’s business plan without the threat of a hostile takeover. Nevertheless, as a result of their shareholdings, Mr. Huang and Mr. Deng may be able to control the vote over decisions regarding mergers, consolidations and the sale of all or substantially all of our assets, the election of directors, and other significant corporate actions. They may also take action that is not in the best interests of our other shareholders. This concentration of voting power may discourage or delay our Company, which could deprive our shareholders of an opportunity to receive a premium for their shares as part of the sale of our Company and might reduce the market price of our Ordinary Shares. These actions may be taken even if they are opposed by our other shareholders.

We may be unable to comply with the applicable continued listing requirements of the Nasdaq Capital Market, which may adversely impact our access to capital markets and may cause us to default certain of our agreements.

Our Ordinary Shares are currently traded on the Nasdaq Capital Market. Nasdaq rules require us to maintain a minimum closing bid price of $1.00 per Ordinary Share. The closing bid price of our Ordinary Shares fell below $1.00 per share for 30 consecutive trading days in November 2019, so we were not in compliance with Nasdaq’s rules for listing standards. Although we regained compliance, there can be no assurance we will continue to meet the minimum bid price requirements or any other Nasdaq requirements in the future, in which case our Ordinary Shares could be delisted.

In the event that our Ordinary Shares are delisted from Nasdaq and are not eligible for quotation or listing on another market or exchange, trading of our Ordinary Shares could be conducted only on the over-the-counter market or on an electronic bulletin board established for unlisted securities, such as the OTC. In such event, it could become more difficult to dispose of, or obtain accurate price quotations for, our Ordinary Shares, and there would likely also be a reduction in our coverage by securities analysts and the news media, which could cause the price of our Ordinary Shares to decline further. In addition, our ability to raise additional capital may be severely impacted if our shares are delisted from Nasdaq, which may negatively affect our business plans and the results of our operations.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish unfavorable research about our business, our share price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our Ordinary Shares will be influenced by whether industry or securities analysts publish research and reports about us, our business, our market or our competitors and, if any analysts do publish such reports, what they publish in those reports. We may not obtain or maintain analyst coverage in the future. Any analysts that do cover us may make adverse recommendations regarding our shares, adversely change their recommendations from time to time and/or provide more favorable relative recommendations about our competitors. If analysts who may cover us in the future were to cease coverage of our company or fail to regularly publish reports on us, or if analysts fail to cover us or publish reports about us at all, we could lose (or never gain) visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause the share price of our Ordinary Shares or trading volume to decline. Moreover, if our operating results do not meet the expectations of the investor community, one or more of the analysts who cover our Company may change their recommendations regarding our Company, and our share price could decline.

Our Ordinary Shares may be thinly traded, and you may be unable to sell at or near ask prices or at all if you need to sell your shares to raise money or otherwise desire to liquidate your shares.

Our Ordinary Shares may become “thinly-traded,” meaning that the number of persons interested in purchasing our Ordinary Shares at or near bid prices at any given time may be relatively small or non-existent. This situation may be attributable to a number of factors, including the fact that we may not be well-known to stock analysts, stock brokers, institutional investors and others in the investment community that generate or influence sales volume, and that, even if we came to the attention of such persons, they tend to be risk-averse and might be reluctant to follow a relatively unknown company such as ours or purchase or recommend the purchase of our shares until such time as we became more seasoned. As a consequence, there may be periods of several days or more when trading activity in our shares is minimal or non-existent, as compared to a seasoned issuer which has a large and steady volume of trading activity that will generally support continuous sales without an adverse effect on share price. A broad or active public trading market for our Ordinary Shares may not develop or be sustained.

We defended a securities class action litigation which resulted in significant costs for the Company.

The market for our Ordinary Shares may have, when compared to seasoned issuers, significant price volatility, and we expect that our share price may continue to be more volatile than that of a seasoned issuer for the indefinite future. In the past, plaintiffs have often initiated securities class action litigation against a company following periods of volatility in the market price of its securities. On January 20, 2021, a securities class action lawsuit was filed against the Company and its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer titled Anthony Pauwels v. Bit Digital, Inc., Min Hu and Erke Huang (Case No. 1:21-cv-00515) (U.S.D.C. S.D.N.Y.). The class action was brought on behalf of persons that purchased or acquired our Ordinary Shares between December 21, 2020 and January 8, 2021, a period of volatility in our shares, as well as volatility in the price of bitcoin. On April 29, 2021, the Court consolidated several related cases under the caption In re Bit Digital, Inc. Securities Litigation. Joseph Franklin Monkam Nitcheu was appointed as lead plaintiff. On July 6, 2021, the lead plaintiff filed a consolidated class action complaint (the “Amended Complaint”). The Amended Complaint was still based primarily upon a January 11, 2021 short seller report and included, among other things, additional information concerning our previously discontinued peer to peer lending business. We filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit and vigorously defended the action. While that motion was pending, the Company agreed with the lead plaintiff selected in the case to settle the class action by paying $2,100,000. The Company chose to do that to eliminate the burden, expense and uncertainties of further litigation. The Company continues to deny the allegations in the Amended Complaint and nothing in the settlement is evidence of any liability on the Company’s behalf.

