DEF 14A 1 formdef14a.htm

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

☒	Filed by the Registrant
☐	Filed by a Party other than the Registrant

Check the appropriate box:

☐	Preliminary Proxy Statement
☐	Confidential, for Use of the SEC Only (As Permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))
☒	Definitive Proxy Statement
☐	Definitive Additional Materials
☐	Soliciting Material Pursuant to § 240.14a-12

EIGHTCO HOLDINGS INC.

(Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

☒	No fee required.
☐	Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.
☐	Fee computed on table in exhibit required by Item 25(b) per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.

Eightco Holdings Inc.

101 Larry Holmes Drive, Suite 313

Easton, PA 18042.

ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TO BE HELD ON December 30, 2024

December 10, 2024

Dear Stockholder,

You are cordially invited to attend the 2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”) of Eightco Holdings Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), to be held on December 30, 2024, at 2:00 p.m., Eastern Time, in virtual-only format at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/OCTO2024.

The attached Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders and the accompanying proxy statement (the “Proxy Statement”) describe the business we will conduct at the Annual Meeting and provide information about us that you should consider when you vote your shares.

At the Annual Meeting, we will ask stockholders to:

(1)

approve the redomestication of the Company’s jurisdiction of incorporation from Delaware to Nevada (the “Redomestication Proposal”);

(2)

approve the amendment to the Company’s 2022 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Incentive Plan”) increasing the total number of shares of the Company’s common stock available under the Incentive Plan by 172,285 shares, from 356,588 shares to 528,873 (the “Plan Proposal”);

(3)

approve the sale of assets of Ferguson Containers, Inc. (“Fergco”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (the “Fergco Asset Sale”), to an entity affiliated with the current management of Fergco (the “Fergco Asset Sale Proposal”);

(4)

elect Frank Jennings and Kevin O’Donnell as Class II members of the Company’s Board of Directors, to serve until the 2027 annual meeting of stockholders or until the appointment, election and qualification of their respective successors (the “Director Election Proposal”);

(5)

ratify the selection of Stephano Slack LLC as the Company’s independent registered certified public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2024 (the “Accountant Ratification Proposal”);

(6)

approve the adjournment of the Annual Meeting, if necessary, to solicit additional proxies in the event that there are not sufficient votes at the time of the Annual Meeting to approve any or all of the foregoing proposals (the “Adjournment Proposal”); and

(7)

transact such other business as may properly come before the Annual Meeting or any adjournments or postponements thereof.

We hope you will be able to attend the Annual Meeting. When you have finished reading the Proxy Statement, you are urged to vote in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Proxy Statement. You may change or revoke your proxy at any time before it is voted at the Annual Meeting. Whether you plan to attend the Annual Meeting or not, we urge you to vote and submit your proxy by the Internet, telephone or mail to ensure that your shares will be represented and voted at the Annual Meeting and the presence of a quorum.

Thank you for your ongoing support. We look forward to seeing you at our Annual Meeting.

Sincerely,

Paul Vassilakos
Chief Executive Officer

Your vote is important. Please sign, date and return your proxy card as soon as possible to make sure that your shares are represented at the special meeting. If you are a stockholder of record, you may also cast your vote in person at the special meeting. If your shares are held in an account at a brokerage firm or bank, you must instruct your broker or bank how to vote your shares, or you may cast your vote in person at the special meeting by obtaining a proxy from your brokerage firm or bank. Your failure to vote or instruct your broker or bank how to vote will have the same effect as voting against both of the proposals.

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on December 30, 2024: This notice of meeting and the accompanying proxy statement are available at https://materials.proxyvote.com/22890A. This notice of meeting is not a form for voting and presents only an overview of the accompanying proxy statement, which you are encouraged to review before voting. Upon written or oral request, the Company will deliver a separate copy of the proxy statement to any stockholder. Stockholders may notify the Company of their requests by calling (212) 818-8800 or writing the Company at the Company’s principal executive offices at 101 Larry Holmes Drive, Sutie 313, Easton, PA 18042. In order to receive delivery of the requested documents, your request must be received no later than December 16, 2024.

Eightco Holdings Inc.

101 Larry Holmes Drive, Suite 313

Easton, PA 18042

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TO BE HELD ON December 30, 2024

To the Stockholders:

The 2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”) of Eightco Holdings Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), will be held on December 30, 2024, at 2:00 p.m., Eastern Time, in virtual-only format at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/OCTO2024 for the following purposes:

(1)

approve the redomestication of the Company’s jurisdiction of incorporation from Delaware to Nevada (the “Redomestication Proposal”);

(2)

approve the amendment to the Company’s 2022 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) increasing the total number of shares of the Company’s common stock available under the Incentive Plan by 172,285 shares, from 356,588 shares to 528,873 (the “Plan Proposal”);

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

transact such other business as may properly come before the Annual Meeting or any adjournments or postponements thereof.

The foregoing items are more fully described in the accompanying proxy statement (the “Proxy Statement”), which forms a part of this Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders. As of the date of the Proxy Statement, we do not know of any other matters to be raised at the Annual Meeting other than those described in the Proxy Statement.

The Annual Meeting will be conducted in a virtual-only format. The Board believes that a virtual meeting will enable increased stockholder accessibility while allowing for meeting efficiency and reduced costs. You will be able to attend the Annual Meeting virtually, vote your shares, and submit your questions during the meeting by visiting www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/OCTO2024. Details regarding how to attend the Annual Meeting online are more fully described in the accompanying Proxy Statement.

Stockholders entitled to notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting shall be determined as of the close of business on December 5, 2024, the record date fixed by our Board for such purpose. A list of stockholders of record will be available during the ten days prior to the Annual Meeting at our office at the above address.

All stockholders are cordially invited to attend the Annual Meeting. You may change or revoke your proxy at any time before it is voted at the Annual Meeting. Whether you plan to attend the Annual Meeting or not, we urge you to vote and submit your proxy by the Internet, telephone or mail to ensure that your shares will be represented and voted at the Annual Meeting and the presence of a quorum.

Thank you for your continued support of Eightco Holdings Inc. We look forward to seeing you at the Annual Meeting.

By Order of the Board,

/s/ Paul Vassilakos
Paul Vassilakos
Chief Executive Officer and Director
Easton, Pennsylvania
December 10, 2024

TABLE OF CONTENTS

	Page Number
Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Stockholder Meeting	2
Questions and Answers About the Annual Meeting	3
Corporate Governance	9
Directors and Executive Officers	14
Executive Compensation	16
Director Compensation	20
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters	21
Proposal 1: The Redomestication Proposal	22
Proposal 2: The Incentive Plan Proposal	38
Proposal 3: Fergco Asset Sale Proposal	44
Proposal 4: Election of Class II Directors	46
Proposal: Ratification of Selection of Auditors	47
Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions	49
Stockholder Proposals	50
Expenses and Solicitation	50
Householding of Proxy Materials	50
Other Matters	51
Appendix A	A-1
Appendix B	B-1
Appendix C	C-1
Appendix D	D-1
Appendix E	E-1

December 10, 2024

Eightco Holdings Inc.

101 Larry Holmes Drive, Suite 313

Easton, PA 18042

(888) 765-8933

PROXY STATEMENT

This proxy statement (the “Proxy Statement”), the attached Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Notice”) and the enclosed proxy card are being mailed to stockholders of record on or about December 5, 2024 and are furnished in connection with the solicitation of proxies by the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Eightco Holdings Inc. (the “Company,” “we,” or “us”) for use at our 2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”), to be held on December 30, 2024, at 2:00 p.m., Eastern Time, in virtual-only format at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/OCTO2024, and at any adjournments or postponements thereof. Although not part of this Proxy Statement, we are also sending along with this Proxy Statement our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023, which includes our financial statements and related notes thereto for such year (the “2023 Annual Report”).

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR THE STOCKHOLDER MEETING TO BE HELD ON December 30, 2024.

You can find a copy of this Proxy Statement and our 2023 Annual Report on the website of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) at https://www.sec.gov, or in the “SEC Filings” section of the “Investors” section of our website at https://www.8co.holdings. You may also obtain a printed copy of our 2023 Annual Report, free of charge, from us by sending a written request to: Attention: Secretary, Eightco Holdings Inc., 101 Larry Holmes Drive, Suite 313, Easton, PA 18042. Exhibits to the 2023 Annual Report will be provided upon written request and payment of an appropriate processing fee.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE ANNUAL MEETING

What am I voting on?

At the Annual Meeting, you will be asked to act upon the matters outlined in the Notice, which include the following:

(1)

approve the redomestication of the Company’s jurisdiction of incorporation from Delaware to Nevada (the “Redomestication Proposal”);

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

transact such other business as may properly come before the Annual Meeting or any adjournments or postponements thereof.

What happens if additional matters are presented at the Annual Meeting?

The Board knows of no other matters to be presented at the Annual Meeting. If any other matter should be presented at the Annual Meeting upon which a vote may be properly taken, shares represented by all proxies received by the Board will be voted with respect thereto in accordance with the judgment of the persons named as proxies in the proxy.

Why is the Annual Meeting a virtual, online meeting?

The Annual Meeting will be a virtual meeting of stockholders where stockholders will participate by accessing a website using the Internet. There will not be a physical meeting location. We believe that hosting a virtual meeting will facilitate stockholder attendance and participation at the Annual Meeting by enabling stockholders to participate remotely from any location around the world. Our virtual meeting will be governed by Rules of Conduct and Procedures which will be available during the online meeting at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/OCTO2024. We have designed the virtual Annual Meeting to provide the same rights and opportunities to participate as stockholders have at an in-person meeting, including the right to vote and submit questions through the virtual meeting platform.

How can I access the virtual Annual Meeting?

We are committed to ensuring that stockholders will be afforded the same rights and opportunities to participate as they would at an in-person meeting. You will be able to attend the meeting virtually, vote your shares electronically and submit questions during the meeting by visiting www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/OCTO2024. We will try to answer as many stockholder-submitted questions as time permits that comply with the meeting rules of conduct. However, we reserve the right to edit inappropriate language or to exclude questions that are not pertinent to meeting matters or that are otherwise inappropriate. If we receive substantially similar questions, we will group such questions together and provide a single response to avoid repetition.

Instructions on how to participate in and attend the Annual Meeting virtually via the Internet, including instructions on how to demonstrate proof of ownership, will be posted at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/OCTO2024.

Who is entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting, and how many votes do they have?

Only common stockholders of record as of the close of business on December 5, 2024 (the “Record Date”) will be entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting and any adjournments or postponements thereof. As of the Record Date, 2,441,363 shares of our common stock, $0.001 par value per share (the “common stock”), were issued and outstanding. Each share of common stock outstanding as of the Record Date will be entitled to one vote, and stockholders may vote such shares by voting online at the Annual Meeting or by proxy.

What constitutes a quorum?

The holders of one-third of the voting power of the stock issued, outstanding and entitled to vote thereat, present in person (virtually) or represented by proxy, is necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at the Annual Meeting. A quorum is necessary in order to conduct the Annual Meeting. If you choose to have your shares represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting, you will be considered part of the quorum. Abstentions, withheld votes and “broker non-votes”, if any, will be included in the calculation of the number of shares considered to be present at the Annual Meeting to determine whether a quorum has been established.

If a quorum is not present at the Annual Meeting, then either (i) the chairperson of the meeting, or (ii) the stockholders entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting, present in person (virtually) or represented by proxy, may adjourn the Annual Meeting to a later date or dates, without notice other than announcement at the Annual Meeting, until a quorum is present. If an adjournment is for more than 30 days, or if after the adjournment a new record date is fixed for the adjourned meeting, we will provide notice of the adjourned meeting to each stockholder of record entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting.

How do I vote?

Proxies are solicited by the Board and are revocable by you any time before they are voted. Execution of a proxy will not in any way affect a stockholder’s right to attend the meeting and vote online at the Annual Meeting, although the presence (without further action) of a stockholder at the Annual Meeting will not constitute revocation of a previously given proxy. Any stockholder delivering a proxy has the right to revoke it by either (1) filing a written revocation with our Secretary at Eightco Holdings Inc., 101 Larry Holmes Drive, Suite 313, Easton, PA 18042, (2) submitting a new proxy by telephone, Internet, or proxy card after the date of the previously submitted proxy, or (3) voting online at the Annual Meeting. Your most current vote, whether by telephone, Internet or proxy card is the one that will be counted.

Whether you plan to attend the Annual Meeting or not, we urge you to vote by proxy. If you vote by proxy, the individuals named on the proxy card, or your “proxies,” will vote your shares in the manner you indicate. You may specify whether your shares should voted for, against, or abstain with respect to Proposals 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6, and whether your shares be voted for or withheld with respect to Proposal 4. Voting by proxy will not affect your right to attend the Annual Meeting. If your shares are registered directly in your name through our transfer agent, Nevada Agency and Transfer Company, or you have stock certificates registered in your name, you may vote:

By mail. Complete and mail the enclosed proxy card in the enclosed postage prepaid envelope. Your proxy will be voted in accordance with your instructions. If you sign the proxy card but do not specify how you want your shares voted, they will be voted as recommended by our Board.

By Internet or by telephone. Follow the instructions attached to the proxy card to vote by Internet or telephone.

During the Annual Meeting. Instructions on how to vote while participating in the Annual Meeting live via the Internet are posted at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/OCTO2024.

Telephone and Internet voting facilities for stockholders of record will be available 24-hours a day and will close at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on December 29, 2024.

What if I change my mind after I return my proxy card?

Any stockholder delivering a proxy has the right to revoke it by either (1) filing a written revocation with our Secretary at Eightco Holdings Inc., 101 Larry Holmes Drive, Suite 313, Easton, PA 18042, (2) submitting a new proxy by telephone, Internet, or proxy card after the date of the previously submitted proxy, or (3) voting online at the Annual Meeting. Your most current vote, whether by telephone, Internet or proxy card is the one that will be counted.

What is the difference between a stockholder of record and a “street name” holder?

If your shares are registered directly in your name with Nevada Agency and Transfer Company, our transfer agent, you are considered the stockholder of record with respect to those shares. The Notice has been sent directly to you by us.

If your shares are held in a stock brokerage account or by a bank or other nominee, the nominee is considered the record holder of those shares. You are considered the beneficial owner of these shares, and your shares are held in “street name.” A notice or Proxy Statement and voting instruction card have been forwarded to you by your nominee. As the beneficial owner of your shares, you must provide the bank, broker, or other holder of record with instructions on how to vote your shares, and can do so as follows:

By mail. Follow the instructions you receive from your broker or other nominee explaining how to vote your shares.

By Internet or by telephone. Follow the instructions you receive from your broker or other nominee to vote by Internet or telephone.

During the Annual Meeting. Instructions on how to vote while participating in the Annual Meeting live via the Internet are posted at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/OCTO2024.

What is a broker non-vote?

