Item 1A. RISK FACTORS

Investing in our securities involves a number of significant risks. Before you invest in our securities, you should be aware of various risks, including those described below. You should carefully consider these risk factors, together with all of the other information included in this annual report on Form 10-K, before you decide whether to make an investment in our securities. The risks set out below are the principal risks with respect to an investment in our securities generally and with respect to a BDC with investment objectives, investment policies, capital structures or trading markets similar to ours. However, they may not be the only risks we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or not presently deemed material by us may also impair our operations and performance. If any of the following events occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected. In such case, our net asset value and the trading price of our securities could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

Risks Relating to our Business and Structure

We are dependent upon key personnel of House Hanover for our future success. If House Hanover were to lose any of its key personnel, our ability to achieve our investment objective could be significantly harmed.

We will depend on the diligence, skill and network of business contacts of the investment professionals of House Hanover to achieve our investment objective. We expect that House Hanover’s investment team will evaluate, negotiate, structure, close and monitor our investments in accordance with the terms of the House Hanover Investment Advisory Agreement. We can offer no assurance, however, that House Hanover’s investment team will continue to provide investment advice to us.

Our business model depends to a significant extent upon strong referral relationships. Any inability of House Hanover to maintain or develop these relationships, or the failure of these relationships to generate investment opportunities, could adversely affect our business.

We depend upon House Hanover to maintain its relationships with private equity sponsors, placement agents, investment banks, management groups, financial institutions and other service providers, and we expect to rely to a significant extent upon these relationships to provide us with potential investment opportunities. If House Hanover fails to maintain such relationships, or to develop new relationships with other sources of investment opportunities, we will not be able to grow our investment portfolio. In addition, individuals with whom House Hanover has relationships are not obligated to provide us with investment opportunities, and we can offer no assurance that these relationships will generate investment opportunities for us in the future.

Our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows will depend on our ability to manage our business effectively.

Our ability to achieve our investment objective will depend on our ability to manage our business and to grow our investments and earnings. This will depend, in turn, on House Hanover ability to identify, invest in and monitor portfolio companies that meet our investment criteria. The achievement of our investment objective on a cost-effective basis will depend upon House Hanover execution of our investment process, its ability to provide competent, attentive and efficient services to us and, to a lesser extent, our access to financing on acceptable terms. House Hanover’s investment team may have responsibilities in connection with the management of other investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles. The personnel of House Hanover may be called upon to provide managerial assistance to our portfolio companies. These activities may distract them from servicing new investment opportunities for us or slow our rate of investment. Any failure to manage our business and our future growth effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. We have limited capital on hand by which we can make new investments, thereby making it difficult to grow our investments.

There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could negatively affect our investment returns.

The investment professionals of House Hanover serve, or may serve, as officers, directors, members, or principals of entities that operate in the same or a related line of business as we do, or of investment funds, accounts, or investment vehicles managed by House Hanover. Similarly, House Hanover may have other clients with similar, different or competing investment objectives. In serving in these multiple capacities, they may have obligations to other clients or investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which may not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders.

The senior investment team and other investment professionals of House Hanover may, from time to time, possess material non-public information, limiting our investment discretion.

The senior investment team and other investment professionals of House Hanover may serve as directors of, or in a similar capacity with portfolio companies in which we invest, the securities of which are purchased or sold on our behalf. In the event that material nonpublic information is obtained with respect to such companies, or we become subject to trading restrictions under the internal trading policies of those companies or as a result of applicable law or regulations, we could be prohibited for a period of time from purchasing or selling the securities of such companies, and this prohibition may have an adverse effect on us.

The management fee structure we have with House Hanover may create incentives that are not fully aligned with the interests of our stockholders.

In the course of our investing activities, we will pay management fees to House Hanover. We have entered into an investment advisory agreement with House Hanover that provides that these fees will be based on the value of our net assets. As a result, investors in our common stock will invest on a gross basis and receive distributions on a net basis after expenses, resulting in a lower rate of return than one might achieve through direct investments.

Our board of directors is charged with protecting our interests by monitoring how House Hanover addresses these and other conflicts of interests associated with its management services and compensation. While our board of directors is not expected to review or approve each investment decision, borrowing or incurrence of leverage, our independent directors will periodically review House Hanover’s services and fees as well as its portfolio management decisions and performance of our portfolio. In connection with these reviews, our independent directors will consider whether our fees and expenses (including those related to leverage) remain appropriate. As a result of this arrangement, House Hanover may from time to time have interests that differ from those of our stockholders, giving rise to a conflict.

The involvement of our interested directors in the valuation process may create conflicts of interest.

We expect to make many of our portfolio investments in the form of loans and securities that are not publicly traded and for which no market based price quotation is available. As a result, our board of directors will determine the fair value of these loans and securities in good faith as described below in “— Our portfolio investments will be recorded at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors and, as a result, there may be uncertainty as to the value of our portfolio investments.” In connection with that determination, investment professionals from House Hanover may provide our board of directors with valuations based upon the most recent portfolio company financial statements available and projected financial results of each portfolio company. While the valuation for most portfolio investments will be prepared quarterly by an independent valuation firm, the ultimate determination of fair value will be made by our board of directors, including our interested directors, and not by such third-party valuation firm. In addition, Mr. Mark DiSalvo, an interested member of our board of directors, has a direct pecuniary interest in House Hanover. The participation of House Hanover’s investment professionals in our valuation process, and the pecuniary interest in House Hanover by a member of our board of directors, could result in a conflict of interest as House Hanover’s management fee is based, in part, on the value of our gross assets.

The time and resources that House Hanover devote to us may be diverted, and we may face additional competition due to the fact that House Hanover and its affiliates are not prohibited from raising money for, or managing, another entity that makes the same types of investments that we target.

House Hanover and some of its affiliates, including our officers and our non-independent directors, are not prohibited from raising money for, or managing, another investment entity that makes the same types of investments as those we target. For example, House Hanover could seek to raise capital for a private credit fund that will have an investment strategy that is identical to our investment strategy. House Hanover and we may seek exemptive relief from the SEC that would establish a co-investment program with investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles managed by House Hanover; however, there can be no assurance if and when the SEC would grant such relief. In addition, we may compete with any such investment entity for the same investors and investment opportunities.

House Hanover’s liability is limited under the House Hanover Investment Advisory Agreement and we have agreed to indemnify House Hanover against certain liabilities, which may lead House Hanover to act in a riskier manner on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.