For the settlement to become enforceable and binding on the class, the federal district court must approve it and certify a class for purposes of enforcing the settlement. Lead plaintiff’s counsel has filed an unopposed motion to have the settlement approved. The date and time of a hearing on that motion has not yet been set.

We have not paid dividends in the past and do not anticipate paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends with respect to our Ordinary Shares and do not intend to pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. The Preference Shares held by our Chairman of the Board and Chief Financial Officer provide for an eight (8%) percent annual dividend when and if declared by the Board and none has been declared. We currently plan to retain any future earnings to cover operating costs and otherwise fund the growth of our business. We cannot assure you that we would, at any time, generate sufficient surplus cash that would be available for distribution to the holders of our Ordinary Shares as a dividend. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our Ordinary Shares will be the sole source of gain for the foreseeable future. There is no guarantee that our Ordinary Shares will appreciate in value or even maintain the price at which a shareholder purchased such shareholder’s shares.

You may face difficulties in protecting your interests as a shareholder, as Cayman Islands law provides substantially less protection when compared to the laws of the United States and it may be difficult for a shareholder of ours to effect service of process or to enforce judgements obtained in the United States courts.

Our corporate affairs are governed by our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association and by the Companies Act (Revised) of the Cayman Islands and common law of the Cayman Islands. The rights of shareholders to take legal action against our directors and us, actions by minority shareholders and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors to us under Cayman Islands law are to a large extent governed by the common law of the Cayman Islands. The common law of the Cayman Islands is derived in part from comparatively limited judicial precedent in the Cayman Islands as well as from English common law. Decisions of the Privy Council (which is the final court of appeal for British overseas territories such as the Cayman Islands) are binding on a court in the Cayman Islands. Decisions of the English courts, and particularly the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and the Court of Appeal are generally of persuasive authority but are not binding on the courts of the Cayman Islands. The rights of our shareholders and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors under Cayman Islands law are not as clearly established as they would be under statutes or judicial precedents in the United States. In particular, the Cayman Islands has a less developed body of securities laws as compared to the United States and provide significantly less protection to investors. In addition, Cayman Islands companies may not have standing to initiate a shareholder derivative action before the United States federal courts. The Cayman Islands courts are also unlikely to impose liabilities against us in original actions brought in the Cayman Islands, based on certain civil liability provisions of United States securities laws. It may be difficult for a shareholder to enforce against us judgments obtained in United States courts, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the United States or any state in the United States.

As a result of all of the above, our shareholders may have more difficulty in protecting their interests through actions against us or our officers, directors or major shareholders than would shareholders of a corporation incorporated in a jurisdiction in the United States. See “Description of Share Capital – Provisions in Corporate Law” below.

You may experience difficulties in effecting service of legal process and enforcing judgments against us and our management, and the ability of U.S. authorities to bring actions abroad.

Currently, a portion of our operations and of our non-mining assets and personnel are located in Hong Kong. Four of five members of our Board of Directors are nationals or residents of jurisdictions other than the United States,  and a substantial portion, if not all, of their assets are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult for a shareholder to effect service of process within the United States upon these persons, or to enforce against us or them judgments obtained in United States courts, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the United States or any state in the United States. Hong Kong has no arrangement for the reciprocal enforcement of judgments with the United States. As a result, recognition and enforcement in Hong Kong of judgments of a court in the United States and any of the other jurisdictions in relation to any matter not subject to a binding arbitration provision may be difficult or impossible. Even if you sue successfully in a U.S. court or any other jurisdictions, you may not be able to collect on such judgment against us or our directors and officers. In addition, the SEC, the U.S. Department of Justice and other U.S. authorities may also have difficulties in bringing and enforcing actions against us or our directors or officers in Hong Kong.

We are currently a foreign private issuer within the meaning of the rules under the Exchange Act, and, as such, we are exempt from certain provisions applicable to United States domestic public companies.