Broker non-votes occur when shares are held indirectly through a broker, bank or other intermediary on behalf of a beneficial owner (referred to as held in “street name”) and the broker submits a proxy but does not vote for a matter because the broker has not received voting instructions from the beneficial owner and (i) the broker does not have discretionary voting authority on the matter, or (ii) the broker chooses not to vote on a matter for which it has discretionary voting authority. Under the rules of the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”), which are also applicable to Nasdaq-listed companies, that govern how brokers may vote shares for which they have not received voting instructions from the beneficial owner, brokers are permitted to exercise discretionary voting authority only on “routine” matters when voting instructions have not been timely received from a beneficial owner. Only Proposal 5 and Proposal 6 are considered “routine” matters. Therefore, if you hold your shares in street name and you do not instruct your bank, broker or other nominee how to vote on Proposals 1, 2, 3 or 4, no votes will be cast on such proposals on your behalf.

If I am a beneficial owner of shares, can my brokerage firm vote my shares?

If you are a beneficial owner and do not vote via the Internet or telephone or by returning a signed voting instruction card to your broker, your shares may be voted only with respect to so-called “routine” matters where your broker has discretionary voting authority over your shares. As indicated above, only Proposals 5 and 6 are considered “routine” matters. Accordingly, brokers will not have such discretionary authority to vote your unvoted shares on Proposals 1, 2, 3 or 4 at the Annual Meeting without receiving instructions from you. If you hold your shares in street name, it is critical that you cast your vote if you want your vote to be counted for any proposal.

How are abstentions and broker non-votes treated for purposes of the Annual Meeting?

The holders of one-third of the voting power of the stock issued, outstanding and entitled to vote thereat, present in person (virtually) or represented by proxy, is necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at the Annual Meeting. Abstentions and broker “non-votes” are counted as present or represented for purposes of determining the presence or absence of a quorum for the meeting. A “non-vote” occurs when a nominee holding shares for a beneficial owner votes on one proposal, but does not vote on another proposal because, in respect of such other proposal, the nominee does not have discretionary voting power and has not received voting instructions from the beneficial owner. An automated system administered by our transfer agent tabulates the votes. The vote on each matter submitted to stockholders is tabulated separately.

Each of the persons named as proxies in the proxy is one of our officers. All properly executed proxies returned in time to be cast at the Annual Meeting will be voted. If your shares are registered in your name, they will not be counted if you do not vote as described above. If your shares are held in street name and you do not provide voting instructions to the bank, broker or other holder of record that holds your shares, the bank, broker or other holder of record will have the authority to vote your unvoted shares only on Proposal 5 and Proposal 6 if it does not receive instructions from you. Accordingly, we encourage you to provide voting instructions. This ensures your shares will be voted at the Annual Meeting in the manner you desire.

What vote is required to approve each proposal?

The following sets forth the vote required to approve each proposal and how votes are counted:

Proposal 1: Redomestication from Delaware to Nevada. The affirmative vote of a majority of the voting power of the shares entitled to vote on this proposal is required to approve to the redomestication of the Company from Delaware to Nevada, including the approval and adoption of a Nevada Charter and the Nevada Bylaws. Abstentions will have the same effect as an “AGAINST” vote. Brokerage firms do not have authority to vote customers’ unvoted shares held by the firms in street name for Proposal 1. As a result, any shares not voted by a customer will be treated as a broker non-vote. Such broker non-votes will have the same effect as a vote against this matter.

Proposal 2: Increasing the Incentive Plan. The affirmative vote of a majority of the voting power of the shares present in person or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote on this proposal is required to approve to the amendment to the Incentive Plan. Abstentions will have the same effect as an “AGAINST” vote. Brokerage firms do not have authority to vote customers’ unvoted shares held by the firms in street name for Proposal 2. As a result, any shares not voted by a customer will be treated as a broker non-vote. Such broker non-votes will have no effect on the results of this vote.

Proposal 3: Selling the Assets of Fergco. The affirmative vote of a majority of the voting power of the shares present in person or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote on this proposal is required to approve to the Fergco Asset Sale. Abstentions will have the same effect as an “AGAINST” vote. Brokerage firms do not have authority to vote customers’ unvoted shares held by the firms in street name for Proposal 3. As a result, any shares not voted by a customer will be treated as a broker non-vote. Such broker non-votes will have the same effect as a vote against this matter.

Proposal 4: Election of Class II Directors. The affirmative vote of a plurality of the voting power of the shares present in person or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote on this proposal is required to elect Frank Jennings and Kevin O’Donnell, the director nominees, as a Class II members of our Board for a term ending at the 2027 annual meeting of stockholders or the appointment, election, and qualification of their successors, respectively. Abstentions will have no effect on the results of this vote. Brokerage firms do not have authority to vote customers’ unvoted shares held by the firms in street name for Proposal 4. As a result, any shares not voted by a customer will be treated as a broker non-vote. Such broker non-votes will have no effect on the results of this vote. You may also choose to withhold your vote.

Proposal 5: Ratification of Selection of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. The affirmative vote of a majority of the voting power of the shares present in person or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote on this proposal is required to ratify the selection of our independent registered public accounting firm. Abstentions will have the same effect as an “AGAINST” vote. Brokerage firms have authority to vote customers’ unvoted shares held by the firms in street name for Proposal 5. If a broker does not exercise this authority, such broker non-votes will have no effect on the results of this vote. We are not required to obtain the approval of our stockholders to select our independent registered public accounting firm. However, if our stockholders do not ratify the selection of Stephano Slack LLC as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2024, the audit committee of our Board will reconsider its selection.

Proposal 6: The Adjournment Proposal. The affirmative vote of a majority of the voting power of the shares present in person or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote on this proposal is required to approve adjournment of the meeting if necessary to solicit additional proxies in the event that there are not sufficient votes at the time of the Annual Meeting to approve any or all of the foregoing proposals. Abstentions will have the same effect as an “AGAINST” vote. Brokerage firms have authority to vote customers’ unvoted shares held by the firms in street name for Proposal 6. If a broker does not exercise this authority, such broker non-votes will have no effect on the results of this vote.

If you hold your shares in street name, it is critical that you cast your vote for Proposals 1, 2, 3 and 4. Your bank, broker, or other holder of record only has discretionary authority to vote any uninstructed shares with respect to Proposals 5 and 6.

What happens if a director nominee is unable to stand for election?

Our Board of Directors may select a substitute nominee. If you have completed, signed and returned your proxy card, the proxy can vote your shares for the substitute nominee.

Is my vote kept confidential?

Proxies, ballots and voting tabulations identifying stockholders are kept confidential and will not be disclosed to third parties except as may be necessary to meet legal requirements.

Who are the candidates nominated for election as directors?

The Class II director candidates nominated for election at the Annual Meeting are Frank Jennings and Kevin O’Donnell, each of whom is currently a director of the Company.

Who is our independent registered public accounting firm and will they be represented at the Annual Meeting?

Stephano Slack LLC is expected to serve as our independent registered public accounting firm auditing and reporting on our financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2024. We do not expect that representatives of Stephano Slack LLC will be present at the Annual Meeting.

Where can I find the voting results of the Annual Meeting?

The preliminary voting results are expected to be announced at the Annual Meeting, and we will publish final results in a Current Report on Form 8-K within four business days following the date of the Annual Meeting.

Who counts the votes?

All votes will be tabulated by the inspector of election appointed for the Annual Meeting.

Do I have any dissenters’ or appraisal rights or cumulative voting rights with respect to any of the matters to be voted on at the Annual Meeting?

No. None of our stockholders have any dissenters’ or appraisal rights or cumulative voting rights with respect to the matters to be voted on at the Annual Meeting.

Who is soliciting proxies, how are they being solicited, and who pays the cost?

Our Board is making this solicitation of proxies for the Annual Meeting. We will bear all costs of such solicitation, including the cost of preparing and distributing this Proxy Statement and the enclosed form of proxy, and the cost of hosting the virtual Annual Meeting. After the initial distribution of this Proxy Statement, proxies may be solicited by mail, telephone, or personally by our directors, officers, employees or agents. Brokerage houses and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries will be requested to forward soliciting materials to beneficial owners of shares held by them for the accounts of beneficial owners, and we will pay their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses.

We have engaged Broadridge to host the virtual Annual Meeting and manage the production and distribution of this Proxy Statement. We expect to pay Broadridge approximately $75,000 for their services.

What is “householding” and how does it affect me?

With respect to eligible stockholders who share a single address, we may send only one copy of the proxy materials to that address unless we receive instructions to the contrary from any stockholder at that address. This practice, known as “householding,” is designed to reduce our printing and postage costs. However, if a stockholder of record residing at such address wishes to receive a separate set of proxy materials in the future, he or she may contact us by sending a request to our Secretary at Eightco Holdings Inc., 101 Larry Holmes Drive, Suite 313, Easton, PA 18042. Eligible stockholders of record receiving multiple sets of our proxy materials can request householding by contacting us in the same manner. Stockholders who own shares through a bank, broker or other intermediary can request householding by contacting the intermediary or by contacting us at the above address or phone number.

We hereby undertake to deliver promptly, upon written or oral request, a copy of the proxy materials to a stockholder at a shared address to which a single copy of the document was delivered. Requests should be directed to the address set forth above.

May I access and receive proxy materials electronically?

Most stockholders can elect to view or receive copies of future proxy materials over the Internet instead of receiving paper copies in the mail.

If you are a stockholder of record, you can choose this option and save us the cost of producing and mailing these documents by visiting www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/OCTO2024, accessing your account information and following the instructions provided.

How do I submit a question at the Annual Meeting?

If you wish to submit a question, on the day of the Annual Meeting, beginning at 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 30, 2024, you may log into the virtual meeting platform and follow the instructions there. Our virtual meeting will be governed by our Rules of Conduct and Procedures that will be available during the online meeting. The Rules of Conduct and Procedures will address the ability of stockholders to ask questions during the meeting, including rules on permissible topics, and rules for how questions and comments will be recognized and disclosed to meeting participants. We will answer appropriate questions that are pertinent to the matters to be voted on by the stockholders at the Annual Meeting. If there are any matters of individual concern to a stockholder and not of general concern to all stockholders, or if a question was not otherwise answered, such matters may be raised separately after the Annual Meeting by contacting the Company at (888) 765-8933.

Who can help answer my questions?

The information provided above in this “Question and Answer” format is for your convenience only and is merely a summary of the information contained in this Proxy Statement. We urge you to carefully read this entire Proxy Statement, including the documents we refer to in this Proxy Statement. If you have further questions, or need additional materials, please feel free to contact our Secretary at Eightco Holdings Inc., 101 Larry Holmes Drive, Suite 313, Easton, PA 18042.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Our Board manages and directs the business and affairs of the Company, as provided by the Delaware General Corporation Law (the “DGCL”) and conducts its business through meetings of the Board and three standing committees: the audit committee (the “Audit Committee”), the compensation committee (the “Compensation Committee”) and the nominating and corporate governance committee (the “Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee”).

Our Board evaluates our corporate governance policies on an ongoing basis with a view towards maintaining the best corporate governance practices in the context of our current business environment and aligning our governance practices closely with the interest of our stockholders. Our Board and management value the perspective of our stockholders and encourage stockholders to communicate with the Board as described under the heading “Communications with the Board” below.

Classified Board of Directors

In accordance with our Certificate of Incorporation (as amended, the “Certificate of Incorporation”) and our Bylaws (the “Bylaws”), our Board is divided into three classes with staggered, three-year terms. At each annual meeting of stockholders, the successors to directors whose terms then expire are elected to serve from the time of election and qualification until the third annual meeting of stockholders following election. Our directors are divided among the three classes as follows:

●

the Class I director is Paul Vassilakos, and his term expires at the 2026 annual meeting of stockholders;

●

the Class II directors are Frank Jennings and Kevin O’Donnell, and their terms will expire at this Annual Meeting; and

●

the Class III directors are Louis Foreman and Mary Ann Halford, and their terms will expire at the 2025 annual meeting of stockholders.

Our Certificate of Incorporation provides that the authorized number of directors may be changed only by resolution adopted by the affirmative vote of a majority of the entire Board. Any additional directorships resulting from an increase in the number of directors will be distributed among the three classes so that, as nearly as possible, each class will consist of one-third of the total number of directors constituting the entire Board. The division of our Board into three classes with staggered three-year terms may delay or prevent a change of our management or a change in control of the Company. Subject to the special rights of the holders of one or more outstanding series of preferred stock to elect directors, our directors may be removed only for cause by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority of our outstanding voting stock entitled to vote in the election of directors.

Director Independence

Nasdaq listing standards require that a majority of the Company’s board of directors be independent. An “independent director” is defined generally as a person other than an officer or employee of the Company or its subsidiaries or any other individual having a relationship that, in the opinion of the Company’s board of directors, would interfere with the director’s exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director. The board of directors has affirmatively determined that Frank Jennings, Louis Foreman, and Mary Ann Halford qualify as independent directors in accordance with the Nasdaq listing rules.

Board Committees and Meetings

Our Board directs the management of our business and affairs, as provided by the DGCL, and conducts its business through meetings of the Board and standing committees. We have a standing Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. In addition, from time to time, special committees may be established under the direction of the Board when necessary to address specific issues.

Audit Committee

Pursuant to its charter, the primary responsibilities and functions of the Audit Committee are, among other things, to:

●

appoint, compensate, and oversee the work of any independent auditor;

●

resolve any disagreements between management and the independent auditor regarding financial reporting;

●

pre-approve all audit and permitted non-audit services by the independent auditor;

●

retain independent counsel, accountants, or other advisors or consultants to advise and assist the Audit Committee in carrying out its duties, without needing to seek approval for the retention of such advisors or consultants from the Board, and determine the appropriate compensation for any such advisors or consultants retained by the Audit Committee;

●

seek any information it requires from employees of the Company or any direct or indirect subsidiary of the Company, all of whom are directed to cooperate with the Audit Committee’s requests, or external parties;

●

meet with any officer or employee of the Company (or any subsidiary), the independent auditor or outside counsel, as necessary, or request that any such persons meet with any members of, or advisors or consultants to, the Audit Committee; and

●

ensure that management has established and maintained processes to assure compliance by the Company with applicable laws, regulations and corporate policy.

The Audit Committee held four meetings in 2023. Our Audit Committee consists of Mr. Jennings, Ms. Halford and Mr. Foreman, with Mr. Foreman serving as chair. Rule 10A-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) and the rules of the Nasdaq Capital Market (“Nasdaq”) require that our Audit Committee be composed entirely of independent members. Our Board has affirmatively determined Mr. Jennings, Ms. Halford and Mr. Foreman each meet the definition of “independent director” for purposes of serving on the Audit Committee under Rule 10A-3 of the Exchange Act and the Nasdaq rules. Each member of our Audit Committee also meets the financial literacy requirements of Nasdaq listing standards. In addition, our Board has determined that Mr. Foreman qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert,” as such term is defined in Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K. Our Board has adopted a written charter for the Audit Committee. The complete text of the Audit Committee’s current charter is available on our website at www.8co.holdings.

Compensation Committee

Our Compensation Committee has overall responsibility for reviewing and recommending to the Board the compensation of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and the annual base salaries and annual incentive opportunities of the Company’s executive officers. The Company may utilize the services of independent consultants to perform analyses and to make recommendations relative to executive compensation matters. These analyses and recommendations will be conveyed to the Compensation Committee, and the Compensation Committee takes such information into consideration in making its compensation decisions.