Under the House Hanover Investment Advisory Agreement, House Hanover has not assumed any responsibility to us other than to render the services called for under that agreement. It will not be responsible for any action of our board of directors by following or declining to follow House Hanover’s advice or recommendations. Under the House Hanover Investment Advisory Agreement, House Hanover, its officers, members and personnel, and any person controlling or controlled by House Hanover will not be liable to us, any subsidiary of ours, our directors, our stockholders or any subsidiary’s stockholders or partners for acts or omissions performed in accordance with and pursuant to the House Hanover Investment Advisory Agreement, except those resulting from acts constituting gross negligence, willful misfeasance, bad faith or reckless disregard of the duties that House Hanover owes to us under the House Hanover Investment Advisory Agreement. In addition, as part of the House Hanover Investment Advisory Agreement, we have agreed to indemnify House Hanover and each of its officers, directors, members, managers and employees from and against any claims or liabilities, including reasonable legal fees and other expenses reasonably incurred, arising out of or in connection with our business and operations or any action taken or omitted on our behalf pursuant to authority granted by the House Hanover Investment Advisory Agreement, except where attributable to gross negligence, willful misfeasance, bad faith or reckless disregard of such person’s duties under the House Hanover Investment Advisory Agreement. These protections may lead House Hanover to act in a riskier manner when acting on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.

Our ability to enter into transactions with our affiliates will be restricted, which may limit the scope of investments available to us.

We are prohibited under the 1940 Act from participating in certain transactions with our affiliates without the prior approval of our independent directors and, in some cases, the SEC. Any person that owns, directly or indirectly, 5% or more of our outstanding voting securities will be our affiliate for purposes of the 1940 Act, and we are generally prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to such affiliate without the prior approval of our independent directors. The 1940 Act also prohibits certain “joint” transactions with certain of our affiliates, which could include concurrent investments in the same portfolio company, without prior approval of our independent directors and, in some cases, of the SEC. We are prohibited from buying or selling any security from or to any person that controls us or who owns more than 25% of our voting securities or certain of that person’s affiliates, or entering into prohibited joint transactions with such persons, absent the prior approval of the SEC. As a result of these restrictions, we may be prohibited from buying or selling any security (other than any security of which we are the issuer) from or to any portfolio company of a private fund managed by House Hanover or its affiliates without the prior approval of the SEC, which may limit the scope of investment opportunities that would otherwise be available to us.

We may, however, invest alongside House Hanover’s investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles in certain circumstances where doing so is consistent with our investment strategy as well as applicable law and SEC staff interpretations. For example, we may invest alongside such investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles consistent with guidance promulgated by the SEC staff to purchase interests in a single class of privately placed securities so long as certain conditions are met, including that House Hanover, acting on our behalf and on behalf of such investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles, negotiates no term other than price. We may also invest alongside House Hanover’s investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles as otherwise permissible under regulatory guidance, applicable regulations and House Hanover’s allocation policy. This allocation policy provides that allocations among us and investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles managed by House Hanover and its affiliates will generally be made pro rata based on capital available for investment, as determined, in our case, by our board of directors as well as the terms of our governing documents and those of such investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles. It is our policy to base our determinations on such factors as the amount of cash on-hand, existing commitments and reserves, if any, our targeted leverage level, our targeted asset mix and diversification requirements and other investment policies and restrictions set by our board of directors or imposed by applicable laws, rules, regulations or interpretations. We expect that these determinations will be made similarly for investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles managed by House Hanover. However, we can offer no assurance that investment opportunities will be allocated to us fairly or equitably in the short-term or over time.

In situations where co-investment with investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles managed by House Hanover, prior to receiving exemptive relief, is not permitted or appropriate, such as when there is an opportunity to invest concurrently in different securities of the same issuer or where the different investments could be expected to result in a conflict between our interests and those of House Hanover’s clients, subject to the limitations described in the preceding paragraph, House Hanover will need to decide which client will proceed with the investment. House Hanover will make these determinations based on its policies and procedures, which generally require that such opportunities be offered to eligible accounts on an alternating basis that will be fair and equitable over time. Moreover, except in certain circumstances, we will be unable to invest in any issuer in which an investment fund, account or investment vehicle managed by House Hanover has previously invested.

We and House Hanover may seek exemptive relief from the SEC to permit greater flexibility to negotiate the terms of co-investments if our board of directors determines that it would be advantageous for us to co-invest with investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles managed by House Hanover in a manner consistent with our investment objective, positions, policies, strategies and restrictions as well as regulatory requirements and other pertinent factors. We believe that co-investment by us and investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles managed by House Hanover may afford us additional investment opportunities and an ability to achieve greater diversification. Accordingly, if we make an application for exemptive relief, we will seek an exemptive order permitting us to invest with investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles managed by House Hanover in the same portfolio companies under circumstances in which such investments would otherwise not be permitted by the 1940 Act. We expect that such exemptive relief permitting co-investments, if granted, would not require review and approval of each co-investment by our independent directors. There can be no assurance if and when the SEC would grant such relief.

We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities, which could reduce returns and result in losses.

A number of entities compete with us to make the types of investments that we plan to make. We will compete with public and private funds, commercial and investment banks, commercial financing companies and, to the extent they provide an alternative form of financing, private equity and hedge funds. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do. For example, we believe some of our competitors may have access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and establish more relationships than us. Furthermore, many of our competitors are not subject to the regulatory restrictions that the 1940 Act imposes on us as a BDC or the source-of-income, asset diversification and distribution requirements we must satisfy to achieve RIC qualification. The competitive pressures we face may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. As a result of this competition, we may not be able to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities from time to time, and we may not be able to identify and make investments that are consistent with our investment objective.

With respect to the investments we make, we will not seek to compete based primarily on the interest rates we will offer, and we believe that some of our competitors may make loans with interest rates that will be lower than the rates we offer. With respect to all investments, we may lose some investment opportunities if we do not match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure. However, if we match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure, we may experience decreased net interest income, lower yields and increased risk of credit loss. We may also compete for investment opportunities with investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles managed by House Hanover. Although House Hanover will allocate opportunities in accordance with its policies and procedures, allocations to such investment funds, accounts and investment vehicles will reduce the amount and frequency of opportunities available to us and may not be in the best interests of us and our stockholders. See “Risk Factor — Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure — There are significant potential conflicts of interest that could negatively affect our investment returns.”

We will be subject to corporate-level income tax if we are unable to qualify or maintain our qualification as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code.

To qualify as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code, we must meet certain source-of-income, asset diversification and distribution requirements. The distribution requirement for a RIC is satisfied if we distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to our stockholders on an annual basis. If we incur debt, we will be subject to certain asset coverage ratio requirements under the 1940 Act and financial covenants under loan and credit agreements that could, under certain circumstances, restrict us from making distributions necessary to qualify as a RIC. If we are unable to obtain cash from other sources, we may fail to qualify as a RIC and, thus, may be subject to corporate-level income tax. To qualify as a RIC, we must also meet certain asset diversification requirements at the end of each calendar quarter. Failure to meet these tests may result in our having to dispose of certain investments quickly in order to prevent the loss of our qualification as a RIC. Because most of our investments will be in private or thinly-traded public companies, any such dispositions may be made at disadvantageous prices and may result in substantial losses. If we fail to qualify as a RIC for any reason and become subject to corporate income tax, the resulting corporate income taxes could substantially reduce our net assets, the amount of income available for distributions to our stockholders and the amount of funds available for new investments. Such a failure would have a material adverse effect on us and our stockholders.

