Summary of Risk Factors

This Offering, which provides for the registration of Shares by the Selling Security Holders and the subsequent public resale of such shares, involves substantial risk. Our ability to execute our business strategy is also subject to various risks detailed in this Prospectus. The risks described under the heading “Risk Factors” included elsewhere in this Prospectus may cause us not to realize the full benefits of our business plan and strategy or may cause us to be unable to successfully execute all or part of our strategy. Some of the most significant challenges and risks are:

Before you invest in our Common Stock, you should carefully consider all the information in this Prospectus, including matters set forth under the heading “Risk Factors.”

Where You Can Find Us

Our principal executive office and mailing address and phone number are: 6810 North State Road 7, Coconut Creek, Florida 33073, (954) 906-0098.

Shell Company Status

We are a shell company and we are designated a Shell Company Risk by OTCMARKETS.

Our Filing Status as a “Smaller Reporting Company”

We are also a “smaller reporting company,” meaning that the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700 million and our annual revenue is less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year. We may continue to be a smaller reporting company after this offering if either (i) the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250 million or (ii) our annual revenue is less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700 million. If we are a smaller reporting company at the time, we cease to be an emerging growth company, we may continue to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are available to smaller reporting companies. Specifically, as a smaller reporting company we may choose to present only the two most recent fiscal years of audited financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K and, similar to emerging growth companies, smaller reporting companies have reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation.

Implications of Being an Emerging Growth Company

We qualify as an emerging growth company as that term is used in the JOBS Act as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (the “JOBS Act”) enacted in April 2012. An emerging growth company may take advantage of specified reduced reporting and other burdens that are otherwise applicable generally to public companies. These provisions include:

	·	A requirement to have only two years of audited financial statements and only two years of related MD&A;
	·	Exemption from the auditor attestation requirement in the assessment of the emerging growth company’s internal control over financial reporting under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”);
	·	Reduced disclosure about the emerging growth company’s executive compensation arrangements; and
	·	No non-binding advisory votes on executive compensation or golden parachute arrangements.

In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act also provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Act”) for complying with new or revised accounting standards. We have elected to take advantage of the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards, which allows us to delay the adoption of new or revised accounting standards that have different effective dates for public and private companies until those standards apply to private companies. As a result of this election, our financial statements contained in this Form S-1 may not be comparable to companies that comply with public company effective dates. The existing scaled executive compensation disclosure requirements for smaller reporting companies will continue to apply to our filings so long as we are an emerging growth company, regardless of whether we remain a “smaller reporting company”.

We could remain an emerging growth company for up to five years, or until the earliest of (i) the last day of the first fiscal year in which our annual gross revenues exceed $1 billion, (ii) the date that we become a “large accelerated filer” as defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Exchange Act, which would occur if the market value of our Common Stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter, or (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in non-convertible debt during the preceding three year period.

For more details regarding this exemption, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Critical Accounting Policies.”

RISK FACTORS

The shares of our Common Stock being offered for resale by the Selling Shareholders are highly speculative in nature, involve a high degree of risk and should be purchased only by persons who can afford to lose their entire amount invested in the Common Stock. Accordingly, prospective investors should carefully consider, along with other matters referred to herein, the following risk factors in evaluating our business before purchasing any shares of Common Stocks. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition or operating results could be materially adversely affected. In such case, you may lose all or part of your investment. You should carefully consider the risks described below and the other information in this Prospectus before investing in our Common Stock.

Risks Related to Our Business

Our financial statements disclose that there is substantial doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern, in which case you could lose your investment.

We have a working capital deficit, a history of net losses, and are dependent on advances from our officer in order to continue its operations. These factors raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our ability to continue as a going concern is dependent upon our generating profitable operations in the future and/or to obtain the necessary financing to meet our obligations and repay our liabilities arising from normal business operations when they come due. Our management intends to finance operating costs with additional advances from related parties, notes payable and/or public issuance of common stock. Although we may be successful in obtaining financing, there are no assurances that such funding will be achieved at a sufficient level or that we will succeed in our future operations.

We expect to incur substantial expenses to meet our reporting obligations as a public company.

We will incur substantial annual costs to maintain the proper management and financial controls for our filings required as a public reporting company, funds that would otherwise be spent for our business operations. Our public reporting costs may increase over time, which will increase our expenses and may decrease our potential profitability.

Our business is highly competitive; competition presents an ongoing threat to the success of our hemp processing business.

We face significant competition from small, medium and large competitors in the hemp processing space, which competitors have greater financial, operational, and personnel resources than we do. Should we fail to develop strategies to overcome our competition, our revenues will be negatively impacted.

Because our directors and executive officers are among our largest stockholders, they can exert significant control over our business and affairs and have actual or potential interests that may depart from those of investors.

Certain of our executive officers and directors own a significant percentage of our outstanding capital stock. As of the date of this prospectus, our Chief Executive Officer, through his ownership of shares of Series A Preferred Stock, beneficially owns over 51% of our outstanding voting stock. The interests of our Chief Executive Officer may differ from the interests of our other stockholders. As a result, in addition to their board seats and offices, our Chief Executive Officer will have significant influence and control over all corporate actions requiring stockholder approval, irrespective of how our other stockholders may vote, including the following actions:

This concentration of ownership by itself may have the effect of impeding a merger, consolidation, takeover or other business consolidation, or discouraging a potential acquirer from making a tender offer for our common stock, which in turn could reduce our stock price or prevent our stockholders from realizing a premium over our stock price.

We will need substantial funding of at least $2.1 million to fund our Plan of Operations. We may be unable to raise capital when needed, if at all, which could cause us to have insufficient funds to pursue our operations, or to delay, reduce or eliminate our development of new programs or commercialization efforts. Additionally, we expect additional costs to continue our operations, including SEC reporting costs associated with operating as a public company. We may also encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may increase our capital needs and/or cause us to spend our cash resources faster than we expect. Accordingly, we expect that we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in order to continue our operations, assuming we are successful in completing our Plan of Operations, of which there are no assurances.

To date, we have financed our operations entirely through management and equity investments from investors, and we expect to continue to do so in the foreseeable future. Additional funding from those or other sources may not be available when or in the amounts needed, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we raise capital through the sale of equity, or securities convertible into equity, it would result in dilution to our existing stockholders, which could be significant depending on the price at which we may be able to sell our securities. If we raise additional capital through the incurrence of additional indebtedness, we would likely become subject to further covenants restricting our business activities, and holders of debt instruments may have rights and privileges senior to those of our equity investors. In addition, servicing the interest and principal repayment obligations under debt facilities could divert funds that would otherwise be available to support development of new programs and marketing to current and potential new clients. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate development of new programs or future marketing efforts. Any of these events could significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects.