The Compensation Committee held four meetings in 2023. Our Compensation Committee consists of Mr. Jennings, Ms. Halford and Mr. Foreman, with Mr. Jennings serving as chair. Our Board has affirmatively determined that Mr. Jennings, Ms. Halford and Mr. Foreman each meet the definition of “independent director” for purposes of serving on the compensation committee under the Nasdaq rules, including the heightened independence standards for members of a compensation committee, and are “non-employee directors” as defined in Rule 16b-3 of the Exchange Act. Our Board has adopted a written charter for the Compensation Committee. The complete text of the Compensation Committee’s current charter is available on our website at www.8co.holdings.

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for, among other things:

●

assisting the Board by identifying qualified candidates for director, and recommending to the Board the director nominees for the next annual meeting of shareholders;

●

leading the Board in its annual review of the Board’s performance;

●

recommending to the Board director nominees for each Board committee; and

●

developing and making recommendations to the Board regarding corporate governance guidelines and matters.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee did not hold any meetings in 2023. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee consists of Mr. Jennings, Ms. Halford and Mr. Foreman, with Mr. Jennings serving as chair. Our Board has affirmatively determined Mr. Jennings, Ms. Halford and Mr. Foreman each meet the definition of “independent director” under the Nasdaq rules. Our Board has adopted a written charter for the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. The complete text of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee’s current charter is available on our website at www.8co.holdings.

Director Nominations Process

Each year the Board is expected to nominate directors for election by stockholders at the annual meeting of stockholders based on the recommendations of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. In identifying prospective director candidates, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee may seek referrals from other members of the Board, management, stockholders and other sources, including third-party recommendations.

Risk Oversight

Our management is responsible for identifying risks facing our Company, including strategic, financial, operational, and regulatory risks, implementing risk management policies and procedures and managing our day-to-day risk exposure. The Board is expected to have overall responsibility for risk oversight, including, as part of regular Board and committee meetings, general oversight of executives’ management of risks relevant to the Company. While the full Board has overall responsibility for risk oversight and is currently overseeing the Company’s business continuity risks, it is expected to be supported in this function by its Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.

The Audit Committee is responsible for reviewing and discussing with management and the Company’s auditors, as appropriate, the risks faced by the Company and the policies and programs with respect to risk management and risk assessment and inquire about risks or exposures facing the Company.

The Compensation Committee is responsible for reviewing all of the Company’s compensation policies and practices for all employees to determine whether they create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for overseeing the process of succession planning for the Chief Executive Officer and, as warranted, other senior officers of the Company.

In addition, the Board will be presented with information at its regularly scheduled and special meetings regarding risks facing our Company, and management will provide more frequent, informal communications to the Board between regularly scheduled meetings which will be designed to give the Board regular updates about our business. The Board will consider this information and will provide feedback, will make recommendations, and, as appropriate, will authorize or direct management to address particular exposures to risk.

Code of Business Conduct and Ethics

We adopted a written code of business conduct and ethics. Our Corporate Code of Conduct and Ethics and Whistleblower Policy (the “Code of Ethics”) covers areas such as conflicts of interest, insider trading and compliance with laws and regulations. The complete text of the Code of Ethics is available on our website at www.8co.holdings. In addition, we intend to post on our website all disclosures that are required by law or the Nasdaq listing standards concerning any amendments to, or waivers from, any provision of the Code of Ethics. The information contained in, or accessible through, our website does not constitute a part of this Proxy Statement. We have included our website address in this Proxy Statement solely as an inactive textual reference.

Anti-Hedging Policy

Our Board adopted an Insider Trading Policy, which prohibits, among other things, our directors, officers and employees from engaging in any hedging or monetization transactions with respect to the Company’s securities. In addition, our Insider Trading Policy prohibits our directors, officers and employees from engaging in certain short-term or speculative transactions in the Company’s securities, such as short-term trading, short sales, and publicly traded options, which could create heightened legal risk and/or the appearance of improper or inappropriate conduct by our directors, officers, and employees.

Policy Governing Director Attendance at Annual Meetings

The Company encourages and expects all of its directors to virtually attend the Annual Meeting. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023, there were 36 meetings of the Board. Each member of our Board attended at least 75% of the aggregate of (i) the total number of meetings of the Board (held during the period for which he or she was a director), and (ii) the total number of meetings held by all committees of the Board on which such director served (held during the period that such director served).

Family Relationships

There are no family relationships among any of our executive officers or directors.

Policies Governing Director Nominations

Securityholder Recommendations

Our existing Bylaws provide that nominations of any person for election to the Board at an annual meeting may be made at such meeting by a stockholder present in person virtually (A) who was a record owner of shares of the Company both at the time of giving the notice provided for in the Bylaws and on the Record Date, and (B) has complied with the Bylaws as to such notice and nomination.

All stockholder recommendations for director candidates made other than at a meeting must be submitted to our Secretary at Eightco Holdings Inc., 101 Larry Holmes Drive, Suite 313, Easton, PA 18042, who will forward all recommendations to the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. All stockholder recommendations for director candidates for the 2025 annual meeting of stockholders must be submitted to our Secretary between October 26, 2025 and September 26, 2025, in accordance with our bylaws, and must include the following information:

●

the name, age, business address and residence address of the nominee;

●

the principal occupation or employment of the nominee;

●

the class and number of shares of the Company that are held of record or are beneficially owned by the nominee and any derivative positions held or beneficially held by the nominee;

●

whether and the extent to which any hedging or other transaction or series of transactions has been entered into by or on behalf of the nominee with respect to any securities of the Company, and a description of any other agreement, arrangement or understanding (including any short position or any borrowing or lending of shares), the effect or intent of which is to mitigate loss to, or to manage the risk or benefit of share price changes for, or to increase or decrease the voting power of the nominee;

●

a description of all arrangements or understandings between or among the stockholder and each nominee and any other person or persons (naming such person or persons) pursuant to which the nominations are to be made by the stockholder or concerning the nominee’s potential service on the Board;

●

a written statement executed by the nominee acknowledging that as a director of the Company, the nominee will owe fiduciary duties under Delaware law (or Nevada law after the Redomestication) with respect to the Company and its stockholders; and

●

any other information relating to the nominee that would be required to be disclosed about such nominee if proxies were being solicited for the election or re-election of the nominee as a director, or that is otherwise required, in each case pursuant to Regulation 14A under the Exchange Act (including without limitation the nominee’s written consent to being named in the proxy statement, if any, as a nominee and to serving as a director if elected or re-elected, as the case may be).

Board Leadership Structure

Our Board is not expected to have a formal policy regarding the combination of the roles of Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer because the Board believes that it is in the best interests of the Company to have the flexibility to determine, from time to time, whether the positions should be held by the same person or by separate persons. The Board believes that it is currently in the best interest of our stockholders that the role of Chairman be held by Paul Vassilakos, who ius also currently our Chief Executive Officer.

The Board may reconsider this leadership structure from time to time based on the leadership needs of our Board and the Company at any particular time.

Communications with the Board

Stockholders who wish to communicate with the Board may do so by writing the Company’s Office of the Secretary by mail at 101 Larry Holmes Drive, Suite 313, Easton, PA 18042, Attention: Office of the Secretary or by email at investors@8co.holdings. All communications that relate to matters within the scope of the responsibilities of the Board and its standing committees will be forwarded to the Chairman of the Board. Communications that relate to ordinary business matters that are not within the scope of the responsibilities of the Board are to be sent to the appropriate executive officer or employee.

We recommend that all correspondence be sent via certified U.S. Mail, return receipt requested.

Legal Proceedings

During the normal course of its business, the Company may be subject to occasional legal proceedings and claims. There are currently no legal proceedings or claims asserted against the Company or its subsidiaries.

DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

We have two Class II directors with a term expiring at the Annual Meeting: Frank Jennings and Kevin O’Donnell. Our Board has nominated Frank Jennings and Kevin O’Donnell to serve as Class II members of our Board until the 2027 annual meeting of stockholders or until the appointment, election, and qualification of his respective successor.

Information Regarding the Directors and Executive Officers

The following table sets forth, as of the date of this Proxy Statement, certain information regarding our current executive officers and directors.

Name	Age	Position
Paul Vassilakos	48	President and Chief Executive Officer, Chairman
Brett Vroman	43	Chief Financial Officer
Kevin O’Donnell	49	Director
Frank Jennings(1)(2)(3)	54	Director
Louis Foreman (1)(2)(3)	56	Director
Mary Ann Halford (1)(2)(3)	66	Director

(1) Member of Audit Committee.

(2) Member of Compensation Committee.

(3) Member of Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.

Executive Officer and Director Biographies

Information concerning our directors and director nominee is set forth below. The biographical description of each director and director nominee includes the specific experience, qualifications, attributes and skills that led the Board to conclude that such person should serve as a director.

Paul Vassilakos. Mr. Vassilakos has served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer since March 18, 2024. Mr. Vassilakos has also served as a director of Adamas One Corp. (NASDAQ) from October 2021 until November 2024. Mr. Vassilakos co-founded, and since July 2020 has been a partner of Forever 8 Fund, LLC, a subsidiary of Eightco Holdings Inc., a consumer products inventory capital provider. Since 2013 Mr. Vassilakos has served and held various Board, CEO and CFO positions on several publicly listed companies. In July 2007, Mr. Vassilakos founded Petrina Advisors, Inc., a privately held advisory firm formed to provide investment banking services for public and privately held companies, and has served as its President since its formation. Mr. Vassilakos also founded and has served as the President of Petrina Properties Ltd., a privately held real estate holding company, since December 2006. Earlier in his career, Mr. Vassilakos was engaged as a consultant to assist several specified purpose acquisition companies with business combinations. Mr. Vassilakos started his career an Analyst at Salomon Smith Barney’s New York Investment Banking Division and later as an Associate within the Greek Coverage Group of Citigroup Inc.’s UK Investment Banking Division. While attending university, Mr. Vassilakos was a Registered Securities Representative at Paine Webber CSC - DJS Securities Ltd, during which time he provided securities brokerage services to private clients. Mr. Vassilakos holds a Bachelor of Science in finance from the Leonard N. Stern Undergraduate School of Business and was a licensed Registered Securities Representative (Series 7 and 63) from February 1996 to February 2002.

Brett Vroman. Mr. Vroman has served as Chief Financial Officer since October 13, 2021. Mr. Vroman served as Chief Financial Officer of Vinco Venture, Inc., the Company’s former parent company (“Vinco”), from June 2019 to November 22, 2021, and previously served as its Controller from May 2018 through May 2019. From October 2014 to May 2018, Mr. Vroman was Director of Financial Reporting at Avantor, Inc., a global manufacturer and distributor of high-quality products, services and solutions to customers and suppliers in the life science, advanced technology, and applied materials industries. From March 2011 to October 2014, Mr. Vroman was employed as an Assurance Senior Manager at BDO USA, LLP, a public accounting, tax, consulting. Mr. Vroman is a certified public accountant and holds a Bachelor of Science in Accounting from York College of Pennsylvania.

Kevin O’Donnell. Mr. O’Donnell served as Chairman of the board of directors from October 15, 2021 to March 17, 2024, and continues to serve as a member of the board of directors. On February 22, 2024, the Board appointed Kevin O’Donnell as Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and he later resigned from this position on March 17, 2024. Mr. O’Donnell founded Poptop Partners, LLC, a boutique investment firm specializing in small to mid-market companies with an emphasis on the retail sector in April 2011 and continues to serve as its Managing Partner. From May 2007 to June 2010, Mr. O’Donnell served as the Founder/President of KOR Capital, LLC, a private equity and consulting firm specializing in turn around management of mid-market companies. Mr. O’Donnell has been an early-stage investor in multiple industries including hospitality, beverage, cannabis, hemp and technology. Mr. O’Donnell has served or continues to serve on numerous private and public boards including but not limited to SRM Entertainment, Vinco, Lakeside Alternatives Hospital Foundation, and The University Club. Mr. O’Donnell will bring to Eightco close to 25 years of strategic corporate growth, financial structuring, leadership, and business development initiatives to emerging growth companies.

Frank Jennings. Mr. Jennings has served as a member of the board of directors since October 13, 2021. Mr. Jennings is currently the President of Pelago Health, a leading virtual clinic for substance use management. He previously has served as the Chief Sales Officer and Executive Vice President at Castlight Health. From August 2014 to 2019, Mr. Jennings was employed as the Vice President of Sales, North America by Doctor on Demand, Inc., an innovative healthcare telemedicine provider. He currently serves as an advisor at numerous early-stage companies. Mr. Jennings is a co-founder of the CMK Foundation, a charitable organization which has been helping people in local communities since 2009. Mr. Jennings brings to Eightco 30 years of experience in business development and management of sales professionals in a variety of technology-adjacent industries. He holds his degree from the Max M. Fisher College of Business at The Ohio State University.

Louis Foreman. Mr. Foreman has served as a member of the board of directors since October 15, 2021. Mr. Foreman was the founder and has been the Chief Executive of Enventys, an integrated product design and engineering firm, since 2001. Over the past 38 years, Mr. Foreman has created 10 successful start-ups and has been directly responsible for the creation of over 20 others. In 2013, Mr. Foreman was appointed by the SBA Administrator to serve on the National SBDC Advisory Board until the end of 2024. In 2008, Mr. Foreman was appointed by United States Secretary of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez to serve for a three-year term on the nine-person Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). In 2011, he was appointed by Secretary Gary Locke to serve an additional three-year term. In addition to being an inventor, Mr. Foreman was the creator of the Emmy^® Award winning PBS TV show, Everyday Edisons, and served as the Executive Producer and lead judge. Mr. Foreman currently serves as Chairman of the Board of Directors of the James Dyson Foundation. He is also a board member of the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPOA), the Intellectual Property Owners Educational Foundation (IPOEF), The Federal Reserve Bank Industry Roundtable, the National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD) Carolinas Region, and serves on the advisory board of Park National Bank. Mr. Foreman has a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from the University of Illinois. Mr. Foreman brings to Eightco significant experience with start-ups and knowledge of intellectual property matters.

Mary Ann Halford. Ms. Halford has served as a member of the board of directors since October 13, 2021. She is the Founder and and has been Managing Principal of Halford Media Advisory, which provides strategic, operational and investment advisory services to the media and entertainment industry, since January of 2024. From 2021 to 2023, she was a Partner in the Telecommunications, Media, and Technology (“TMT”) strategy consultancy Altman Solon. She was a Senior Advisor to OC&C Strategy Consultants from December 2017 to December 2020. From March 2012 to April 2017, Ms. Halford was a Managing Director and then a Senior Managing Director in FTI Consulting’s TMT Group working both in NY and London. Ms. Halford built out the digital operations for ITN Networks from 2008 – 2009. In 2002, she co-founded the entity that ultimately became North American Midway Entertainment, which today is largest midway operator in the State and County Fair industry. From 1997 through 2001, Ms. Halford built and established the Fox International Channels Group. She also held senior roles at two independent filmed entertainment production and distribution companies, Solomon International Enterprises and the Samuel Goldwyn Company. She started her career in banking, working both at Chase Manhattan Bank and Bankers Trust Company. Presently, Ms. Halford serves on twoone other public boards, Media and Games Invest and Cineverse. Previously from 2021 through 2023, she served on the board of Verve Group SE (formerly Media and Games Invest SE), from 2020 to 2022, she served on the board of Vinco and from 2007 through 2014, she served on the board of directors of Triton Digital. Ms. Halford received her Bachelor of Arts degree in Government and Economics from Georgetown University and her Master’s in Business Administration from Harvard University. Ms. Halford brings to Eightco over 30 years of experience as both an operator and consultant to the global media and entertainment industry.