We may need to raise additional capital to grow because we must distribute most of our income.

We may need additional capital to fund new investments and grow our portfolio of investments. We intend to access the capital markets periodically to issue debt or equity securities or borrow from financial institutions in order to obtain such additional capital. Unfavorable economic conditions could increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. A reduction in the availability of new capital could limit our ability to grow. In addition, we will be required to distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to our stockholders to achieve qualification as a RIC. As a result, these earnings will not be available to fund new investments. An inability on our part to access the capital markets successfully could limit our ability to grow our business and execute our business strategy fully and could decrease our earnings, if any, which would have an adverse effect on the value of our securities.

You may not receive distributions, or our distributions may not grow over time.

To date since the Reincorporation, we have not made any distributions. We intend to make distributions on a quarterly basis to our stockholders out of assets legally available for distribution. We cannot assure you that we will achieve investment results that will allow us to make a specified level of cash distributions or year-to-year increases in cash distributions. Our ability to pay distributions might be adversely affected by the impact of one or more of the risk factors described in this filing. Due to the asset coverage test applicable to us under the 1940 Act as a BDC, we may be limited in our ability to make distributions. All distributions will be made at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on our earnings, financial condition, maintenance of RIC status, compliance with applicable BDC, and such other factors as our board of directors may deem relative from time to time. We cannot assure you that we will make distributions to our stockholders in the future.

We may have difficulty paying required distributions to qualify as a RIC if we recognize income before, or without, receiving cash representing such income.

For U.S. federal income tax purposes, we will include in income certain amounts that we have not yet received in cash, such as the accrual of original issue discount. This may arise if we receive warrants in connection with the making of a loan and in other circumstances, or through contracted PIK interest, which represents contractual interest added to the loan balance and due at the end of the loan term. Such original issue discount, which could be significant relative to our overall investment activities, and increases in loan balances as a result of contracted PIK arrangements will be included in income before we receive any corresponding cash payments. We also may be required to include in income certain other amounts that we will not receive in cash.

Since we may recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income, we may have difficulty meeting the requirement to distribute at least 90% of our net ordinary income and net short-term capital gains in excess of net long-term capital losses, if any, to achieve qualification as a RIC. In such a case, we may have to sell some of our investments at times we would not consider advantageous, raise additional debt or equity capital or reduce new investment originations to meet these distribution requirements. If we are not able to obtain such cash from other sources, we may continue to fail to qualify as a RIC and thus be subject to corporate-level income tax.

PIK interest payments we receive will increase our assets under management and, as a result, will increase the amount of base management fees payable by us to House Hanover.

Certain of our debt investments may contain provisions providing for the payment of PIK interest. Because PIK interest results in an increase in the size of the loan balance of the underlying loan, the receipt by us of PIK interest will have the effect of increasing our assets under management. As a result, because the base management fee that we pay to House Hanover is based on the value of our gross assets, the receipt by us of PIK interest will result in an increase in the amount of the base management fee payable by us.

Regulations governing our operation as a BDC affect our ability to, and the way in which we, raise additional capital. As a BDC, the necessity of raising additional capital may expose us to risks, including the typical risks associated with leverage.

We may issue debt securities or preferred stock and/or borrow money from banks or other financial institutions, which we refer to collectively as “senior securities,” up to the maximum amount permitted by the 1940 Act. Under the provisions of the 1940 Act, we will be permitted as a BDC to issue senior securities in amounts such that our asset coverage ratio, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 200% of our gross assets less all liabilities and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, after each issuance of senior securities. If the value of our assets declines, we may be unable to satisfy this test. If that happens, we may be required to sell a portion of our investments at a time when such sales may be disadvantageous to us in order to repay a portion of our indebtedness. Also, any amounts that we use to service our indebtedness would not be available for distributions to our common stockholders. If we issue senior securities, we will be exposed to typical risks associated with leverage, including an increased risk of loss.

We are not generally able to issue and sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per share. We may, however, sell our common stock, or warrants, options or rights to acquire our common stock, at a price below then current net asset value per share of our common stock if our board of directors determines that such sale is in our best interests and if our stockholders approve such sale. In any such case, the price at which our securities are to be issued and sold may not be less than a price that, in the determination of our board of directors, closely approximates the market value of such securities (less any distributing commission or discount). If we raise additional funds by issuing common stock or senior securities convertible into, or exchangeable for, our common stock, then the percentage ownership of our stockholders at that time will decrease, and you may experience dilution.

We may finance our investments with borrowed money, which will magnify the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested and may increase the risk of investing in us.

We may finance our investments with borrowed money when we expect the return on our investment to exceed the cost of borrowing. The use of leverage magnifies the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested. The use of leverage is generally considered a speculative investment technique and increases the risks associated with investing in our securities. However, we may borrow from, and may in the future issue debt securities to, banks, insurance companies and other lenders. Lenders of these funds will have fixed dollar claims on our assets that are superior to the claims of our common stockholders, and we would expect such lenders to seek recovery against our assets in the event of a default. We may pledge up to 100% of our assets and may grant a security interest in all of our assets under the terms of any debt instruments we may enter into with lenders. In addition, under the terms of any borrowing facility or other debt instrument we may enter into, we are likely to be required to use the net proceeds of any investments that we sell to repay a portion of the amount borrowed under such facility or instrument before applying such net proceeds to any other uses. If the value of our assets decreases, leveraging would cause net asset value to decline more sharply than it otherwise would have had we not leveraged, thereby magnifying losses or eliminating our stake in a leveraged investment. Similarly, any decrease in our revenue or income will cause our net income to decline more sharply than it would have had we not borrowed. Such a decline would also negatively affect our ability to make distributions with respect to our common stock or preferred stock. Our ability to service any debt will depend largely on our financial performance and will be subject to prevailing economic conditions and competitive pressures. Moreover, as the base management fee payable to House Hanover will be payable based on the value of our gross assets, including those assets acquired through the use of leverage, House Hanover will have a financial incentive to incur leverage, which may not be consistent with our stockholders’ interests. In addition, our stockholders will bear the burden of any increase in our expenses as a result of our use of leverage, including interest expenses and any increase in the base management fee payable to House Hanover.

As a BDC, we generally are required to meet a coverage ratio of total assets to total borrowings and other senior securities, which include all of our borrowings (other than potential leverage in future SBIC subsidiaries, should we apply for and receive an SBIC license(s), subject to exemptive relief) and any preferred stock that we may issue in the future, of at least 200%. If this ratio declines below 200%, we will not be able to incur additional debt and could be required to sell a portion of our investments to repay some debt when it is otherwise disadvantageous for us to do so. This could have a material adverse effect on our operations, and we may not be able to make distributions. The amount of leverage that we employ will depend on House Hanover’s and our board of directors’ assessment of market and other factors at the time of any proposed borrowing. We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain credit at all or on terms acceptable to us.

