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

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 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 with the assistance of the Company’s Valuation Committee, 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.

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

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 requirements, 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.

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.

As a BDC, we generally invest in illiquid loans and securities including debt and equity securities of middle-market companies. Under procedures established by our board of directors, we value investments for which market quotations are readily available at such market quotations. We obtain these market values from an independent pricing service or at the mean between the bid and ask prices obtained from at least two brokers or dealers (if available, otherwise by a principal market maker or a primary market dealer). Debt and equity securities that are not publicly traded or whose market prices are not readily available are valued at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors. Such determination of fair values may involve subjective judgments and estimates, although we engage independent valuation providers to review the valuation of each portfolio investment that does not have a readily available market quotation quarterly. Investments purchased within 60 days of maturity are valued at cost plus accreted discount, or minus amortized premium, which approximate fair value. With respect to unquoted securities, our board of directors values each investment considering, among other measures, discounted cash flow models, comparisons of financial ratios of peer companies that are public and other factors, which are provided by a nationally recognized independent valuation firm. The Company has engaged a third-party valuation firm to perform its independent valuations of the Company’s Level 3 investments. This valuation firm provides a range of values for selected investments, which is presented to the Valuation Committee to determine the value for each of the selected investments.

When an external event such as a purchase transaction, public offering or subsequent equity sale occurs, our board of directors uses the pricing indicated by the external event to corroborate and/or assist us in our valuation. Because there is not a readily available market for substantially all of the investments in our portfolio, we value our portfolio investments at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors using a documented valuation policy and a consistently applied valuation process. Due to the inherent uncertainty of determining the fair value of investments that do not have a readily available market value, the fair value of our investments may differ significantly from the values that would have been used had a readily available market value existed for such investments, and the differences could be material.

With respect to investments for which market quotations are not readily available, our board of directors undertakes a multi-step valuation process each quarter, as described below:

Our common stock is traded on the Over the Counter Pink 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 OTC Market 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 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.

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.

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.

The impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had and will continue to have on our business, results of operations, financial position and cash flow.

The global economy has been effected by the COVID-19 pandemic, including the small and medium sized businesses in which we are invested. The extent to which our operations may be impacted will depend largely on future developments, which are uncertain and cannot be predicted, including duration, the restrictions by governmental authorities to operate businesses and the effect that programs, such as the Paycheck Protection Program by the U.S. Small Business Administration, will have.

Cybersecurity risks and cyber incidents may adversely affect our business or those of our portfolio companies by causing a disruption to our operations, a compromise or corruption of confidential information and/or damage to business relationships, or those of our portfolio companies, all of which could negatively impact our business, results of operations or financial condition.

A cyber incident is considered to be any adverse event that threatens the confidentiality, integrity or availability of our information resources. These incidents may be an intentional attack or an unintentional event and could involve gaining unauthorized access to, use, alteration or destruction of our information systems for purposes of misappropriating assets, obtaining ransom payments, stealing confidential information, corrupting data or causing operational disruption, or may involve phishing. The result of these incidents may include disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, liability for stolen information, misappropriation of assets, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation and damage to our business relationships. This could result in significant losses, reputational damage, litigation, regulatory fines or penalties, or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to modify our protective measures and to investigate and remediate vulnerabilities or other exposures arising from operational and security risks. The costs related to cybersecurity incidents may not be fully insured or indemnified. As our and our portfolio companies’ reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our information systems, both internal and those provided by our Investment Adviser and third-party service providers, and the information systems of our portfolio companies. We, our Investment Adviser and its affiliates have implemented processes, procedures and internal controls to help mitigate cybersecurity risks and cyber intrusions, but these measures, as well as our increased awareness of the nature and extent of a risk of a cyber incident, may be ineffective and do not guarantee that a cyber incident will not occur or that our financial results, operations or confidential information will not be negatively impacted by such an incident.

Third parties with which we do business (including, but not limited to, service providers, such as accountants, attorneys, custodians, transfer agents and administrators, and the issuers of securities in which we invest) may also be sources or targets of cybersecurity or other technological risks. We outsource certain functions and these relationships allow for the storage and processing of our information and assets, as well as certain investor, counterparty and borrower information. While we engage in actions to reduce our exposure resulting from outsourcing, we cannot control the cybersecurity plans and systems put in place by these third parties and ongoing threats may result in unauthorized access, loss, exposure or destruction of data, or other cybersecurity incidents, with increased costs and other consequences, including those described above. Privacy and information security laws and regulation changes, and compliance with those changes, may also result in cost increases due to system changes and the development of new administrative processes.

Risks Relating to our Investments

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.

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 increase or maintain in whole or in part our position as a creditor or equity ownership percentage in a portolio company, exercise warrants, options or convertible securities that were acquired in the original or subsequent financing, or preserve or enhance the value of our investment.

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.

When we 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 in 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.

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.

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.

Risks Relating to our Common Stock

Our share ownership is concentrated.