Our financial statements may not be comparable to those of other companies.

Pursuant to Section 107(b) of the JOBS Act, we have elected to use the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards under Section 102(b)(2) of The JOBS Act. This election allows us to delay the adoption of new or revised accounting standards that have different effective dates for public and private companies until those standards apply to private companies. As a result, our financial statements may not be comparable to companies that comply with public company effective dates, and our stockholders and potential investors may have difficulty in analyzing our operating results if comparing us to such companies.

We do not have an independent board of directors which could create a conflict of interests and pose a risk from a corporate governance perspective.

Our Board of Directors (the “Board”) of our current executive officer and consultants and we do not have any outside or independent directors. The lack of independent directors:

Because officers serve on our Board of Directors, it will be difficult for the Board to fulfill its traditional role as overseeing management.

Because we do not have a nominating, audit or compensation committee, shareholders will have to rely on the entire board of directors, no members of which are independent, to perform these functions.

We do not have a nominating, audit or compensation committee or any such committee comprised of independent directors. The board of directors performs these functions. No members of the board of directors are independent directors. Thus, there is a potential conflict in that board members who are also part of management will participate in discussions concerning management compensation and audit issues that may affect management decisions.

Our election not to opt out of the JOBS Act extended accounting transition period may not make our financial statements easily comparable to other companies.

Pursuant to the JOBS Act of 2012, as an emerging growth company we can elect to opt out of the extended transition period for any new or revised accounting standards that may be issued by the PCAOB or the SEC. We have elected not to opt out of such extended transition period, which means that when a standard is issued or revised, and it has different application dates for public or private companies, we, as an emerging growth company, can adopt the application date for private companies. Our financial statements may therefore not be comparable to those of companies that comply with such new or revised accounting standards. As of present, there are no new or revised accounting standards that have been issued by the PCAOB or the SEC applicable to us for which we have adopted the application date for private companies.

The JOBS Act will also allow us to postpone the date by which we must comply with certain laws and regulations intended to protect investors and to reduce the amount of information provided in reports filed with the SEC. The recently enacted JOBS Act is intended to reduce the regulatory burden on emerging growth companies. The Registrant meets the definition of an emerging growth company and so long as it qualifies as an “emerging growth company,” it will, among other things:

We intend to take advantage of some or all the reduced regulatory and reporting requirements that will be available to it so long as it qualifies as an “emerging growth company”. We have elected not to opt out of the extension of time to comply with new or revised financial accounting standards available under Section 102(b) of the JOBS Act. Among other things, this means that the Registrant’s independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to provide an attestation report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting so long as it qualifies as an emerging growth company, which may increase the risk that weaknesses or deficiencies in the internal control over financial reporting go undetected. Likewise, so long as it qualifies as an emerging growth company, we may elect not to provide certain information, including certain financial information and certain information regarding compensation of executive officers that would otherwise have been required to provide in filings with the SEC, which may make it more difficult for investors and securities analysts to evaluate the Registrant. As a result, investor confidence and the market price of our common stock may be adversely affected.

We may have difficulty obtaining officer and director coverage or obtaining such coverage on favorable terms or financially be unable to obtain any such coverage, which may make it difficult for our attracting and retaining qualified members of our board of directors, particularly to serve on our audit committee and compensation committee, and qualified executive officers.

We also expect that being a public company and these new rules and regulations will make it more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage or financially be unable to obtain such coverage. These factors could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors, particularly to serve on our audit committee and compensation committee, and qualified executive officers.

We are required to comply with certain provisions of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and if we fail to comply in a timely manner, our business could be harmed, and our stock price could decline.

Rules adopted by the SEC pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 require an annual assessment of internal controls over financial reporting, and for certain issuers an attestation of this assessment by the issuer’s independent registered public accounting firm. The standards that must be met for management to assess the internal controls over financial reporting as effective are evolving and complex, and require significant documentation, testing, and possible remediation to meet the detailed standards.

We expect to incur expenses and to devote resources to Section 404 compliance on an ongoing basis. It is difficult for us to predict how long it will take or costly it will be to complete the assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting for each year and to remediate any deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting. As a result, we may not be able to complete the assessment and remediation process on a timely basis. In addition, although attestation requirements by our independent registered public accounting firm are not presently applicable to us, we could become subject to these requirements in the future and we may encounter problems or delays in completing the implementation of any resulting changes to internal controls over financial reporting. In the event that our Chief Executive Officer or Chief Financial Officer determine that our internal control over financial reporting is not effective as defined under Section 404, we cannot predict how the market prices of our shares will be affected; however, we believe that there is a risk that investor confidence and share value may be negatively affected.

These and other new or changed laws, rules, regulations and standards are, or will be, subject to varying interpretations in many cases due to their lack of specificity. As a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies, which could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices. Our efforts to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards are likely to continue to result in increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. Further, compliance with new and existing laws, rules, regulations and standards may make it more difficult and expensive for us to maintain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. Members of our board of directors and our principal executive officer and principal financial officer could face an increased risk of personal liability in connection with the performance of their duties. As a result, we may have difficulty attracting and retaining qualified directors and executive officers, which could harm our business. We continually evaluate and monitor regulatory developments and cannot estimate the timing or magnitude of additional costs we may incur as a result.

We cannot predict when or if we will produce revenues.

We have generated no revenues for the years presented in this prospectus and since our inception. For us to execute upon and complete our Plan of Operations (See Plan of Operations beginning at page 49), we must obtain substantial funding. Our potential revenues are fully contingent upon adequate funding and successful completion of our Plan of Operations. There is no assurance that we will generate revenues sufficient to generate our business. Even if we obtain adequate funding and complete our Plan of Operations, we may be unsuccessful in our business and business strategies, and our results of operations will be negatively impacted, and you will lose your entire investment.

Because of our new business model, we have not proven our ability to generate revenues or profit, and any investment is high risky.

We have very no meaningful operating history in our planned hemp processing business, so it will be difficult for you to evaluate an investment in our stock. Our entire business is contingent upon adequate funding and successful execution of our Plan of Operations. We have disclosed in our financial statement footnotes the existence of substantial doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern. We cannot assure that we will ever generate meaningful revenues or be profitable. Since we have not proven the essential elements of profitable operations, you will be furnishing venture capital to us and will bear the risk of complete loss of your investment in the event we are unsuccessful.