Board Diversity

It is anticipated that we will seek diversity in experience, viewpoint, education, skill, and other individual qualities and attributes to be represented on our Board. We believe directors should have various qualifications, including individual character and integrity; business experience; leadership ability; strategic planning skills, ability, and experience; requisite knowledge of our industry and finance, accounting, and legal matters; communications and interpersonal skills; and the ability and willingness to devote time to our company. We also believe the skill sets, backgrounds, and qualifications of our anticipated directors, taken as a whole, should provide a significant mix of diversity in personal and professional experience, background, viewpoints, perspectives, knowledge, and abilities. Nominees will not be discriminated against on the basis of race, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, disability, or any other basis proscribed by law. It is anticipated that the assessment of prospective directors will be made in the context of the perceived needs of our Board from time to time.

We expect that all of our directors will be individuals of high character and integrity, able to work well with others, and committed to devote sufficient time to the business and affairs of our company. In addition to these attributes, the description of each anticipated director’s background set forth above indicates the specific qualifications, skills, perspectives, and experience necessary to conclude that each individual should serve as a director of our company.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Summary Compensation Table

The following table presents summary information regarding the total compensation incurred by Eightco Holdings Inc. for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, for the named executive officers of the Company.

Name and Principal Position	Year	Salary ($)		Bonus ($)		Stock Awards ($)		Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($)		All Other Compensation ($)		Total ($)
Brian McFadden*	2023		325,000		-		-		-		-		325,000
Former Chief Executive Officer	2022		248,846		-		44,000		-		-		292,846

Brett Vroman**	2023		292,000		-		-		-		-		292,000
Chief Financial Officer	2022		243,261		-		39,600		-		-		282,861

Kevin O’Donnell***	2023		292,000		-		-		-		-		292,000
Former Executive Chairman	2022		138,643		-		39,600		-		-		178,243

	*	Brian McFadden was appointed President of Eightco on September 23, 2021, and his title was later expanded to include Chief Executive Officer, which he served until March 17, 2024. The Company paid cash of $171,635 of Mr. McFadden’s salary for the year ended December 31, 2023 and $153,365 was deferred until a later date to be determined.

	**	Brett Vroman was appointed Chief Financial Officer of Eightco on October 13, 2021. The Company paid cash of $147,462 of Mr. Vroman’s salary for the year ended December 31, 2023 and $144,538 was deferred until a later date to be determined.

	***	Kevin O’Donnell served as the Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors from October 15, 2021 to March 17, 2024. The Company paid cash of $165,923 of Mr. O’Donnell’s salary for the year ended December 31, 2023 and $126,077 was deferred until a later date to be determined.

Overview

The Company expects to provide total compensation packages that are competitive, tailored to the unique characteristics and needs of the Company within its industry, and adequately reward its executives for their roles in creating value for our stockholders. The Company expects that it will be competitive in its executive compensation with other similarly situated companies in its industry. The compensation decisions regarding the Company’s executives are expected to be based on its need to attract individuals with the skills necessary to achieve its business plan, to reward those individuals fairly over time and to retain those individuals who continue to perform at or above the Company’s expectations.

The Company’s executive compensation program is expected to consist of three primary components: salary, incentive bonus and stock-based awards issued under an equity incentive plan. The Company determines the appropriate level for each compensation component based in part, but not exclusively, on its view of internal equity and consistency, individual performance, the Company’s performance, and other information deemed relevant and timely.

Employment Agreements

Paul Vassilakos Employment Agreement

In connection with Mr. Vassilakos’ appointment as the Executive Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, on March 17, 2024, the Company and Mr. Vassilakos entered into an Employment Agreement (the “Vassilakos Employment Agreement”), which supersedes and replaces the Employment Agreement dated October 16, 2022, by and between Mr. Vassilakos, the Company and Forever 8. The Vassilakos Employment Agreement provides for an initial term of two year, unless earlier terminated in accordance therein, and automatic renewals for successive one (1) year terms unless either party provides timely written notice otherwise.

Pursuant to the terms of the Vassilakos Employment Agreement, Mr. Vassilakos will be entitled to a base salary payable at the annualized rate of $300,000 per year (the “Vassilakos Base Salary”). Mr. Vassilakos is eligible for an annual cash bonus opportunity equal to up to 75% of the Vassilakos Base Salary and awards of restricted stock units up to 100% of the Vassilakos Base Salary, subject to the terms and conditions of the Incentive Plan and the Company’s form of restricted stock unit agreement (the “Vassilakos Bonus”), based on certain milestones to be determined in the sole and absolute discretion of the Board. Mr. Vassilakos may also be eligible for additional compensation in the sole and complete discretion of the Board or the Compensation Committee of the Board.

In the event the Company terminates Mr. Vassilakos’ employment without cause (as defined in the Vassilakos Employment Agreement), Mr. Vassilakos will receive (i) the Accrued Obligations (as defined in the Vassilakos Employment Agreement) and (ii) severance in the amount of equal to the Vassilakos Base Salary for twelve (12) months, less applicable payroll deductions and tax withholdings. In addition, this termination will cause the vesting of all equity awards subject to the terms of the Incentive Plan held by Mr. Vassilakos and entitle Mr. Vassilakos to reimbursement of premiums associated with the continuation of health insurance benefits provided under the Vassilakos Employment Agreement during the remaining Term of Employment (as defined in the Vassilakos Employment Agreement).

A complete copy of the Vassilakos Employment Agreement is included as Exhibit 10.7 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 18, 2024.

Brett Vroman Consulting Agreement

On February 26, 2024, the Company and Brett Vroman entered into General Release and Severance Agreement, (the “Vroman Severance Agreement”), effective as of the eighth day following the Vroman Severance Agreement (the “Vroman Effective Date”) in connection with the termination of the amended and restated employment agreement, by and between the Company and Mr. Vroman, effective as of September 27, 2022 (the “Vroman Employment Agreement”). Pursuant to the Vroman Severance Agreement, as of the Vroman Effective Date, the Vroman Employment Agreement terminated, and no party shall have any further obligation or liability thereunder except as related to any obligations that survive employment termination, including but not limited to the obligations set forth under the Employee Confidential Disclosure, Invention Assignment, Non-Competition, Non-Solicitation and Non-Interference Agreement, attached to the Vroman Employment Agreement.

Additionally, on February 22, 2024, the Company and CXO Lite, LLC, a limited liability company organized under the laws of Pennsylvania, of which Mr. Vroman is the sole member, entered into a consulting agreement (the “Vroman Consulting Agreement”) pursuant to which Mr. Vroman shall be engaged and continue to serve the Company as its Chief Financial Officer. Pursuant to Vroman Consulting Agreement, the Company has agreed to compensate Mr. Vroman at a rate of $10,000 per month for services rendered as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, commencing as of January 1, 2024. The term of Vroman Consulting Agreement shall automatically renew on a month-to-month basis unless terminated by either the Company or Mr. Vroman upon 30 days written notice to the other party. Vroman Consulting Agreement additionally provides for certain customary covenants regarding confidentiality.

Pursuant to the Vroman Severance Agreement, the Company will provide Mr. Vroman with (i) back pay wages through the Vroman Effective Date in the amount of $151,615.46, less all lawful and authorized withholdings and deductions, to be paid as soon as practicable following the Vroman Effective Date and (ii) severance, of 24 months of Mr. Vroman’s base salary, less all lawful and authorized withholdings and deductions, under the Vroman Employment Agreement. Pursuant to the Vroman Severance Agreement, the Company shall also reimburse to Mr. Vroman the premiums associated with the continuation of Mr. Vroman’s health insurance for the period commencing on the Vroman Effective Date through December 31, 2024, pursuant to applicable law, expenses in accordance with the Company’s expense reimbursement policy, and the full vesting of any earned shares of Common Stock. The Vroman Severance Agreement also provides for a mutual waiver and release of any claims in connection with Mr. Vroman’s employment, separation and departure from the Company, and for certain customary covenants regarding confidentiality.

A complete copy of the Vroman Severance Agreement and the Vroman Consulting Agreement are included as Exhibit 10.3 and 10.4, respectively to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 26, 2024.

Kevin O’Donnell Severance Agreement

In connection with Mr. O’Donnell’s resignation from his positions with the Company, on March 17, 2024, the Company and Kevin O’Donnell entered into a General Release and Severance Agreement (the “O’Donnell Severance Agreement”), effective as of March 17, 2024 (the “O’Donnell Effective Date”). The O’Donnell Severance Agreement terminated of the amended and restated employment agreement, by and between the Company and Mr. O’Donnell, effective as of October 21, 2022 (the “O’Donnell Employment Agreement”). Pursuant to the O’Donnell Severance Agreement, as of the O’Donnell Effective Date, the O’Donnell Employment Agreement shall terminate, and no party shall have any further obligation or liability thereunder except as related to any obligations that survive employment termination, including but not limited to the obligations set forth under the Employee Confidential Disclosure, Invention Assignment, Non-Competition, Non-Solicitation and Non-Interference Agreement, attached to the O’Donnell Employment Agreement.

Pursuant to the O’Donnell Severance Agreement, the Company will provide Mr. O’Donnell with (i) back pay wages through December 31, 2023 (the “O’Donnell Separation Date”) in the amount of $138,000, less all lawful and authorized withholdings and deductions, to be paid as soon as practicable following the O’Donnell Effective Date and (ii) severance equal to 24 months of Mr. O’Donnell’s base salary, less all lawful and authorized withholdings and deductions, under the O’Donnell Employment Agreement. Pursuant to the O’Donnell Severance Agreement, the Company shall also provide Mr. O’Donnell with (i) reimbursement of the premiums associated with the continuation of Mr. O’Donnell’s health insurance for the period commencing on the O’Donnell Separation Date through and including September 27, 2024, pursuant to applicable law, (ii) reimbursement of expenses in accordance with the Company’s expense reimbursement policy, and (iii) the full vesting of any earned, outstanding and unvested shares of Common Stock subject to the Incentive Plan. The O’Donnell Severance Agreement also provides for a mutual waiver and release of any claims in connection with Mr. O’Donnell’s employment, separation and departure from the Company, and for certain customary covenants regarding confidentiality.

A complete copy of the O’Donnell Severance Agreement is included as Exhibit 10.6 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 18, 2024.

Brian McFadden Severance Agreement

On February 26, 2024, the Company and Brian McFadden entered into General Release and Severance Agreement, (the “McFadden Severance Agreement”), effective as of the eighth day following the McFadden Severance Agreement (the “McFadden Effective Date”) in connection with Mr. McFadden’s resignation as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, effective as of December 31, 2023 (the “McFadden Separation Date”). Pursuant to the McFadden Severance Agreement, Mr. McFadden is eligible to receive $146,683 in accrued but unpaid base salary through the McFadden Separation Date in four quarterly payments of $36,670.75 each, less all applicable tax withholdings, by December 31, 2024.

In consideration of the McFadden Severance Agreement, the release therein and Mr. McFadden’s resignation as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, the Company provided Mr. McFadden severance pay in the gross amount of amount of $422,500, less all lawful and authorized withholdings and deductions (the “Severance Payment”), which Severance Payment shall be paid in four quarterly installments of $105,625 per each installment, payable at the Company’s option in either cash or Common Stock, with the payment to be made as follows: (i) on the McFadden Effective Date, Mr. McFadden shall be granted, in lieu of cash, 128,811 fully-vested restricted shares of the Common Stock at a price of $0.82 per share, subject to the terms and conditions of the Incentive Plan, and as of each of (ii) April 1, 2024, (iii) July 1, 2024, and (iv) October 1, 2024, payable at the Company’s option, in either cash or Common Stock. The shares of Common Stock to be issued to Mr. McFadden under installments (ii), (iii) and (iv), if applicable, shall be fully vested and the number of shares to be issued shall be determined based on the volume weighted average trading price of the Common Stock on the principal exchange on which the Common Stock is listed or admitted to trade during the period of 10 trading days immediately prior to the date of such issuance.

Pursuant to the McFadden Severance Agreement, the Company shall also reimburse to Mr. McFadden the premiums associated with the continuation of Mr. McFadden’s health insurance for the period commencing on the McFadden Separation Date through December 31, 2024, pursuant to applicable law, and approved but unpaid business expenses through the McFadden Separation Date within 30 days following McFadden Effective Date.

Pursuant to the McFadden Severance Agreement, as of the McFadden Separation Date, the amended and restated employment agreement, by and between the Company and Mr. McFadden, effective as of September 27, 2022 (the “McFadden Employment Agreement”), shall terminate forever, and no party shall have any further obligation or liability thereunder except as related to any obligations that survive employment termination, including but not limited to the obligations set forth under the Employee Confidential Disclosure, Invention Assignment, Non-Competition, Non-Solicitation and Non-Interference Agreement (the “Restrictive Covenants Agreement”), attached to the McFadden Employment Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company has agreed to waive certain post-termination obligations as related to certain non-competition and non-compete provisions in the Restrictive Covenants Agreement.

Pursuant to the McFadden Severance Agreement, for a period of eight weeks following the McFadden Separation Date, Mr. McFadden has agreed to reasonably cooperate with the Company in the transition of positions. Additionally, Mr. McFadden shall remain a director of the Board under the standard terms, conditions, and bylaws of the Company from the McFadden Separation Date through March 31, 2024, at which time Mr. McFadden shall resign from the Board. The McFadden Severance Agreement also provides for a mutual waiver and release of any claims in connection with Mr. McFadden’s employment, separation and departure from the Company, and for certain customary covenants regarding confidentiality.

A complete copy of the McFadden Severance Agreement is included as Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 26, 2024.

Outstanding Equity Awards at 2023 Fiscal Year End

None.

Retirement Plans

The Company expects to maintain a tax-qualified defined contribution plan that meets the requirements of Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”), commonly called a 401(k) plan, for substantially all of its employees. The 401(k) plan will be made available on the same basis to all employees, including the named executive officers. Each participant in the 401(k) plan will be able to elect to defer from 0% to 100% of compensation, subject to limitations under the Code and Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

Clawback

We have adopted a clawback policy effective as of November 3, 2023, that complies with the Nasdaq’s new clawback rules promulgated under the SEC’s Rule 10D-1. Under this policy, the Compensation Committee must seek payment of incentive-based compensation, such as cash payments under our annual incentive plan or long-term equity-based incentive awards, that was paid to our executive officers based on financial statements that were subsequently restated. The policy provides that if the Compensation Committee determines that there has been a material restatement of publicly issued financial results from those previously issued to the public, the Compensation Committee will review all incentive-based compensation made to executive officers during the three-year period prior to the restatement. If such payments would have been lower had they been calculated based on such restated results, our Compensation Committee will recoup the payments in excess of the amount that would have been received had it been determined based on the restated amounts.