As of March 29, 2024 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.

Risks Relating to our Business and Structure

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 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 with the assistance of the Company’s Valuation Committee, 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.

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

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 requirements, 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.

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.

As a BDC, we generally invest in illiquid loans and securities including debt and equity securities of middle-market companies. Under procedures established by our board of directors, we value investments for which market quotations are readily available at such market quotations. We obtain these market values from an independent pricing service or at the mean between the bid and ask prices obtained from at least two brokers or dealers (if available, otherwise by a principal market maker or a primary market dealer). Debt and equity securities that are not publicly traded or whose market prices are not readily available are valued at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors. Such determination of fair values may involve subjective judgments and estimates, although we engage independent valuation providers to review the valuation of each portfolio investment that does not have a readily available market quotation quarterly. Investments purchased within 60 days of maturity are valued at cost plus accreted discount, or minus amortized premium, which approximate fair value. With respect to unquoted securities, our board of directors values each investment considering, among other measures, discounted cash flow models, comparisons of financial ratios of peer companies that are public and other factors, which are provided by a nationally recognized independent valuation firm. The Company has engaged a third-party valuation firm to perform its independent valuations of the Company’s Level 3 investments. This valuation firm provides a range of values for selected investments, which is presented to the Valuation Committee to determine the value for each of the selected investments.

When an external event such as a purchase transaction, public offering or subsequent equity sale occurs, our board of directors uses the pricing indicated by the external event to corroborate and/or assist us in our valuation. Because there is not a readily available market for substantially all of the investments in our portfolio, we value our portfolio investments at fair value as determined in good faith by our board of directors using a documented valuation policy and a consistently applied valuation process. Due to the inherent uncertainty of determining the fair value of investments that do not have a readily available market value, the fair value of our investments may differ significantly from the values that would have been used had a readily available market value existed for such investments, and the differences could be material.

With respect to investments for which market quotations are not readily available, our board of directors undertakes a multi-step valuation process each quarter, as described below:

Our common stock is traded on the Over the Counter Pink 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 OTC Market 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 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.

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.

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.

The impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had and will continue to have on our business, results of operations, financial position and cash flow.

The global economy has been effected by the COVID-19 pandemic, including the small and medium sized businesses in which we are invested. The extent to which our operations may be impacted will depend largely on future developments, which are uncertain and cannot be predicted, including duration, the restrictions by governmental authorities to operate businesses and the effect that programs, such as the Paycheck Protection Program by the U.S. Small Business Administration, will have.

Cybersecurity risks and cyber incidents may adversely affect our business or those of our portfolio companies by causing a disruption to our operations, a compromise or corruption of confidential information and/or damage to business relationships, or those of our portfolio companies, all of which could negatively impact our business, results of operations or financial condition.

A cyber incident is considered to be any adverse event that threatens the confidentiality, integrity or availability of our information resources. These incidents may be an intentional attack or an unintentional event and could involve gaining unauthorized access to, use, alteration or destruction of our information systems for purposes of misappropriating assets, obtaining ransom payments, stealing confidential information, corrupting data or causing operational disruption, or may involve phishing. The result of these incidents may include disrupted operations, misstated or unreliable financial data, liability for stolen information, misappropriation of assets, increased cybersecurity protection and insurance costs, litigation and damage to our business relationships. This could result in significant losses, reputational damage, litigation, regulatory fines or penalties, or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to modify our protective measures and to investigate and remediate vulnerabilities or other exposures arising from operational and security risks. The costs related to cybersecurity incidents may not be fully insured or indemnified. As our and our portfolio companies’ reliance on technology has increased, so have the risks posed to our information systems, both internal and those provided by our Investment Adviser and third-party service providers, and the information systems of our portfolio companies. We, our Investment Adviser and its affiliates have implemented processes, procedures and internal controls to help mitigate cybersecurity risks and cyber intrusions, but these measures, as well as our increased awareness of the nature and extent of a risk of a cyber incident, may be ineffective and do not guarantee that a cyber incident will not occur or that our financial results, operations or confidential information will not be negatively impacted by such an incident.

Third parties with which we do business (including, but not limited to, service providers, such as accountants, attorneys, custodians, transfer agents and administrators, and the issuers of securities in which we invest) may also be sources or targets of cybersecurity or other technological risks. We outsource certain functions and these relationships allow for the storage and processing of our information and assets, as well as certain investor, counterparty and borrower information. While we engage in actions to reduce our exposure resulting from outsourcing, we cannot control the cybersecurity plans and systems put in place by these third parties and ongoing threats may result in unauthorized access, loss, exposure or destruction of data, or other cybersecurity incidents, with increased costs and other consequences, including those described above. Privacy and information security laws and regulation changes, and compliance with those changes, may also result in cost increases due to system changes and the development of new administrative processes.

Risks Relating to our Common Stock

Our share ownership is concentrated.

As of March 29, 2024 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.