We depend heavily on our Chief Executive Officer.

Our future success depends to a significant degree on the skills, experience and efforts of our CEO, Matthew Dwyer, who has public company experience and experience in the cannabis sector. We have no key man life insurance for our CEO. Should we lose the services of our CEO, we may be unable to hire another CEO with similar and equal skills to direct our operations.

Investors may lose their entire investment if we fail to implement our business plan.

We expect to face substantial risks, uncertainties, expenses, and difficulties in the execution of our Plan of Operations. There are no historical operations in our current business plan from which you can evaluate our business. Our prospects must be considered in light of the risks, uncertainties, expenses and difficulties frequently encountered by companies in their early stages of development. We cannot guarantee that we will be successful in accomplishing our Plan of Operations.

Assuming we receive adequate funding, our business and operations may experience rapid growth; if we fail to manage our growth, our business and operating results could be negatively impacted.

Assuming we are successful in obtaining funding to successful execute the steps in our Plan of Operations detailed on page 49, we may experience rapid growth in our operations, which may place significant demands on our management, operational and financial infrastructure. If we fail to manage growth, the quality of our products and/or services could materially suffer, which could negatively affect our brand and operating results. We efficiently manage our growth, we will need to continue to improve operational, financial and management controls and reporting systems and procedures. These systems enhancements and improvements will require significant capital expenditures and allocation of valuable management resources. If the improvements are not implemented successfully, our ability to manage growth will be impaired causing significant additional expenditures.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may be unable to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud; as a result, current and potential stockholders could lose confidence in our financial reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our stock.

Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and effectively prevent fraud. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our brand and operating results will likely be harmed. We may in the future discover areas of our internal controls that need improvement. We cannot be certain that any measures we implement will ensure that we achieve and maintain adequate controls over our financial processes and reporting in the future. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could harm our operating results or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and materially harm our business, which would have a negative effect on our operations.

Risks Related to Hemp

The farmers from which we purchase Hemp Biomass may be subject to material farming risks, as follows:

	·	Hemp has less infrastructure than other crops, so farmers cannot rely on selling their crop to a local grain elevator;
	·	Mold to crops leading to destruction of crops;
	·	Cultivated crops containing higher-than- allowed levels of the psychoactive chemical THC, leading to required destruction of hemp crops (the 2018 Farm Bill prohibits requires that industrial hemp must contain less than 0.3% THC on a dry weight basis).

Should any of the foregoing risks become material to our operations, our results of operations will be negatively impacted.

Following the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, which legalized the cultivation of hemp, a form of cannabis with low concentrations of THC, the main psychoactive agent in marijuana, there was a glut of farmers and CBD manufacturers entering the hemp farming and CBD processing and manufacturing fields, About 65 percent of U.S. hemp farmers lack a buyer for their crop the 2019 season according to a July 2019 survey by Whitney Economics (Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-hemp-farmers/for-many-u-s-farmers-who-planted-hemp-cbd-boom-leaves-bitter-taste-idUSKBN1XD0GE). If this over speculation and over supply of farmers continues when we begin our Hemp processing activities, our operations will be negatively impacted.

In order to make a sound decision regarding the production of hemp, growers must evaluate the risks associated with the crop. That risk assessment should include a thorough review of the five areas of risk in agriculture: price, production, legal, financial and human risk. Price risk is defined as the fluctuations in prices paid for inputs or received for commodities sold. The major issue for industrial hemp in this risk category is the lack of a price discovery function, i.e. it is difficult for producers to determine if a price offered for a hemp product is a fair price. The lack of price discovery can lead to an unfair advantage when buyers and sellers negotiate prices. Should we and the farmers from which we purchase the Hemp Biomass fail to conduct the foregoing risk assessments, our results of operations will be negatively impacted.

Hemp related regulatory, financial, and risk management risks may negatively impact our results of operations.

At the present time, there are no quality standards for hemp, unlike most traditional crops such as corn, that is sold worldwide, is marketed as U.S. #2 yellow corn, and the USDA has developed specifications for corn as well as the methods used to determine those specifications. These quality standard or grades allow buyers and sellers from across the globe to trade corn contracts effectively.

The lack of quality standards for hemp makes it difficult to develop production contracts as the buyers and sellers could have vastly different views on what criteria to use to determine a good product from a poor product. Grading standards could be especially important if there is a dispute regarding the quality of the hemp product at delivery that would impact the final price. Another concern in the area of legal risk would be the current status of CBD’s with the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”). To date, only one CBD has been approved by the FDA to treat a medical condition. On June 25, 2018, the FDA approved the use of Epidiolex for the treatment of two severe pediatric seizure disorders, Lennox-Gastaut and Dravet syndrome. Currently, CBD’s are being promoted as a potential treatment for a wide range of medical conditions, and although future research may show that CBD’s are effective in treating many maladies, that research must prove that CBD’s are effective and safe. The type of research required by the FDA is very costly and time-consuming, and the future growth of the CBD market may be dependent on the approval of additional medical and nutritional uses.

Much of the stress farmers and ranchers are experiencing today can be attributed to financial risk. This fourth category of risk is defined as a condition of not having sufficient cash to meet expected obligations, generating lower than expected profits, and losing equity. One way to combat this type of risk is to produce hemp under a contract. Without a contract, hemp is considered a speculative crop, and producers should not invest more than they can afford to lose.

The final area of risk management is human risk, defined as the uncertainty attributed to the character, health or behavior of the people involved in the business. Low commodity prices have forced many producers to search for alternatives to traditional crop and livestock enterprises. Many of these alternatives provide their own set of challenges, and farmers and ranchers must do a thorough risk assessment as they consider producing industrial hemp.

Our goal is to obtain all necessary permits to conduct our business, however, we cannot guarantee we will be successful in procuring all necessary permits and adhering to all regulations.

The predecessor to the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018, the Agricultural Act of 2014 created a patchwork of state permitting regimes. These regimes have yet to be fully updated after the 2018 Farm Bill. We will seek permits to process hemp in various strategic locales, however, we cannot guarantee that we will be successful in obtaining all necessary permits to conduct our operations.