We may default under any future borrowing facility we enter into or be unable to amend, repay or refinance any such facility on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In the event we default under any future borrowing facility, our business could be adversely affected as we may be forced to sell a portion of our investments quickly and prematurely at what may be disadvantageous prices to us in order to meet our outstanding payment obligations and/or support working capital requirements under such future borrowing facility, any of which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In addition, following any such default, the agent for the lenders under such future borrowing facility could assume control of the disposition of any or all of our assets, including the selection of such assets to be disposed and the timing of such disposition, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Because we may use debt to finance our investments, if market interest rates were to increase, our cost of capital could increase, which could reduce our net investment income.

Because we may borrow money to make investments, our net investment income will depend, in part, upon the difference between the rate at which we borrow funds and the rate at which we invest those funds. As a result, we can offer no assurance that a significant change in market interest rates would not have a material adverse effect on our net investment income in the event we use debt to finance our investments. In periods of rising interest rates, our cost of funds would increase, which could reduce our net investment income. We may use interest rate risk management techniques in an effort to limit our exposure to interest rate fluctuations. We may utilize instruments such as forward contracts, currency options and interest rate swaps, caps, collars and floors to seek to hedge against fluctuations in the relative values of our portfolio positions from changes in currency exchange rates and market interest rates to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act.

Provisions in any future borrowing facility may limit our discretion in operating our business.

Any future borrowing facility may be backed by all or a portion of our loans and securities on which the lenders may have a security interest. We may pledge up to 100% of our assets and may grant a security interest in all of our assets under the terms of any debt instrument we enter into with lenders. We expect that any security interests we grant will be set forth in a pledge and security agreement and evidenced by the filing of financing statements by the agent for the lenders. In addition, we expect that the custodian for our securities serving as collateral for such loan would include in its electronic systems notices indicating the existence of such security interests and, following notice of occurrence of an event of default, if any, and during its continuance, will only accept transfer instructions with respect to any such securities from the lender or its designee. If we were to default under the terms of any debt instrument, the agent for the applicable lenders would be able to assume control of the timing of disposition of any or all of our assets securing such debt, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In addition, any security interests as well as negative covenants in any borrowing facility may limit our ability to create liens on assets to secure additional debt and may make it difficult for us to restructure or refinance indebtedness at or prior to maturity or obtain additional debt or equity financing. In addition, if our borrowing base under any other borrowing facility were to decrease, we would be required to secure additional assets in an amount equal to any borrowing base deficiency. In the event that all of our assets are secured at the time of such a borrowing base deficiency, we could be required to repay advances under the borrowing facility or make deposits to a collection account, either of which could have a material adverse impact on our ability to fund future investments and to make stockholder distributions.

In addition, under any future borrowing facility we may be subject to limitations as to how borrowed funds may be used, which may include restrictions on geographic and industry concentrations, loan size, payment frequency and status, average life, collateral interests and investment ratings, as well as regulatory restrictions on leverage which may affect the amount of funding that may be obtained. There may also be certain requirements relating to portfolio performance, including required minimum portfolio yield and limitations on delinquencies and charge-offs, a violation of which could limit further advances and, in some cases, result in an event of default. An event of default under any borrowing facility could result in an accelerated maturity date for all amounts outstanding thereunder, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition. This could reduce our revenues and, by delaying any cash payment allowed to us under the borrowing facility until the lenders have been paid in full, reduce our liquidity and cash flow and impair our ability to grow our business and to qualify as a RIC.

Adverse developments in the credit markets may impair our ability to enter into any other future borrowing facility.

During the economic downturn in the United States that began in mid-2007, many commercial banks and other financial institutions stopped lending or significantly curtailed their lending activity. In addition, in an effort to stem losses and reduce their exposure to segments of the economy deemed to be high risk, some financial institutions limited refinancing and loan modification transactions and reviewed the terms of existing facilities to identify bases for accelerating the maturity of existing lending facilities. If these conditions recur, it may be difficult for us to enter into a borrowing facility, obtain financing for growth of our investments, or refinance any outstanding indebtedness on acceptable economic terms, or at all.

If we do not invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets, we could fail to maintain our qualification as a BDC or be precluded from investing according to our current business strategy.

As a BDC, we are required to invest at least 70% of our total assets in “qualifying assets” as defined under the 1940 Act. See “Business – Regulation as a BDC.” We believe that most of the investments that we may acquire in the future will constitute qualifying assets. However, we may be precluded from investing in what we believe to be attractive investments if such investments are not qualifying assets for purposes of the 1940 Act. If we do not invest a sufficient portion of our assets in qualifying assets, we could violate the 1940 Act provisions applicable to BDC’s. As a result of such violation, specific rules under the 1940 Act could prevent us, for example, from making follow-on investments in existing portfolio companies (which could result in the dilution of our position) or could require us to dispose of investments at inappropriate times in order to come into compliance with the 1940 Act. If we need to dispose of such investments quickly, it could be difficult to dispose of such investments on favorable terms. We may not be able to find a buyer for such investments and, even if we do find a buyer, we may have to sell the investments at a substantial loss. Any such outcomes would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

If we do not maintain our status as a BDC, we would be subject to regulation as a registered closed-end investment company under the 1940 Act. As a registered closed-end investment company, we would be subject to substantially more regulatory restrictions under the 1940 Act, which would significantly decrease our operating flexibility.

Our portfolio investments will be recorded at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors and, as a result, there may be uncertainty as to the value of our portfolio investments.

We expect that most of our portfolio investments will take the form of securities that are not publicly traded. The fair value of loans, securities and other investments that are not publicly traded may not be readily determinable, and we will value these investments at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors, including to reflect significant events affecting the value of our investments. Most, if not all, of our investments (other than cash and cash equivalents) will be classified as Level 3 under Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures”, or ASC 820. This means that our portfolio valuations will be based on unobservable inputs and our own assumptions about how market participants would price the asset or liability in question. We expect that inputs into the determination of fair value of our portfolio investments will require significant management judgment or estimation. Even if observable market data are available, such information may be the result of consensus pricing information or broker quotes, which include a disclaimer that the broker would not be held to such a price in an actual transaction. The non-binding nature of consensus pricing and/or quotes accompanied by disclaimers materially reduces the reliability of such information. We expect to retain the services of one or more independent service providers to review the valuation of these loans and securities. The types of factors that the board of directors may take into account in determining the fair value of our investments generally include, as appropriate, comparison to publicly traded securities including such factors as yield, maturity and measures of credit quality, the enterprise value of a portfolio company, the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company’s ability to make payments and its earnings and discounted cash flow, the markets in which the portfolio company does business and other relevant factors. Because such valuations, and particularly valuations of private securities and private companies, are inherently uncertain, may fluctuate over short periods of time and may be based on estimates, our determinations of fair value may differ materially from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these loans and securities existed. Our net asset value could be adversely affected if our determinations regarding the fair value of our investments were materially higher than the values that we ultimately realize upon the disposal of such loans and securities.