Additionally, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 subjects incentive-based compensation and stock sale profits of our CEO and CFO to forfeiture in the event of an accounting restatement resulting from any non-compliance, as a result of their misconduct, with any financial reporting requirement under securities laws.

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

The Company’s board of directors’ compensation program is expected to be designed to provide competitive compensation necessary to attract and retain high quality non-employee directors and to encourage ownership of Company stock to further align their interests with those of our stockholders.

The director annual compensation program is expected to provide the following compensation for independent, non-employee directors following the Business Combination:

●

A quarterly retainer (the “Quarterly Retainer”) of $25,000, and 25,000 shares of the Company common stock, a supplemental 5,000 shares of the Company common stock as an annual retainer for each of the Audit Committee Chair, the Compensation Committee Chair, and the Nominating and Governance Committee Chair; and

●

Additional compensation for ad hoc services on a case-by-case basis.

Summary Director Compensation Table

The following table presents summary information regarding the total director compensation for the years ended December 31, 2023, and 2022.

		Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($)		Stock Awards ($)		Option Awards ($)		Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($)		Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings ($)		All Other Compensation ($)		Total ($)
Name	Year	(b)		(c)		(d)		(e)		(f)		(g)		(h)

Brian McFadden (1)	2023	$	-	$	-		-		-		-		-	$	-
	2022	$	-	$	-		-		-		-		-	$	-

Kevin O’Donnell (2)	2023	$	-	$	-		-		-		-		-	$	-
	2022	$	-	$	-		-		-		-		-	$	-

Frank Jennings (3)	2023	$	100,000	$	-		-		-		-		-	$	100,000
	2022	$	45,000	$	30,600		-		-		-		-	$	75,600

Louis Foreman (4)	2023	$	100,000	$	-		-		-		-		-	$	100,000
	2022	$	45,000	$	30,600		-		-		-		-	$	75,600

Mary Ann Halford (5)(6)	2023	$	100,000	$	-		-		-		-		-	$	100,000
	2022	$	45,000		30,600		-		-		-		-		75,600

(1)	Mr. McFadden was appointed a director on October 15, 2021 and served until March 17, 2024.
(2)	Mr. O’Donnell was appointed a director on October 15, 2021. Mr. O’Donnell served as the Chairman of the Board of Directors from October 15, 2021 until March 17, 2024.
(3)	Mr. Jennings served as a director of Vinco until October 14, 2021. Mr. Jennings was appointed a director of Eightco on October 15, 2021.
(4)	Mr. Foreman served as a director of Vinco until October 14, 2021. Mr. Foreman was appointed a director of Eightco on October 15, 2021.
(5)	Ms. Halford served as a director of Vinco until October 14, 2021. Ms. Halford was appointed a director of Eightco on October 15, 2021.

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

The following table sets forth information with respect to the beneficial ownership of our common stock, as of the Record Date by:

●

each person who is the beneficial owner of more than 5% of the outstanding shares of our common stock;

●

each of our Named Executive Officers and directors; and

●

all of our executive officers and directors as a group.

Beneficial ownership for the purposes of the following table is determined in accordance with the rules and regulations of the SEC. A person is a “beneficial owner” of a security if that person has or shares “voting power”, which includes the power to vote or to direct the voting of the security, or “investment power”, which includes the power to dispose of or to direct the disposition of the security or has the right to acquire such powers within 60 days. Accordingly, we have included all shares of common stock issuable to such person upon the exercise of warrants or options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of the date hereof. We did not deem such shares outstanding, however, for the purpose of computing the percentage ownership of any other person.

Unless otherwise noted in the footnotes to the following table, and subject to applicable community property laws, the persons and entities named in the table have sole voting and investment power with respect to their beneficially owned common stock and preferred stock.

Unless otherwise noted, the address of each beneficial owner is c/o Eightco Holdings Inc., 101 Larry Holmes Drive, Suite 313, Easton, PA 18042.

The beneficial ownership of our common stock is based on 2,441,363 shares of common stock issued and outstanding as of the Record Date.

	Beneficial Ownership
Name and Address of Beneficial Owner	Number of Shares		Percentage
5% Stockholders
BHP Capital NY Inc.⁽¹⁾		205,600		7.95	%
Named Executive Officers and Directors
Paul Vassilakos⁽²⁾		147,138		5.99	%
Brett Vroman⁽³⁾		42,574		1.71	%
Kevin O’Donnell⁽⁴⁾		28,752		1.16	%
Frank Jennings⁽⁵⁾		45,703		1.85	%
Louis Foreman⁽⁶⁾		45,701		1.85	%
Mary Ann Halford⁽⁷⁾		45,736		1.85	%
Current Executive Officers and Directors as a group (six persons)		355,604		13.61	%

*	Less than 1%

(1)	Includes 60,000 shares of common stock, 145,600 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of warrants and excludes 0 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of the warrants. Pursuant to the terms of the warrants, BHP may not exercise the warrants to the extent (but only to the extent) BHP or any of its affiliates would beneficially own upon such conversion or exercise a number of shares of our common stock which would exceed 9.99% of the outstanding shares of common stock of the Company. Bryan Pantofel is the President of BHP and has sole voting and investment power over these securities. BHP’s address is 45 SW 9th Street, Suite 1603, Miami, Florida 33130. All shares reported are shares of the Company’s common stock.

(2)	Includes 130,883 shares of common stock, 16,255 shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the Note issued to Mr. Vassilakos in connection with the acquisition of Forever 8.

(3)	Includes 568 shares of common stock and 42,006 shares of common stock to be issued pursuant to a stock option to be granted to Mr. Vroman. Excludes 23,147 shares of common stock contractually agreed to be issued to Mr. Vroman for the partial settlement of severance payments which have never been issued to Mr. Vroman.

(4)	Represents 8,752 shares of common stock, of which 8,500 shares of restricted common stock remain unissued, and 20,000 shares of common stock to be issued pursuant to a stock option to be granted to Mr. O’Donnell. Excludes 23,147 shares of common stock contractually agreed to be issued to Mr. O’Donnell for the partial settlement of severance payments which have never been issued to Mr. O’Donnell.

(5)	Represents 25,703 shares of common stock, of which 8,500 shares of restricted common stock remains unissued, and 20,000 shares of common stock to be issued pursuant to a stock option to be granted to Mr. Jennings.

(6)	Represents 25,701 shares of common stock, of which 8,500 shares of restricted common stock remains unissued, and 20,000 shares of common stock to be issued pursuant to a stock option to be granted to Mr. Foreman

(7)	Represents 25,736 shares of common stock, of which 8,500 shares of restricted common stock remains unissued, and 20,000 shares of common stock to be issued pursuant to a stock option to be granted to Ms. Halford.

PROPOSAL 1: THE REDOMESTICATION PROPOSAL

Introduction

Our Board has approved a proposal to redomesticate the Company from a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware to a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Nevada (such conversion from a Delaware corporation into a Nevada corporation is hereafter referred to as the “Redomestication”). Our Board recommends that our shareholders approve the Redomestication and adopt the plan of conversion by which the Redomestication will be effectuated (the “Plan of Conversion”), which is included as Appendix A to this proxy statement. Upon the completion of the Redomestication, the Company will become a Nevada corporation and will continue to operate our business under our existing name, “Eightco Holdings Inc.”

The Redomestication is expected to reduce the Company’s overall tax burden given the franchise taxes imposed on Delaware corporations. Our Board also believes that the Redomestication in Nevada will give the Company a greater measure of flexibility and simplicity in corporate governance than is available under Delaware law and will provide for greater protection for our directors and officers from unmeritorious lawsuits. The Redomestication will not result in any change in the Company’s business, operations, management, assets, liabilities or net worth.

Accordingly, our Board believes that it is in the Company’s and our shareholders’ best interests that the Company’s state of incorporation be changed from Delaware to Nevada.

Reasons for the Redomestication

Our Board believes that there are several reasons the Redomestication is in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders. In particular, the Board believes that the Redomestication will allow the Company to take advantage of certain provisions of the corporate and tax laws of Nevada.

The Redomestication will eliminate our obligation to pay the annual Delaware franchise tax, which we expect will result in substantial savings to us over the long term. For fiscal year 2023, the Company paid approximately $200,000 in Delaware franchise taxes. For fiscal year 2024, the Company’s Delaware franchise taxes will be similar to its 2023 franchise taxes (based on our current capital structure and assets). However, because the Company will remain subject to Delaware franchise taxes for the portion of fiscal year 2024 prior to the Redomestication, we may incur some franchise tax obligations for 2024, but would not incur Delaware franchise taxes beyond the Redomestication. If the Company redomesticates in Nevada, our current annual fees will consist of an annual business license fee of $500 and the fee for filing the Company’s annual list of directors and officers based on the number of authorized shares and their par value, which is currently expected to equal $650.

In addition, the Redomestication will provide potentially greater protection from unmeritorious litigation for directors and officers of the Company. Delaware law permits a corporation to adopt provisions limiting or eliminating the liability of a director or an officer to a company and its shareholders for monetary damages for breach of fiduciary duty, provided that the liability does not arise from certain proscribed conduct, including breach of the duty of loyalty, acts or omissions not in good faith or which involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law. In contrast, Nevada law permits a broader exclusion of individual liability of both officers and directors to a company and its shareholders, providing for an exclusion of any damages as a result of any act or failure to act in his or her capacity as a director or officer unless the presumption that the director or officer acted in good faith, on an informed basis and with a view to the interests of the company, has been rebutted, and it is proven that the director’s or officer’s act or failure to act constituted a breach of his or her fiduciary duties as a director or officer, and such breach involved intentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law. The Redomestication will result in the elimination of any liability of an officer or director for a breach of the duty of loyalty unless arising from intentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law.

There is currently no known pending claim or litigation against any of our directors or officers for breach of fiduciary duty related to their service as directors or officers of the Company. Nevertheless, the directors and officers of the Company have an interest in the Redomestication to the extent that they will be entitled to such limitation of liability in the future. The Board was aware of these interests and considered them, among other matters, in reaching its decision to approve the Redomestication and to recommend that our shareholders vote in favor of this proposal.

Furthermore, by reducing the risk of lawsuits being filed against the Company’s directors and officers, the Redomestication may help us attract and retain qualified management. As previously discussed and for the reasons described below, we believe that, in general, Nevada law provides greater protection to our directors, officers and the Company than Delaware law. The increasing frequency of claims and litigation directed towards directors and officers has greatly expanded the risks facing directors and officers of public companies in exercising their duties. The amount of time and money required to respond to these claims and to defend these types of litigation matters can be substantial. Delaware law provides that every person becoming a director or officer of a Delaware corporation consents to the personal jurisdiction of the Delaware courts in connection with any action concerning the corporation. Accordingly, both directors and officers can be personally sued in Delaware, even though the director or officer has no other contacts with the state. Similarly, Nevada law provides that every person who accepts election or appointment, including reelection or reappointment, as a director or officer of a Nevada corporation consents to the personal jurisdiction of the Nevada courts in connection with all civil actions or proceedings brought in Nevada by, on behalf of or against the entity in which the director or officer is a necessary or proper party, or in any action or proceeding against the director or officer for a violation of a duty in such capacity, whether or not the person continues to serve as a director or officer at the time the action or proceeding is commenced. Though Delaware corporate law has recently been amended to, among other things, increase protections for officers of a corporation, we believe Nevada is more advantageous than Delaware because Nevada has pursued a statute-focused approach that does not depend upon judicial interpretation, supplementation and revision, and is intended to be stable, predictable and more efficient, whereas much of Delaware corporate law still consists of judicial decisions that migrate and develop over time.

The Redomestication is also expected to provide corporate flexibility in connection with certain corporate transactions. However, the Redomestication is not being effected to prevent a change in control, nor is it in response to any present attempt known to our Board to acquire control of the Company or obtain representation on our Board. Nevertheless, certain effects of the proposed Redomestication may be considered to have anti-takeover implications by virtue of being subject to Nevada law.

Principal Terms of the Redomestication

The Redomestication would be effected through a conversion pursuant to Section 266 of the DGCL as set forth in the Plan of Conversion. The Plan of Conversion provides that the Company will convert from a Delaware corporation into a Nevada corporation pursuant to Section 266 of the DGCL and Sections 92A.195 and 92A.205 of the Nevada Revised Statutes (the “NRS”).

The Plan of Conversion provides that, upon the Redomestication, each outstanding share of common stock of the Delaware corporation will be automatically converted into one outstanding share of common stock of the Nevada corporation. Security holders will not have to exchange their existing stock certificates for new stock certificates. At the same time, upon the Redomestication, each outstanding stock option, warrant or other right to acquire shares of common stock of the Delaware corporation will automatically become a stock option, warrant or right to acquire an equal number of shares of common stock of the Nevada corporation under the same terms and conditions. In addition, upon conversion, the Company will operate under our existing corporate name, Eightco Holdings Inc. At the Effective Time (as defined herein) of the Redomestication, the common stock will continue to be traded on The Nasdaq Capital Market under our existing trading symbol, “OCTO”. There is not expected to be any interruption in the trading of the common stock as a result of the Redomestication.

The Board currently intends that the Redomestication will occur as soon as practicable following the Annual Meeting. If the Redomestication is approved by our shareholders, it is anticipated that the Redomestication will become effective at the date and time (the “Effective Time”) specified in each of (i) the Articles of Domestication to be executed and filed with the office of the Nevada Secretary of State in accordance with NRS 92A.205 and (ii) the Certificate of Conversion to be executed and filed with the Office of the Secretary of State of Delaware in accordance with Section 266 of the DGCL. However, the Redomestication may be delayed by our Board or the Plan of Conversion may be terminated and abandoned by action of the Board at any time prior to the Effective Time of the Redomestication, whether before or after the approval by the Company’s shareholders, if the Board determines for any reason that the consummation of the Redomestication should be delayed or would be inadvisable or not in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders, as the case may be.

Effects of the Redomestication

Following the Redomestication, the Company will be governed by the NRS instead of the DGCL, and the Company will be governed by the form of Nevada Articles of Incorporation (the “Nevada Charter”) and the form of Nevada Bylaws (the “Nevada Bylaws”), included as Appendix B and Appendix C, respectively, to this proxy statement. The Company’s current Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, as amended (collectively, the “Delaware Charter”), and its current Bylaws (the “Delaware Bylaws”) will no longer be applicable following completion of the Redomestication. Copies of the Delaware Charter and Delaware Bylaws are available as Exhibits 3.1 and 3.2 to the Company’s Amendment No. 2 to Form 10 dated March 18, 2022, available to the public via the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov. A copy of the Certificate of Amendment to the Delaware Charter filed in connection with the Company’s August 2024 reverse stock split is available as Exhibit 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed August 13, 2024, also available to the public via the SEC’s website.