As CBD production is a new industry, our management has researched production mechanisms involving various machinery for extraction, winterization, solvent extraction and distillation. Each of our machines will be highly technical and their operators require specific training in their use. We will need to perfect our production processes, which may take some time to achieve optimum results. In addition, machines need to be staffed and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to secure the necessary highly trained personnel to operate the machines. As with any machinery, our machines will need to be maintained, and even with appropriate maintenance, we risk their malfunction. We cannot be certain that we will be able to attract and retain staff with appropriate machinery maintenance skills, and if and when any machine malfunctions, we could lose the batch then being processed and suffer down-time until the malfunction could be identified and rectified, by repair or replacement. In addition, as machinery becomes obsolete or unfit for purpose, it will have to be replaced, requiring, purchase, installation, operator training and the related downtime.

Outsourcing raw hemp material at competitive prices is essential to our business model.

Manufacturing high-quality CBD oil based on CO₂ extraction requires that we purchase large quantities of hemp. While bulk pricing tends to give favorable pricing, the emerging hemp market is making pricing raw material unpredictable in the near future. If we are unable to source our raw material at favorable prices, our business will be negatively affected. While the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill now allows for the transport of hemp across state lines, there is no guarantee that we will be able to secure favorable pricing or be able to produce our own hemp at commercially viable cost.

Our success will be dependent on our ability to sell high quality CBD oil and we have yet to develop our manufacturing process and sales channels.

We will use various highly technical machines that are subject to human error and possible mechanical failure. Once we have perfected our manufacturing process, we will still need to sell our products into competitive markets. There is no guarantee that we will be able to produce a high-quality CBD oil as planned and develop significant sales.

FDA regulations, FDA approval processes, and FDA enforcement actions could increase our cost of business by regulating Food Producers.

Our business model currently depends on the future sale of CBD at wholesale, but we may wish to manufacture direct-to-consumer products. In addition, our wholesale customers who intend to add CBD to food or cosmetic products will be regulated by the FDA. We have not sought FDA approval and therefore may be unable to sell into such markets or limited as to potential purchasers. We have not sought FDA approval for our products, potentially subjecting us to enforcement proceedings. In New York City, for example, the Department of Health recently banned the addition of CBD to food and drink, and other jurisdictions could do the same. We do not think this ban will hold up to court challenges, but it could negatively impact the price we are able to obtain for the sale of our products. If we determine to seek FDA or other approval of our products, we will spend time and expense in doing so, and could obtain an adverse determination. Alternatively, even if we were to prevail in an enforcement proceeding, the defense thereof could be extremely time-consuming and expensive.

We may be subject to compliance actions by the FDA for making unsubstantiated claims as to our products efficacy or intended use. On April 2, 2019, outgoing FDA Commissioner Scott Gotlieb issued a statement on the agency’s website, www.fda.gov, pledging the agency will continue to use its authority to take action against companies and product developers which make unproven claims to treat serious or life-threatening diseases, and “where patients may be misled to forgo otherwise effective, available therapy and opt instead for a product that has no proven value or may cause them serious harm.”

The FDA has issued warning letters, in collaboration with the Federal Trade Commission, to three companies – Advanced Spine and Pain LLC (d/b/a Relievus), Nutra Pure LLC and PotNetwork Holdings Inc. – in response to their making unsubstantiated claims related to more than a dozen different products and spanning multiple product webpages, online stores and social media websites. The FDA deemed that companies “used these online platforms to make unfounded, egregious claims about their products’ ability to limit, treat or cure cancer, neurodegenerative conditions, autoimmune diseases, opioid use disorder, and other serious diseases, without sufficient evidence and the legally required FDA approval.”

The agency has said it may pursue a company making medical claims about products asserting to contain CBD that haven’t been approved by the FDA. The FDA has stated that selling unapproved products with unsubstantiated therapeutic claims can put patients and consumers at risk. The FDA does not believe these products have not been shown to be safe or effective, and deceptive marketing of unproven treatments may keep some patients from accessing appropriate, recognized therapies to treat serious and even fatal diseases. Additionally, because they are not evaluated by the FDA, there may be other ingredients that are not disclosed, which may be harmful.

The FDA has pledged to continue to monitor the marketplace and take enforcement action as needed to protect the public health against companies illegally selling CBD products that claim to prevent, diagnose, treat, or cure serious diseases, such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, psychiatric disorders and diabetes; illegally selling cannabis and cannabis-derived products that can put consumers at risk; and marketing and distributing such products in violation of the FDA’s authorities.

Additional regulatory considerations that must be taken into account include the Federal Trade Commission’s regulation of unfair and deceptive product labeling and marketing, as well as state law regulation of food safety. States have the authority to regulate matters related to the health and safety of its own citizens, such that the 2018 Farm Bill and regulation by the USDA will not necessarily preempt state or local laws regulating the manufacture and distribution of cannabis-related products that are not directly in conflict with federal law. States may still choose to enact their own laws that can promote or restrict the sale of cannabis-based products. States such as Indiana and Alabama do not permit the sale of CBD oil on a personal level without a prescription.

Any and all claims of medicinal value must be substantiated with reputable scientific support and may be subject to evaluation by the FDA.

There are limitations to how CBD may be marketed and what potential benefits may be advertised.

Any and all claims of medicinal value must be substantiated with reputable scientific support and may be subject to evaluation by the FDA and we may be unable to effectively market our products without proper scientific documentation.

In April 2019, outgoing FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb acknowledged that the FDA is considering whether to use its authority to issue regulations that would permit the marketing of CBD in foods or as dietary supplements. However, until the law changes, it is the FDA’s position that selling unapproved products with unsubstantiated therapeutic claims both violates the law and potentially puts patients at risk. Commissioner Gottlieb also asserted that it continues to be unlawful to market foods containing added CBD or THC or dietary supplements containing CBD or THC, regardless of whether the substances are hemp-derived and regardless of the claims being made. FDA takes this position based on the operation of statutory “exclusionary clauses” in the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act related to food additives and dietary supplements. Specifically, FDA has determined that both CBD and THC, which are now active ingredients in FDA-approved drugs, were the subject of substantial clinical investigations before they were marketed as foods or dietary supplements, and due to the operation of the exclusionary clauses, FDA concludes that it is currently illegal to introduce CBD or THC into the food supply or to market these ingredients as dietary supplements.

Additional regulatory considerations that must be taken into account include the Federal Trade Commission’s regulation of unfair and deceptive product labeling and marketing, as well as state law regulation of food safety.

Participants in the cannabis or hemp or CBD industry may have difficulty accessing the service of banks, which may make it difficult for us to operate.