We will adjust the valuation of our portfolio quarterly to reflect our board of directors’ determination of the fair value of each investment in our portfolio. Any changes in fair value are recorded in our statement of operations as net change in unrealized gain or loss.

We may experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results.

We could experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results due to a number of factors, including the interest rate payable on the loans and debt securities we acquire, the default rate on such loans and securities, the level of our expenses, variations in and the timing of the recognition of realized and unrealized gains or losses, the degree to which we encounter competition in our markets and general economic conditions. In light of these factors, results for any period should not be relied upon as being indicative of performance in future periods.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, stockholders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our common stock.

Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, are designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by us conducted in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or the subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm (when undertaken, as noted below), may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our consolidated financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our common stock.

We will be required to disclose changes made in our internal control and procedures on a quarterly basis and our management will be required to assess the effectiveness of these controls annually. An independent assessment of the effectiveness of our internal controls could detect problems that our management’s assessment might not. Undetected material weaknesses in our internal controls could lead to financial statement restatements and require us to incur the expense of remediation.

Our common stock is traded on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board “Pink Sheet” market, which may make it more difficult for investors to resell their shares due to suitability requirements.

Our common stock is currently traded on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board under the symbol “PIAC” where we expect it to remain in the foreseeable future. We do not believe that we will become eligible for the OTCQB Market in the foreseeable future because of our inability to meet the required public float restrictions of the OTCQB Market. Broker-dealers often decline to trade in OTC Pink Sheet stocks given the markets for such securities are often limited, the stocks are more volatile, and the risk to investors is greater. These factors may reduce the potential market for our common stock by reducing the number of potential investors. This may make it more difficult for investors in our common stock to sell shares to third parties or to otherwise dispose of their shares. This could cause our stock price to decline.

New or modified laws or regulations governing our operations may adversely affect our business.

We and our portfolio companies will be subject to regulation by laws at the U.S. federal, state and local levels. These laws and regulations, as well as their interpretation, may change from time to time, and new laws, regulations and interpretations may also come into effect. Any such new or changed laws or regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Additionally, changes to the laws and regulations governing our operations related to permitted investments may cause us to alter our investment strategy in order to avail ourselves of new or different opportunities. Such changes could result in material differences to the strategies and plans set forth in this filing and may shift our investment focus from the areas of expertise of House Hanover to other types of investments in which House Hanover may have little or no expertise or experience. Any such changes, if they occur, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and the value of your investment.

Our board of directors may change our investment objective, operating policies and strategies without prior notice or stockholder approval.

Our board of directors has the authority, except as otherwise provided in the 1940 Act, to modify or waive certain of our operating policies and strategies without prior notice and without stockholder approval. However, absent stockholder approval, we may not change the nature of our business so as to cease to be, or withdraw our election as, a BDC. We cannot predict the effect any changes to our current operating policies and strategies would have on our business, operating results and the market price of our common stock. Nevertheless, any such changes could adversely affect our business and impair our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

Recently passed legislation may allow us to incur additional leverage.

Historically a BDC, under the 1940 Act generally were not permitted to incur indebtedness unless immediately after such borrowing we had an asset coverage for total borrowings of at least 200% (i.e., the amount of debt could not exceed 50% of the value of our total assets). The Small Business Credit Availability Act, which was signed into law in March 2018, modifies this section of the 1940 Act and decreases this percentage from 200% to 150% (subject to either stockholder approval or approval of both a majority of the board of directors and a majority of directors who are not interested persons). As a result of this new law, we may be able to incur additional indebtedness subject to relevant approval and disclosure requirements and therefore your risk of an investment in us may increase. In addition, since our management fee is calculated as a percentage of the value of our gross assets, which includes any borrowings for investment purposes, the management fee expenses will increase if we incur additional indebtedness.

Our board of directors is authorized to reclassify any unissued shares of common stock into one or more series of preferred stock, which could convey special rights and privileges to its owners.

Under Maryland General Corporation Law and our charter, our board of directors is authorized to classify and reclassify any authorized but unissued shares of stock into one or more classes or series of stock, including preferred stock of one or more series. Prior to the issuance of shares of each class or series, the board of directors will be required by Maryland law and our charter to set the preferences, conversion and other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to distributions, qualifications and terms and conditions of redemption for each such class or series. Thus, the board of directors could authorize the issuance of shares of a series of preferred stock with terms and conditions which could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for holders of our common stock or that otherwise might be in their best interest. The cost of any such reclassification and issuance would be borne by our common stockholders. Certain matters under the 1940 Act require the separate vote of the holders of any issued and outstanding preferred stock. For example, the 1940 Act provides that holders of preferred stock are entitled to vote separately from holders of common stock to elect two directors. We currently have no plans to issue preferred stock. The issuance of shares of preferred stock convertible into shares of common stock may also reduce the net income and net asset value per share of our common stock upon conversion, provided, that we will only be permitted to issue such convertible preferred stock to the extent we comply with the requirements of Section 61 of the 1940 Act, including obtaining common stockholder approval. These effects, among others, could have an adverse effect on your investment in our common stock.

The foregoing provisions are expected to discourage certain coercive takeover practices and inadequate takeover bids and to encourage persons seeking to acquire control of us to negotiate first with our board of directors. However, these provisions may deprive a stockholder of the opportunity to sell such stockholder’s shares at a premium to a potential acquirer. We believe that the benefits of these provisions outweigh the potential disadvantages of discouraging any such acquisition proposals because, among other things, the negotiation of such proposals may improve their terms. Our board of directors has considered both the positive and negative effects of the foregoing provisions determined that they are in the best interests of our stockholders.

Provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law and of our charter and bylaws could deter takeover attempts and have an adverse impact on the price of our common stock.

The Maryland General Corporation Law and our charter and bylaws contain provisions that may discourage, delay or make more difficult a change in control of the Company or the removal of our directors. We are subject to the Maryland Business Combination Act, subject to any applicable requirements of the 1940 Act. Our board of directors has adopted a resolution exempting from the Business Combination Act any business combination between us and any other person, subject to prior approval of such business combination by our board of directors, including approval by a majority of our independent directors. If the resolution exempting business combinations is repealed or our board of directors does not approve a business combination, the Business Combination Act may discourage third parties from trying to acquire control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating such an offer. Our bylaws exempt from the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act acquisitions of our stock by any person. If we amend our bylaws to repeal the exemption from the Control Share Acquisition Act, the Control Share Acquisition Act also may make it more difficult for a third party to obtain control of us and increase the difficulty of consummating such a transaction.

We have also adopted measures that may make it difficult for a third party to obtain control of us, including authorizing our board of directors to classify or reclassify shares of our stock in one or more classes or series, to cause the issuance of additional shares of our stock and to amend our charter without stockholder approval to increase or decrease the number of shares of stock that we have authority to issue. These provisions, as well as other provisions of our charter and bylaws, may delay, defer or prevent a transaction or a change in control that might otherwise be in the best interests of our stockholders.