Apart from being governed by the Nevada Charter, Nevada Bylaws and the NRS and operating under its existing corporate name, Eightco Holdings Inc., following completion of the Redomestication, the Company will continue to exist in the form of a Nevada corporation. By virtue of the Redomestication, all of the rights, privileges, and powers of the Delaware corporation, and all property, real, personal, and mixed, and all debts due to the Delaware corporation, as well as all other things and causes of action belonging to the Delaware corporation, will remain vested in the Nevada corporation and will be the property of the Nevada corporation. In addition, all debts, liabilities, and duties of the Delaware corporation will remain attached to the Nevada corporation and may be enforced against the Nevada corporation.

There will be no change in our business, properties, assets, obligations, or management as a result of the Redomestication. Our directors and officers immediately prior to the Redomestication will serve as our directors and officers following the completion of the Redomestication. We will continue to maintain our headquarters in Easton, Pennsylvania.

Effect of Vote for the Redomestication

A vote in favor of this Redomestication proposal is a vote to approve the Plan of Conversion and therefore the Redomestication. A vote in favor of this Redomestication proposal is also effectively a vote in favor of the Nevada Charter and the Nevada Bylaws.

If the Redomestication proposal fails to obtain the requisite vote for approval, the Redomestication will not be consummated and the Company will continue to be incorporated in Delaware and be subject to the Delaware Charter, Delaware Bylaws and the DGCL.

No Securities Act Consequences

The Company will continue to be a publicly held company following completion of the Redomestication, and its common stock will continue to be listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market under its existing corporate name, Eightco Holdings Inc. and its existing trading symbol, “OCTO”. The Company will continue to file required periodic reports and other documents with the SEC. There is not expected to be any interruption in the trading of the common stock as a result of the Redomestication. We and our shareholders will be in the same respective positions under the federal securities laws after the Redomestication as we and our shareholders were prior to the Redomestication.

Key Differences Between Delaware Charter and Bylaws and the Nevada Charter and Bylaws

Following completion of the Redomestication, the Company will be governed by the NRS instead of the DGCL as well as the Nevada Charter and Nevada Bylaws, forms of which are included as Appendix B and Appendix C, respectively, to this proxy statement. Our current Delaware Charter and Delaware Bylaws will no longer be applicable following completion of the Redomestication.

The Nevada Charter and Nevada Bylaws differ in a number of respects from the Delaware Charter and Delaware Bylaws, respectively. Set forth below is a table summarizing certain material differences in the rights of our shareholders under Nevada and Delaware law under the respective charters and bylaws. This chart does not address each difference, but focuses on some of those differences which we believe are most relevant to our shareholders. This chart is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Nevada Charter, the Nevada Bylaws, the Delaware Charter and the Delaware Bylaws.

Provision	Delaware	Nevada

Charter Regarding Authorized Shares of Capital Stock	The Delaware Charter provides that the Company is authorized to issue 110,000,000 shares of capital stock, consisting of 100,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.001 per share, and 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share.	The Nevada Charter provides that the Company is authorized to issue 110,000,000 shares of capital stock, consisting of 100,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.001 per share, and 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share.

Charter Regarding Limitation of Liability	The Delaware Charter states that no Director shall be liable to the Company or its shareholders for monetary damages for any breach of fiduciary duty as a director, except to the extent such exemption from liability or limitation thereof is not permitted under the DGCL, as may be amended from time to time. Any repeal or modification of this provision shall not adversely affect any right or protection of a director of the Company existing at the time of such repeal or modification with respect to acts or omissions occurring prior to such repeal or modification	The Nevada Charter provides that the liability of Directors and Officers shall be limited to the fullest extent permitted by law. Any repeal or modification of this provision will not adversely affect the protection of any Director or Officer provided thereby for any act or omission as a Director or Officer occurring prior to the effectiveness of such repeal or modification. If any provision of the NRS is amended to authorize corporate action further eliminating or limiting the personal liability of Directors and Officers, then the liability of Directors and Officers will be eliminated or limited to the fullest extent permitted by the NRS, as so amended. Note that, under the NRS, this provision provides for exculpation for breaches of the duty of loyalty unless arising from intentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law, and covers both Officers and Directors.

Charter Regarding Forum for Adjudication of Disputes	The Delaware Charter provides unless the Company consents in writing to the selection of an alternative forum (an “Alternative Forum Consent”), the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware shall be the sole and exclusive forum for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on behalf of the Company, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any director, officer, stockholder, employee or agent of the Company to the Company or the Company’s stockholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim against the Company or any director, officer, stockholder, employee or agent of the Company arising out of or relating to any provision of the DGCL, the Delaware Charter or the Delaware Bylaws, or (iv) any action asserting a claim against the Company or any director, officer, stockholder, employee or agent of the Company governed by the internal affairs doctrine of the State of Delaware; provided, however, that, in the event that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware lacks subject matter jurisdiction over any such action or proceeding, including in the event claims are brought under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the sole and exclusive forum for such action or proceeding shall be another state or federal court located within the State of Delaware, in each such case, unless the Court of Chancery (or such other state or federal court located within the State of Delaware, as applicable) has dismissed a prior action by the same plaintiff asserting the same claims because such court lacked personal jurisdiction over an indispensable party named as a defendant therein. Failure to enforce the foregoing provisions would cause the Company irreparable harm and the Company shall be entitled to equitable relief, including injunctive relief and specific performance, to enforce the foregoing provisions. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of capital stock of the Company shall be deemed to have notice of and consented to this provision. The existence of any prior Alternative Forum Consent shall not act as a waiver of the Company’s ongoing consent right as set forth above in this provision with respect to any current or future actions or claims.	The Nevada Charter provides unless the Company consents in writing to the selection of an alternative forum (an “Alternative Forum Consent”), the Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, located in Clark County, shall be the sole and exclusive forum for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on behalf of the Company, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any director, officer, stockholder, employee, or agent of the Company to the Company or the Company’s stockholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim against the Company or any director, officer, stockholder, employee, or agent of the Company arising out of or relating to any provision of the NRS, the Nevada Charter or the Nevada Bylaws, or (iv) any action asserting a claim against the Company or any director, officer, stockholder, employee, or agent of the Company governed by the internal affairs doctrine of the State of Nevada; provided, however, that in the event that the Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada lacks subject matter jurisdiction over any such action or proceeding, including in the event claims are brought under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the sole and exclusive forum for such action or proceeding shall be another state or federal court located within the State of Nevada, in each such case, unless the Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada (or such other state or federal court located within the State of Nevada, as applicable) has dismissed a prior action by the same plaintiff asserting the same claims because such court lacked personal jurisdiction over an indispensable party named as a defendant therein. Failure to enforce the foregoing provisions would cause the Company irreparable harm and the Company shall be entitled to equitable relief, including injunctive relief and specific performance, to enforce the foregoing provisions. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of capital stock of the Company shall be deemed to have notice of and consented to this provision. The existence of any prior Alternative Forum Consent shall not act as a waiver of the Company’s ongoing consent right as set forth above in this provision with respect to any current or future actions or claims.

Provision	Delaware	Nevada

Bylaws Regarding Proxies	Under the Delaware Bylaws, no proxy shall be voted after three years from its date, unless the proxy provides for a longer period.	The Nevada Bylaws expressly provide that a proxy may be authorized by an instrument in writing or by electronic transmission. Under the Nevada Bylaws, no proxy shall be voted or acted upon after six months from its date, unless coupled with an interest or unless the proxy provides for a longer period, which may not exceed seven years.

Bylaws Regarding Indemnification	The Delaware Bylaws provide that the Company shall indemnify against expenses (including attorneys’ fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred and hold harmless each person who has been successful on the merits or otherwise in the defense of any action, suit or proceeding and each person who a majority vote of a quorum consisting of Directors who were not parties to such action, suit or proceeding, or the firm of independent legal counsel then employed by the Company, in a written opinion, authorizes the indemnification of when that person is a party to or is threatened to be made a party to an action, suit or proceeding, or investigation by reason of the fact that he or she is or was a Director, Officer, employee or agent of the Company or who was or is a party or is threatened to be made a party of any, threatened, pending or completed action or suit by or in the right of the Company to procure a judgment in its favor by reason of the fact that he or she is or was a Director, Officer, employee or agent of the Company. However, under the Delaware Bylaws, no indemnification shall be made in respect to any claim, issue or matter as to which such person shall have been adjudged to be liable for negligence or misconduct in the performance of his or her duty to the Company, unless and only to the extent that the court in which such action or suit was brought shall determine upon application that, despite the adjudication of liability but in view of all the circumstances of the case, such person is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity for such expenses.	The Nevada Bylaws provide that the Company shall indemnify against expenses (including attorneys’ fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred and hold harmless each person who has been successful on the merits or otherwise in the defense of any action, suit or proceeding and each person who the shareholders, a majority vote of a quorum consisting of Directors who were not parties to such action, suit or proceeding, or independent legal counsel, in a written opinion, authorizes the indemnification of when that person is a party to or is threatened to be made a party to an action, suit or proceeding, or investigation by reason of the fact that he or she is or was a Director, Officer, employee or agent of the Company or who was or is a party or is threatened to be made a party of any, threatened, pending or completed action, suit by or in the right of the Company to procure a judgment in its favor by reason of the fact that he or she is or was a Director, Officer, employee or agent of the Company. However, under the Nevada Bylaws, no indemnification shall be made in respect to any claim, issue or matter as to which such person shall have been adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction, after exhaustion of any appeals, to the Company or for amounts paid in settlement to the Company, unless and only to the extent that the court in which such action or suit was brought or other court of competent jurisdiction determines upon application that, in view of all the circumstances of the case, such person is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity for such expenses.

Comparison of Shareholder Rights under Delaware and Nevada Law

The rights of our shareholders are currently governed by the DGCL, the Delaware Charter and the Delaware Bylaws. Following completion of the Redomestication, the rights of our shareholders will be governed by the NRS, the Nevada Charter and the Nevada Bylaws.

The statutory corporate laws of Nevada, as governed by the NRS, are similar in many respects to those of Delaware, as governed by the DGCL. However, there are certain differences that may affect your rights as a shareholder, as well as the corporate governance of the Company. The following are brief summaries of material differences between the current rights of shareholders of the Company and the rights of shareholders of the Company following completion of the Redomestication. The following discussion does not provide a complete description of the differences that may affect you. This summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the NRS and DGCL as well as the Delaware Charter and Delaware Bylaws and the Nevada Charter and Nevada Bylaws.

Increasing or Decreasing Authorized Capital Stock. The NRS allows the board of directors of a corporation, unless restricted by the articles of incorporation, to increase or decrease the number of authorized shares in a class or series of the corporation’s shares and correspondingly effect a forward or reverse split of any class or series of the corporation’s shares (and change the par value thereof) without a vote of the shareholders, so long as the action taken does not adversely change or alter any right or preference of the shareholders and does not include any provision or provisions pursuant to which only money will be paid or scrip issued to shareholders who hold 10% or more of the outstanding shares of the affected class and series, and who would otherwise be entitled to receive fractions of shares in exchange for the cancellation of all of their outstanding shares. Delaware law has no similar provision.

Classified Board of Directors. The DGCL permits any Delaware corporation to classify its board of directors into as many as three classes with staggered terms of office. The Delaware Charter and Delaware Bylaws provide for the Company’s classified board of directors. The NRS also permits any Nevada corporation to classify its board of directors into any number of classes with staggered terms of office, so long as at least one-fourth of the total number of directors is elected annually. The Nevada Charter and Nevada Bylaws provide for the Company’s classified board of directors.

Cumulative Voting. Cumulative voting for directors entitles each shareholder to cast a number of votes that is equal to the number of voting shares held by such shareholder multiplied by the number of directors to be elected and to cast all such votes for one nominee or distribute such votes among up to as many candidates as there are positions to be filled. Cumulative voting may enable a minority shareholder or group of shareholders to elect at least one representative to the board of directors where such shareholders would not be able to elect any directors without cumulative voting.

Although the DGCL does not generally grant shareholders cumulative voting rights, a Delaware corporation may provide in its certificate of incorporation for cumulative voting in the election of directors. The NRS also permits any Nevada corporation to provide in its articles of incorporation the right to cumulative voting in the election of directors as long as certain procedures are followed.

Neither the Delaware Charter nor the Nevada Charter provides for cumulative voting in the election of directors.

Vacancies. Under both the DGCL and the NRS, subject to the certificate or articles of incorporation and bylaws, vacancies on the board of directors, including those resulting from any increase in the authorized number of directors, may be filled by the affirmative vote of a majority of the remaining directors then in office, even if less than a quorum. Any director so appointed will hold office for the remainder of the term of the director no longer on the board.

Removal of Directors. Under the DGCL, the holders of a majority of shares of each class entitled to vote at an election of directors may vote to remove any director or the entire board without cause unless (i) the board is a classified board, in which case directors may be removed only for cause, or (ii) the corporation has cumulative voting, in which case, if less than the entire board is to be removed, no director may be removed without cause if the votes cast against his or her removal would be sufficient to elect him or her. The NRS requires the vote of the holders of at least two-thirds of the shares or class or series of shares of the issued and outstanding stock entitled to vote at an election of directors in order to remove a director or all of the directors. The articles of incorporation may provide for a voting threshold higher than two-thirds, but not lower. Furthermore, the NRS does not make a distinction between removals for cause and removals without cause.

The Delaware Charter requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of the stock of the Company entitled to elect directors and effect their removal. However, because the board is classified, directors may only be removed for cause. On the other hand, the Nevada Charter requires the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the outstanding shares of the stock of the Company entitled to elect directors and effect their removal, with or without cause. Under NRS § 78.335, directors can be removed with or without cause, even if the board is classified, unless the articles of incorporation or bylaws specifically require removal only for cause. The Nevada Charter is consistent with these requirements.

Fiduciary Duties and Business Judgment. Nevada, like most jurisdictions, requires that directors and officers of Nevada corporations exercise their powers in good faith and with a view to the interests of the corporation, but, unlike some other jurisdictions, fiduciary duties of directors and officers are codified in the NRS. As a matter of law, directors and officers are presumed to act in good faith, on an informed basis and with a view to the interests of the corporation in making business decisions. In performing such duties, directors and officers may exercise their business judgment through reliance on information, opinions, reports, financial statements and other financial data prepared or presented by corporate directors, officers or employees who are reasonably believed to be reliable and competent. Reliance may also be extended to legal counsel, public accountants, advisers, bankers or other persons reasonably believed to be competent, and to the work of a committee (on which the particular director or officer does not serve) if the committee was established and empowered by the corporation’s board of directors, and if the committee’s work was within its designated authority and was about matters on which the committee was reasonably believed to merit confidence. However, directors and officers may not rely on such information, opinions, reports, books of account or similar statements if they have knowledge concerning the matter in question that would make such reliance unwarranted.

Under Delaware law, members of the board of directors or any committee designated by the board of directors are similarly entitled to rely in good faith upon the records of the corporation and upon such information, opinions, reports and statements presented to the corporation by corporate officers, employees, committees of the board of directors or other persons as to matters such member reasonably believes are within such other person’s professional or expert competence, provided that such other person has been selected with reasonable care by or on behalf of the corporation. Such appropriate reliance on records and other information protects directors from liability related to decisions made based on such records and other information. Both Delaware and Nevada law extend the statutory protection for reliance on such persons to corporate officers.