Despite recent rules issued by the United States Department of the Treasury mitigating the risk to banks who do business with cannabis, hemp or CBD companies permitted under state law, as well as recent guidance from the United States Department of Justice, banks remain weary to accept funds from businesses in the cannabis industry. Since the use of cannabis remains illegal under Federal law, there remains a compelling argument that banks may be in violation of Federal law when accepting for deposit funds derived from the sale or distribution of cannabis. Consequently, businesses involved in the cannabis industry continue to have trouble establishing banking relationships. An inability to open bank accounts may make it difficult for us, or some of our advertisers, to do business.

Federal enforcement practices could change with respect to services provided to participants in the cannabis and hemp industries, which could adversely impact us; if the Federal government were to expend its resources on enforcement actions against service providers in the cannabis industry under guidance provided by the Sessions Memo, including asset forfeiture actions, such actions could have a material adverse effect on our operations, our customers, or our services.

On January 4, 2018, then U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued the Sessions Memo stating that the Cole Memo was rescinded effectively immediately. Mr. Sessions stated that “prosecutors should follow the well-established principles that govern all federal prosecutions,” which require “federal prosecutors deciding which cases to prosecute to weigh all relevant considerations, including federal law enforcement priorities set by the Attorney General, the seriousness of the crime, the deterrent effect of criminal prosecution, and the cumulative impact of particular crimes on the community.” Mr. Sessions went on to state in the memorandum that “previous nationwide guidance specific to marijuana is unnecessary and is rescinded, effective immediately.” It is unclear at this time whether the Sessions Memo indicates that the Trump administration will strongly enforce the federal laws applicable to cannabis or what types of activities will be targeted for enforcement. We may be irreparably harmed by a change in enforcement policies of the federal government depending on the nature of such change.

Attorney General Order No. 3946-2018 released by Jeff Sessions on July 19, 2018 shows that he is in favor of law enforcement using civil asset forfeiture as “an effective tool to reduce crime” and that “its use should be encouraged where appropriate.” It is possible that due to the recent Sessions Memo our clients may discontinue the use of our services, our potential source of customers may be reduced, and our revenues may decline. Further, additional government disruption in the cannabis industry could cause potential customers and users to be reluctant to use our services or buy advertising from us. It is possible that due to the recent Sessions Memo our clients may discontinue the use of our services, we or our customers may be subject to asset forfeiture actions, our potential source of customers may be reduced, and our revenues may decline. Further, additional government disruption in the cannabis industry could cause potential customers and users to be reluctant to use advertising services, which would negatively impact our results of operations.

The 2018 Farm Bill officially reclassifies hemp for commercial uses after decades of statutes and legal enforcement conflating hemp and marijuana, the 2018 Farm Bill distinguishes between the two by removing hemp from the Controlled Substances Act. While the two are closely related, hemp lacks the high concentration of THC that is responsible for the “high” from the use of marijuana. This would effectively move Regulation Ad enforcement of the crop from the purview of the Drug Enforcement Agency to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Laws and regulations affecting the medical marijuana and the CBD industries are constantly changing, which could detrimentally affect our business, and we cannot predict the impact that future regulations may have on us.

Local, state and federal medical marijuana and hemp laws and regulations are broad in scope and they are subject to evolving interpretations, which could require us to incur substantial costs associated with compliance. In addition, violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could disrupt our business and result in a material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability, and financial condition.

In addition, it is possible that regulations may be enacted in the future that will be directly applicable to Hemp. We cannot predict the nature of any future laws, regulations, interpretations or applications, nor can we determine what effect additional governmental regulations or administrative policies and procedures, when and if promulgated, could have on our business. These potential effects could include, however, requirements for the revisions to our products to meet new standards, the recall or discontinuance of certain products, or additional record keeping and reporting requirements. Any or all these requirements could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Should we fail to comply with the Hemp related rules and regulations adopted by Wisconsin, Colorado and Florida, we could be subject to fines, license suspensions, license revocation or other sanctions, which will negatively impact our operations and financial condition.

We will be governed by Hemp related regulations administered by state regulations in Wisconsin, Colorado and Florida. Should we fail to comply with these regulations, we may be subject to fines, injunctions, cease and desist orders or other sanctions, which will negatively impact our operations and financial condition.

U.S. Federal and foreign regulation and enforcement may adversely affect the implementation of cannabis and hemp laws and regulations and may negatively impact our revenues, or we may be found to be violating the Controlled Substances Act or other U.S. federal, state, or foreign laws.

In December 2018, the 2018 Farm Bill was signed into law. Under section 10113 of the 2018 Farm Bill, state departments of agriculture must consult with the state’s governor and chief law enforcement officer to devise a plan that must be submitted to the Secretary of USDA. A state’s plan to license and regulate hemp can only commence once the Secretary of USDA approves that state’s plan. In states opting not to devise a hemp regulatory program, USDA will construct a regulatory program under which hemp cultivators in those states must apply for licenses and comply with a federally run program. This system of shared regulatory programming is similar to options states had in other policy areas such as health insurance marketplaces under ACA, or workplace safety plans under OSHA—both of which had federally-run systems for states opting not to set up their own systems. Non-cannabis hemp is a highly regulated crop in the United States for both personal and industrial production.

The law outlines actions that are considered violations of federal hemp law (including such activities as cultivating without a license or producing cannabis with more than 0.3 percent THC). The law details possible punishments for such violations, pathways for violators to become compliant, and even which activities qualify as felonies under the law, such as repeated offenses.

Section 12619 of the 2018 Farm Bill removes hemp-derived products from its Schedule I status under the Controlled Substances Act, but the legislation does not legalize CBD generally. CBD, with some minor exceptions, remains a Schedule I substance under federal law. The 2018 Farm Bill ensures that any cannabinoid—a set of chemical compounds found in the cannabis plant—that is derived from hemp will be legal, if and only if that hemp is produced in a manner consistent with the 2018 Farm Bill, associated federal regulations, association state regulations, and by a licensed grower. All other cannabinoids, produced in any other setting, remain a Schedule I substance under federal law and are thus illegal.

In October 2018, the United States Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”) rescheduled drugs approved by the FDA, which contain CBD derived from cannabis and no more than 0.1 percent tetrahydrocannabinols from Schedule I, the highest level of restriction with a high potential for abuse, to Schedule V, the lowest restriction with the lowest potential for abuse under the Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”). This ruling does not apply to Cannabidiol (“CBD”) products such as oils, tinctures, extracts, and other foods because they are not FDA approved.