The foregoing provisions are expected to discourage certain coercive takeover practices and inadequate takeover bids and to encourage persons seeking to acquire control of us to negotiate first with our board of directors. However, these provisions may deprive a stockholder of the opportunity to sell such stockholder’s shares of a premium to a potential acquirer. We believe that the benefits of these provisions outweigh the potential disadvantages of discouraging any such acquisition proposals because, among other things, the negotiation of such proposals may improve their terms. Our board of directors has considered both the positive and negative effects of the foregoing provisions and determined that they are in the best interests of our stockholders.

House Hanover can resign as our investment advisor and administrator upon 60 days’ notice and we may not be able to find suitable replacements within that time, or at all, resulting in a disruption in our operations that could adversely affect our financial condition, business and results of operations.

House Hanover has the right under the House Hanover Investment Advisory Agreement to resign as our investment adviser and administrator at any time upon 60 days’ written notice, whether we have found a replacement or not. If House Hanover was to resign, we may not be able to find a new investment adviser or administrator or hire internal management with similar expertise and ability to provide the same or equivalent services on acceptable terms within 60 days, or at all. If we are unable to do so quickly, our operations are likely to experience a disruption, our financial condition, business and results of operations as well as our ability to pay distributions to our stockholders are likely to be adversely affected and the market price of our shares may decline. In addition, the coordination of our internal management and investment or administrative activities, as applicable, is likely to suffer if we are unable to identify and reach an agreement with a single institution or group of executives having the expertise possessed by House Hanover. Even if we are able to retain comparable management, whether internal or external, the integration of such management and their lack of familiarity with our investment objective may result in additional costs and time delays that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Recent market conditions materially and adversely affected debt and equity capital markets in the United States and around the world. If these conditions recur, debt capital may not be available to us on favorable terms, or at all, which could negatively affect our financial performance and results.

From 2007 through 2009, the global capital markets experienced a period of disruption resulting in increasing spreads between the yields realized on riskier debt securities and those realized on risk-free securities and a lack of liquidity in parts of the debt capital markets, significant write-offs in the financial services sector relating to subprime mortgages and the re-pricing of credit risk in the broadly syndicated market. These events, along with the deterioration of the housing market, illiquid market conditions, declining business and consumer confidence and the failure of major financial institutions in the United States, led to a decline of general economic conditions. This economic decline materially and adversely affected the broader financial and credit markets and reduced the availability of debt and equity capital for the market as a whole and to financial firms in particular during that time. These conditions may recur, in which case, to the extent that we wish to use debt to fund our investments, the debt capital that will be available to us, if at all, may be at a higher cost, and on terms and conditions that may be less favorable, than what we expect, which could negatively affect our financial performance and results. A prolonged period of market illiquidity may cause us to reduce the volume of loans and debt securities we originate and/or fund and adversely affect the value of our portfolio investments, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Risks Relating to our Investments

Economic recessions or downturns could impair our portfolio companies and harm our operating results.

Many of the portfolio companies in which we expect to make investments, including those currently included in our portfolio, are likely to be susceptible to economic slowdowns or recessions and may be unable to repay our loans during such periods. Therefore, the number of our non-performing assets are likely to increase and the value of our portfolio is likely to decrease during such periods. Adverse economic conditions may decrease the value of collateral securing some of our loans and debt securities and the value of our equity investments. Economic slowdowns or recessions could lead to financial losses in our portfolio and a decrease in revenues, net income and assets. Unfavorable economic conditions also could increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. These events could prevent us from increasing our investments and harm our operating results.

A portfolio company’s failure to satisfy financial or operating covenants imposed by us or other lenders could lead to defaults and, potentially, termination of its loans and foreclosure on its assets, which could trigger cross-defaults under other agreements and jeopardize our portfolio company’s ability to meet its obligations under the loans and debt securities that we hold. We may incur expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms with a defaulting portfolio company. In addition, lenders in certain cases can be subject to lender liability claims for actions taken by them when they become too involved in the borrower’s business or exercise control over a borrower. It is possible that we could become subject to a lender’s liability claim, including as a result of actions taken if we render significant managerial assistance to the borrower. Furthermore, if one of our portfolio companies were to file for bankruptcy protection, a bankruptcy court might re-characterize our debt holding and subordinate all or a portion of our claim to claims of other creditors, even though we may have structured our investment as senior secured debt. The likelihood of such a re-characterization would depend on the facts and circumstances, including the extent to which we provided managerial assistance to that portfolio company.

Our investments in leveraged portfolio companies may be risky, and we could lose all or part of our investment.

Investments in leveraged companies involve a number of significant risks. Leveraged companies in which we invest may have limited financial resources and may be unable to meet their obligations under their loans and debt securities that we hold. Such developments may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of our realizing any guarantees that we may have obtained in connection with our investment. Smaller leveraged companies also may have less predictable operating results and may require substantial additional capital to support their operations, finance their expansion or maintain their competitive position.

We may hold the loans and debt securities of leveraged companies that may, due to the significant operating volatility typical of such companies, enter into bankruptcy proceedings.

Leveraged companies may experience bankruptcy or similar financial distress. The bankruptcy process has a number of significant inherent risks. Many events in a bankruptcy proceeding are the product of contested matters and adversary proceedings and are beyond the control of the creditors. A bankruptcy filing by a portfolio company may adversely and permanently affect that company. If the proceeding is converted to a liquidation, the value of the portfolio company may not equal the liquidation value that was believed to exist at the time of the investment. The duration of a bankruptcy proceeding is also difficult to predict, and a creditor’s return on investment can be adversely affected by delays until the plan of reorganization or liquidation ultimately becomes effective. The administrative costs in connection with a bankruptcy proceeding are frequently high and would be paid out of the debtor’s estate prior to any return to creditors. Because the standards for classification of claims under bankruptcy law are vague, our influence with respect to the class of securities or other obligations we own may be lost by increases in the number and amount of claims in the same class or by different classification and treatment. In the early stages of the bankruptcy process, it is often difficult to estimate the extent of, or even to identify, any contingent claims that might be made. In addition, certain claims that have priority by law (for example, claims for taxes) may be substantial.

Our investments in private and small and lower middle-market portfolio companies are risky, and we could lose all or part of our investment.

Investments in private and small and lower middle-market companies involve a number of significant risks. Generally, little public information exists about these companies, and we will rely on the ability of House Hanover’s investment professionals to obtain adequate information to evaluate the potential returns from investing in these companies. If we are unable to uncover all material information about these companies, we may not make a fully informed investment decision, and we may lose money on our investments. Small and lower middle-market companies may have limited financial resources and may be unable to meet their obligations under their loans and debt securities that we hold, which may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of our realizing any guarantees we may have obtained in connection with our investment. In addition, such companies typically have shorter operating histories, narrower product lines and smaller market shares than larger businesses, which tend to render them more vulnerable to competitors’ actions and adverse market conditions, as well as general economic downturns. Additionally, middle-market companies are more likely to depend on the management talents and efforts of a small group of persons. Therefore, the death, disability, resignation or termination of one or more of these persons could have a material adverse impact on one or more of the portfolio companies we invest in and, in turn, on us. Small and lower middle-market companies also may be parties to litigation and may be engaged in rapidly changing businesses with products subject to a substantial risk of obsolescence. In addition, our executive officers, directors and investment advisor may, in the ordinary course of business, be named as defendants in litigation arising from our investments in portfolio companies.