Flexibility for Decisions, Including Takeovers. Nevada provides directors with more discretion than Delaware in making corporate decisions, including decisions made in takeover situations. Under Nevada law, director and officer actions taken in response to a change or potential change in control are granted the benefits of the business judgment rule. However, in the case of an action to resist a change or potential change in control that impedes the rights of shareholders to vote for or remove directors, directors will only be given the benefit of the presumption of the business judgment rule if the directors have reasonable grounds to believe a threat to corporate policy and effectiveness exists and the action taken that impedes the exercise of the shareholders’ rights is reasonable in relation to such threat.

In exercising their powers, including in response to a change or potential change of control, directors and officers of Nevada corporations may consider all relevant facts, circumstances, contingencies or constituencies, which may include, without limitation, the effect of the decision on several corporate constituencies in addition to the shareholders, including the corporation’s employees, suppliers, creditors and customers, the economy of the state and nation, the interests of the community and society in general, and the long-term as well as short-term interests of the corporation and its shareholders, including the possibility that these interests may be best served by the continued independence of the corporation. To underscore the discretion of directors and officers of Nevada corporations, the NRS specifically states that such directors and officers are not required to consider the effect of a proposed corporate action upon any constituent as a dominant factor. Further, a director may resist a change or potential change in control of the corporation if the board of directors determines that the change or potential change of control is opposed to or not in the best interest of the corporation upon consideration of any relevant facts, circumstances, contingencies or constituencies, including that there are reasonable grounds to believe that, within a reasonable time the corporation or any successor would be or become insolvent subjected to bankruptcy proceedings.

The DGCL does not provide a similar list of statutory factors that corporate directors and officers may consider in making decisions. In a number of cases and in certain situations, Delaware law has been interpreted to provide that fiduciary duties require directors to accept an offer from the highest bidder regardless of the effect of such sale on the corporate constituencies other than the shareholders. Thus, the flexibility granted to directors of Nevada corporations when making business decisions, including in the context of a hostile takeover, are greater than those granted to directors of Delaware corporations.

Limitation on Personal Liability of Directors and Officers. The NRS and the DGCL each, by way of statutory provisions or permitted provisions in corporate charter documents, eliminate or limit the personal liability of directors and officers to the corporation or their shareholders for monetary damages for breach of a director’s fiduciary duty, subject to the differences discussed below.

The DGCL precludes liability limitation for acts or omissions not in good faith or involving intentional misconduct and for paying dividends or repurchasing stock out of other than lawfully available funds. Under the NRS, in order for a director or officer to be individually liable to the corporation or its shareholders or creditors for damages as a result of any act or failure to act, the presumption of the business judgment rule must be rebutted and it must be proven that the director’s or officer’s act or failure to act constituted a breach of his or her fiduciary duties as a director or officer and that the breach of those duties involved intentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law. Unlike the DGCL, however, the limitation on director and officer liability under the NRS does not distinguish the duty of loyalty or transactions from which a director derives an improper personal benefit, but does, pursuant to NRS 78.300, impose limited personal liability on directors for distributions made in violation of NRS 78.288. Further, the NRS permits a corporation to renounce in its articles of incorporation any interest or expectancy to participate in specific or specified classes or categories of business opportunities. Both the DGCL and the NRS permit limitation of liability which applies to both directors and officers, though the NRS expressly also applies this limitation to liabilities owed to creditors of the corporation. Furthermore, under the NRS, it is not necessary to adopt provisions in the articles of incorporation limiting personal liability of directors or officers as this limitation is provided by statute. Under Delaware law, the exculpation of officers is authorized only in connection with direct claims brought by shareholders, including class actions; however, the DGCL does not eliminate monetary liability of officers for breach of fiduciary duty arising out of claims brought by the corporation itself or for derivative claims brought by shareholders in the name of the corporation.

As described above, the NRS provides broader protection from personal liability for directors and officers than the DGCL. Both the Delaware Charter and the Nevada Charter provide a limitation to director liability to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware and Nevada law, respectively. The Nevada Charter also extends this limitation to officer liability.

Indemnification. The NRS and the DGCL each permit corporations to indemnify directors, officers, employees and agents in similar circumstances, subject to the differences discussed below.

In suits that are not brought by or in the right of the corporation, both jurisdictions permit a corporation to indemnify current and former directors, officers, employees and agents for attorneys’ fees and other expenses, judgments and amounts paid in settlement that the person actually and reasonably incurred in connection with the action, suit or proceeding. The person seeking indemnity may recover as long as he or she acted in good faith and believed his or her actions were either in the best interests of or not opposed to the best interests of the corporation. Under the NRS, the person seeking indemnity may also be indemnified if he or she is not liable for breach of his or her fiduciary duties. Similarly, with respect to a criminal proceeding, the person seeking indemnification must not have had any reasonable cause to believe his or her conduct was unlawful.

In derivative suits, a corporation in either jurisdiction may indemnify its directors, officers, employees or agents for expenses that the person actually and reasonably incurred. A corporation may not indemnify a person if the person was adjudged to be liable to the corporation unless a court otherwise orders. No corporation may indemnify a party unless it decides that indemnification is proper. Under the DGCL, the corporation through its shareholders, directors or independent legal counsel will determine whether the conduct of the person seeking indemnity conformed with the statutory provisions governing indemnity. Under the NRS, the corporation through its shareholders, directors or independent counsel must determine that the indemnification is proper.

The NRS and the DGCL also each permit corporations to pay the expenses of officers and directors incurred in defending a civil or criminal action, suit or proceeding in advance of the final disposition of the action, suit or proceeding, upon receipt of an undertaking by or on behalf of the director or officer to repay the amount if it is ultimately determined that the director or officer is not entitled to be indemnified by the corporation.

Under the NRS, the indemnification pursuant to the statutory mechanisms available under the NRS, as described above, does not exclude any other rights to which a person seeking indemnification or advancement of expenses may be entitled under the articles of incorporation or any bylaw, agreement, vote of shareholders or disinterested directors or otherwise, but unless ordered by a court, indemnification may not be made to or on behalf of any director or officer finally adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction, after exhaustion of any appeals taken therefrom, to be liable for intentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law, and such misconduct, fraud or violation was material to the cause of action.

Both the Delaware Bylaws and the Nevada Bylaws include substantially similar provisions providing for indemnification, including advancement of expenses, consistent with the laws of the respective states. In addition, the Nevada Charter provides for indemnification and advancement of expenses to the fullest extent permitted by law.

Director Compensation. The DGCL does not have a specific statute on the fairness of director compensation. In contrast, the NRS provides that, unless otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation or bylaws, the board of directors, without regard to personal interest, may establish the compensation of directors for services in any capacity. If the board of directors so establishes the compensation of directors, such compensation is be presumed to be fair to the corporation unless proven unfair by a preponderance of the evidence.

Action by Written Consent of Directors. Both the DGCL and NRS provide that, unless the articles or certificate of incorporation or the bylaws provide otherwise, any action required or permitted to be taken at a meeting of the directors or a committee thereof may be taken without a meeting if all members of the board or committee, as the case may be, consent to the action in writing. Neither the Delaware Charter or Delaware Bylaws nor the Nevada Charter or Nevada Bylaws limit a Board action by written consent.

Actions by Written Consent of Shareholders. Both the DGCL and NRS provide that, unless the articles or certificate of incorporation provides otherwise, any action required or permitted to be taken at a meeting of the shareholders may be taken without a meeting if the holders of outstanding stock having at least the minimum number of votes that would be necessary to authorize or take the action at a meeting of shareholders consent to the action in writing. In addition, the DGCL requires the corporation to give prompt notice of the taking of corporate action without a meeting by less than unanimous written consent to those shareholders who did not consent in writing. There is no equivalent requirement under the NRS.

The NRS also permits a corporation to prohibit shareholder action by written consent in lieu of a meeting of shareholders by including such prohibition in its articles of incorporation or bylaws. Neither the Delaware Charter or Delaware Bylaws nor the Nevada Charter or Nevada Bylaws limit a shareholder action by written consent.

Dividends and Distributions. Delaware law is more restrictive than Nevada law with respect to dividend payments. Unless further restricted in the certificate of incorporation, the DGCL permits a corporation to declare and pay dividends out of either (i) surplus, or (ii) if no surplus exists, out of net profits for the fiscal year in which the dividend is declared and/or the preceding fiscal year (provided that the amount of capital of the corporation is not less than the aggregate amount of the capital represented by the issued and outstanding stock of all classes having a preference upon the distribution of assets). The DGCL defines surplus as the excess, at any time, of the net assets of a corporation over its stated capital. In addition, the DGCL provides that a corporation may redeem or repurchase its shares only when the capital of the corporation is not impaired and only if such redemption or repurchase would not cause any impairment of the capital of the corporation.

The NRS provides that no distribution (including dividends on, or redemption or purchases of, shares of capital stock or distributions of indebtedness) may be made if, after giving effect to such distribution, (i) the corporation would not be able to pay its debts as they become due in the usual course of business, or, (ii) except as otherwise specifically permitted by the articles of incorporation, the corporation’s total assets would be less than the sum of its total liabilities plus the amount that would be needed at the time of a dissolution to satisfy the preferential rights of preferred stockholders (the condition in this clause (ii), the “Balance Sheet Test”). Directors may consider financial statements prepared on the basis of accounting practices that are reasonable in the circumstances, a fair valuation, including but not limited to unrealized appreciation and depreciation, and any other method that is reasonable in the circumstances.

Restrictions on Business Combinations. Both Delaware and Nevada law provide certain protections to shareholders in connection with certain business combinations. These protections can be found in NRS 78.411 to 78.444, inclusive, and Section 203 of the DGCL. Under Section 203 of the DGCL, certain “business combinations” with “interested stockholders” of the Company are subject to a three-year moratorium unless specified conditions are met. For purposes of Section 203, the term “business combination” is defined broadly to include (i) mergers with or caused by the interested stockholder; (ii) sales or other dispositions to the interested stockholder (except proportionately with the corporation’s other stockholders) of assets of the corporation or a subsidiary equal to 10% or more of the aggregate market value of either the corporation’s consolidated assets or its outstanding stock; (iii) the issuance or transfer by the corporation or a subsidiary of stock of the corporation or such subsidiary to the interested stockholder (except for transfers in a conversion or exchange or a pro rata distribution or certain other transactions, none of which increase the interested stockholder’s proportionate ownership of any class or series of the corporation’s or such subsidiary’s stock); or (iv) receipt by the interested stockholder (except proportionately as a stockholder), directly or indirectly, of any loans, advances, guarantees, pledges or other financial benefits provided by or through the corporation or a subsidiary.

The three-year moratorium imposed on business combinations by Section 203 of the DGCL does not apply if: (i) prior to the time on which such stockholder becomes an interested stockholder the board of directors approves either the business combination or the transaction which resulted in the person becoming an interested stockholder; (ii) the interested stockholder owns 85% of the corporation’s voting stock upon consummation of the transaction that made him, her or it an interested stockholder (excluding from the 85% calculation shares owned by directors who are also officers of the target corporation and shares held by employee stock plans that do not permit employees to decide confidentially whether to accept a tender or exchange offer); or (iii) at or after the time on which such stockholder becomes an interested stockholder, the board approves the business combination and it is also approved at a stockholder meeting by at least two-thirds (66-2/3%) of the outstanding voting stock not owned by the interested stockholder.

In contrast, the NRS imposes a maximum moratorium of two years versus Delaware’s three-year moratorium on business combinations. However, NRS 78.411 to 78.444, inclusive, regulate combinations more stringently. First, an interested stockholder is defined as a beneficial owner of 10% or more of the voting power. Second, the two-year moratorium can be lifted only by advance approval of the combination or the transaction by which such person first becomes an interested stockholder by a corporation’s board of directors or unless the combination is approved by the board and 60% of the corporation’s voting power not beneficially owned by the interested stockholder, its affiliates and associates, as opposed to Delaware’s provision that allows interested stockholder combinations with stockholder approval at the time of such combination. Finally, after the two-year period, a combination remains prohibited unless (i) it is approved by the board of directors, the disinterested stockholders or a majority of the outstanding voting power not beneficially owned by the interested stockholder and its affiliates and associates or (ii) the interested stockholders satisfy certain fair value requirements. But note that these statutes do not apply to any combination of a corporation and an interested stockholder after the expiration of four years after the person first became an interested stockholder. The combinations statutes in Nevada apply only to Nevada corporations with 200 or more stockholders of record. As of December 5, 2024, the Company has fewer than 200 stockholders of record.

Companies are entitled to opt out of the business combination provisions of the DGCL and NRS. The Company has not opted out of the business combination provisions of Section 203 of the DGCL, nor does the Company plan to opt out of the business combination provisions of NRS 78.411 to 78.444, inclusive, under the Nevada Charter. Any opt-out of the business combinations provisions of the NRS must be contained in an amendment to the Nevada Charter approved by a majority of the outstanding voting power not then owned by interested stockholders, but the amendment would not be effective until 18 months after the vote of the stockholders to approve the amendment, and would not apply to any combination with a person who first became an interested stockholder on or before the effective date of the amendment.

Acquisition of Controlling Interests. In addition to certain restrictions on business combinations with interested shareholders, Nevada law also protects the corporation and its shareholders from persons acquiring a “controlling interest” in a corporation. The provisions can be found in NRS 78.378 to 78.3793, inclusive. Delaware law does not have similar provisions. Pursuant to NRS 78.379, any person who acquires a controlling interest in a corporation may not exercise voting rights on any control shares unless such voting rights are conferred by a majority vote of the disinterested shareholders of the issuing corporation at a special meeting of such shareholders held upon the request and at the expense of the acquiring person. NRS 78.3785 provides that a “controlling interest” means the ownership of outstanding voting shares of an issuing corporation sufficient to enable the acquiring person, individually or in association with others, directly or indirectly, to exercise (i) one fifth or more but less than one third, (ii) one third or more but less than a majority or (iii) a majority or more of the voting power of the issuing corporation in the election of directors, and once an acquirer crosses one of these thresholds, shares which it acquired in the transaction taking it over the threshold and within the 90 days immediately preceding the date when the acquiring person acquired or offered to acquire a controlling interest become “control shares” to which the voting restrictions described above apply. In the event that the control shares are accorded full voting rights and the acquiring person acquires control shares with a majority or more of all the voting power, any shareholder, other than the acquiring person, who does not vote in favor of authorizing voting rights for the control shares is entitled to demand payment for the fair value of such person’s shares, and the corporation must comply with the demand.