In October 2018, the FDA was advised by the DEA that removing CBD from the CSA would violate international drug treaties to which the United States is a signatory. Specifically, the DEA explained that the United States would “not be able to keep obligations under the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs if CBD were decontrolled under the CSA”.

Consequently, the FDA revised its recommendation and advised the DEA to place CBD in Schedule V—which applies to drugs with demonstrated medical value and deemed unlikely to cause harm, abuse, or addiction—instead. Nonetheless, the FDA declared that “[i]f treaty obligations do not require control of CBD, or the international controls on CBD…are removed at some future time, the above recommendation for Schedule V under the CSA would need to be revisited promptly.”

On May 22, 2018, the DEA released the Internal Directive Regarding the Presence of Cannabinoids in Products and Materials Made from the Cannabis Plant, which states “The mere presence of cannabinoids is not itself dispositive as to whether a substance is within the scope of the CSA; the dispositive question is whether the substance falls within the CSA definition of marijuana.”

Many CBD products are derived from cannabis. Some come from marijuana (“Marijuana-CBD”). Marijuana-CBD remains a Schedule I substance. Marijuana-CBD products may be legal under state law in states like Washington, Oregon, and California but their sale is only permitted through a state-regulated marijuana market in the respective state of legal cultivation. Marijuana-CBD products are only legal in states where they were cultivated and these products are heavily regulated at all stages of production, from seed-to-sale. These products come from licensed producers, are developed by licensed processors or manufacturers, and are sold to the public through licensed retailers or dispensaries. Marijuana-CBD products may also contain significant levels of THC.

On the other hand, CBD derived from industrial hemp (“Hemp-CBD”) can be argued as falling completely outside the CSA because the cultivation of industrial hemp was legalized by Section 7606 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (the “2014 Farm Bill”). Industrial hemp is defined as the cannabis plant with less than .3% THC. The 2014 Farm Bill also requires that industrial hemp to be cultivated under a state agricultural pilot program. Some states also require a license to cultivate or process industrial hemp into other products like Hemp-CBD.

The distribution of Hemp-CBD products is arguably legal under federal law because the 2014 Farm Bill does not explicitly limit distribution. In oral arguments during HIA v. DEA, the DEA admitted that the 2018 Farm Bill pre-empted the CSA with regards to industrial hemp. The DEA has rarely taken any enforcement action against distributors of Hemp-CBD, in part because Congress has limited the DEA’s ability to use federal funds to do so and because the DEA would have to legally establish that the CSA does in fact cover Hemp-CBD. However, the DEA, FDA, and other federal agencies issued guidance in 2016 stating that the 2014 Farm Bill did not permit the interstate transfer or commercial sale of industrial hemp. Several states like Idaho prohibit the distribution of Hemp-CBD. Other states like Ohio, Michigan, and California significantly restrict the distribution of Hemp-CBD.

Even though Hemp-CBD does not fall within the CSA, Hemp-CBD products have not been approved by the FDA. This is also true of Marijuana-CBD. This means that even cannabis derived Marijuana-CBD and Hemp-CBD products containing less than 0.1% THC are not approved CBD drugs for lack of FDA approval.

There is always some risk of enforcement action against Hemp-CBD distributors, as the budgetary restriction that prevented the DEA from using funds to prosecute industrial hemp distributors expired on September 30, 2018. It is also possible that the FDA could take a more aggressive approach to limit the distribution of CBD products.

Different states and different advertising networks may have their own regulations and restrictions regarding advertising CBD products.

Relevant state and local laws may make it difficult to advertise in various markets. The two largest ad buying platforms -- Facebook and Google -- still do not allow CBD advertising (it is designated as a “dangerous product”) on their platforms, which limits the digital marketing efforts of CBD companies to organic marketing. For new businesses, the inability to promote their brand without paid social and search ads makes it extremely challenging to get the qualified traffic needed to grow their online retail business.

We may be subject to certain tax risks and treatments that could negatively impact our results of operations.

Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, prohibits businesses from deducting certain expenses associated with trafficking-controlled substances (within the meaning of Schedule I and II of the Controlled Substances Act). The IRS has invoked Section 280E in tax audits against various cannabis businesses in the U.S. that are permitted under applicable state laws. Although the IRS issued a clarification allowing the deduction of certain expenses, the scope of such items is interpreted very narrowly, and the bulk of operating costs and general administrative costs are not permitted to be deducted. While there are currently several pending cases before various administrative and federal courts challenging these restrictions, there is no guarantee that these courts will issue an interpretation of Section 280E favorable to cannabis businesses or to hemp that exceeds the applicable THC limitations.

Risks Related to Our Securities

An investment in our shares is highly speculative.

The shares of our common stock are highly speculative in nature, involve a high degree of risk and should be purchased only by persons who can afford to lose the entire amount invested in the common stock. Before purchasing any of the shares of common stock, you should carefully consider the risk factors contained herein relating to our business and prospects. If any of the risks presented herein actually occur, our business, financial condition or operating results could be materially adversely affected. In such case, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

Because we are a shell company there are restrictions imposed upon the transferability of unregistered shares.

We are a shell company as defined in Rule 405, because we are a company with nominal operations and no assets. Accordingly, there will be illiquidity of any future trading market until we are no longer considered a shell company, as well as restrictions imposed upon the transferability of unregistered shares outlined in Rule 144(i). Our investors are not allowed to rely on Rule 144 of the Securities Act for a period of one year from the date that we cease to be a shell company. Because investors may be unable to rely on an exemption for the resale of their shares other than Rule 144, and there is no guarantee that we will cease to be a shell company, they may be unable to re-sell our shares in the future and could lose their entire investment as a result. These restrictions and requirements may have a negative impact on our ability to attract additional capital.

Our Chief Executive Officer has voting control over our shares and may determine important corporate actions.

We are authorized to issue 1,000,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock (“Preferred A Shares”) , 1,000,000 of which are outstanding and were issued to our Chief Executive Officer, Matthew Dwyer. Each Preferred A share is convertible into 50,000 shares of common stock and holds voting rights at 50,000 voting shares per each Preferred A Share, and, consequently equals 50 Billion Common Stock and 50 Billion capital Voting Shares, representing 97% of the outstanding shares or capital share vote, assuming such conversion or exercise of voting rights.. These voting preferences may operate to the detriment of the rights of the holders of our Common Stock, and further, could be used by the Board of Directors as a device to prevent a change in control of the Registrant. Mr. Dwyer’s control over a majority of our outstanding voting power, would give him the ability to control future stock-based acquisition transactions, to fund employee equity incentive programs, and gives him the ability to elect certain directors and to determine the outcome of all matters submitted to a vote of our stockholders. This concentrated control eliminates other stockholders’ ability to influence corporate matters.