As of June 30, 2022, the date of determination, we remained a foreign private issuer within the meaning of the rules under the Exchange Act. As such, we are exempt from certain provisions applicable to United States domestic public companies. For example:

We are an “emerging growth company” within the meaning of the Securities Act, and we take advantage of certain exemptions from disclosure requirements available to emerging growth companies, which could make it more difficult to compare our performance with other public companies and make our Ordinary Shares less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company” within the meaning of the Securities Act, as modified by the JOBS Act. Section 102(b)(1) of the JOBS Act exempts emerging growth companies from being required to comply with new or revised financial accounting standards until private companies (that is, those that have not had a Securities Act registration statement declared effective or do not have a class of securities registered under the Exchange Act) are required to comply with the new or revised financial accounting standards. We have elected to take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies”, including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a non-binding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. The JOBS Act provides that a company can elect to opt out of the extended transition period and comply with the requirements that apply to non-emerging growth companies but any such an election to opt out is irrevocable. We have elected not to opt out of such extended transition period, which means that, when a financial accounting standard is issued or revised and it has different application dates for public or private companies, we, as an emerging growth company, can adopt the new or revised standard at the time private companies adopt the new or revised standard. This may make comparison of our financial statements with another public company that is neither an emerging growth company nor an emerging growth company which has opted out of using the extended transition period difficult or impossible because of the potential differences in accountant standards used. Because of these lessened regulatory requirements, our shareholders are left without information or rights available to shareholders of more mature companies. If some investors find our Ordinary Shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our Ordinary Shares, and our share price may be more volatile. 

We incur significant costs as a result of being a public company and will continue to do so in the future, particularly after we cease to qualify as an “emerging growth company.” 

We incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses as a public company. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as well as rules subsequently implemented by the SEC and the NASDAQ Capital Market, impose various requirements on the corporate governance practices of public companies. We are an “emerging growth company,” as set forth above, and will remain an emerging growth company until the earlier of (1) the last day of the fiscal year (a) ending December 31, 2023, or (b) in which we have a total annual gross revenue of at least $1.07 billion, or (c) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our Ordinary Shares that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the prior June 30^th, and (2) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period. An emerging growth company may take advantage of specified reduced reporting and other requirements that are otherwise applicable generally to public companies. If we are no longer an emerging growth company, we will incur additional costs which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

If we are classified as a passive foreign investment company, United States taxpayers who own our Ordinary Shares may have adverse United States federal income tax consequences.

A non-U.S. corporation such as ourselves will be classified as a passive foreign investment company, which is known as a PFIC, for any taxable year if, for such year, either

Passive income generally includes dividends, interest, rents and royalties (other than rents or royalties derived from the active conduct of a trade or business) and gains from the disposition of passive assets.

If we are determined to be a PFIC for any taxable year (or portion thereof) that is included in the holding period of a U.S. shareholder who holds our Ordinary Shares, the U.S. shareholder may be subject to increased U.S. federal income tax liability and may be subject to additional reporting requirements.

Whether we are a PFIC for 2021 or any future taxable year is uncertain because, among other things, the treatment of digital asset such as bitcoin for purposes of the PFIC rules is unclear. We express no opinion with respect to our PFIC status and also express no opinion with regard to our expectations regarding our PFIC status. Given this uncertainty, prospective U.S. shareholders contemplating an investment in the Ordinary Shares may want to assume that we are a PFIC and are urged to consult their own tax advisors regarding our PFIC status and the resulting U.S. federal income tax consequences in light of their own particular circumstances.

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This prospectus and the documents incorporated herein by reference contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act about us and our industry that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this document and the materials accompanying this document are forward-looking statements. These statements are based on current expectations of future events. Frequently, but not always, forward-looking statements are identified by the use of the future tense and by words such as “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “will,” “may,” “could,” “would,” “predicts,” “anticipates,” “future,” “plans,” “continues,” “estimates” or similar expressions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and actual results could differ materially from those indicated by such forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause our or our industry’s actual results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date made and are subject to a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including the important factors incorporated by reference into this prospectus from our most recent Annual Report on Form 20-F and any subsequent Reports on Form 6-K we file after the date of this prospectus, and all other information contained or incorporated by reference into this prospectus, as updated by our subsequent filings under the Exchange Act and in our other filings with the SEC, that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.

Because forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, some of which cannot be predicted or quantified and some of which are beyond our control, you should not rely on these forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. The events and circumstances reflected in our forward-looking statements may not be achieved or occur and actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Moreover, we operate in an evolving environment. New risk factors and uncertainties may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for management to predict all risk factors and uncertainties. Except as required by applicable law, we do not plan to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of any new information, future events, changed circumstances or otherwise.