The lack of liquidity in our investments may adversely affect our business.

All of our assets may be invested in illiquid loans and securities, and a substantial portion of our investments in leveraged companies will be subject to legal and other restrictions on resale or will otherwise be less liquid than more broadly traded public securities. The illiquidity of these investments may make it difficult for us to sell such investments if the need arises. In addition, if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we have previously recorded our investments. Also, as noted above, we may be limited or prohibited in our ability to sell or otherwise exit certain positions in our initial portfolio as such a transaction could be considered a joint transaction prohibited by the 1940 Act.

Price declines and illiquidity in the corporate debt markets may adversely affect the fair value of our portfolio investments, reducing our net asset value through increased net unrealized depreciation.

As a BDC, we are required to carry our investments at market value or, if no market value is ascertainable, at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors. As part of the valuation process, we may take into account the following types of factors, if relevant, in determining the fair value of our investments:

When an external event such as a purchase transaction, public offering or subsequent equity sale occurs, we use the pricing indicated by the external event to corroborate our valuation. We record decreases in the market values or fair values of our investments as unrealized depreciation. Declines in prices and liquidity in the corporate debt markets may result in significant net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. The effect of all of these factors on our portfolio may reduce our net asset value by increasing net unrealized depreciation in our portfolio. Depending on market conditions, we could incur substantial realized losses and may suffer additional unrealized losses in future periods, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We are a non-diversified investment company as defined under the 1940 Act, and therefore we are not limited with respect to the proportion of our assets that may be invested in securities of a single issuer.

We are classified as a non-diversified investment company as defined under the 1940 Act, which means that we are not limited by the 1940 Act with respect to the proportion of our assets that we may invest in securities of a single issuer. Beyond the asset diversification requirements associated with our qualification as a RIC under the Code, we do not have fixed guidelines for diversification. To the extent that we assume large positions in the securities of a small number of issuers or our investments are concentrated in relatively few industries, our net asset value may fluctuate to a greater extent than that of a diversified investment company as a result of changes in the financial condition or the market’s assessment of the issuer. We may also be more susceptible to any single economic or regulatory occurrence than a diversified investment company.

Our failure to make follow-on investments in our portfolio companies could impair the value of our portfolio.

Following an initial investment in a portfolio company, we may make additional investments in that portfolio company as “follow-on” investments, in seeking to:

We have discretion to make follow-on investments, subject to the availability of capital resources. Failure on our part to make follow-on investments may, in some circumstances, jeopardize the continued viability of a portfolio company and our initial investment, or may result in a missed opportunity for us to increase our participation in a successful operation. Even if we have sufficient capital to make a desired follow-on investment, we may elect not to make a follow-on investment because we may not want to increase our level of risk, because we prefer other opportunities or because we are inhibited by compliance with BDC requirements of the 1940 Act or the desire to maintain our qualification as a RIC. Our ability to make follow-on investments may also be limited by House Hanover’s allocation policy.

Because we generally do not hold controlling equity interests in our portfolio companies, we may not be able to exercise control over our portfolio companies or to prevent decisions by management of our portfolio companies that could decrease the value of our investments.

If we do not hold controlling equity positions the portfolio companies included in our portfolio, we will be subject to the risk that a portfolio company may make business decisions with which we disagree, and that the management and/or stockholders of a portfolio company may take risks or otherwise act in ways that are adverse to our interests. Due to the lack of liquidity of the debt and equity investments that we expect to hold in our portfolio companies, we may not be able to dispose of our investments in the event we disagree with the actions of a portfolio company and may therefore suffer a decrease in the value of our investments.

Defaults by our portfolio companies will harm our operating results.

A portfolio company’s failure to satisfy financial or operating covenants imposed by us or other lenders could lead to defaults and, potentially, termination of its loans and foreclosure on its assets. This could trigger cross-defaults under other agreements and jeopardize such portfolio company’s ability to meet its obligations under the loans or debt or equity securities that we hold. We may incur expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms, which may include the waiver of certain financial covenants, with a defaulting portfolio company.

Because we rely on the interest income from our portfolio companies to fund operating expenses, payment defaults of our portfolio companies could have an adverse effect on our operations. Our interest income may not exceed our operating expenses which could affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flow.

Prepayments of our debt investments by our portfolio companies could adversely impact our results of operations and ability to make stockholder distributions and result in a decline in the market price of our shares.

We will be subject to the risk that the debt investments we make in our portfolio companies may be repaid prior to maturity. We expect that our investments will generally allow for repayment at any time subject to certain penalties. When this occurs, we intend to generally reinvest these proceeds in temporary investments, pending their future investment in accordance with our investment strategy. These temporary investments will typically have substantially lower yields than the debt being prepaid, and we could experience significant delays in reinvesting these amounts. Any future investment may also be at lower yields than the debt that was repaid. As a result, our results of operations could be materially adversely affected if one or more of our portfolio companies elects to repay amounts owed to us prior to maturity. Additionally, prepayments could negatively impact our ability to make, or the amount of, distributions with respect to our common stock, which could result in a decline in the market price of our shares.

Our portfolio companies may incur debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, our investments in such companies.

We intend to invest a portion of our capital in second lien and subordinated loans issued by our portfolio companies. The portfolio companies usually have, or may be permitted to incur, other debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, the loans in which we invest. By their terms, such debt instruments may provide that the holders are entitled to receive payment of interest or principal on or before the dates on which we are entitled to receive payments in respect of the loans in which we invest. Also, in the event of insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of a portfolio company, holders of debt instruments ranking senior to our investment in that portfolio company would typically be entitled to receive payment in full before we receive any distribution in respect of our investment. After repaying senior creditors, a portfolio company may not have any remaining assets to use for repaying its obligation to us. In the case of debt ranking equally with loans in which we invest, we would have to share any distributions on an equal and ratable basis with other creditors holding such debt in the event of an insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of the relevant portfolio company.

Additionally, certain loans that we may make to portfolio companies may be secured on a second priority basis by the same collateral securing senior secured debt of such companies. The first priority liens on the collateral will secure the portfolio company’s obligations under any outstanding senior debt and may secure certain other future debt that may be permitted to be incurred by the portfolio company under the agreements governing the loans. The holders of obligations secured by first priority liens on the collateral will generally control the liquidation of, and be entitled to receive proceeds from, any realization of the collateral to repay their obligations in full before us. In addition, the value of the collateral in the event of liquidation will depend on market and economic conditions, the availability of buyers and other factors. There can be no assurance that the proceeds, if any, from sales of all of the collateral would be sufficient to satisfy the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens after payment in full of all obligations secured by the first priority liens on the collateral. If such proceeds were not sufficient to repay amounts outstanding under the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens, then we, to the extent not repaid from the proceeds of the sale of the collateral, will only have an unsecured claim against the portfolio company’s remaining assets, if any.