The market price of our Common Stock may fluctuate significantly in the future.

We expect that the market price of our Common Stock may fluctuate in response to one or more of the following factors, many of which are beyond our control:

24

Table of Contents

The price at which you purchase shares of our Common Stock may not be indicative of the price that will prevail in the trading market. Shareholders may experience wide fluctuations in the market price of our securities. These fluctuations may have a negative effect on the market price of our securities and may prevent a shareholder from obtaining a market price equal to the purchase price such shareholder paid when the shareholder attempts to sell our securities in the open market. In these situations, the shareholder may be required either to sell our securities at a market price, which is lower than the purchase price the shareholder paid, or to hold our securities for a longer period than planned. An inactive or low trading market may also impair our ability to raise capital by selling shares of capital stock. You may be unable to sell your shares of Common Stock at or above your purchase price, which may result in substantial losses to you and which may include the complete loss of your investment. Any of the risks described above could adversely affect our sales and profitability and the price of our Common Stock.

There is no active public trading market for our common stock and an active market may never develop.

The public trading market for our common stock on the OTCMARKETS Pink tier, has reflected an uneven and inactive market. Market liquidity will depend on the perception of our operating business and any steps that our management might take to bring us to the awareness of investors. There can be no assurance given that there will be any awareness generated. Consequently, investors may be unable to liquidate their investment or liquidate it at a price that reflects the value of the business. As a result, holders of our securities may not find purchasers for our securities should they to sell securities held by them. Consequently, only investors having no need for liquidity in their investment should purchase our securities and who can hold our securities for an indefinite period.

Any market that develops in shares of our common stock will be subject to the penny stock regulations and restrictions pertaining to low priced stocks that will create a lack of liquidity and make trading difficult or impossible.

The trading of our securities will be in the over-the-counter market, which is commonly referred to as the OTCQB as maintained by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). As a result, an investor may find it difficult to dispose of, or to obtain accurate quotations as to the price of our securities.

Rule 3a51-1 of the Exchange Act establishes the definition of a “penny stock,” for purposes relevant to us, as any equity security that has a minimum bid price of less than $5.00 per share or with an exercise price of less than $5.00 per share, subject to a limited number of exceptions that are not available to us. It is likely that our shares will be penny stocks for the immediately foreseeable future. This classification severely and adversely affects any market liquidity for our common stock.

For any transaction involving a penny stock, unless exempt, the penny stock rules require that a broker or dealer approve a person’s account for transactions in penny stocks and the broker or dealer receive from the investor a written agreement to the transaction setting forth the identity and quantity of the penny stock to be purchased. In order to approve a person’s account for transactions in penny stocks, the broker or dealer must obtain financial information and investment experience and objectives of the person and make a reasonable determination that the transactions in penny stocks are suitable for that person and that that person has sufficient knowledge and experience in financial matters to be capable of evaluating the risks of transactions in penny stocks.

The broker or dealer must also deliver, prior to any transaction in a penny stock, a disclosure schedule prepared by the SEC relating to the penny stock market, which, in highlight form, sets forth:

Disclosure also must be made about the risks of investing in penny stock in both public offerings and in secondary trading and commissions payable to both the broker-dealer and the registered representative, current quotations for the securities and the rights and remedies available to an investor in cases of fraud in penny stock transactions. Additionally, monthly statements must be sent disclosing recent price information for the penny stock held in the account and information on the limited market in penny stocks.

Because of these regulations, broker-dealers may not wish to engage in the above-referenced necessary paperwork and disclosures and/or may encounter difficulties in their attempt to sell shares of our common stock, which may affect the ability of selling shareholders or other holders to sell their shares in any secondary market and have the effect of reducing the level of trading activity in any secondary market. These additional sales practice and disclosure requirements could impede the sale of our securities when our securities become publicly traded. In addition, the liquidity for our securities may decrease, with a corresponding decrease in the price of our securities. Our shares, probably, will be subject to such penny stock rules for the foreseeable future and our shareholders will, likely, find it difficult to sell their securities.

Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and to effectively prevent fraud. We maintain a system of internal control over financial reporting, which is defined as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, or persons performing similar functions, and effected by our board of directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

FINRA sales practice requirements may limit a shareholder’s ability to buy and sell our Common Stock.

In addition to the “penny stock” rules described above, FINRA has adopted rules that require that in recommending an investment to a customer, a broker-dealer must have reasonable grounds for believing that the investment is suitable for that customer. Prior to recommending speculative low-priced securities to their non-institutional customers, broker-dealers must make reasonable efforts to obtain information about the customer’s financial status, tax status, investment objectives and other information. Under interpretations of these rules, FINRA believes that there is a high probability that speculative low-priced securities will not be suitable for at least some customers. FINRA requirements make it more difficult for broker-dealers to recommend that their customers buy our Common stock, which may limit your ability to buy and sell our stock and have an adverse effect on the market for our shares.

Our stock is thinly traded, sale of your holding may take a considerable amount of time.

The shares of our Common Stock are thinly traded on the OTCMARKETS Pink tier, meaning that the number of persons interested in purchasing our Common Stock at or near bid prices at any given time may be relatively small or non-existent. Consequently, there may be periods of several days or more when trading activity in our shares is minimal or non-existent, as compared to a seasoned issuer which has a large and steady volume of trading activity that will generally support continuous sales without an adverse effect on share price. We cannot give you any assurance that a broader or more active public trading market for our Common Stock will develop or be sustained, or that current trading levels will be sustained. Due to these conditions, we can give you no assurance that you will be able to sell your shares at or near bid prices or at all if you need money or otherwise desire to liquidate your shares.

Shares eligible for future sale may adversely affect the market.

From time to time, certain of our stockholders may be eligible to sell all or some of their shares of Common Stock by means of ordinary brokerage transactions in the open market pursuant to Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act, subject to certain limitations. In general, pursuant to amended Rule 144, non-affiliate stockholders may sell freely after six months subject only to the current public information requirement. Affiliates may sell after six months subject to the Rule 144 volume, manner of sale (for equity securities), current public information and notice requirements. Any substantial sales of our Common Stock pursuant to Rule 144 may have a material adverse effect on the market price of our Common Stock.

If we fail to maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting, the price of our Common Stock may be adversely affected.