NRS 78.378(1) provides that the control share statutes of the NRS do not apply to any acquisition of a controlling interest in an issuing corporation if the articles of incorporation or bylaws of the corporation in effect on the 10th day following the acquisition of a controlling interest by the acquiring person provide that the provisions of those sections do not apply to the corporation or to an acquisition of a controlling interest specifically by types of existing or future shareholders, whether or not identified. In addition, NRS 78.3788 provides that the controlling interest statutes apply as of a particular date only to a corporation that has 200 or more shareholders of record, at least 100 of whom have addresses in Nevada appearing on the corporation’s stock ledger at all times during the 90 days immediately preceding that date, and which does business directly or indirectly in Nevada. NRS 78.378(2) provides that the corporation may impose stricter requirements if it so desires. Corporations are entitled to opt out of the above controlling interest provisions of the NRS.

Shareholder Vote for Mergers and Other Corporate Reorganizations. Under the DGCL, unless the certificate of incorporation specifies a higher percentage, the shareholders of a corporation that is being acquired in a merger or selling substantially all of its assets must authorize such merger or sale of assets by vote of an absolute majority of outstanding shares entitled to vote. The corporation’s board of directors must also approve such transaction. Similarly, under the NRS, a merger or sale of all assets requires authorization by shareholders of the corporation being acquired or selling its assets by at least a majority of the voting power of the outstanding shares entitled to vote, as well as approval of such corporation’s board of directors. Although a substantial body of case law has been developed in Delaware as to what constitutes the “sale of substantially all of the assets” of a corporation, it is difficult to determine the point at which a sale of virtually all, but less than all, of a corporation’s assets would be considered a “sale of all of the assets” of the corporation for purposes of Nevada law. It is possible that many sales of less than all of the assets of a corporation requiring shareholder authorization under Delaware law would not require shareholder authorization under Nevada law.

The DGCL and NRS have substantially similar provisions with respect to approval by shareholders of a surviving corporation in a merger. The DGCL does not require a shareholder vote of a constituent corporation in a merger (unless the corporation provides otherwise in its certificate of incorporation) if (i) the plan of merger does not amend the existing certificate of incorporation, (ii) each share of stock of such constituent corporation outstanding immediately before the effective date of the merger is an identical outstanding share after the effective date of merger and (iii) either no shares of the common stock of the surviving corporation and no shares, securities or obligations convertible into such stock are to be issued or delivered under the plan of merger, or the authorized unissued shares or treasury shares of the common stock of the surviving corporation to be issued or delivered under the plan of merger plus those initially issuable upon conversion of any other shares, securities or obligations to be issued or delivered under such plan do not exceed 20% of the shares of common stock of such constituent corporation outstanding immediately prior to the effective date of the merger. The NRS does not require a shareholder vote of the surviving corporation in a merger under substantially similar circumstances. The Delaware Charter does not require a higher percentage to vote to approve certain corporate transactions. The Nevada Charter also does not specify a higher percentage.

Appraisal or Dissenter’s Rights. In both jurisdictions, dissenting shareholders of a corporation engaged in certain major corporate transactions are entitled to appraisal rights. Appraisal or dissenter’s rights permit a shareholder to receive cash generally equal to the fair value of the shareholder’s shares (as determined by agreement of the parties or by a court) in lieu of the consideration such shareholder would otherwise receive in any such transaction.

Under Section 262 of the DGCL, appraisal rights are generally available for the shares of any class or series of stock of a Delaware corporation in a merger, consolidation or conversion, provided that no appraisal rights are available with respect to shares of any class or series of stock if, at the record date for the meeting held to approve such transaction, such shares of stock, or depositary receipts in respect thereof, are either (i) listed on a national securities exchange or (ii) held of record by more than 2,000 holders, unless the shareholders receive in exchange for their shares anything other than shares of stock of the surviving or resulting corporation (or depositary receipts in respect thereof), or of any other corporation that is listed on a national securities exchange or held by more than 2,000 holders of record, cash in lieu of fractional shares or fractional depositary receipts described above or any combination of the foregoing.

In addition, Section 262 of the DGCL allows beneficial owners of shares to file a petition for appraisal without the need to name a nominee holding such shares on behalf of such owner as a nominal plaintiff and makes it easier than under Nevada law to withdraw from the appraisal process and accept the terms offered in the merger, consolidation or conversion. Under the DGCL, no appraisal rights are available to shareholders of the surviving or resulting corporation if the merger did not require their approval. The Delaware Charter and Delaware Bylaws do not provide for appraisal rights in addition to those provided by the DGCL.

Under the NRS, a shareholder is entitled to dissent from, and obtain payment for, the fair value of the shareholder’s shares in the event of (i) certain acquisitions of a controlling interest in the corporation, (ii) consummation of a plan of merger, if approval by the shareholders is required for the merger, regardless of whether the shareholder is entitled to vote on the merger or if the domestic corporation is a subsidiary and is merged with its parent, or if the domestic corporation is a constituent entity in a merger pursuant to NRS 92A.133, (iii) consummation of a plan of conversion to which the corporation is a party, (iv) consummation of a plan of exchange in which the corporation is a party, (iv) any corporate action taken pursuant to a vote of the shareholders, if the articles of incorporation, bylaws or a resolution of the board of directors provides that voting or nonvoting shareholders are entitled to dissent and obtain payment for their shares, or (v) any corporate action to which the shareholder would be obligated, as a result of the corporate action, to accept money or scrip rather than receive a fraction of a share in exchange for the cancellation of all the shareholder’s outstanding shares, except where the shareholder would not be entitled to receive such payment pursuant to NRS 78.205, 78.2055 or 78.207.

Holders of covered securities (generally those that are listed on a national securities exchange), any shares traded in an organized market and held by at least 2,000 shareholders of record with a market value of at least $20,000,000, and any shares issued by an open end management investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 and which may be redeemed at the option of the holder at net asset value are generally not entitled to dissenter’s rights. However, this exception is not available if (i) the articles of incorporation of the corporation issuing the shares provide that such exception is not available, (ii) the resolution of the board of directors approving the plan of merger, conversion or exchange expressly provides otherwise or (iii) the holders of the class or series of stock are required by the terms of the corporate action to accept for the shares anything except cash, shares of stock or other securities as described in NRS 92A.390(3) or any combination thereof. The NRS prohibits a dissenting shareholder from voting his or her shares or receiving certain dividends or distributions after his or her dissent. The Nevada Charter and Nevada Bylaws do not provide for dissenter’s rights in addition to those provided by the NRS. The mechanics and timing procedures vary somewhat between Delaware and Nevada, but both require technical compliance with specific notice and payment protocols.

Special Meetings of the Shareholders. The DGCL permits special meetings of shareholders to be called by the board of directors or by any other person authorized in the certificate of incorporation or bylaws to call a special shareholder meeting. In contrast, the NRS permits special meetings of shareholders to be called by the entire board of directors, any two directors or the President, unless the articles of incorporation or bylaws provide otherwise. Under the Delaware Bylaws, a special meeting of shareholders may be called by the President, Chief Executive Officer, or the Chairman of the Board. Under the Delaware Bylaws, a special meeting may be called at any time only by (A) the affirmative vote of a majority of the whole board of directors, (B) the chairperson of the board of directors, if there be one, (C) the Chief Executive Officer, if there be one, or (D) the President. Such written request must contain the purposes or purposes of the proposed meeting. The Nevada Bylaws contain identical provisions.

Special Meetings Pursuant to Petition of Shareholders. The DGCL provides that a director or a shareholder of a corporation may apply to the Court of Chancery of Delaware if the corporation fails to hold an annual meeting for the election of directors or there is no written consent to elect directors in lieu of an annual meeting for a period of 30 days after the date designated for the special meeting or, if there is no date designated, within 13 months after the last annual meeting.

Under the NRS, shareholders having not less than 15% of the voting interest may petition the district court to order a meeting for the election of directors if a corporation fails to call a meeting for that purpose within 18 months after the last meeting at which directors were elected.

Adjournment of Shareholder Special Meetings. Under the DGCL, if a meeting of shareholders is adjourned due to lack of a quorum and the adjournment is for more than 30 days, or if after the adjournment a new record date is fixed for the adjourned meeting, notice of the adjourned meeting must be given to each shareholder of record entitled to vote at the meeting. At the adjourned meeting the corporation may transact any business that might have been transacted at the original meeting.

In contrast, under the NRS, a corporation is not required to give any notice of an adjourned meeting or of the business to be transacted at an adjourned meeting, other than by announcement at the meeting at which the adjournment is taken, unless the board of directors of the corporation fixes a new record date for the adjourned meeting or the meeting date is adjourned to a date more than 60 days later than the date set for the original meeting, in which case a new record date must be fixed and notice given.

Duration of Proxies. Under the DGCL, a proxy executed by a shareholder may not be voted after a period of three years from its date, unless the proxy provides for a longer period. The Delaware Bylaws provide that a proxy is valid for three years, unless the proxy provides for a longer period. Under the NRS, a proxy is effective only for a period of six months, unless it is coupled with an interest or unless otherwise provided in the proxy, which duration may not exceed seven years. The NRS also provides for irrevocable proxies, without limitation on duration, in limited circumstances. The proxy provisions in the Nevada Bylaws are consistent with the NRS.

Quorum and Voting. The DGCL provides that the certificate of incorporation and bylaws may establish quorum and voting requirements, but in no event shall quorum consist of less than one-third of the shares entitled to vote. If the certificate of incorporation and bylaws are silent as to specific quorum and voting requirements: (a) a majority of the shares entitled to vote shall constitute a quorum at a meeting of shareholders; (b) in all matters other than the election of directors, the affirmative vote of the majority of shares present at the meeting and entitled to vote on the subject matter shall be the act of the shareholders; (c) directors shall be elected by a plurality of the votes of the shares present at the meeting and entitled to vote on the election of directors; and (d) where a separate vote by a class or series is required, a majority of the outstanding shares of such class or series shall constitute a quorum entitled to take action with respect to that vote on that matter and, in all matters other than the election of directors, the affirmative vote of the majority of shares of such class or series present at the meeting shall be the act of such class or series or classes or series. A bylaw amendment adopted by shareholders which specifies the votes that shall be necessary for the election of directors shall not be further amended or repealed by the board. The Delaware Bylaws provide that the holders of shares representing a one-third of the voting power of the Company’s stock issued, outstanding and entitled to vote, present in person or represented by proxy, shall constitute a quorum at all meetings of the shareholders for the transaction of business, except as otherwise provided by law, the Delaware Charter or the Delaware Bylaws.

The NRS provides that, unless the articles of incorporation or bylaws provide otherwise, a majority of the voting power of the corporation, present in person or by proxy at a meeting of shareholders (regardless of whether the proxy has authority to vote on any matter), constitutes a quorum for the transaction of business. Under the NRS, unless the articles of incorporation or bylaws provide for different proportions, action by the shareholders on a matter other than the election of directors is approved if the number of votes cast in favor of the action exceeds the number of votes cast in opposition to the action. Unless provided otherwise in the corporation’s articles of incorporation or bylaws, directors are elected at the annual meeting of shareholders by plurality vote. The Nevada Bylaws similarly provide that the holders of a majority of the Company’s stock issued, outstanding and entitled to vote, present in person or represented by proxy, shall constitute a quorum at all meetings of the shareholders for the transaction of business, except as otherwise provided by law, the Nevada Charter or the Nevada Bylaws. Consistent with the NRS, the Nevada Bylaws also provide that, except as otherwise provided by law, in the Nevada Charter or the Nevada Bylaws, that action by the shareholders on a matter other than the election of directors is approved if the number of votes case in favor of the action exceeds the number of votes cast in opposition to the action.

Shareholder Inspection Rights. The DGCL grants any shareholder or beneficial owner of shares the right, upon written demand under oath stating the proper purpose thereof, either in person or by attorney or other agent, to inspect and make copies and extracts from a corporation’s stock ledger, list of shareholders and its other books and records for any proper purpose. A proper purpose is one reasonably related to such person’s interest as a shareholder.

Inspection rights under Nevada law are more limited. The NRS grants any person who has been a stockholder of record of a corporation for at least six months immediately preceding the demand, or any person holding, or thereunto authorized in writing by the holders of, at least 5% of all of its outstanding shares, upon at least five days’ written demand the right to inspect in person or by agent or attorney, during usual business hours (i) the articles of incorporation and all amendments thereto, (ii) the bylaws and all amendments thereto and (iii) a stock ledger or a duplicate stock ledger, revised annually, containing the names, alphabetically arranged, of all persons who are shareholders of the corporation, showing their places of residence, if known, and the number of shares held by them respectively. A Nevada corporation may require a shareholder to furnish the corporation with an affidavit that such inspection is for a proper purpose related to his or her interest as a shareholder of the corporation.

In addition, the NRS grants certain shareholders the right to inspect the books of account and records of a corporation for any proper purpose. The right to inspect the books of account and all financial records of a corporation, to make copies of records and to conduct an audit of such records is granted only to a shareholder who owns at least 15% of the issued and outstanding shares of a Nevada corporation, or who has been authorized in writing by the holders of at least 15% of such shares. However, these requirements do not apply to any corporation that furnishes to its shareholders a detailed annual financial statement or any corporation that has filed during the preceding 12 months all reports required to be filed pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.

Business Opportunities. Under Delaware law, the corporate opportunity doctrine holds that a corporate officer or director may not generally and unilaterally take a business opportunity for his or her own if: (i) the corporation is financially able to exploit the opportunity; (ii) the opportunity is within the corporation’s line of business; (iii) the corporation has an interest or expectancy in the opportunity; and (iv) by taking the opportunity for his or her own, the corporate fiduciary will thereby be placed in a position inimical to his duties to the corporation. The DGCL permits a Delaware corporation to renounce, in its certificate of incorporation or by action of the board of directors, any interest or expectancy of the corporation in, or being offered an opportunity to participate in, specified business opportunities or specified classes or categories of business opportunities that are presented to the corporation or one or more of its officers, directors or shareholders.

Similar to the DGCL, the NRS permits a Nevada corporation to renounce, in its articles of incorporation or by action of the board of directors, any interest or expectancy to participate in specified business opportunities or specified classes or categories of business opportunities that are presented to the corporation or one or more of its officers, directors or shareholders. Neither the Company’s Delaware Charter, nor the Company’s Nevada Charter contain such provisions.

Potential Risks and Disadvantages of the Redomestication

Because of Delaware’s prominence as a state of incorporation for many large corporations, the Delaware courts have developed considerable expertise in dealing with corporate issues and a substantial body of case law has developed construing Delaware law and establishing public policies with respect to Delaware corporations. While Nevada also has encouraged incorporation in that state and has adopted comprehensive, modern and flexible statutes that it periodically updates and revises to meet changing business needs, Nevada case law concerning the effects of its statutes and regulations is more limited. As a result, the Company and its shareholders may experience less predictability with respect to the legality of certain corporate affairs and transactions and shareholders’ rights to challenge them, to the extent Nevada’s statutes do not provide a clear answer and a Nevada court must make a determination.

Also, underwriters and other members of the financial services industry may be less willing and able to assist the Company with capital-raising transactions because they might perceive Nevada’s laws as being less flexible or developed than those of Delaware. Certain investment funds, sophisticated investors and brokerage firms may likewise be less comfortable and less willing to invest in a corporation incorporated in a jurisdiction other than Delaware whose corporate laws may be less understood or perceived to be unresponsive to shareholder rights.