We may also make unsecured loans to portfolio companies, meaning that such loans will not benefit from any interest in collateral of such companies. Liens on such portfolio companies’ collateral, if any, will secure the portfolio company’s obligations under its outstanding secured debt and may secure certain future debt that is permitted to be incurred by the portfolio company under its secured loan agreements. The holders of obligations secured by such liens will generally control the liquidation of, and be entitled to receive proceeds from, any realization of such collateral to repay their obligations in full before us. In addition, the value of such collateral in the event of liquidation will depend on market and economic conditions, the availability of buyers and other factors. There can be no assurance that the proceeds, if any, from sales of such collateral would be sufficient to satisfy our unsecured loan obligations after payment in full of all secured loan obligations. If such proceeds were not sufficient to repay the outstanding secured loan obligations, then our unsecured claims would rank equally with the unpaid portion of such secured creditors’ claims against the portfolio company’s remaining assets, if any.

The rights we may have with respect to the collateral securing the loans we make to our portfolio companies with senior debt outstanding may also be limited pursuant to the terms of one or more intercreditor agreements that we enter into with the holders of such senior debt. Under a typical intercreditor agreement, at any time that obligations that have the benefit of the first priority liens are outstanding, any of the following actions that may be taken in respect of the collateral will be at the direction of the holders of the obligations secured by the first priority liens:

We may not have the ability to control or direct such actions, even if our rights are adversely affected.

If we make subordinated investments, the obligors or the portfolio companies may not generate sufficient cash flow to service their debt obligations to us.

We may make subordinated investments that rank below other obligations of the obligor in right of payment. Subordinated investments are subject to greater risk of default than senior obligations as a result of adverse changes in the financial condition of the obligor or economic conditions in general. If we make a subordinated investment in a portfolio company, the portfolio company may be highly leveraged, and its relatively high debt-to-equity ratio may create increased risks that its operations might not generate sufficient cash flow to service all of its debt obligations.

The disposition of our investments may result in contingent liabilities.

We currently expect that substantially all of our investments will involve loans and private securities. In connection with the disposition of an investment in loans and private securities, we may be required to make representations about the business and financial affairs of the portfolio company typical of those made in connection with the sale of a business. We may also be required to indemnify the purchasers of such investment to the extent that any such representations turn out to be inaccurate or with respect to potential liabilities. These arrangements may result in contingent liabilities that ultimately result in funding obligations that we must satisfy through our return of distributions previously made to us.

We may not realize gains from our equity investments.

When we invest in loans and debt securities, we may acquire warrants or other equity securities of portfolio companies as well. We may also invest in equity securities directly. To the extent we hold equity investments, we will attempt to dispose of them and realize gains upon our disposition of them. However, the equity interests we receive may not appreciate in value and, may decline in value. As a result, we may not be able to realize gains from our equity interests, and any gains that we do realize on the disposition of any equity interests may not be sufficient to offset any other losses we experience.

Risks Relating to our Common Stock

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including BDC’s, frequently trade at a discount from their net asset value.

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including BDC’s, frequently trade at a discount from their net asset value. This characteristic of closed-end investment companies is separate and distinct from the risk that our net asset value per share of common stock may decline. We cannot predict whether our common stock will trade at, above or below net asset value. In addition, we cannot issue shares of our common stock below net asset value unless our board of directors determines that it would be in our and our stockholders’ best interests to do so. Sales of common stock at prices below net asset value per share dilute the interests of existing stockholders, have the effect of reducing out net asset value per share and may reduce our market price per share. In addition, continuous sales of common stock below net asset value may have a negative impact on total returns and could have a negative impact on the market price of our shares of common stock.

Stockholders may experience dilution in their ownership percentage if they do not participate in our dividend reinvestment plan.

All distributions declared in cash payable to stockholders that are participants in our dividend reinvestment plan are generally automatically reinvested in shares of our common stock. As a result, stockholders that do not participate in the dividend reinvestment plan may experience dilution over time. Stockholders who receive distributions in shares of common stock may experience accretion to the net asset value of their shares if our shares are trading at a premium and dilution if our shares are trading at a discount. The level of accretion or discount would depend on various factors, including the proportion of our stockholders who participate in the plan, the level of premium or discount at which our shares are trading and the amount of the distribution payable to a stockholder.

Our share ownership is concentrated.

As of April 1, 2019 the Partnerships beneficially own approximately 95% of our outstanding common stock. As a result, the Partnerships will exert significant influence over all matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election and removal of directors, any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of the assets, as well as any charter amendment and other matters requiring stockholder approval. This concentration of ownership may delay or prevent a change in control and may have a negative impact on the market price of our common stock by discouraging third party investors. In addition, the interests of the Partnerships may not always coincide with the interests of our other stockholders.

The Company’s common stock may be subject to the penny stock rules which might make it harder for stockholders to sell.

As a result of our stock price, our shares are subject to the penny stock rules. Because a “penny stock” is, generally speaking, one selling for less than $5.00 per share, the Company’s common stock may be subject to the foregoing rules. The application of the penny stock rules may affect stockholders’ ability to sell their shares because some broker-dealers may not be willing to make a market in the Company’s common stock because of the burdens imposed upon them by the penny stock rules which include but are not limited to:

Section 15(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rules 15g-1 through 15g-6, which impose additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell Company securities to persons other than established customers and accredited investors.

Rule 15g-2 declares unlawful any broker-dealer transactions in penny stocks unless the broker-dealer has first provided to the customer a standardized disclosure document.

Rule 15g-3 provides that it is unlawful for a broker-dealer to engage in a penny stock transaction unless the broker-dealer first discloses and subsequently confirms to the customer the current quotation prices or similar market information concerning the penny stock in question.

Rule 15g-4 prohibits broker-dealers from completing penny stock transactions for a customer unless the broker-dealer first discloses to the customer the amount of compensation or other remuneration received as a result of the penny stock transaction.

Rule 15g-5 requires that a broker-dealer executing a penny stock transaction, other than one exempt under Rule 15g-1, disclose to its customer, at the time of or prior to the transaction, information about the sales persons compensation.

Potential stockholders of the Company should also be aware that, according to SEC Release No. 34-29093, the market for penny stocks has suffered in recent years from patterns of fraud and abuse. Such patterns include (i) control of the market for the security by one or a few broker-dealers that are often related to the promoter or issuer; (ii) manipulation of prices through prearranged matching of purchases and sales and false and misleading press releases; (iii) “boiler room” practices involving high-pressure sales tactics and unrealistic price projections by inexperienced sales persons; (iv) excessive and undisclosed bid-ask differential and markups by selling broker-dealers; and (v) the wholesale dumping of the same securities by promoters and broker dealers after prices have been manipulated to a desired level, along with the resulting inevitable collapse of those prices and with consequent investor losses.