Our internal control over financial reporting may have weaknesses and conditions that could require correction or remediation, the disclosure of which may have an adverse impact on the price of our Common Stock. We are required to establish and maintain appropriate internal controls over financial reporting. Failure to establish those controls, or any failure of those controls once established, could adversely affect our public disclosures regarding our business, prospects, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, management’s assessment of internal controls over financial reporting may identify weaknesses and conditions that need to be addressed in our internal controls over financial reporting or other matters that may raise concerns for investors. Any actual or perceived weaknesses and conditions that need to be addressed in our internal control over financial reporting or disclosure of management’s assessment of our internal controls over financial reporting may have an adverse impact on the price of our Common Stock.

Our annual and quarterly results may fluctuate, which may cause substantial fluctuations in our Common Stock price.

Our annual and quarterly operating results may in the future fluctuate significantly depending on factors including the timing of purchase orders, new product releases by us and other companies, gain or loss of significant customers, price discounting of our product, the timing of expenditures, product delivery requirements and economic conditions. Revenues related to our product are required to be recognized upon satisfaction of all applicable revenue recognition criteria. The recognition of revenues from our product is dependent on several factors, including, but not limited to, the terms of any license agreement and the timing of implementation of our products by our customers.

Any unfavorable change in these or other factors could have a material adverse effect on our operating results for a particular quarter or year, which may cause downward pressure on our Common stock price. We expect quarterly and annual fluctuations to continue for the foreseeable future.

We have never paid cash dividends and do not anticipate doing so in the foreseeable future.

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our common shares. We currently plan to retain any earnings to finance the growth of our business rather than to pay cash dividends. Payments of any cash dividends in the future will depend on our financial condition, results of operations and capital requirements, as well as other factors deemed relevant by our board of directors.

We are subject to the anti-takeover provisions of the NRS. Depending on the number of residents in the state of Nevada who own our shares, we could be subject to the provisions of Sections 78.378 et seq. of the Nevada Revised Statutes which, unless otherwise provided in the Company’s articles of incorporation or by-laws, restricts the ability of an acquiring person to obtain a controlling interest of 20% or more of our voting shares. Our articles of incorporation and by-laws do not contain any provision which would currently keep the change of control restrictions of Section 78.378 from applying to us.

We are subject to the provisions of Sections 78.411 et seq. of the Nevada Revised Statutes. In general, this statute prohibits a publicly held Nevada corporation from engaging in a “combination” with an “interested stockholder” for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person became an interested stockholder, unless the combination or the transaction by which the person became an interested stockholder is approved by the corporation’s board of directors before the person becomes an interested stockholder. After the expiration of the three-year period, the corporation may engage in a combination with an interested stockholder under certain circumstances, including if the combination is approved by the board of directors and/or stockholders in a prescribed manner, or if specified requirements are met regarding consideration. The term “combination” includes mergers, asset sales and other transactions resulting in a financial benefit to the interested stockholder. Subject to certain exceptions, an “interested stockholder” is a person who, together with affiliates and associates, owns, or within three years did own, 10% or more of the corporation’s voting stock. A Nevada corporation may “opt out” from the application of Section 78.411 et seq. through a provision in its articles of incorporation or by-laws. We have not “opted out” from the application of this section.

Our stock price may be volatile, which may result in losses to our shareholders.

The stock markets have experienced significant price and trading volume fluctuations, and the market prices of companies listed on the OTCMARKETS quotation system in which shares of our common stock are listed, have been volatile in the past and have experienced sharp share price and trading volume changes. The trading price of our common stock is likely to be volatile and could fluctuate widely in response to many factors, including the following, some of which are beyond our control:

Shareholders should be aware that, according to SEC Release No. 34-29093, the market for penny stocks can be negatively affected from patterns of fraud and abuse.

Such patterns include (1) control of the market for the security by one or a few broker-dealers that are often related to the promoter or issuer; (2) manipulation of prices through prearranged matching of purchases and sales and false and misleading press releases; (3) boiler room practices involving high-pressure sales tactics and unrealistic price projections by inexperienced sales persons; (4) excessive and undisclosed bid-ask differential and markups by selling broker-dealers; and (5) 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. Our management is aware of the abuses that have occurred historically in the penny stock market. Although we do not expect to be in a position to dictate the behavior of the market or of broker-dealers who participate in the market, management will strive within the confines of practical limitations to prevent the described patterns from being established with respect to our securities. The occurrence of these patterns or practices could increase the volatility of our share price.

Our Articles of Incorporation exculpates our officers and directors from certain liability to us or our stockholders.

Our Articles of Incorporation contain a provision that no director or officer will be personally liable to us or our stockholders for damages regarding breaches of fiduciary duty. This limitation on liability may reduce the likelihood of derivative litigation against our officers and directors and may discourage or deter our stockholders from suing our officers and directors based upon breaches of their duties to our Company. We may also have contractual indemnification obligations under our employment agreements with our officers. The foregoing indemnification obligations could result in our incurring substantial expenditures to cover the cost of settlement or damage awards against directors and officers, which we may be unable to recoup. Additionally, these provisions and resultant costs may also discourage our bringing a lawsuit against directors and officers for breaches of their fiduciary duties and may similarly discourage the filing of derivative litigation by our shareholders against our directors and officers, even though such actions, if successful, might otherwise benefit our company and shareholders.

Cautionary Note

We have sought to identify what we believe to be the most significant risks to our business, but we cannot predict whether, or to what extent, any of such risks may be realized nor can we guarantee that we have identified all possible risks that might arise. Investors should carefully consider all of such risk factors before making an investment decision with respect to our common stock.

The forward-looking statements contained herein report may prove incorrect.

This filing contains certain forward-looking statements, including among others: (i) anticipated trends in our financial condition and results of operations; (ii) our business strategy for expanding our business into various foreign countries; and (iii) our ability to distinguish ourselves from our current and future competitors. These forward-looking statements are based largely on our current expectations and are subject risks and uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially from these forward-looking statements. In addition to the other risks described elsewhere in this Risk Factors discussion, important factors to consider in evaluating such forward-looking statements include: (i) changes to external competitive market factors or in our internal budgeting process which might impact trends in our results of operations; (ii) anticipated working capital or other cash requirements; (iii) changes in our business strategy or an inability to execute our strategy due to unanticipated changes in our business; and (iv) various competitive factors that may prevent us from competing successfully in the marketplace. Considering these risks and uncertainties, many of which are described in greater detail elsewhere in this Risk Factors discussion, there can be no assurance that the events predicted in forward-looking statements contained in this Prospectus will, in fact, transpire.